INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
FOR
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Performance
Measure
July
27,
2004
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
Office
of
Compliance
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
Part
A
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
of
the
Data
3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
3(
a)
Nonduplication
3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
3(
c)
Consultations
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Data
Collection
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
3(
f)
Confidentiality
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
Respondents/
SIC
Codes
4(
b)
Information
Requested
5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED:
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
6.
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
6(
b)
Estimating
Government
Burden
6(
c)
Bottom
Line
Burden
and
Cost
Table
6(
d)
Reasons
for
Change
of
Burden
6(
e)
Burden
Statement
Part
A
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
ICR:
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Performance
Measure
(
EPA
ICR
Number
2143.01)
OMB
Control
Number:

"
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Performance
Measure"

1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
The
survey
in
question
asks
state
environmental
commissioners
to
report
on
their
contribution
to
enforcement
and
compliance
assistance
for
2000­
2003.
They
are
asked
to
refer
to
their
own
records
and
account
for
the
number
of
inspections,
reviews,
complaints
etc.
that
have
taken
shape
during
this
time.
They
are
also
asked
to
give
the
number
and
type
of
mechanisms
and
fines
applied
and
collected.
It
also
questions
if
and
how
the
states
feel
they
have
been
effective
using
these
methods.
There
is
a
section
of
the
survey
asking
the
states
to
rate
how
important
and
useful
they
feel
the
statistics
and
reports
required
by
the
EPA
are
in
conveying
the
current
conditions
within
their
borders.
Importantly,
the
survey
also
aims
to
capture
information
about
state
activity
in
outcome
measurement.
In
particular,
it
asks
states
about
their
experiences
with
compliance
rate
measurement
and
with
calculating
the
environmental
benefits
of
enforcement
actions
and
compliance
assistance.
The
survey
is
designed
to
capture
compliance
rates
and
activities
directly
from
state
records.
This
will
provide
a
means
in
which
the
states'
efforts
to
promote
the
EPA's
philosophy
on
enforcement
and
compliance
can
be
more
readily
monitored.
The
responses
to
this
collection
of
information
are
voluntary.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
in
40
CFR
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9.
This
survey
will
provide
information
that
will
assist
in
the
creation
of
a
report.
This
will
show
if
there
is
a
discrepancy
in
the
data
found
in
the
states
databases
and
EPA's
database.
In
addition
to
providing
the
EPA
with
the
information
it
needs
to
more
successfully
function
in
the
way
it
was
designed
to,
this
survey
is
also
keeping
the
states
burden
at
a
minimum.
This
is
being
done
by
the
use
of
electronic
responses.

2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
The
purpose
of
this
collection
is
to
identify
by
survey
environmental
compliance
measures
(
especially
compliance
rates
measures)
currently
in
existence
and
use
by
state
governments.
As
part
of
the
cooperative
agreement
with
U.
S.
EPA's
Office
of
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Assurance,
the
Environmental
Council
of
States
(
ECOS)
will
provide
a
report
of
the
measures
used
which
would
be
distributed
to
all
States,
use
this
collection
to
facilitate
discussion
groups,
and
ultimately
produce
a
report
based
on
the
collection
and
the
discussion
groups
detailing
the
agreed­
upon
measures.

The
data
requested
by
these
surveys
is
not
currently
in
EPA's
or
ECOS's
databases.

The
Agency
is
permitted
to
collect
the
information
under
the
following
statutes:


The
Clean
Air
Act.
The
Act
refers
to
activities
involving
the
discharge
of
hazardous
air
pollutants
and
criteria
pollutants
from
emission
sources.
At
§
114,
the
Agency
may
require
any
person
who
owns
or
operates
any
emission
source
to
establish
and
maintain
such
records,
...
make
such
reports,
...
install,
use,
and
maintain
such
monitoring
equipment
or
methods,
...
sample
such
emissions,
...
and
provide
such
other
information
as
he/
she
may
reasonably
require.
(
Note
that
no
additional
monitoring
or
sampling
will
be
required
by
this
ICR).


The
Solid
Waste
Disposal
Act.
The
Act
refers
to
activities
at
companies
that
generate
hazardous
waste.
At
§
3007,
the
Agency
is
permitted
to
have
access
to
and
request
records
regarding
hazardous
waste
generating
activities.


The
Clean
Water
Act.
The
Act
refers
to
activities
involving
the
discharge
of
materials
into
waters
of
the
United
States.
At
§
308,
the
Agency
is
permitted
to
review
records
to
determine
compliance
with
effluent
limitations
or
treatment
performance
standards.

The
information
collected
through
this
ICR
will
aid
the
Agency
in
achieving
EPA's
Strategic
Plan
goal
of
focusing
on
results
rather
than
activities
within
organizational
units
to
increase
compliance
and
environmental
stewardship.
This
goal
was
developed
in
response
to
the
1993
Government
Performance
and
Results
Act
and
is
described
in
EPA's
2000
Strategic
Plan,
Goal
5,
"
Compliance
and
Environmental
Stewardship.".

2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
of
the
Data
The
main
users
of
the
data
collected
will
be
ECOS.
ECOS
will
use
the
data
firsthand
to
facilitate
the
outcome
measures
discussion
groups
and
to
create
the
report
detailing
the
newly
agreed
upon
outcome
measures.
However,
as
part
of
the
agreed
upon
cooperative
plan
between
ECOS
and
OECA,
states
and
the
EPA
will
benefit
from
the
new
agreed
upon
measures.
These
measures
will
allow
for
more
concise
and
standardized
reporting
of
activities.

3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
3(
a)
Nonduplication
The
information
to
be
obtained
under
this
ICR
has
not
been
collected
by
EPA
or
any
other
federal
agency.

3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
On
April
30,
2004,
EPA
published
a
pre­
ICR
Federal
Register
Notice
announcing
its
intent
to
submit
an
ICR
to
OMB
regarding
the
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Performance
Measure
survey.
Attachment
A
includes
a
copy
of
this
Federal
Register
Notice.
EPA
and
ECOS
received
comments
from
Shelley
Metzenbaum
of
the
Environmental
Compliance
Consortium,
University
of
Maryland­
College
Park..
The
comments
have
been
considered
and
responded
to.

Below
are
survey
sub­
titles,
comments,
and
our
responses
to
the
comments:

II.
GENERAL
INFORMATION
A.
Agency
Information
Comment
1:
Suggested
formatting
bullets
and
numbering.
Response
1:
Accepted
and
also
in
the
revised
survey
combined
State
Name,
State
Code,
and
Agency
Name
into
one
question
and
created
a
drop
down
list
in
the
web­
based
survey
to
allow
States
to
conveniently
select
their
agency
name
from
the
list.

