INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
FOR
NATIONAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
PERFORMANCE
TRACK
OUTREACH
AWARD,
MENTORING
PROGRAM
REGISTRATION,
AND
CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION
QUESTIONNAIRE
December
5,
2003
Prepared
by:

U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Office
of
Policy,
Economics,
and
Innovation
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue
NW
Washington,
D.
C.,
20003
­
2­
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
Table
of
Contents
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
2
1.
Identification
Of
The
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
1(
a)
Title
of
The
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
2.
Need
For
And
Use
Of
The
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
2(
b)
Use/
Users
of
the
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3.
Nonduplication,
Consultations,
And
Other
Collection
Criteria
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
3(
a)
Nonduplication
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
3(
c)
Consultations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
3(
f)
Confidentiality
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
4.
Respondents
and
the
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
4(
a)
Respondents/
NAICS
Codes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
4(
b)
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
(
i)
Data
Items
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
(
ii)
Respondent
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
5.
The
Information
Collected
 
Agency
Activities,
Collection
Methodology,
and
Information
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
6.
Estimating
the
Burden
and
Cost
of
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
(
i)
Estimating
Labor
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
(
ii)
Estimating
Capital
and
Operations
and
Maintenance
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
21
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
24
6(
d)
Estimating
the
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
­
3­
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Tables
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
(
i)
Respondent
Tally
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
(
ii)
Agency
Tally
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
6(
g)
Burden
Statement
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
Index
of
Tables
Table
4.1
Primary
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
Codes
of
Current
Performance
Track
Members
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
Table
5.1
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
Table
6.1
Projected
Membership
and
Response
Levels
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
20
Table
6.2
Detailed
Annualized
Respondent
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
22
Table
6.3
Detailed
Annualized
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
25
Table
6.4
Bottom
Line
Respondent
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
28
Table
6.5
Bottom
Line
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
29
Appendices
Appendix
A:
Federal
Register
Notice
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
31
Appendix
B:
National
Environmental
Performance
Track
Outreach
Award
Application
.
.
.
.
.
.
39
Appendix
C:
National
Environmental
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
Registration
.
.
.
43
Appendix
D:
National
Environmental
Performance
Track
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
46
­
4­
SECTION
I:
PART
A
OF
THE
SUPPORTING
DOCUMENT
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
of
Information
Collection
National
Environmental
Performance
Track
(
Performance
Track)
Outreach
Award
Application,
Mentoring
Program
Registration,
and
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire.

1(
b)
Short
Characterization
US
Environmental
Protection
Agency
announced
the
National
Environmental
Performance
Track
Program
(
Performance
Track)
on
June
26,
2000.
The
program
is
voluntary
and
is
designed
to
recognize
and
encourage
facilities
that
consistently
meet
their
legal
requirements;
that
have
implemented
environmental
management
systems
to
monitor
and
improve
performance;
that
have
achieved
environmental
improvements
beyond
compliance;
and
that
publicly
commit
to
specific
environmental
improvements
and
report
on
progress.
A
total
of
309
facilities
are
current
members.

The
Performance
Track
Outreach
Award
is
sponsored
by
the
EPA's
Performance
Track
Program.
While
Performance
Track
rewards
all
members
for
their
commitment
to
improving
their
role
in
protecting
the
environment,
the
Outreach
Award
is
a
special
award
offered
to
current
members
and
partners
who
are
educating
the
public
and
encouraging
prospective
facilities
to
join
Performance
Track.
Educating
prospective
facilities
on
the
merits
of
joining
the
program
helps
increase
membership
in
the
Performance
Track
program,
which
in
turn
provides
additional
environmental
benefits
as
more
and
more
facilities
make
commitments
to
continuous
environmental
improvement.

Outreach
Award
applications
will
be
accepted
between
October
and
December,
and
may
be
submitted
by
any
facility
or
organization
that
was
a
member
of
Performance
Track
during
the
calendar
year.
To
be
considered
for
the
award,
facilities/
organizations
may
self­
nominate
or
may
be
nominated
by
other
facilities,
local
or
state
entities,
or
EPA
Performance
Track
staff.
The
applications
will
be
reviewed
by
a
panel
of
EPA
judges
and
the
recipients
of
the
Outreach
Award
will
be
announced
at
the
following
year's
Annual
Member
Event.
It
is
estimated
that
between
27
and
42
facilities
will
complete
the
application
annually
over
the
life
of
this
information
collection
request,
with
a
burden
of
1.5
hours
for
each
application.

The
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
was
developed
to
facilitate
information
sharing
among
facilities
and
to
help
potential
Performance
Track
applicants
improve
their
environmental
performance
and
strengthen
their
Performance
Track
applications.
The
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
is
available
to
any
current
program
member
or
any
facility
that
has
considered
applying
to
the
Performance
Track
program
and
is
seeking
assistance
in
setting
environmental
goals
from
the
top
performing
facilities
currently
in
the
program.
Mentees
­
5­
are
matched
together
with
Performance
Track
sites
that
volunteer
their
time
and
resources
to
share
their
experiences
and
expertise
in
environmental
best
practices.

The
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form
may
be
completed
by
any
facility
that
is
currently
a
Performance
Track
member,
or
any
facility
interested
in
joining
the
Performance
Track
program.
As
both
membership
to
the
Performance
Track
program
and
applying
to
serve
as
a
mentor/
mentee
is
voluntary,
facilities
are
not
obligated
to
provide
information
associated
with
this
collection
request.
EPA
estimates
that
between
39
and
60
facilities
will
complete
the
Mentoring
Program
Registration
annually
over
the
life
of
this
information
collection
request,
with
a
burden
of
0.25
hours
needed
to
complete
the
registration
form.

In
addition
to
increasing
membership
in
the
Performance
Track
program,
EPA
is
interested
in
improving
and
increasing
the
value
that
Performance
Track
members
receive
from
the
Performance
Track
Program
through
membership
services.
EPA
plans
to
gather
feedback
from
all
current
Performance
Track
members
through
a
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire,
which
will
be
administered
biannually.
Current
Performance
Track
members
reflect
a
broad
array
of
industry
categories
and
their
opinions
about
the
program's
effectiveness
and
level
of
service
will
be
used
to
shape
the
development
of
future
member
services.
The
questionnaire
will
assess
the
satisfaction
level
of
current
members
as
well
as
identify
improvements
to
services
that
the
program
can
implement
to
increase
long­
term
member
satisfaction.
The
questionnaire
will
ascertain
the
following
information:
program
benefits
and
services
that
are
important
to
members;
member
satisfaction
with
current
services;
potential
improvements
in
communicating
with
members
about
the
program;
the
level
of
promotion/
publicity
that
members
desire
for
their
participation
in
the
program;
and
any
additional
benefits
and
services
that
would
increase
member
satisfaction.

The
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
will
be
administered
every
two
years
online,
via
the
worldwide
web,
to
reduce
the
burden
on
respondents
and
encourage
a
high
response
rate.
Email
notification
will
be
sent
to
all
current
members
with
passwords
to
allow
them
to
access
the
survey.
The
questionnaire
will
be
administered
for
one
month
to
further
encourage
all
members
to
respond,
allowing
EPA
to
accurately
assess
member
satisfaction
and
desired
improvements
to
the
program.
Member
responses
will
be
analyzed
in
a
report
at
the
conclusion
of
the
one­
month
survey
period.
EPA
estimates
that
358
members
will
complete
the
survey
in
the
first
year,
and
554
members
will
complete
the
survey
in
the
third
year
of
this
information
collection
request,
with
an
estimated
burden
of
0.5
hours
needed
to
complete
the
questionnaire.
­
6­
2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
In
a
July
1999
report,
Aiming
for
Excellence:
Actions
to
Encourage
Stewardship
and
Accelerate
Environmental
Progress,
EPA
committed
to
developing
and
launching
a
National
Performance
Track
Program
that
uses
incentives
and
promotes
environmental
management
systems
to
reward
and
encourage
environmental
leaders.

EPA
views
this
program
as
a
way
to
build
upon
and
integrate
a
range
of
innovative
programs
that
have
been
underway
for
some
time
at
both
the
federal
and
state
level.
The
Performance
Track
Program
will
increase
the
use
of
environmental
management
systems,
public
participation,
and
performance
reporting,
which
will
help
improve
the
environment
while
shifting
EPA's
resources
from
the
oversight
of
good
performers.

The
Outreach
Award
is
meant
to
show
appreciation
to
facilities
that
continually
work
to
strengthen
Performance
Track
and
to
encourage
other
facilities
to
do
the
same.
The
information
to
be
collected
is
needed
for
assessing
the
most
deserving
candidates
to
receive
the
awards.