B.
Respondent
Contact
Information
Comment
2:
Suggested
formatting
numbering.
Response
2:
Accepted.

III.
ENFORCEMENT
DATA
A.
Enforcement
Statistics
Comment
3:
Suggested
that
the
title
"
Enforcement
Statistics"
changed
to
"
Compliance
and
Enforcement
Statistics."
Response
3:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
survey
reorganized
this
part
into
three
sub­
parts:
size
of
regulated
universe,
types
of
surveillance,
and
number
of
facility
sites
with
violation.

Comment
4:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
once
if
state
reports
by
calendar
or
fiscal
year.
Response
4:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
web­
based
survey
created
a
simple
choice
question
to
allow
States
to
choose
calendar
year
or
fiscal
year.

Comment
5:
Suggested
that
States
report
for
the
full
year,
not
just
a
snap
shot,
and
then
allow
States
who
are
not
able
to
do
that
to
note
prominently
that
they
are
providing
a
snap
shot,
not
full­
year
statistics.
Response
5:
Accepted
and
in
the
Part
II
of
the
revised
survey
states
that
the
survey
asks
for
a
full
year
of
the
statistics.

Comment
6:
Suggested
that
"
Site/
Incidents/
Facilities"
changed
to
"
Facility
Site"
and
also
suggested
all
other
terms
to
be
as
consistent
as
possible
with
data
standards.
Response
6:
Accepted
and
reviewed
all
terms
in
the
revised
survey
to
make
sure
that
they
are
consistent
with
data
standards
where
they
are
available.

Comment
7:
Suggested
that
"
Compliance
Inspection
Type"
and
"
Compliance
Inspection"
are
repeated
each
other.
Response
7:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
survey
created
two
questions:
the
number
of
compliance
inspections
and
number
of
facility
sites
with
violation.
There
are
four
types
of
compliance
inspections
according
to
data
standards:
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspection,
Compliance
Sampling
Inspection,
Reconnaissance
or
Screening
Inspection,
and
Case
Development
Inspection.
And
there
are
two
types
of
violations:
Significant
or
High
Priority
Violation,
and
Other.
The
revised
survey
asks
States
to
record
the
number
of
four
types
of
compliance
inspections
and
number
of
facility
sites
with
two
types
of
violations.
If
States
cannot
provide
these
numbers,
they
can
only
record
the
total
number
of
compliance
inspections
and
the
total
number
of
facility
sites
with
violation.

Comment
8:
Suggested
that
the
survey
in
both
Parts
A
and
B
(
about
thirteen
sub­
questions)
ask
about
the
number
of
facility
sites
where
inspections,
enforcement,
etc.
occur.
Response
8:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
suggestion
into
the
revised
survey.
The
compliance
committee,
advisors
for
the
survey,
indicated
that
this
data
is
not
readily
available.

Comment
9:
Suggested
that
the
survey
add
a
question
whether
or
not
state
agency
notifies
regulated
entities
before
conducting
an
on­
site
inspection.
Response
9:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
suggestion
into
the
revised
survey
because
States
sometimes
notify
facilities
to
assure
that
it
is
operating,
has
pertinent
records,
and
etc
and
the
question
cannot
be
constructed
to
provide
meaningful
data.

B.
Enforcement
Mechanisms
Comment
10:
Suggested
formatting
numbering.
Response
10:
Accepted.

Comment
11:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
about
the
time
(
average
or
duration)
that
it
takes
a
facility
to
return
to
compliance
as
well
as
the
method
used
to
count
or
estimate
return
to
compliance.
Response
11:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
suggestion
into
the
revised
survey.
The
compliance
committee,
advisors
for
the
survey,
indicated
that
this
data
is
not
readily
available.

Comment
12:
Suggested
that
the
survey
add
one
question
on
"
Voluntary
Compliance
Agreement."
Response
12:
Accepted.

Comment
13:
Suggested
that
the
survey
add
one
question
on
"
compliance
assistance
provided
to
specific
facility
after
violation
found."
Response
13:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
suggestion
into
the
revised
survey.
The
compliance
committee,
advisors
for
the
survey,
indicated
that
this
data
is
not
readily
available.

C.
Penalties
and
Files
Collected
Comment
14:
Suggested
formatting
numbering.
Response
14:
Accepted.

Comment
15:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
questions
whether
or
not
state
agency
tracks
the
effectiveness/
benefits
of
enforcement
efforts
on
a
case
specific
basis
or
on
a
program
basis
Response
15:
Accepted
and
created
two
questions
in
the
revised
survey.

D.
Compliance
Rates
Comment
16:
Identified
some
typos;
Response
16:
Accepted.

Comment
17:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
States
to
describe
their
experiences
with
using
a
compliance
rate
measure
and
how
they
have
used
these
data.
Response
17:
Accepted
and
created
the
question
in
the
revised
survey.

Comment
18:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
questions
whether
or
not
States
report
this
compliance
rate
to
the
public
and
also
explain
what
medium
they
use
and
how
often
they
use.
Response
18:
Accepted
and
created
the
question
in
the
revised
survey.

E.
State
Perspectives
on
Enforcement
Data
Comment
19:
Suggested
that
States
select
three
to
five
from
a
list
of
choices.
Response
19:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
suggestion
into
the
revised
survey
because
three
is
an
adequate
response.

Comment
20:
Suggested
more
choices
be
added
to
the
list.
Response
20:
Accepted
those
that
the
US
EPA
or
States
EPA
uses
or
suggests.
We
will
not
be
incorporating
those
that
the
US
EPA
or
States
EPA
does
not
use
or
suggest.

IV.
COMPLIANCE
ASSISTANCE
Comment
21:
Suggested
formatting
numbering.
Response
21:
Accepted.

Comment
22:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
questions
whether
or
not
States
compliance
assistance
activities
include
workbooks
or
other
written
material
that
describe
regulatory
obligations
and
how
to
comply.
Response
22:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
web­
based
survey
created
a
simple
choice
question
to
allow
states
to
choose
yes
or
no.

Comment
23:
Suggested
that
if
States
compliance
assistance
activities
include
education
seminars
the
survey
also
ask
information
about
specific
industrial
sectors
states
serve.
Response
23:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
suggestion
into
the
revised
survey
because
this
data
is
not
readily
available.

Comment
24:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
about
loans
and
grants
as
well
as
revolving
state
loans.
Response
24:
Accepted
and
in
the
web­
based
revised
survey
created
a
multiple
choice
question
to
allow
states
to
choose.

Comment
25:
Suggested
that
the
survey
first
ask
if
States
calculate
the
Environmental
Benefits
resulting
from
Compliance
Assistance
Activities
and
then
asks
the
method
they
use
and
the
benefits
they
calculate.
Response
25:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
survey
created
two
questions.
Comment
26:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
States
to
describe
their
experiences
with
using
an
environmental
benefit
measure
and
how
they
have
used
these
data.
Response
26:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
survey
created
the
question.

Comment
27:
Suggested
that
the
survey
ask
questions
whether
or
not
States
report
this
rate
to
the
public
and
also
explain
what
medium
they
use
and
how
often
they
use.
Response
27:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
survey
created
the
question.

EPA
and
ECOS
also
received
comments
from
the
state
of
Massachusetts
after
the
comment
deadline.
These
comments
were
reviewed
and
responded
to.

Below
are
comments,
and
our
responses
to
the
comments:

Comment
1:
Page
1.
The
descriptions
of
program
areas
currently
include
both
federally
delegated
programs
as
well
as
state
only
programs.
This
should
be
noted,
as
data
standards
and
practices
for
state
only
programs
will
have
no
federal
reporting
component
and
therefore
no
consistent
data
standards
across
states.
Response
1:
Accepted
and
reflected
in
the
revised
survey.

Comment
2:
Section
III
A.
Enforcement
Statistics:
The
definition
of
"
sites/
incidents/
facilities"
has
no
date
limitation.
Massachusetts
advocates
narrowing
this
question
to
mean
facilities/
sites/
incidents
being
regulated
as
"
open/
active"
for
the
year
in
question.
This
would
eliminate
the
facilities
that
were
once
regulated,
are
now
closed
and
no
longer
in
business
or
are
no
longer
responsible
for
the
regulated
activity
(
eliminated
discharges
for
example)
including
facilities
that
reduced
the
levels
of
their
activities
to
below
regulatory
thresholds.

Response
2:
We
recognize
that
the
question
is
not
clearly
documented
and
thus
in
the
revised
survey
we
ask
total
number
of
facility
sites
regulated
During
the
Reporting
Period.
If
a
regulated
facility
site
was
open/
active
in
any
single
day
during
the
reporting
period,
it
should
be
counted.

Comment
3:
Section
IIIA,
page
4­
5.
The
subcategories
listed
of
the
types
of
inspections
are
something
Mass.
DEP
does
not
currently
track.
For
example,
we
do
not
track
whether
a
sample
was
taken
during
an
inspection
to
count
it
as
either
a
Compliance
Sampling
Inspection
or
a
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspection.
In
Massachusetts,
activities
that
are
not
obviously
in
person
"
on­
site"
inspections
are
counted
as
inspections
for
our
annual
compliance
and
enforcement
accomplishment
report.

Response
3:
We
recognize
that
the
question
is
not
clearly
documented
and
thus
in
the
revised
survey
we
clarify
that
if
States
do
not
know
the
number
of
specific
compliance
inspections
they
can
only
record
the
total
number
of
compliance
inspections.

Comment
4:
Section
III
A,
page
4.
Enforcement
Statistics
Section:
Massachusetts
tracks
activity
categories
and
events
by
our
state
fiscal
year
(
July
1
to
June
30).
The
federal
fiscal
year
covers
a
different
time
period
(
Oct
1
to
Sept
30).
There
should
be
one
reporting
period
chosen
so
comparisons
are
possible
state
to
state.

Response
4:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
suggestion
into
the
revised
survey
because
we
will
not
planning
to
compare
States.
The
survey
does
let
States
choose
either
calendar
year
or
fiscal
year
as
their
reporting
period
and
also
asks
States
to
specify
the
start
and
end
dates
including
the
month
and
day
if
they
use
fiscal
year
to
report
data.

Comment
5:
Page
5­
6.
We
do
not
have
complete
information
on
the
number
of
self
disclosed
violations,
or
the
number
of
violations
self
disclosed
for
which
the
entity
also
seeks
penalty
relief
under
our
self
audit
policy.
We
are
designing
a
case
management
system
that
will
include
this
component
but
it
is
not
yet
able
to
compile
statewide
numbers.

Response
5:
If
you
do
not
have
complete
information
in
such
a
question,
please
skip
it
or
just
explain
in
"
Comments."

Comment
6:
Page
6.
We
do
not
have
complete
data
on
the
number
of
complaints
received,
or
the
number
of
complaints
for
which
some
compliance
monitoring
action
was
taken.
Perhaps
a
definition
of
"
compliance
monitoring
action"
would
also
be
helpful,
and
might
include
referrals
to
other
regulatory
boards,
investigations
of
records,
or
other
information
as
well
as
on
site
inspections.

Response
6:
If
you
do
not
have
complete
information
in
such
a
question,
please
skip
it
or
just
explain
in
"
Comments."

Comment
7:
Page
6.
The
definition
of
"
Compliance
Monitoring
Inspection"
seems
potentially
duplicative
of
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspections,
Compliance
Sampling
Inspections
and
Case
Development
Inspections.
See
our
comment
above
on
the
subcategories
of
inspections.
Should
this
include
report
reviews,
of
which
Massachusetts
completes
thousands
per
year?

Response
7:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
survey
created
two
seperate
questions.

Comment
8:
Page
6.
The
survey
also
requests
a
number
of
sites/
facilities/
incidents
in
"
significant"
non­
compliance.
Will
you
leave
the
determination
of
significance
to
each
responding
state?
Guidance
in
this
area
would
be
helpful
to
gather
data
that
would
have
the
same
meaning
from
state
to
state.

Response
8:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
survey
provided
the
standard
definition
of
Significant
or
High
Priority
Violation
­­
the
violation
meets
applicable
programmatic
criteria
for
those
terms,
set
by
the
U.
S.
EPA.

Comment
9:
Off
Site
Record
Review
Type
 
Page
5.
Should
this
section
asking
for
numbers
of
Self
Policing
Policy
Submissions
include
disclosures
that
do
not
meet
all
the
terms
of
the
selfaudits
self
policing
policy?
Response
9:
No.
There
is
no
data
standard
for
this
category.
If
you
think
that
there
should
be
a
data
standard,
please
raise
this
question
to
the
Environmental
Data
Standard
Council
(
EDSC).
Tom
Lamberson
is
the
State
Co­
chair
and
can
be
reached
at
402­
471­
4235
or
email
tom.
lamberson@
NDEQ.
State.
NE.
US.
Given
that
you
raised
a
number
of
questions
on
this
issue,
you
may
also
want
to
look
at
the
data
standard
on
www.
envdatastandards.
net.

Comment
10:
Section
III
B
page
7.
We
do
not
currently
count
oral
notifications
of
violations,
nor
are
there
plans
to
include
this
item
for
C/
E
tracking
at
this
time.
What
is
the
value
of
this
measure
on
a
national
level?