The
mentor/
mentee
program
is
meant
to
assist
facilities
considering
the
program
in
meeting
the
program
criteria
and
completing
acceptable
applications.
EPA
believes
establishing
a
mentor/
mentee
program
will
help
it
achieve
its
target
rate
of
25
percent
annual
growth
in
Performance
Track
membership
by
allowing
current
members
to
share
their
expertise
in
environmental
best
practices
with
facilities
that
are
considering
becoming
members
in
Performance
Track.
This
sharing
of
knowledge
will
facilitate
establishment
of
meaningful
and
achievable
performance
goals
for
potential
members,
and
will
provide
an
additional
source
of
information
available
to
potential
members
about
the
Performance
Track
program
application
process.
EPA
believes
this
feedback
will
strengthen
the
quality
of
potential
members'
applications
and
streamline
the
application
process.
The
information
to
be
collected
is
necessary
to
match
the
skills
and
knowledge
of
mentors
to
the
appropriate
mentees.

To
further
the
goals
of
the
Performance
Track
program,
EPA
needs
to
assess
the
level
of
satisfaction
of
current
members
and
identify
additional
benefits
and
services
through
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire.
More
than
300
members
have
participated
in
the
program
since
its
inception,
and
the
survey
mechanism
allows
an
assessment
of
changes
in
their
needs.
Focus
groups
of
Performance
Track
members
have
introduced
desired
benefits.
Performance
Track
is
now
in
its
third
year,
and
EPA
will
use
the
survey
results
to
identify
services
and
benefits
that
all
members
would
find
useful.

EPA
has
tried
to
structure
each
instrument
so
that
the
information
collected
is
the
minimum
amount
needed
to
achieve
the
goals
for
each
component
of
the
Performance
Track
program.
As
each
instrument
of
this
information
collection
request
is
voluntary
in
nature,
EPA
seeks
to
minimize
the
information
collected
and
associated
burden
in
order
to
increase
­
7­
participation
in
each
area.
Failure
to
obtain
the
information
requested
may
harm
EPA's
goal
of
increasing
membership
in
Performance
Track
by
not
recognizing
those
facilities
that
are
exemplary
in
their
environmental
stewardship
practices,
not
providing
assistance
through
the
mentoring
program
to
facilities
that
may
be
considering
joining
Performance
Track,
and
not
allowing
EPA
to
tailor
the
Performance
Track
program
to
provide
maximum
benefits
to
current
members
and
facilities
in
consideration
of
joining
the
program.

2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
of
the
Data
The
Performance
Track
Outreach
Award
application
will
be
submitted
to
EPA
by
facilities
and
organizations
affiliated
with
Performance
Track
within
the
reporting
year
(
e.
g.
member
facilities,
network
partners,
state
and
local
governments,
and
EPA
staff).
A
panel
of
five
EPA
judges
will
consider
all
submitted
applications
to
select
recipients
of
the
Outreach
Award.
Performance
Track
members
selected
for
the
award
will
be
notified
at
the
following
years'
Annual
Member
event.

The
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form
will
be
submitted
to
EPA
by
facilities
and
organizations
affiliated
with
Performance
Track
whom
wish
to
serve
as
mentors,
as
well
as
facilities
and
organizations
who
are
seeking
to
join
Performance
Track
and
will
serve
as
mentees.
EPA
will
use
these
registration
forms
to
match
prospective
members
with
Performance
Track
mentor
facilities
who
volunteer
their
time
and
resources
to
promote
to
prospective
members
the
value
of
becoming
a
Performance
Track
member,
as
well
as
sharing
their
expertise
in
environmental
best
practices
and
applying
for
membership.

EPA
will
use
results
compiled
from
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
to
identify
priority
areas
of
the
program
to
improve.
Information
obtained
on
effective
means
of
communicating
with
members
will
be
used
to
adjust
how
members
receive
information
on
services
and
events
(
e.
g.,
making
more
information
available
through
conferences
or
trade
associations
rather
than
mailings).
Respondents
can
also
enter
new
benefits
or
services
they
desire
for
their
continued
participation,
and
these
suggestions
will
be
evaluated
by
EPA
as
potential
additions
to
the
program.
Responses
will
be
stored
in
an
electronic
database
accessible
only
to
the
project
personnel.
Personally
identifiable
information
will
not
be
shared
with
other
agencies
or
organizations.
The
data
analysis
will
focus
on
groups
of
respondents
and
not
individual
members,
and
the
results
will
not
be
linked
to
member
facilities
or
companies
in
any
presentation
of
the
results.
A
report
will
be
developed
for
the
purpose
of
presenting
the
results
to
Performance
Track
program
staff.
­
8­
3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
3(
a)
Nonduplication
As
the
Outreach
Award
is
meant
to
formally
recognize
those
facilities
and
organizations
that
go
above
and
beyond
the
requirements
of
Performance
Track
in
working
to
improve
the
environment
by
educating
the
public
and
encouraging
prospective
facilities
to
join
Performance
Track,
EPA
deems
the
nomination
process
for
the
Outreach
Award
to
be
the
best
way
to
collect
information
on
what
activities
the
nominees
are
performing
to
strengthen
Performance
Track.
Since
the
program
and
award
application
process
is
voluntary,
and
EPA
does
not
require
Performance
Track
members
to
report
on
outreach
activities
that
go
above
and
beyond
the
program
criteria,
the
Outreach
Award
application
will
be
the
only
available
way
for
EPA
to
collect
information
necessary
in
determining
recipients
of
the
Outreach
Award.

EPA
believes
the
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
registration
will
provide
a
means
for
prospective
members
to
learn
about
the
benefits
of
the
program
and
gain
valuable
insight
from
current
members
on
environmental
best
practices
which
will,
in
turn,
increase
membership
in
the
Performance
Track
program.
There
is
currently
no
source
of
information
as
to
which
facilities/
organizations
would
like
to
serve
as
mentors
for
Performance
Track,
as
well
as
no
information
as
to
which
potential
facilities/
organizations
may
wish
to
serve
as
mentees
under
the
program.
This
information
collection
will
allow
EPA
to
identify
those
facilities
that
wish
to
be
involved
in
either
capacity
in
efforts
to
grow
the
Performance
Track
Program
and
improve
environmental
stewardship.

Similarly,
the
information
to
be
obtained
through
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
is
not
collected
by
EPA
or
any
other
agency.
Member
satisfaction
with
current
benefits
and
services,
information
on
the
most
effective
means
of
communicating
with
members,
and
desired
benefits
can
only
be
obtained
partially
through
anecdotes
from
EPA's
periodic
contact
with
members.
Use
of
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
will
allow
member
facilities
to
provide
regular
feedback
on
the
services
provided
by
Performance
Track,
giving
EPA
the
information
necessary
to
make
changes
that
will
better
suit
the
program
as
a
whole.

3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
In
compliance
with
the
1995
Paperwork
Reduction
Act,
EPA
solicited
public
comments
for
a
60­
day
period
prior
to
submission
of
the
ICR
to
OMB.
EPA
issued
a
Federal
Register
Notice
announcing
the
request
to
implement
the
National
Environmental
Performance
Track
(
Performance
Track)
Outreach
Award
Application,
Mentoring
Program
Registration,
and
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire.
See
Appendix
A
for
a
copy
of
the
Federal
Register
Notice.
­
9­
3(
c)
Consultations
The
Performance
Track
Outreach
Award,
Mentoring
Program,
and
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
have
been
discussed
with
member
facilities
at
Performance
Track
Annual
Member
events,
through
Performance
Track
newsletters,
and
Regional
meetings.
Responses
to
the
initiatives
have
been
positive,
leading
to
the
formation
of
this
information
collection
request.
In
addition,
a
number
of
facilities
have
contacted
EPA
on
their
own
accord
to
ask
for
mentoring
assistance
and
to
nominate
members
for
the
Outreach
Award.
On
a
number
of
occasions,
EPA
has
had
general
discussions
with
these
facilities
regarding
the
anticipated
burden
of
providing
information
to
support
these
programs.

3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
The
Performance
Track
Outreach
Award
is
given
annually
to
recognize
those
facilities
and
organizations
associated
within
Performance
Track
during
the
reporting
year
that
have
gone
above
and
beyond
the
requirements
associated
with
being
a
Performance
Track
member.
The
Outreach
Award
will
be
presented
during
the
existing
Annual
Members
event.
As
such,
EPA
will
collect
Outreach
Award
applications
annually
to
determine
which
facilities
are
to
receive
the
Outreach
Award.
Less
frequent
collection
would
miss
the
opportunity
to
recognize
facilities
or
organizations
that
are
striving
to
improve
the
environment
through
their
efforts
in
attempting
to
strengthen
Performance
Track
and
hamper
efforts
to
reach
the
25
percent
growth
in
Performance
Track
membership
that
EPA
seeks.