Response
10:
If
you
do
not
have
complete
information
in
such
a
question,
please
skip
it.
In
our
first
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Survey,
we
found
that
Oral
notifications
of
violations
are
one
of
most
important
informal
enforcement
mechanisms
adopted
by
States.
A
copy
of
this
section
is
attached.

Comment
11:
Page
7.
Our
field
citations
could
involve
only
Notice
of
the
Violations
(
Notice
of
Noncompliance)
but
could
also
include
an
assessment
of
a
civil
penalty.
This
definitional
concept
includes
a
penalty
component.
Is
there
value
in
adding
a
separate
category
of
Notices
of
Violation
issued
in
the
field
without
a
penalty
component?
This
would
be
similar
to
the
existing
category
"
written
notice
of
violation"
 
but
would
separate
out
those
issued
in
the
field
(
Field
Notices
of
Noncompliance)
from
those
letters
(
Notices
of
Noncompliance)
mailed
from
the
office.

Response
11:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
question
into
the
revised
survey
because
there
is
no
data
standard
for
it.
Again,
if
you
think
there
should
be
data
standard,
please
raise
it
to
the
EDSC.

Comment
12:
It
may
be
useful
to
add
a
category
to
this
section
(
section
III
B
 
Enforcement
mechanisms)
of
administrative
penalties
assessed
(
in
dollars).
This
information
is
compiled
later
in
Section
III
D.
Note
there
is
no
section
III
C.

Response
12:
In
the
revised
survey
created
the
question
about
administrative
penalties
assessed
and
corrected
the
numbering
problem.

Comment
13:
This
section
III
B
requests
estimates
of
the
"
percentage
of
each
enforcement
mechanism
[
that]
results
in
compliance".
This
is
not
a
measurement
that
we
track
by
document
or
mechanism
used.
It
is
important
to
keep
in
mind
the
time
value
of
return
to
compliance
period
 
and
the
length
of
time
that
some
mechanisms
allow
by
their
own
terms
for
returning
to
compliance.

Response
13:
If
you
do
not
have
complete
information
in
such
a
question,
please
skip
it.

Comment
14:
Page
7.
Letter
to
regulated
Entity:
MA
DEP
does
send
out
compliance
letters
after
inspection
visits
if
a
company
does
not
have
any
noticed
violations.
Also,
MA
DEP
sends
out
Return
to
Compliance
Letters
if
a
company
has
completed
all
the
performed
actions
required
and
cited
in
an
enforcement
document.
Response
14:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
question
into
the
revised
survey
because
we
only
raise
questions
related
to
data
standards.
Compliance
letter
is
not
included
in
data
standards.
Again,
if
you
think
there
should
be
data
standard,
please
raise
it
to
the
EDSC.

Comment
15:
Page
8.
All
of
our
"
Voluntary
Compliance
Agreements"
invoke
the
agency's
legal
enforcement
authority.
They
are
enforceable
judicially
as
contracts,
as
well
as
through
assessment
of
civil
administrative
and
or
judicial
penalties.
Occasionally
we
contractually
bind
an
entity
to
go
beyond
compliance
or
perform
activities
not
required
 
and
these
agreements
are
entirely
voluntary
on
the
part
of
the
regulated
entity.

Response
15:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
question
into
the
revised
survey
because
there
is
no
data
standard
for
it.
Again,
if
you
think
there
should
be
data
standard,
please
raise
it
to
the
EDSC.

Comment
16:
Page
9­
10
Judicial
Referrals
are
defined
to
mean
formal
requests
to
another
entity
to
undertake
enforcement
action.
Not
all
such
requests
(
formal
or
informal)
are
acted
upon.
Should
this
category
be
narrowed
at
least
for
some
enforcement
entities
to
cases
accepted
by
those
entities
for
prosecution?
It
might
also
be
helpful
to
allow
states
to
specify
the
different
administrative
regulatory
authorities
to
which
referrals
are
made
for
example,
state
licensing
boards,
other
state
agencies,
and
local
permitting
authorities.
Not
all
such
referrals
are
for
judicial
sanctions.

Response
16:
We
will
not
be
incorporating
this
question
into
the
revised
survey
because
there
is
no
data
standard
for
it.
Again,
if
you
think
there
should
be
data
standard,
please
raise
it
to
the
EDSC.

Comment
17:
Section
III
D
Page
11.
The
survey
asks
for
the
amount
of
fines
collected
 
that
is
 
paid,
not
the
value
of
fines
assessed.
We
would
advocate
changing
this
to
report
fines
assessed.

Response
17:
See
answer
to
question
12.

Comment
18:
Page
11.
For
Supplement
Environmental
Projects,
we
presume
the
value
requested
is
the
estimated
value
of
the
Project,
not
the
penalty
mitigation
allowed.

Response
18:
Yes,
you
are
correct
and
we
clarify
it
in
the
revised
survey.

Comment
19:
Page
11.
Should
there
be
a
similar
question
regarding
the
estimated
value
of
an
Environmental
Management
System
that
is
agreed
to
be
developed
and
implemented
in
the
context
of
an
enforcement
action?

Response
19:
This
is
a
good
idea,
but
we
will
not
add
this
question
in
this
survey
since
currently
we
do
not
have
sufficient
information
to
address
this
subject.

Comment
20:
Page
11.
This
penalties
and
fines
collected
chart
does
not
separate
criminal
fines,
or
victim
compensation
payment
or
other
restitution
obtained
as
a
result
of
a
criminal
prosecution.
Response
20:
Accepted
and
in
the
revised
survey
we
created
a
question
on
criminal
fines.

Comment
21:
Section
III
E.
Compliance
Rates.
Massachusetts
has
determined
that
there
are
significant
data
limitations
and
caveats
that
should
be
explained
as
part
of
any
compliance
rate
calculation.
For
example,
in
a
sector
where
95%
of
the
facilities
subject
to
regulation
are
not
registered
or
permitted
("
in
the
system")
you
can
nevertheless
have
a
very
high
compliance
rate
for
those
who
are
in
the
system.
Distinguishing
between
kinds
of
noncompliance
is
also
very
important
in
reporting
these
results.
Recordkeeping
violations
can
be
very
different
in
importance
and
environmental
impact
from
violations
that
have
direct
and
negative
impacts
on
the
environment.

Mass.
DEP
has
developed
some
generic
language
and
principles
regarding
a
report
of
compliance
rates
as
follows:

A.
All
DEP
compliance
rate
statistics
should
be
accompanied
verbally
or
in
writing
with
the
qualifying
phrase
"
based
on
available
data".

B.
When
compliance
rates
appear
in
print,
the
phrase
"
based
on
available
data"
will
be
followed
by
a
footnote
or
asterisk
that
elaborates.
The
footnote
will
read:
"
Compliance
data
should
be
interpreted
in
light
of
the
following:
[
data
source];
[
universe
capture];
[
data
accuracy
/
completeness]."
Programs
will
develop
the
specific
inserts
for
their
data.

Cross
state
tracking
of
compliance
rates
 
even
within
federal
programs
 
is
probably
premature
given
the
lack
of
a
consistent
methodology
for
their
calculation.
It
may
be
more
useful
at
this
time
to
gather
information
on
existing
principles
and
current
methodologies
in
calculating
rates
or
outcome
measures
than
in
publishing
comparisons
of
compliance
rates
from
different
sectors
across
different
states.

Response
21:
Thank
you
for
sharing
this.
One
purposes
of
the
survey
is
to
gather
more
information
on
this
issue.
The
second
part
of
this
project
will
be
a
focus
group
that
is
specifically
looking
into
this
issue.
We
will
share
this
information
with
them.

Comment
22:
Section
III
F
Page
12.
This
information
is
described
as
different
ways
to
"
demonstrate
the
extent
of
your
enforcement
efforts".
Instead
of
the
"
extent"
or
scope
of
the
states'
efforts,
we
believe
the
goal
should
be
to
accurately
describe
the
effectiveness
or
impact
of
enforcement
actions.
This
phrase
is
repeated
throughout
this
section.

Response
22:
Accepted
in
the
revised
survey.

Comment
23:
Page
12.
Consider
adding
another
option
to
the
chart
of
"
Improved
Environmental
Indicators"
 
of
real
world
measures
of
environmental
improvements
effected
through
enforcement.
These
might
be
very
targeted
by
programmatic
emphasis
and
environmental
needs.

Response
23:
Currently
we
do
not
have
sufficient
information
to
address
this
subject.
There
will
be
a
separate
effort
to
look
at
it
during
the
focus
group
to
discuss
performance
measures.
Comment
24:
Page
12.
Should
there
be
a
definition
or
detail
provided
of
"
case"
or
"
compliance
rate"
to
assist
in
evaluating
the
"
number
of
cases"
or
"
compliance
rate"
measure?
Similarly,
a
definition
of
"
informal
enforcement
actions"
would
be
helpful.

Response
24:
We
agree
that
these
definitions
would
be
helpful
but
there
is
no
standard
definition
which
States
would
agree
with
each
other.
Again,
if
you
think
there
should
be
data
standard,
please
raise
it
to
the
EDSC.

3(
c)
Consultations
The
following
people
were
consulted
to
determine
estimates
of
burden
and
to
get
a
baseline
for
the
kind
of
questions
that
should
be
included
in
the
survey.
Their
responses
were
helpful
in
determining
the
amount
of
time
a
state
would
use
to
answer
the
survey
questions.
In
a
more
general
sense,
these
consultations
gave
ECOS
a
better
idea
how
to
formulate
the
survey
to
get
at
the
information
of
interest.
Their
responses
also
allowed
ECOS
to
avoid
duplicative
questions.

South
Carolina
DHEC
­­
Robin
Stephens,
Asst.
to
the
Deputy
Commissioner
­­
stephers@
dhec.
sc.
gov
Oklahoma
DEP,
Steve
Thompson,
Commissioner
,
Steve.
Thompson@
deq.
state.
ok.
us
Wyoming
DEQ,
John
Corra,
Commissioner
,
jcorra@
state.
wy.
gov
New
Jersey
DEP,
Marybeth
Brenner
,
marybeth.
brenner@
dep.
state.
nj.
us
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Data
Collection
The
survey
and
site
visit
program
for
the
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Measures
is
a
one­
time
data
gathering
effort.

3(
e)
General
Guidelines
This
information
collection
is
consistent
with
OMB
guidelines
contained
in
5
CFR
1320.5(
d)(
2).

3(
f)
Confidentiality
EPA
does
not
expect
any
confidentiality
issues
to
present
from
the
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Measures.
None
of
the
information
requested
is
confidential.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
The
survey
in
this
ICR
do
not
contain
any
sensitive
questions.

4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
Respondents
and
SIC
Codes
The
respondents
for
this
ICR
will
be
the
following:


Approximately
49
of
the
50
states.

4(
b)
Information
Requested
The
ECOS
survey
requests
information
to
update
the
information
on
the
contribution
of
State
enforcement
activities
to
the
federally
delegated
programs
and
refine
information
on
state
compliance
assistance
programs.

The
survey
will
compile
information
on
the
state's
enforcement
statistics,
enforcement
mechanisms,
penalties
and
fines
collected,
compliance
rates,
and
state
perspectives
on
enforcement
data.
The
survey
is
attached.

4(
c)
Respondent
Activities
Mail
survey
respondent
activities
include
reviewing
the
mailed
survey
instructions
and
completing
the
mail
survey.

5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED:
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
The
Environmental
Council
of
the
States
(
ECOS)
is
the
national
non­
profit,
non­
partisan
association
of
state
and
territorial
environmental
commissioners.
One
of
the
tasks
ECOS
is
undertaking
is
to
send
a
questionnaire
to
their
own
members
regarding
an
update
of
their
enforcement
and
compliance
assistance
programs
and
activities.

ECOS
will
bare
the
burden
for
conducting
the
survey
and
updating
their
programs,
there
are
no
EPA
agency
activities
associated
with
this
ICR.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
A
web­
based
survey
will
be
hosted
in
a
protected
web
server.
Every
State
and
territory
can
use
their
own
password
to
assess
and
fill
out
the
survey.
Survey
responses
will
also
be
stored
in
a
protection
location.
ECOS
staff
will
contact
(
by
e­
mails
and
phone
calls)
with
States
that
do
no
respond.

5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
N.
A.
­­
The
survey
will
only
be
completed
by
States
and
territories.

5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
The
survey
will
be
posted
within
two
weeks
of
ICR
approval
by
OMB.
States
will
then
have
8
to
10
weeks
to
complete
and
submit
their
surveys.

6.
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
and
Costs
The
estimated
total
hour
burden
for
response
is
98
hours.
For
each
survey,
we
estimate
one
hour
of
management
time
will
be
needed
to
answer
the
survey
questions,
and
one
hour
of
clerical
time
will
be
needed
to
fill
out
the
survey
and
respond.
This
burden
hour
estimate
translates
to
a
cost
of
$
91.91
per
entity
that
voluntarily
completes
the
survey
resulting
in
the
total
of
$
4503.59.
This
number
is
derived
based
on
labor
rates
obtained
from
the
United
States
of
Commerce,
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics,
December
2003,
State
and
local
government,
by
occupational
and
industry
group.
The
total
compensation
figure
of
$
34.21/
hour
was
used
for
the
management
portion
of
the
survey
and
the
compensation
figure
of
$
23.23/
hour
was
used
for
the
clerical
portion.
These
numbers
were
then
multiplied
by
1.6
to
account
for
overhead.
There
is
no
recurring
respondent
burden
associated
with
this
ICR.
No
capital
or
operations
and
maintenance
costs
are
incurred
by
respondents
under
this
ICR.