The
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
Registration
forms
will
be
accepted
on
a
rolling
basis.
Because
registration
for
the
program
is
voluntary
and
facilities/
organizations
have
the
opportunity
to
enter
the
program
at
the
time
that
is
most
convenient
for
them,
EPA
has
sought
to
minimize
the
burden
on
facilities.
By
accepting
Mentoring
Program
Registration
forms
on
a
rolling
basis,
the
burden
on
the
Agency
is
also
minimized.

The
Performance
Track
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
will
be
given
to
members
on
a
biennial
schedule.
This
will
allow
EPA
the
time
necessary
to
implement
changes
the
members
suggest
through
their
responses
to
the
questionnaire,
and
gauge
how
beneficial
the
changes
are
to
the
overall
membership
of
Performance
Track.
EPA
believes
a
two­
year
schedule
for
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
is
an
appropriate
timetable
to
implement
suggestions
and
monitor
what
effects
they
have
on
the
program.
­
10­
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
This
information
collection
is
consistent
with
the
provisions
at
5
CFR
1320.5(
d)(
2)(
i)
through
(
iv).
There
are
no
special
circumstances
with
respect
to
5
CFR
1320.5(
d)(
2)(
v)
through
(
viii),
as
the
collection
is
not
a
statistical
survey
and
does
not
use
statistical
classifications;
nor
does
it
include
a
pledge
of
confidentiality
that
is
not
supported
by
authority
established
in
statute
or
regulation;
or
require
proprietary,
trade
secret,
of
other
confidential
business
information
not
protected
by
Agency
procedures.

3(
f)
Confidentiality
EPA
shall
treat
information
claimed
as
confidential
business
information
(
CBI)
in
accordance
with
the
requirements
of
40
CFR
part
2.
If
the
participant
fails
to
claim
the
information
as
confidential
upon
submission,
it
may
be
made
available
to
the
public
without
further
notice.
EPA
cannot
guarantee
that
information
submitted
in
the
Outreach
Award
application,
Mentoring
Program
registration,
or
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
and
claimed
as
confidential
will
be
protected
from
release
under
the
Freedom
of
Information
Act
(
FOIA).
State
participants
will
maintain
CBI
confidentiality
to
the
extent
allowed
by
relevant
state
law.
Note
that
some
state
laws
provide
for
a
greater
degree
of
access
to
and
narrower
protections
for
information
considered
confidential
under
federal
law.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
Sensitive
questions
are
defined
in
the
ICR
instructions
as
"
questions
concerning
sexual
behavior
or
attitudes,
religious
beliefs,
or
other
matters
usually
considered
private."
The
instruments
addressed
in
this
information
collection
request
do
not
include
sensitive
questions.

4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
Codes
Potential
applicants
include
all
facilities
and
organizations
who
have
voluntarily
elected
to
participate
in
Performance
Track
for
the
reporting
year.
Thus,
potential
respondents
may
fall
under
any
NAICS
code.
Table
4.1
on
the
following
page
lists
the
Primary
NAICS
Codes
for
Performance
Track
members
as
of
June
2003.

Table
4.1:
Primary
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
Codes
of
Current
Performance
Track
Members
339113
Surgical
Appliance
and
Supplies
Manufacturing
40
339111
Laboratory
Apparatus
and
Furniture
Manufacturing
33
325412
Pharmaceutical
Preparation
Manufacturing
28
325998
All
Other
Miscellaneous
Chemical
Product
and
Preparation
Manufacturing
18
221112
Fossil
Fuel
Electric
Power
Generation
12
812320
Dry
Cleaning
and
Laundry
Services
(
except
Coin­
Operated)
12
Table
4.1:
Primary
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
Codes
of
Current
Performance
Track
Members
­
11­
454311
Heating
Oil
Dealers
10
322121
Paper
(
except
Newsprint)
Mills
8
334220
Radio
and
Television
Broadcasting
and
Wireless
Communications
Equipment
8
339113
Surgical
and
Appliance
and
Supplies
Manufacturing
8
541710
Research
and
Development
in
the
Physical,
Engineering,
and
Life
Sciences
8
325211
Plastics
Material
and
Resin
Manufacturing
7
321114
Wood
Preservation
6
325199
All
Other
Basic
Organic
Chemical
Manufacturing
6
332991
Ball
and
Roller
Bearing
Manufacturing
6
326211
Tire
Manufacturing
(
except
Retreading)
5
334413
Semiconductor
and
Related
Device
Manufacturing
5
336399
All
Other
Motor
Vehicle
Parts
Manufacturing
5
311421
Fruit
and
Vegetable
Canning
4
322130
Paperboard
Mills
4
323113
Commercial
Screen
Printing
4
326113
Unlaminated
Plastics
Film
and
Sheet
(
except
Packaging)
Manufacturing
4
334111
Electronic
Computer
Manufacturing
4
336322
Other
Motor
Vehicle
Electrical
and
Electronic
Equipment
Manufacturing
4
339112
Surgical
and
Medical
Instrument
Manufacturing
4
339115
Ophthalmic
Goods
Manufacturing
4
339999
All
Other
Miscellaneous
Manufacturing
4
221111
Hydroelectric
Power
Generation
3
221121
Electric
Bulk
Power
Transmission
and
Control
3
221122
Electric
Power
Distribution
3
325411
Medicinal
and
Botanical
Manufacturing
3
327999
All
Other
Miscellaneous
Nonmetallic
Mineral
Product
Manufacturing
3
334418
Printed
Circuit
Assembly
(
Electronic
Assembly)
Manufacturing
3
336211
Motor
Vehicle
Body
Manufacturing
3
311514
Dry,
Condensed,
and
Evaporated
Dairy
Product
Manufacturing
2
314110
Carpet
and
Rug
Mills
2
321912
Cut
Stock,
Re­
sawing
Lumber,
and
Planing
2
325188
All
Other
Basic
Inorganic
Chemical
Manufacturing
2
325611
Soap
and
Other
Detergent
Manufacturing
2
325991
Custom
Compounding
of
Purchased
Resins
2
326199
All
Other
Plastics
Product
Manufacturing
2
327331
Concrete
Block
and
Brick
Manufacturing
2
331111
Iron
and
Steel
Mills
2
331521
Aluminum
Die­
Casting
Foundries
2
332812
Metal
Coating,
Engraving
(
except
Jewelry
and
Silverware),
and
Allied
2
333111
Farm
Machinery
and
Equipment
Manufacturing
2
333313
Office
Machinery
Manufacturing
2
333911
Pump
and
Pumping
Equipment
Manufacturing
2
334411
Electron
Tube
Manufacturing
2
Table
4.1:
Primary
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
Codes
of
Current
Performance
Track
Members
­
12­
334511
Search,
Detection,
Navigation,
Guidance,
Aeronautical,
and
Nautical
System
2
334515
Instrument
Manufacturing
for
Measuring
and
Testing
Electricity
and
2
334612
Prerecorded
Compact
Disc
(
except
Software),
Tape,
and
Record
Reproducing
2
334613
Magnetic
and
Optical
Recording
Media
Manufacturing
2
335312
Motor
and
Generator
Manufacturing
2
336350
Motor
Vehicle
Transmission
and
Power
Train
Parts
Manufacturing
2
336411
Aircraft
Manufacturing
2
336414
Guided
Missile
and
Space
Vehicle
Manufacturing
2
339920
Sporting
and
Athletic
Goods
Manufacturing
2
562213
Solid
Waste
Combustors
and
Incinerators
2
928110
National
Security
2
212391
Potash,
Soda,
and
Borate
Mineral
Mining
1
311213
Malt
Manufacturing
1
312221
Cigarette
Manufacturing
1
314912
Canvas
and
Related
Product
Mills
1
321219
Reconstituted
Wood
Product
Manufacturing
1
321911
Wood
Window
and
Door
Manufacturing
1
322110
Pulp
Mills
1
322215
Nonfolding
Sanitary
Food
Container
Manufacturing
1
325132
Synthetic
Organic
Dye
and
Pigment
Manufacturing
1
325212
Synthetic
Rubber
Manufacturing
1
325222
Noncellulosic
Organic
Fiber
Manufacturing
1
325413
In­
Vitro
Diagnostic
Substance
Manufacturing
1
325520
Adhesive
Manufacturing
1
325612
Polish
and
Other
Sanitation
Good
Manufacturing
1
325613
Surface
Active
Agent
Manufacturing
1
325910
Printing
Ink
Manufacturing
1
326291
Rubber
Product
Manufacturing
for
Mechanical
Use
1
326299
All
Other
Rubber
Product
Manufacturing
1
332313
Plate
Work
Manufacturing
1
332431
Metal
Can
Manufacturing
1
332995
Other
Ordnance
and
Accessories
Manufacturing
1
333293
Printing
Machinery
and
Equipment
Manufacturing
1
333294
Food
Product
Machinery
Manufacturing
1
333314
Optical
Instrument
and
Lens
Manufacturing
1
333315
Photographic
and
Photocopying
Equipment
Manufacturing
1
333611
Turbine
and
Turbine
Generator
Set
Units
Manufacturing
1
334412
Bare
Printed
Circuit
Board
Manufacturing
1
334414
Electronic
Capacitor
Manufacturing
1
334512
Automatic
Environmental
Control
Manufacturing
for
Residential,
1
334513
Instruments
and
Related
Products
Manufacturing
for
Measuring,
Displaying,
1
335929
Other
Communication
and
Energy
Wire
Manufacturing
1
335931
Current­
Carrying
Wiring
Device
Manufacturing
1
Table
4.1:
Primary
North
American
Industry
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
Codes
of
Current
Performance
Track
Members
­
13­
336111
Automobile
Manufacturing
1
336212
Truck
Trailer
Manufacturing
1
336312
Gasoline
Engine
and
Engine
Parts
Manufacturing
1
336391
Motor
Vehicle
Air
Conditioning
Manufacturing
1
339114
Dental
Equipment
and
Supplies
Manufacturing
1
339992
Musical
Instrument
Manufacturing
1
562219
Other
Nonhazardous
Waste
Treatment
and
Disposal
1
812332
Industrial
Launderers
1
926120
Regulation
and
Administration
of
Transportation
Programs
1
927110
Space
Research
and
Technology
1
4(
b)
Information
Requested
(
i)
Data
Items
Initially,
all
facilities
and
organizations
that
are
members
of
Performance
Track
will
be
sent
the
Outreach
Award
application
via
e­
mail.
The
Mentoring
Program
registration
form
will
be
available
online
on
the
Performance
Track
website.
The
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
will
be
made
available
online
to
all
members.
Since
nomination
for
the
Outreach
Award
and
registration
in
the
Mentoring
Program
are
voluntary,
only
those
facilities
interested
in
consideration
for
the
Outreach
Award,
or
being
mentors/
mentees
in
the
Mentoring
Program,
will
submit
an
application
to
EPA.
Submission
of
the
Questionnaire
is
also
voluntary
and
there
are
no
benefits
tied
to
completing
it.