Category
Total
Labor
Hours
Total
Costs
($)

State
worker
management
burden
49
$
2682.26
State
worker
clerical
burden
49
$
1821.33
Total
98
$
4503.59
6(
b)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
Since
the
survey
will
be
completed
and
conducted
by
ECOS,
there
is
no
estimated
Agency
burden.

6(
c)
Bottom
Line
Burden
and
Cost
Since
ECOS
will
be
completing
and
conducting
the
survey,
the
bottom
line
burden
and
cost
is
simply
the
$
4503.59
of
respondent
costs
detailed
in
section
6(
a).

Table
3.
Summary
of
Burden
and
Costs
to
Respondents
and
EPA
Category
Total
Labor
Hours
Total
Costs
($)

Initial
Respondent
Burden
98
$
4503.59
Initial
Agency
Burden
0
0
Initial
Contractor
Burden
0
0
Total
98
$
4503.59
6(
d)
Reasons
for
Changes
in
Burden
Since
this
is
a
new
information
collection,
there
is
no
change
in
burden
for
this
collection.

6(
e)
Burden
Statement
The
annual
public
reporting
and
recordkeeping
burden
for
this
collection
of
information
is
estimated
to
average
two
hour
per
response.
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
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.
OECA­
2004­
0023,
which
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Docket
and
Information
Center
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
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Docket
and
Information
Center
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.
(
OECA­
2004­
0023)
and
EPA
ICR
number
2143.01.
Attachment
A
ICR
First
Federal
Register
Notice
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
OECA­
2004­
0023
 
Environmental
Council
of
the
States
(
ECOS)
Survey
of
State
Performance
Measurements
Agency
Information
Collection
Activities:
Proposed
Collection;
Comment
Request;
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Performance
Measures,
EPA
ICR
Number
2143.01.

AGENCY:
Environmental
Protection
Agency
ACTION:
Notice.

SUMMARY:
In
compliance
with
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.),

this
document
announces
that
EPA
is
planning
to
submit
a
proposed
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
to
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB).
This
is
a
request
for
a
new
collection.
Before
submitting
the
ICR
to
OMB
for
review
and
approval,
EPA
is
soliciting
comments
on
specific
aspects
of
the
proposed
information
collection
as
described
below.

DATES:
Comments
must
be
submitted
on
or
before
[
INSERT
DATE
60
DAYS
AFTER
PUBLICATION
IN
THE
FEDERAL
REGISTER].

ADDRESSES:
Submit
your
comments,
referencing
docket
ID
number
OECA­
2004­

0023,
to
EPA
online
using
EDOCKET
(
our
preferred
method),
by
email
to
intranet.
epa.
gov/
edocket
,
or
by
mail
to:
EPA
Docket
Center,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20460.

FOR
FURTHER
INFORMATION
CONTACT:
Lynn
Vendinello,
Office
of
Compliance,
mail
code
2222a,
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20460;
telephone
number:
(
202)
564­
7066;
fax
number:
(
202)
564­
0031;
email
address:

vendinello.
lynn@
epa.
gov.

SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION:
EPA
has
established
a
public
docket
for
this
ICR
under
Docket
ID
number
OECA­
2004­
0023,
which
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
OECA
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
OECA
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
1514
.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA
Dockets
(
EDOCKET)
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Use
EDOCKET
to
obtain
a
copy
of
the
draft
collection
of
information,
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.

Any
comments
related
to
this
ICR
should
be
submitted
to
EPA
within
60
days
of
this
notice.
EPA's
policy
is
that
public
comments,
whether
submitted
electronically
or
in
paper,
will
be
made
available
for
public
viewing
in
EDOCKET
as
EPA
receives
them
and
without
change,
unless
the
comment
contains
copyrighted
material,
CBI,
or
other
information
whose
public
disclosure
is
restricted
by
statute.
When
EPA
identifies
a
comment
containing
copyrighted
material,
EPA
will
provide
a
reference
to
that
material
in
the
version
of
the
comment
that
is
placed
in
EDOCKET.
The
entire
printed
comment,

including
the
copyrighted
material,
will
be
available
in
the
public
docket.
Although
identified
as
an
item
in
the
official
docket,
information
claimed
as
CBI,
or
whose
disclosure
is
otherwise
restricted
by
statute,
is
not
included
in
the
official
public
docket,

and
will
not
be
available
for
public
viewing
in
EDOCKET.
For
further
information
about
the
electronic
docket,
see
EPA's
Federal
Register
notice
describing
the
electronic
docket
at
67
FR
38102
(
May
31,
2002),
or
go
to
www.
epa.
gov./
edocket.

Affected
entities:
Entities
potentially
affected
by
this
action
are
the
state
environmental
commissioners.

Title:
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Performance
Measures
Abstract:
The
survey
in
question
asks
state
environmental
commissioners
to
report
on
their
contribution
to
enforcement
and
compliance
assistance
for
2000­
2003.
They
are
asked
to
refer
to
their
own
records
and
account
for
the
number
of
inspections,
reviews,
complaints
etc.
that
have
taken
shape
during
this
time.
They
are
also
asked
to
give
the
number
and
type
of
mechanisms
and
fines
applied
and
collected.
It
also
questions
if
and
how
the
states
feel
they
have
been
effective
using
these
methods.
There
is
a
section
of
the
survey
asking
the
states
to
rate
how
important
and
useful
they
feel
the
statistics
and
reports
required
by
the
EPA
are
in
conveying
the
current
conditions
within
their
borders.
Importantly,
the
survey
also
aims
to
capture
information
about
state
activity
in
outcome
measurement.
In
particular,
it
asks
states
about
their
experiences
with
compliance
rate
measurement
and
with
calculating
the
environmental
benefits
of
enforcement
actions
and
compliance
assistance.
The
survey
is
designed
to
capture
compliance
rates
and
activities
directly
from
state
records.
This
will
provide
a
means
in
which
the
states'
efforts
to
promote
the
EPA's
philosophy
on
enforcement
and
compliance
can
be
more
readily
monitored.