The
Outreach
Award
Application
(
attached
as
Appendix
B)
is
made
up
of
two
parts:

°
Section
I
asks
for
general
information,
such
as
the
name
and
address
of
the
facility;
name,
phone
number,
fax
number,
and
e­
mail
address
of
the
primary
contact
person;
and
name,
phone
number,
fax
number,
and
e­
mail
address
of
a
communications
contact.
This
section
also
asks
the
facility
how
it
heard
of
the
Outreach
Award.

°
Section
II
asks
the
respondent
to
describe
the
special
efforts
the
facility/
organization
has
undertaken
to
promote
the
public
value
of
environmental
performance
and/
or
partnership
in
Performance
Track.
Examples
of
such
efforts
are
provided
for
the
respondent
in
this
section
as
well.

The
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form
(
attached
as
Appendix
C)
is
made
up
of
six
parts:

°
Section
1
asks
for
general
information,
such
as
the
name
and
title
of
the
submitter;
name
and
address
of
the
facility;
phone
number,
fax
number,
and
e­
mail
address
of
the
primary
contact
person;
and
NAICS
code
of
the
facility.
­
14­
°
Section
2
asks
whether
the
respondent
is
seeking
to
become
a
mentor
or
mentee.
If
the
respondent
is
seeking
to
become
a
mentor,
he/
she
proceeds
directly
to
Section
6.

°
Section
3
asks
the
respondent
to
briefly
describe
what
the
site
produces
and/
or
its
functions,
as
well
as
the
number
of
employees
at
the
site.

°
Section
4
asks
in
which
areas
the
site
wishes
the
mentoring
relationship
to
provide
additional
guidance.

°
Section
5
asks
the
applicant
if
it
is
currently
working
with
a
Performance
Track
site,
and
if
so,
to
provide
the
name
of
the
site
with
which
they
are
currently
working,
the
name
and
phone
number
of
a
contact
person
at
the
site,
and
if
the
applicant
would
like
to
work
with
this
site
as
its
official
mentor.

°
Section
6
asks
which
characteristics
of
the
mentoring
match
are
most
important
to
the
applicant,
such
as
similar
industry,
geographic
proximity,
or
size
of
business.

The
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
(
attached
as
Appendix
D)
contains
30
questions.
The
questions
are
grouped
together
in
the
following
sections:

°
Question
1
asks
for
the
job
title
of
the
respondent.
It
will
be
important
to
know
if
the
respondent
works
at
the
facility
level,
parent
company
level,
or
in
another
position
to
determine
whether
certain
types
of
Performance
Track
services
should
be
aimed
at
certain
job
responsibilities
°
Questions
2
through
6
ask
about
the
specific
benefits
of
Performance
Track
that
are
important
to
members.
This
tells
EPA
which
aspects
of
the
program
are
most
satisfactory
and
which
might
need
more
or
less
emphasis.

°
Questions
7
through
10
ask
about
the
specific
entities
(
e.
g.,
EPA
or
state
environmental
agency,
community
members,
customers,
etc.)
that
are
important
to
Performance
Track
members.
This
will
be
used
to
assess
if
promotion
efforts
have
been
satisfactorily
targeted.

°
Question
11
asks
about
potential
concerns
members
may
have
had
when
joining
the
program.
This
information
will
be
used
to
potentially
alter
aspects
of
the
program
so
that
prospective
members
will
experience
less
burden
in
applying
(
e.
g.
application
process
or
annual
reporting).
For
example,
if
members
respond
that
there
was
a
lack
of
top
management
support,
more
outreach
can
be
directed
towards
individuals
at
this
level
of
facilities.
­
15­
°
Questions
12
and
13
ask
members
about
the
Performance
Track
services
they
have
used,
and
how
useful
they
found
these
services.
There
is
also
an
option
to
check
if
they
were
not
aware
of
any
of
the
services,
so
that
EPA
can
determine
which
services
have
not
been
communicated
effectively.
EPA
will
use
results
from
these
questions
to
maintain
or
expand
services
that
are
widely
used,
and
reevaluate
services
that
members
do
not
find
useful.

°
Questions
14
through
17
request
member
preferences
for
regulatory
incentives.
Members
are
asked
which
regulatory
areas
they
would
be
interested
in
receiving
incentives,
and
the
particular
types
of
incentives
they
would
find
most
beneficial.

°
Questions
18
and
19
ask
members
to
rate
how
satisfied
they
are
with
the
recognition
their
facility
has
received
for
its
membership
in
Performance
Track
and
ask
respondents
for
recommendations
for
ways
to
improve
recognition
members
receive.

°
Questions
20
and
21
ask
about
the
most
effective
means
for
communicating
with
members
regarding
Performance
Track
services
or
events.
If,
for
example,
members
agree
that
conferences
and
speaker
events
are
effective
ways
to
communicate
program
information,
EPA
can
target
these
events
to
provide
information
about
new
Performance
Track
services.

°
Questions
22
through
25
ask
members
about
their
presence
at
conferences
in
the
past
three
years
and
their
preferences
for
receiving
Performance
Track
information
at
these
events.
This
information
will
assist
EPA
in
determining
the
types
of
conferences,
as
well
as
the
particular
parts
of
the
conferences,
where
Performance
Track
presence
would
be
most
useful
to
members.

°
Questions
26
through
29
ask
about
the
ways
that
members
utilize
to
promote
and
receive
value
for
their
participation
in
Performance
Track.
With
this
information,
EPA
can
assist
in
promotional
efforts
to
increase
the
value
of
Performance
Track
membership.

°
Question
30
is
an
open­
ended
question
soliciting
suggestions
for
improvements
to
the
services
Performance
Track
offers.
These
suggestions
will
also
be
evaluated
as
potential
improvements
to
the
program.

As
EPA
anticipates
making
changes
to
the
program
based
on
responses
received
from
the
questionnaire,
it
may
be
necessary
to
add
or
delete
or
otherwise
slightly
alter
the
questions
asked
in
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
administered
in
year
three
of
this
information
collection
request.
EPA
does
not
expect
such
changes
to
significantly
differ
from
the
general
outline
above,
nor
does
it
expect
any
changes
to
add
additional
burden
in
completion
of
the
­
16­
questionnaire
and
will
seek
OMB
approval
for
any
changes
to
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
prior
to
its
administration.