The
responses
to
this
collection
of
information
are
voluntary.
The
information
obtained
by
this
survey
is
completely
confidential
unless
a
state
wants
their
information
to
be
publicized.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
in
40
CFR
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9.
This
survey
will
provide
information
that
will
assist
in
the
creation
of
a
report.
This
will
show
if
there
is
a
discrepancy
in
the
data
found
in
the
states
databases
and
EPA's
database.
In
addition
to
providing
the
EPA
with
the
information
it
needs
to
more
successfully
function
in
the
way
it
was
designed
to,
this
survey
is
also
keeping
the
states
burden
at
a
minimum.
This
is
being
done
by
the
use
of
electronic
responses.

The
EPA
would
like
to
solicit
comments
to:

(
i)
evaluate
whether
the
proposed
collection
of
information
is
necessary
for
the
proper
performance
of
the
functions
of
the
Agency,
including
whether
the
information
will
have
practical
utility;

(
ii)
evaluate
the
accuracy
of
the
Agency's
estimate
of
the
burden
of
the
proposed
collection
of
information,
including
the
validity
of
the
methodology
and
assumptions
used;

(
iii)
enhance
the
quality,
utility,
and
clarity
of
the
information
to
be
collected;
and
(
iv)
minimize
the
burden
of
the
collection
of
information
on
those
who
are
to
respond,
including
through
the
use
of
appropriate
automated
electronic,

mechanical,
or
other
technological
collection
techniques
or
other
forms
of
information
technology,
e.
g.,
permitting
electronic
submission
of
responses.

Burden
Statement:
The
survey
will
be
distributed
to
one
representative
from
each
state.

An
estimated
49
voluntary
responses
will
be
retrieved.
EPA
estimates
that
participating
entities
may
need
to
spend
between
one
to
two
hours
completing
this
survey.
A
total
of
98
hours
may
be
spent
to
provide
EPA
and
ECOS
with
this
data.
This
burden
hour
estimate
translates
to
a
cost
of
$
75/
39
per
entity
that
voluntarily
completes
the
survey
resulting
in
the
total
of
$
3,694.21
(
based
on
labor
rates
obtained
from
the
United
States
of
Commerce,
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics,

December
2003,
State
and
local
government,
by
occupational
and
industry
group).
There
should
be
no
additional
capital
or
other
non­
labor
costs.

Affected
Entities:
50
Estimated
Number
of
Respondents:
49
Frequency
of
Response:
one
time
Estimated
Total
Hour
Burden:
98
hours
Estimated
Total
Capital
and
Other
Non­
labor
Costs:
$
0
Estimated
Total
Labor
Costs:
$
3,694.21
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.

Dated:
________________

______________________
Michael
M.
Stahl
Office
Director
Office
of
Compliance,
OECA
Attachment
B
ECOS
Survey
of
State
Measures
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
Survey
Instrument
I.
OVERVIEW
This
is
the
Environmental
Council
of
the
States's
(
ECOS)
second
survey
of
State
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Assistance
Data
(
The
first
survey
was
conducted
in
2000
and
collected
data
for
the
years
1995
to
1999).

The
primary
purpose
of
this
survey
is
to:


Present
as
a
complete
and
accurate
picture
of
what
States
are
doing
to
enforce
environmental
laws
and
help
people
comply
with
them
for
the
period
2000
to
2003;


Refine
information
on
State
compliance
assistance
programs.

The
Enforcement
and
Compliance
section
of
the
survey
instrument
essentially
replicates
the
questions
used
in
the
2000
survey,
but
uses
standard
terms
and
definitions
(
collaboratively
developed
by
States
and
the
U.
S.
EPA
in
2001),
where
they
are
available.

The
secondary
purpose
of
the
survey
is
to
have
States
begin
using
the
data
standards
as
a
way
of
exchanging
information
and
communicating
in
a
common
language.


The
mapping
or
cross
walking
of
State
data
to
data
standards
is
the
first
step
in
completing
the
survey;


This
is
also
the
first
step
in
using
the
technical
tools
to
share
data
on
the
Environmental
Information
Exchange
Network
(
in
web­
based
survey
the
website
link
will
be
added
here).

ECOS
will
publish
a
final
report
from
the
results
of
this
survey
effort
after
States
have
reviewed
their
data
and
a
draft
report.
ECOS
will
provide
a
copy
of
the
final
report
to
States
and
the
U.
S.
EPA
and
post
it
on
the
ECOS
web
site.

Survey
Design
and
Schedule:

ECOS
recognizes
that
not
all
States
collect
and
keep
data
in
the
same
way.
Many
states
keep
compliance
and
enforcement
data
in
program­
specific
databases
(
e.
g.
air)
and
a
few
have
integrated
systems
that
provide
summary
of
all
state
actions.
Some
states
have
multi­
media
compliance
assistance
programs,
some
don
not
have
them
at
all.
ECOS
also
recognizes
that
States
must
expend
significant
time
and
efforts
to
complete
this
survey.
Therefore,
ECOS
has
designed
a
survey
instrument
that:


Allows
a
State
to
submit:

'
One
form
if
it
is
submitting
consolidated
data
for
all
programs;
or
'
Separate
forms
if
it
is
submittiing
data
for
an
individal
program
(
e.
g.,
air,
drinking
water,
surface
and
groundwater,
hazardous
waste,
etc.)


Provides
flexibiltiy
for
each
response
that
allows
a
State
to
submit
data
for:

'
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Data
Only
'
Compliance
Assistance
Data
Only
'
Both

Provides
flexibilty
within
individual
questions
that
allow
States
to
submit
summary
or
detailed
data.

ECOS
has
also
designed
a
schedule
that
provides
flexibility
for
a
State
to
respond
in
phases
(
These
Timeframes
are
not
final.
Final
timeframes
will
be
based
on
the
result
of
pilot
submissions):
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx

Phase
I
 
States
submitting
separtate
forms
for
air,
drinking
water,
surface
and
groundwater,
and
hazardous
waste
programs
 
Due
5
weeks
after
the
States
have
the
final
survey.


Phase
II
 
States
submitting
a
single
form
for
all
its
programs
 
Due
7
weeks
after
the
States
have
the
final
survey.


Phase
III
 
States
submitting
separate
forms
for
solid
waste,
remediation,
underground
storage
tanks,
pollution
prevention,
and
other
programs
 
Due
8
weeks
after
the
States
have
the
final
survey.

BURDEN
The
public
reporting
and
recordkeeping
burden
for
this
collection
of
information
is
estimated
to
average
two
per
response.
Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460.
Include
the
OMB
control
number
in
any
correspondence.
Do
not
send
the
completed
survey
to
this
address.
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
II.
GENERAL
INFORMATION
Please
answer
all
questions
in
this
section.