(
ii)
Respondent
Activities
The
respondent
must
perform
the
following
activities
during
the
application
phase
for
the
Outreach
Award:

1.
Read
the
application
directions.
2.
Gather
information
to
complete
both
sections
of
the
application.
3.
Complete
both
sections
of
the
application.
4.
Submit
the
application
to
EPA.
5.
Wait
for
notification
from
EPA
if
facility
has
been
selected
to
receive
the
Outreach
Award.

The
respondent
must
perform
the
following
activities
associated
with
the
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form:

1.
Read
the
registration
form
instructions.
2.
Gather
information
to
complete
the
seven
sections
of
the
application.
3.
Complete
the
seven
sections
of
the
application.
4.
Submit
the
application
to
EPA.
5.
Wait
for
notification
from
EPA
if
facility
has
been
selected
for
participation
in
the
mentoring
program.

Members
conduct
the
following
activities
to
complete
and
submit
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire:

1.
Read
the
e­
mail
announcing
the
survey
and
asking
for
their
participation.
2.
Read
the
e­
mail
containing
instructions
for
taking
the
survey.
3.
Complete
and
submit
the
survey
online.

The
activities
required
by
the
components
of
this
information
collection
request
are
not
customary
and
are
usual
business
practice.

5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
Performance
Track
Outreach
Award
recipients
will
be
selected
by
a
panel
of
five
EPA
judges.
EPA
will
consider
all
applications
submitted
by
the
deadline
set
and
announce
the
award
winners
at
the
following
years'
Annual
Member
event.
Selection
for
the
award
will
be
based
on
­
17­
the
description
of
efforts
submitted
in
the
application
that
the
facility/
organization
has
undertaken
to
promote
public
education,
environmental
stewardship,
and
strengthening
of
Performance
Track.

The
following
activities
must
be
performed
by
the
Agency
in
relation
to
the
Outreach
Award
Application:

1.
Setup
e­
mail
database
and
send
out
applications.
2.
Review
all
submitted
applications
submitted
by
the
deadline.
3.
Notify
recipients
of
award.
4.
Recognize
award
recipients
at
Annual
Member
Event.

EPA
will
accept
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
Registration
forms
from
current
members
and
prospective
members
of
the
Performance
Track
Program
on
a
rolling
basis.
EPA
will
use
these
registration
forms
to
match
companies
based
on
the
responses
in
the
registration
form.
EPA
will
notify
both
the
mentor
and
mentee
facilities
when
a
mentor
relationship
is
made.

The
following
activities
must
be
performed
by
the
Agency
in
relation
to
the
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form:

1.
Receive
registration
forms
from
interested
facilities/
organizations
on
a
rolling
basis.
2.
Review
submitted
applications.
3.
Notify
recipients
of
acceptance
into
the
mentoring
program.
4.
Notify
facilities
of
their
mentoring
partner.

The
following
activities
must
be
performed
by
the
Agency
in
relation
to
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire:

1.
Set
up
e­
mail
database
with
passwords,
create
mail
merge,
configure
internet
mail
outlet,
and
test
system.
2.
Send
e­
mail
notification
announcing
the
survey
and
asking
for
member
participation.
3.
Send
e­
mail
containing
instructions
on
taking
the
survey,
password
for
survey,
and
link
to
survey.
4.
Send
reminder
e­
mail
notice
at
the
end
of
the
next
two
weeks.
5.
Make
phone
calls
to
members
who
have
not
completed
the
survey
within
three
weeks.
6.
Analyze
results
from
survey
and
compile
report.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
Applicants
wishing
to
be
considered
for
the
Performance
Track
Outreach
Award
must
submit
a
copy
of
their
award
application
to
EPA.
The
application
will
be
evaluated
for
completeness
by
Performance
Track
staff.
If
Performance
Track
program
staff
consider
the
application
to
be
incomplete,
or
requiring
additional
information,
the
applicant
may
be
contacted
­
18­
via
e­
mail
or
telephone
to
elaborate
on
the
information
submitted.
A
panel
of
five
EPA
judges
will
review
each
application
and
select
recipients
of
the
Outreach
Award.

Facilities
interested
in
joining
the
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
will
submit
a
copy
of
their
registration
form
to
EPA
by
mail,
fax,
or
e­
mail.
EPA
will
review
each
form,
and
based
on
the
information
provided
regarding
what
the
registering
facility
seeks
in
the
mentor
relationship,
will
match
facilities
with
similar
objectives.

The
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
will
be
available
online
for
facilities
to
complete.
EPA
will
use
electronic
databases
to
store
results
from
the
questionnaire.
The
Agency
will
use
software
to
aggregate
and
analyze
responses
to
the
questionnaire.
A
report
will
be
generated
that
will
identify
areas
of
the
program
that
members
have
identified
as
needing
strengthening,
benefits
they
would
like
to
see,
as
well
as
aspects
of
the
program
that
are
working
well
for
the
members.
This
report
will
allow
EPA
to
tailor
the
program
to
provide
the
greatest
benefit
to
its
members,
and
increase
the
attractiveness
of
the
program
to
facilities
that
are
considering
becoming
members
of
Performance
Track.

EPA
and
its
contractor
support
staff
do
not
intend
to
distribute
the
information
collected
through
the
Outreach
Award
application,
Mentoring
Program
Registration,
and
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire,
as
well
as
the
subsequent
analysis
and
report(
s),
to
anyone
outside
of
the
Performance
Track
program.
However,
EPA
cannot
guarantee
that
information
collected
through
these
instruments
and
claimed
as
confidential
will
be
protected
from
release
under
the
Freedom
of
Information
Act
(
FOIA).

5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
EPA
understands
that
members
of
its
Performance
Track
Program
vary
in
size.
The
burden
to
small
businesses
was
taken
into
account
when
developing
the
Performance
Track
Program,
its
application,
reporting
requirements
and
this
information
collection.
Due
to
the
voluntary
nature
of
submission
and
limited
amount
of
information
requested
in
this
information
collection
request,
EPA
does
not
believe
small
business
will
incur
any
undue
burden.

5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
Table
5.1
on
the
following
page
summarizes
the
program's
collection
schedule.
­
19­
Table
5.1:
Collection
Schedule
Performance
Track
Outreach
Award
Application
Activity
Schedule
EPA
sends
applications
to
members
Annually,
first
quarter
of
fiscal
year
(
FY­
Q1)

EPA
receives
applications
Annually,
FY­
Q1
EPA
panel
of
judges
reviews
all
submitted
applications
Annually,
FY­
Q2
EPA
notifies
recipients
of
award
Annually,
FY­
Q2
EPA
formally
recognizes
recipients
of
award
At
the
Annual
Member
Events
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program
Registration
Activity
Schedule
EPA
sends
registration
form
to
facility
Based
on
request
of
facility
EPA
receives
registration
form
from
facility
Rolling
basis
EPA
reviews
registration
form
Within
days
of
receipt
EPA
informs
facilities
of
mentor
relationship
Within
four
weeks
of
receipt
of
registration
form
Performance
Track
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
Activity
Schedule
EPA
sends
e­
mail
notice
announcing
questionnaire
Upon
OMB
Information
Collection
Request
approval
EPA
sends
e­
mail
notice
with
instructions
One
week
after
announcing
questionnaire
EPA
sends
reminder
e­
mail
after
one
week
to
remaining
non­
respondents
One
week
after
sending
e­
mail
with
instructions
EPA
sends
reminder
e­
mail
after
two
weeks
to
remaining
non­
respondents
Two
weeks
after
sending
e­
mail
with
instructions
EPA
makes
phone
calls
after
three
weeks
to
remaining
non­
respondents
Three
weeks
after
sending
e­
mail
with
instructions
EPA
analyzes
results
and
compiles
report
Within
six
weeks
of
sending
e­
mail
with
instructions
6.
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
This
section
presents
EPA's
estimates
of
respondent
burden
necessary
to
complete
the
activities
associated
with
this
information
collection.
Respondents
to
this
information
collection
are
considered
to
be
the
members
of
Performance
Track
for
the
reporting
year.
EPA
is
the
­
20­
recipient
and
reviewer
of
the
data
collected.
In
using
this
analysis,
it
should
be
noted
again
that
all
submissions
of
this
information
collection
are
voluntary.

Based
on
member
feedback,
EPA
estimates
that
approximately
7
percent
of
the
facilities
that
are
members
of
Performance
Track
will
submit
Outreach
Award
applications
under
this
information
collection
request.
EPA
expects
10
percent
of
current
member
facilities
to
register
in
the
Performance
Track
Mentoring
Program,
and
90
percent
of
the
current
member
facilities
and
corporate
participants
will
complete
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire.

As
of
October
2003,
there
were
309
members
in
Performance
Track.
For
future
year's
estimates
of
number
of
respondents,
EPA's
goal
of
25
percent
annual
increase
in
membership
will
be
used
to
calculate
projected
membership
in
Performance
Track.
The
7
percent
submission
rate
estimate
for
the
Outreach
Award
and
10
percent
submission
rate
estimate
for
the
Mentoring
Program
will
be
applied
to
the
projected
membership
levels
to
estimate
the
number
of
respondents
in
subsequent
years.
The
estimated
number
of
respondents
to
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
is
based
on
90
percent
of
Performance
Track
members
and
12
corporate
participants
completing
the
survey.

Table
6.1
summarizes
the
number
of
submissions
expected
to
be
received
under
this
information
collection.

Table
6.1:
Projected
Membership
and
Response
Levels
Year
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Membership1
198
247
309
386
483
604
Expected
number
of
Outreach
Award
applications2
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
27
34
42
Expected
number
of
Mentoring
Program
Registration
forms3
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
39
48
60
Expected
number
of
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
responses4
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
358
N/
A
554
1
Actual
number
of
members
for
2001,
2002,
and
2003.
Estimate
number
of
members
based
on
EPA
annual
target
growth
rate
of
25%
for
each
year
thereafter.
2
Based
on
an
estimated
7%
of
Performance
Track
members
submitting
applications
for
Outreach
Award.
3
Based
on
an
estimated
10%
of
Performance
Track
members
submitting
registration
forms
for
the
Mentoring
Program.
4
In
addition
to
the
current
members,
12
corporate
participants
will
be
asked
to
complete
the
questionnaire.
Estimated
number
of
respondents
is
based
on
90
percent
of
members
and
corporate
participants
completing
the
survey.

Based
on
discussions
with
Performance
Track
members,
the
Agency
estimates
respondents
to
the
Outreach
Award
Application
will
take
approximately
1.5
hours
to
read
the
instructions,
gather
the
information
needed,
and
complete
the
application.
Since
there
is
no
further
action
required
by
the
facility/
organization,
total
annual
burden
hours
for
each
respondent
for
the
Outreach
Award
Application
is
1.5
hours.
­
21­
Based
on
consultations
with
Performance
Track
members,
the
Agency
estimates
respondents
to
the
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form
to
take
about
0.25
hours
to
read
the
instructions
and
complete
the
registration
form.
As
there
is
no
further
action
required
by
the
facility/
organization,
total
annual
burden
hours
for
each
respondent
to
the
Mentoring
Program
is
0.25
hours.

Based
on
timed
pre­
tests
of
the
questionnaire
instrument,
in
which
EPA
contractor
staff
and
seven
Performance
Track
members
completed
the
questionnaire
online,
EPA
estimates
that
respondents
to
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
will
take
0.5
hours
to
read
the
instructions
and
complete
the
online
survey.

In
order
to
be
conservative
in
estimating
labor
costs
associated
with
this
information
collection,
EPA
assumes
the
respondent
to
the
applications
and
questionnaire
to
be
managers.
However,
in
some
cases,
EPA
suspects
that
managers
may
delegate
the
task
to
their
staff.
To
be
consistent
with
previous
Performance
Track
ICR's,
EPA
used
the
Managerial
wage
rate
set
out
in
the
Information
Collection
Request
for
EPA
Performance
Track
Program
of
June
13,
2003
(
ICR
1949.02).
Table
6.2
on
the
following
page
details
the
annual
respondent
burden
for
each
year
covered
by
this
information
collection
request.

6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
(
i)
Estimating
Labor
Costs
EPA
estimates
the
total
annualized
respondent
cost
for
the
number
of
expected
submissions
and
responses
to
be
$
16,153.
For
an
individual
facility/
organization,
the
Outreach
Award
Application
cost
is
estimated
to
be
$
112,
the
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form
cost
is
estimated
to
be
$
19,
and
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
cost
is
estimated
to
be
$
37.

Table
6.2
uses
the
following
equation
to
obtain
labor
costs
for
each
task
associated
with
this
information
collection
request:
(
Manager
Hours
x
$
74.87/
Hour)
=
Labor
Cost/
Year/
Respondent.
As
stated,
cost
estimates
for
labor
were
taken
from
the
Information
Collection
Request
for
EPA
Performance
Track
Program
of
June
13,
2003
(
ICR
1949.02),
which
were
derived
from
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
Data,
and
reflect
benefits
and
overhead
costs.
In
order
to
obtain
total
hourly
burden
and
total
cost
estimates
for
Table
6.2,
the
following
equations
were
used:

Respondent
Hours/
Year
x
Number
of
Respondents
=
Total
Hours/
Year
Labor
Cost/
Year/
Respondent
x
Number
of
Respondents
=
Total
Cost/
Year
(
ii)
Estimating
Capital
and
Operations
Maintenance
Costs
There
are
no
capital
or
operations
maintenance
costs
associated
with
this
information
collection.
­
22­

Table
6.2:
Detailed
Annualized
Respondent
Burden
and
Costs,
January
1,
2004
­
December
31,
2006
Respondent
Burden,
January
1,
2004
­
December
31,
2004
Information
Collection
Activity
Manager
($
74.87/
Hour)
Respondent
Hours/
Year
Labor
Cost/

Year/
Respondent
Number
of
Respondents
Total
Hours/

Year
Total
Cost/

Year
Outreach
Award
Application
Read
Instructions
0.2
0.2
$
14.97
27
5.4
$
404.30
Complete
Application
1.3
1.3
$
97.33
27
35.1
$
2,627.94
Subtotal
1.5
1.5
$
112
27
40.5
$
3,032
Mentoring
Program
Registration
Form
Read
Instructions
0.05
0.05
$
3.74
39
1.95
$
146.00
Complete
Registration
Form
0.2
0.2
$
14.97
39
7.8
$
583.99
Subtotal
0.25
0.25
$
19
39
9.75
$
730
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
Read
Instructions
0.1
0.1
$
7.49
358
35.8
$
2,680.35
Complete
Questionnaire
0.4
0.4
$
29.95
358
143.2
$
10,721.38
Subtotal
0.5
0.5
$
37
358
179
$
13,402
Totals
for
2004
424
229.25
$
17,164
Respondent
Burden,
January
1,
2005
­
December
31,
2005
Information
Collection
Activity
Manager
($
74.87/
Hour)
Respondent
Hours/
Year
Labor
Cost/

Year/
Respondent
Number
of
Respondents
Total
Hours/

Year
Total
Cost/

Year
Outreach
Award
Application
Read
Instructions
0.2
0.2
$
14.97
34
6.8
$
509.12
Complete
Application
1.3
1.3
$
97.33
34
44.2
$
3,309.25
Subtotal
1.5
1.5
$
112
34
51
$
3,818
­
23­

Mentoring
Program
Registration
Read
Instructions
.05
.05
$
3.74
48
2.4
$
179.69
Complete
Registration
Form
0.2
0.2
$
14.97
48
9.6
$
718.75
Subtotal
0.25
0.25
$
19
48
12
$
898
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
(
Not
administered
this
year)

Subtotal
0.00
0.00
$
0.00
0.0
0.0
$
0.00
Totals
for
2005
82
63
$
4,716
Respondent
Burden,
January
1,
2006
­
December
31,
2006
Information
Collection
Activity
Manager
($
74.87/
Hour)
Respondent
Hours/
Year
Labor
Cost/

Year/
Respondent
Number
of
Respondents
Total
Hours/

Year
Total
Cost/

Year
Outreach
Award
Application
Read
instructions
0.2
0.2
$
14.97
42
8.4
$
628.91
Complete
application
1.3
1.3
$
97.33
42
54.6
$
4,087.90
Subtotal
1.5
1.5
$
112
42
63
$
4,717
Mentoring
Program
Registration
Form
Read
Instructions
0.05
0.05
$
3.74
60
3
$
224.61
Complete
Registration
Form
0.2
0.2
$
14.97
60
12
$
898.44
Subtotal
0.25
0.25
$
19
60
15
$
1,123
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
Read
Instructions
0.1
0.1
$
7.49
554
55.4
$
4,147.80
Complete
Questionnaire
0.4
0.4
$
29.95
554
221.6
$
16,591.19
Subtotal
0.5
0.5
$
37
554
277
$
20,739
Totals
for
2006
656
355
$
26,579
­
24­

Totals
over
the
life
of
this
ICR
1162
647.25
$
48,459
­
25­
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
In
preparation
for
the
delivery
of
Outreach
Award
applications,
EPA
estimates
it
will
spend
4
hours
to
develop
an
e­
mail
database
for
distribution
of
the
applications.
This
is
a
onetime
setup
cost
that
is
not
affected
by
the
number
of
respondents.
EPA
estimates
it
will
expend
5.5
hours
of
burden
per
Outreach
Award
Application.
This
estimate
includes
one
hour
for
each
of
five
judges
to
review
each
application,
and
0.5
hours
for
writing
notification
letters
to
each
facility
as
to
whether
they
have
been
chosen
to
receive
the
Outreach
Award.

The
Agency
estimates
that
the
Mentoring
Program
Registration
forms
will
require
0.75
hours
of
burden
in
order
to
review
each
submission,
find
a
matching
mentor/
mentee,
and
communicate
to
both
parties
the
mentoring
match
via
phone
call
or
e­
mail.

In
administering
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire,
EPA
incurs
costs
due
mostly
to
the
set
up
of
the
e­
mail
notification
system,
testing,
responding
to
problems
in
delivery
of
e­
mails,
and
analysis
of
the
responses.
These
are
up­
front
costs
that
are
independent
of
the
number
of
respondents,
therefore,
the
number
or
responses
has
negligible
effect
on
the
overall
cost
associated
with
implementing
the
questionnaire.
The
only
cost
directly
related
to
number
of
responses
is
the
cost
associated
with
the
number
of
reminder
calls
to
facilities
that
have
not
completed
the
survey
after
three
weeks.
If
a
facility
has
not
completed
the
survey
within
three
weeks
of
receiving
the
link
and
password
to
the
questionnaire,
EPA
will
make
phone
calls
to
the
remaining
non­
respondents
to
encourage
increased
participation.
EPA
estimates
that
15%
of
members
will
not
have
responded
at
that
time.

EPA
estimates
the
total
annualized
Agency
cost
for
the
number
of
expected
responses
to
the
instruments
in
this
information
collection
request
to
be
$
28,662.
EPA
estimates
a
cost
of
$
202
to
set
up
an
e­
mail
database
for
sending
out
Outreach
Award
applications,
and
an
additional
agency
cost
of
$
384
for
each
application
received.
Estimated
Agency
cost
for
each
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form
is
$
38.
As
stated
above,
costs
for
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
are
incurred
mostly
in
the
setup
and
administration
of
the
questionnaire.
EPA
estimates
an
annualized
cost
of
$
20,118
to
administer
the
questionnaire
twice
over
the
life
of
this
collection
request.

Table
6.3
uses
the
following
equation
to
obtain
labor
costs:
(
GS­
15
Hours
x
$
83.41/
Hour)
+
(
GS­
14
Hours
x
$
70.90/
Hour)
+
(
GS­
12
Hours
x
$
50.45/
Hour)
+
(
Contractor
Hours
x
$
69.48/
Hour)
=
Labor
Cost/
Year/
Response.
Labor
cost
estimates
were
derived
from
the
Office
of
Personnel
Management's
Salary
Table
2003­
DCB,
with
the
base
rate
multiplied
by
1.6
to
account
for
benefits
and
overhead.
In
order
to
obtain
total
hourly
burden
and
total
cost
estimates
for
Table
6.3,
the
following
equations
were
used:

Agency
Hours
/
Response
x
Number
of
Responses
=
Total
Hours
/
Year
Labor
Cost
/
Response
x
Number
of
Responses
=
Total
Cost
/
Year
Table
6.3
on
the
following
page
summarizes
the
annualized
agency
burden
associated
with
this
information
collection.
­
26­

Table
6.3:
Detailed
Annualized
Agency
Burden
and
Costs,
January
1,
2004
­
December
31,
2006
Agency
Burden,
January
1,
2004
­
December
31,
2004
Information
Collection
Activity
Agency
Labor1
Agency
Hours/

Response
Labor
Cost/

Response
Number
of
Responses
Total
Hours/
Year
Total
Cost/

Year
GS­
15
($
83.41/
Hour)
GS­
14
($
70.90/
Hour)
GS­
12
($
50.45/
Hour)
Contractor2
($
69.48/
Hour)

Outreach
Award
Application
Setup
e­
mail
database
and
send
out
application
4
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
4
$
201.80
Review
Application
2
2
1
5
$
359.07
27
135
$
9,694.89
Write
Notification
Letter
0.5
0.5
$
25.23
27
13.5
$
681.08
Subtotal
2
2
5.5
0
5.5
$
384
27
152.5
$
10,578
Mentoring
Program
Registration
Form
Review
Registration
form
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
39
9.75
$
491.89
Find
mentoring
partner
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
39
9.75
$
491.89
Communicate
match
to
both
parties
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
39
9.75
$
491.89
Subtotal
0
0
0.75
0
0.75
$
38
39
29.25
$
1,476
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire3
Set
up
and
testing
of
e­
mail
database
60
60
$
4,168.80
N/
A
60
$
4,168.80
Send
e­
mail
announcement
3
3
$
208.44
N/
A
3
$
208.44
E­
mail
survey
link
and
passwords
3
3
$
208.44
N/
A
3
$
208.44
Send
reminder
e­
mail
after
1
week
3
3
$
208.44
N/
A
3
$
208.44
Send
reminder
e­
mail
after
2
weeks
3
3
$
208.44
N/
A
3
$
208.44
Make
reminder
phone
call4
0.25
0.25
$
17.37
60
15
$
1,042.20
Analyze
results
and
compile
report
200
200
$
13,896.00
N/
A
200
$
13,896.00
Subtotal
0
0
0
272.25
272.25
$
18,916
60
287
$
19,941
Total
for
2004
2
2
6.25
272.25
278.5
$
19,338
126
468.75
$
31,994
1
Taken
from
US
Office
of
Personnel
Management's
Salary
Table
2003
­
DCB.
Assumes
2
judges
at
GS­
15,
step
5,
and
GS­
14,
step
5,
and
1
judge
at
GS­
12,
step
5,
each
spending
1
hour
to
review
application.
Base
hourly
wage
multiplied
by
loading
factor
of
1.6
to
account
for
benefits
and
overhead.

2
Taken
from
US
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
Employer
Cost
for
Employee
Compensation
for
Professional
Specialty
Occupations
in
Private
Service
Producing
Industry.
Base
hourly
wage
of
$
28.95
multiplied
by
loading
factor
of
2.4
to
account
for
benefits,
overhead,
G&
A,
and
fee.

3
Costs
for
Agency
tasks
relating
to
the
administration
of
the
questionnaire,
with
the
exception
of
the
reminder
phone
call,
are
not
dependent
on
the
number
of
respondents,
as
once
a
database
with
e­
mail
information
is
established,
additional
e­
mail
announcements
can
be
done
with
negligible
burden,
other
than
resolving
problems
with
delivery.

4
Assumes
15%
of
members
and
corporate
participants
will
not
have
completed
the
questionnaire
at
the
end
of
three
weeks.
­
27­

Table
6.3:
Detailed
Annualized
Agency
Burden
and
Costs,
January
1,
2004
­
December
31,
2006
Agency
Burden,
January
1,
2005
­
December
31,
2005
Information
Collection
Activity
Agency
Labor1
Agency
Hours/
Response
Labor
Cost/

Response
Number
of
Responses
Total
Hours/

Year
Total
Cost/
Year
GS­
15
($
83.41/
Hour)
GS­
14
($
70.90/
Hour)
GS­
12
($
50.45/
Hour)
Contractor2
($
69.48/
Hour)

Outreach
Award
Application
Setup
e­
mail
database
and
send
out
application
4
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
4
$
201.80
Review
Application
2
2
1
5
$
359.07
34
170
$
12,208.38
Write
Notification
Letter
0.5
0.5
$
25.23
34
17
$
857.65
Subtotal
2
2
5.5
0
5.5
$
384
34
191
$
13,268
Mentoring
Program
Registration
Form
Review
Registration
form
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
48
12
$
605.40
Find
mentoring
partner
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
48
12
$
605.40
Communicate
match
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
48
12
$
605.40
Subtotal
0
0
0.75
0
0.75
$
38
48
36
$
1,816
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
(
Not
administered
this
year)

Send
e­
mail
announcement
E­
mail
survey
link
and
passwords
Send
reminder
e­
mail
after
1
week
Send
reminder
e­
mail
after
2
weeks
Make
phone
calls
Analyze
results
and
compile
report
Subtotal
Total
for
2005
2
2
6.25
0
6.25
$
422
82
227
$
15,084
1
Taken
from
US
Office
of
Personnel
Management's
Salary
Table
2003
­
DCB.
Assumes
2
judges
at
GS­
15,
step
5,
and
GS­
14,
step
5,
and
1
judge
at
GS­
12,
step
5,
each
spending
1
hour
to
review
application.
Base
hourly
wage
multiplied
by
loading
factor
of
1.6
to
account
for
benefits
and
overhead.

2
Taken
from
US
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
Employer
Cost
for
Employee
Compensation
for
Professional
Specialty
Occupations
in
Private
Service
Producing
Industry.
Base
hourly
wage
of
$
28.95
multiplied
by
loading
factor
of
2.4
to
account
for
benefits,
overhead,
G&
A,
and
fee.
­
28­

Table
6.3:
Detailed
Annualized
Agency
Burden
and
Costs,
January
1,
2004
­
December
31,
2006
Agency
Burden,
January
1,
2006
­
December
31,
2006
Information
Collection
Activity
Agency
Labor1
Agency
Hours/
Response
Labor
Cost/

Response
Number
of
Responses
Total
Hours/

Year
Total
Cost/
Year
GS­
15
($
83.41/
Hour)
GS­
14
($
70.90/
Hour)
GS­
12
($
50.45/
Hour)
Contractor2
($
69.48/
Hour)

Outreach
Award
Application
Set
up
e­
mail
database
and
send
out
application
4
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
4
$
201.80
Review
Application
2
2
1
5
$
359.07
42
210
$
15,080.94
Write
Notification
Letter
0.5
0.5
$
25.23
42
21
$
1,059.45
Subtotal
2
2
5.5
0
5.5
$
384
42
235
$
16,342
Mentoring
Program
Registration
Form
Review
Registration
form
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
60
15
$
756.75
Find
mentoring
partner
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
60
15
$
756.75
Communicate
match
0.25
0.25
$
12.61
60
15
$
756.75
Subtotal
0
0
0.75
0
0.75
$
38
60
45
$
2,270
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire3
Set
up
and
testing
of
e­
mail
database
60
60
$
4,168.80
N/
A
60
$
4,168.80
Send
e­
mail
announcement
3
3
$
208.44
N/
A
3
$
208.44
E­
mail
survey
link
and
passwords
3
3
$
208.44
N/
A
3
$
208.44
Send
reminder
e­
mail
after
1
week
3
3
$
208.44
N/
A
3
$
208.44
Send
reminder
e­
mail
after
2
weeks
3
3
$
208.44
N/
A
3
$
6.40
Make
reminder
phone
call4
0.25
0.25
$
17.37
92
23
$
1,598.04
Analyze
results
and
compile
report
200
200
$
13,896.00
N/
A
200
$
13,896.00
Subtotal
0
0
0
272.25
272.25
$
18,916
92
295
$
20,295
Total
for
2006
2
2
6.25
272.25
278.5
$
19,338
194
575
$
38,907
1
Taken
from
US
Office
of
Personnel
Management's
Salary
Table
2003
­
DCB.
Assumes
2
judges
at
GS­
15,
step
5,
and
GS­
14,
step
5,
and
1
judge
at
GS­
12,
step
5,
each
spending
1
hour
to
review
application.
Base
hourly
wage
multiplied
by
loading
factor
of
1.6
to
account
for
benefits
and
overhead.

2
Taken
from
US
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
Employer
Cost
for
Employee
Compensation
for
Professional
Specialty
Occupations
in
Private
Service
Producing
Industry.
Base
hourly
wage
of
$
28.95
multiplied
by
loading
factor
of
2.4
to
account
for
benefits,
overhead,
G&
A,
and
fee.

3
Costs
for
Agency
tasks
relating
to
the
administration
of
the
questionnaire,
with
the
exception
of
the
reminder
phone
call,
are
not
dependent
on
the
number
of
respondents,
as
once
a
database
with
e­
mail
information
is
established,
additional
e­
mail
announcements
can
be
done
with
negligible
burden,
other
than
resolving
problems
with
delivery.

4
Assumes
15%
of
members
and
corporate
participants
will
not
have
completed
the
questionnaire
at
the
end
of
three
weeks.
­
29­
6(
d)
Estimating
the
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
and
Costs
Based
on
the
program's
goal
of
a
25
percent
annual
growth
rate
in
membership
for
the
Performance
Track
program,
EPA
estimates
membership
in
Performance
Track
to
range
from
386
to
604
facilities/
organizations
over
the
life
of
this
ICR.
Assuming
the
7
percent
Outreach
Award
application
submission
rate
remains
constant
over
the
life
of
this
information
collection
request,
EPA
expects
to
receive
between
27
and
42
Outreach
Award
applications
annually
through
this
ICR.
Assuming
the
10
percent
submission
rate
for
the
Mentoring
Program,
EPA
estimates
it
will
receive
between
39
and
60
registration
forms
annually
over
the
life
of
this
ICR.
EPA
estimates
for
responses
to
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
are
347
responses
the
first
year,
and
544
responses
in
the
last
year
of
this
information
collection
request,
based
on
a
90
percent
completion
rate
for
members
and
corporate
participants.
As
all
of
the
information
requested
in
this
collection
is
of
a
voluntary
nature,
there
may
be
some
degree
of
variability
in
the
actual
number
of
facilities
subject
to
this
information
collection
request.

6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Tables
(
i)
Respondent
Tally
Bottom
line
burden
hours
and
costs
for
respondents
are
summarized
in
Table
6.4.

Table
6.4:
Bottom
Line
Respondent
Burden
and
Costs
Submission
Number
of
Respondents
Burden
Hours
Total
Costs
Year
1
Outreach
Award
Application
27
40.5
$
3,032
Mentoring
Program
Registration
39
9.75
$
730
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
358
179
$
13,402
Year
1
Bottom
Line
424
229.25
$
17,164
Year
2
Outreach
Award
Application
34
51
$
3,818
Mentoring
Program
Registration
48
12
$
898
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
Year
2
Bottom
Line
82
63
$
4,716
Year
3
Outreach
Award
Application
42
63
$
4,717
Mentoring
Program
Registration
60
15
$
1,123
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
554
277
$
20,739
Year
3
Bottom
Line
656
355
$
26,579
­
30­
(
ii)
Agency
Tally
Bottom
line
burden
and
costs
for
the
Agency
are
summarized
in
Table
6.5
below.

Table
6.5:
Bottom
Line
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
Submission
Number
of
Respondents
Burden
Hours
Total
Costs
Year
1
Outreach
Award
Application
27
152.5
$
10,578
Mentoring
Program
Registration
39
29.25
$
1,476
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire1
60
287
$
19,941
Year
1
Bottom
Line
126
468.75
$
31,994
Year
2
Outreach
Award
Application
34
191
$
13,268
Mentoring
Program
Registration
48
36
$
1,816
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
N/
A
N/
A
N/
A
Year
2
Bottom
Line
82
227
$
15,084
Year
3
Outreach
Award
Application
42
235
$
16,342
Mentoring
Program
Registration
60
45
$
2,270
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire1
92
295
$
20,295
Year
3
Bottom
Line
194
575
$
38,907
1
Number
of
respondents
are
only
those
facilities
that
receive
a
reminder
phone
call.

6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
In
Burden
This
is
the
initial
request
for
the
information
collection,
and
as
such,
there
is
no
change
in
burden.
Burden
estimates
have
been
provided
in
this
information
collection
and
upon
renewal
of
this
information
collection,
changes
in
burden
will
be
addressed.

6(
g)
Burden
Statement
The
burden
for
information
collection
requirements
associated
with
the
Outreach
Award
Application
is
estimated
to
be
1.5
hours
per
respondent.
The
burden
estimate
includes
time
to
review
the
instructions,
gather
information,
and
complete
and
submit
the
application.
­
31­
The
burden
for
information
collection
requirements
associated
with
the
Mentoring
Program
Registration
form
is
estimated
to
be
0.25
hours
per
respondent.
The
burden
estimate
includes
time
to
review
the
registration
form,
and
complete
and
submit
the
registration.

The
burden
for
information
collection
requirements
associated
with
the
Customer
Satisfaction
Questionnaire
is
estimated
to
be
0.5
hours
per
respondent.
The
burden
estimate
includes
time
to
read
the
instructions
for
the
questionnaire
and
complete
the
online
survey.

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;
adjusting
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9
and
48
CFR
chapter
15.

To
comment
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques,
EPA
has
established
a
public
docket
for
this
ICR
under
Docket
ID
No.
OA­
2003­
0008,
which
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Office
of
Environmental
Information
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
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
Office
of
Environmental
Information
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
1752.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA
Dockets
(
EDOCKET)
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Use
EDOCKET
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
docket
ID
number
identified
above.
Also,
you
can
send
comments
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Office
for
EPA.
Please
include
the
EPA
Docket
ID
No.
(
OA­
2003­
0008)
in
any
correspondence.
­
32­