A.
Agency
Name
Please
identify
your
agency
name
from
the
list
below
(
in
web­
based
survey
it
is
a
dropdown
box):


AK
DEC

AL
DEM

AR
DEQ

AZ
DEQ

CA
EPA

CO
DPHE

CT
DEP

DE
DNREC

FL
DEP

GA
DNR

HI
DH

IA
DNR

ID
DEQ

IL
EPA

IN
DEM

KS
DHE

LA
DEQ

MA
DEP

MD
DE

ME
DEP

MI
DEQ

MN
PCA

MO
DNR

MS
DEQ

MT
DEQ

NC
DENR

ND
EHS

NE
DEQ

NH
DES

NJ
DEP

NM
ED

NV
DEP

NY
DEC

OH
EPA

OK
DEQ

OR
DEQ

PA
DEP

PR
EQB

RI
DEM

SC
DHEC

SD
DENR

TN
DEC

TX
CEQ

UT
DEQ

VA
DEQ

VT
ANR
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx

WA
DE

WI
DNR

WV
DEP

WY
DEQ
B.
Respondent
Contact
Information
Please
provide
at
least
one
respondent's
contact
information
(
up
to
three):

Name
Respondent
1
___________________________________
Respondent
2
___________________________________
Respondent
3
___________________________________

Telephone
#
Respondent
1
___________________________________
Respondent
2
___________________________________
Respondent
3
___________________________________

Fax
#
Respondent
1
___________________________________
Respondent
2
___________________________________
Respondent
3
___________________________________

Email
Respondent
1
___________________________________
Respondent
2
___________________________________
Respondent
3
___________________________________

C.
Reporting
Time
Period
Please
choose
either
calendar
year
or
fiscal
year
that
your
program
uses
to
record
a
full
year
of
the
enforcement
statistics.
If
your
office
compiles
fiscal
year
figures,
please
indicate
the
start
and
end
dates,
including
the
month
and
day.


Calendar
Year

Fiscal
Year
(
specify)
___________________________________

D.
Environmental
Program
or
Interest
The
survey
is
interested
in
the
following
Environmental
Program
or
Interest,
including
both
federally
delegated
programs
and
state
only
programs:

A.
Air
­­
programs
that
regulate
or
monitor
air
emissions
from
area,
stationary,
and
mobile
sources,
as
required
by
the
Clean
Air
Act.
B.
Drinking
water
­­
environmental
programs
that
protect
the
quality
of
drinking
water
in
the
United
States,
as
required
by
the
Safe
Drinking
Water
act.
C.
Surface
and
ground
water
­­
environmental
programs
designed
to
(
1)
regulate
discharges
of
pollutants
to
waters
of
the
United
States,
as
required
by
the
Clean
Water
Act;
or
(
2)
improve
the
quality
of,
and
seek
the
protection
of
lakes,
rivers,
and
streams;
or
(
3)
improve
the
quality
of
coastal
and
marine
ecosystems
and
protect
beaches,
coastal,
and
ocean
resources
from
pollution;
or
(
4)
protect
ground
water.
D.
Hazardous
waste
­­
environmental
programs
that
regulate
hazardous
waste,
including
the
generation,
transportation,
treatment,
storage,
and
disposal
of
hazardous
waste,
as
required
by
the
Resource
Conservation
and
Recovery
Act
(
RCRA).
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
E.
Solid
waste
­­
environmental
programs
that
regulate
solid
wastes
(
e.
g.,
compost
sites,
landfills,
and
transfer
stations).
F.
Remediation
­­
environmental
programs
aimed
at
cleaning
up
uncontrolled
or
abandoned
places
where
hazardous
waste
is
located,
possibly
affecting
local
ecosystems
or
people.
G.
Underground
storage
tanks
­
environmental
programs
that
regulate
or
monitor
underground
storage
tanks.
H.
Pollution
prevention
­
an
environmental
protection
approach
that
reduces
pollution
at
the
source
through
regulatory
and
non­
regulatory
programs.
J.
Other
­
this
category
includes
all
programs
or
interests
that
are
not
included
above.

D.
What
Environmental
Program
or
Interest
you
are
reporting?
(
please
choose
only
one)

All
Programs

All
state
enforcement,
compliance
and
complance
assistance
activities
Individal
Program

Air

Drinking
Water

Surface
and
Ground
Water

Hazardous
Waste

Remediation

Underground
Storage
Tanks

Pollution
Prevention

Other
(
Please
specify)
___________________________________

E.
Are
you
reporting
Enforcement
and
Compliance
Data,
Compliance
Assistance
Data,
or
both?
(
please
choose
only
one)


Enforcement
and
Compliance
Data
only

Compliance
Assistance
Data
only

Both
(
Note:
In
web­
based
survey,
if
states
choose
"
Compliance
Assistance
Data
Only"
in
the
above
question,
they
will
skip
part
III
and
continue
with
part
IV)
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
III.
ENFORCEMENT
AND
COMPLIANCE
DATA
INSTRUCTION:
This
section
contains
7
sets
of
questions
from
A
to
G
on
the
following
topics:
size
of
regulated
universe,
types
of
surveillance,
number
of
facility
sites
with
violations,
enforcement
mechanisms,
compliance
rates,
penalties
and
fines
collected,
states'
perspectives
on
enforcement
data.

Questions
in
this
section
use
the
Environmental
Data
Standard
Council
(
EDSC)
data
standards
(
TERMS
and
DEFINITIONS)
(
in
web­
based
survey
the
link
for
data
standards
will
be
added
here).
Please
READ
and
USE
the
DEFINTIONS
to
guide
your
response
since
your
TERM
may
differ
from
the
EDSC
data
standard.

IIIA.
SIZE
OF
THE
REGULATED
UNIVERSE
A.
Total
Number
of
Facility
Sites
Regulated
During
the
Reporting
Period
TERM:
Facility
Sites
DEFINITION:
A
place
where
regulatory
activities
of
interest
to
the
agency
occur
or
have
occurred
in
the
past.

Year
2000
Total
Number
___________________________________

Year
2001
Total
Number
___________________________________

Year
2002
Total
Number
___________________________________

Year
2003
Total
Number
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
space
below
to
comment
or
explain
your
response
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
IIIB.
TYPES
OF
SURVEILLANCE
1).
Number
of
Compliance
Inspections
TERM:
Compliance
Inspection
DEFINITION:
A
visit
to
a
facility
or
site
for
the
purpose
of
gathering
information
to
determine
compliance
including
direct
observations
of
facility
operations.
The
types
of
compliance
inspection
include
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspection,
Compliance
Sampling
Inspection,
Reconnaissance
or
Screening
Inspection,
and
Case
Development
Inspection.

TERM:
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspection
DEFINITION:
An
inspection
designed
to
determine
compliance
with
legal
requirements,
which
does
not
involve
sampling.

TERM:
Compliance
Sampling
Inspection
DEFINITION:
An
inspection
designed
to
determine
compliance
with
applicable
statutes
and
regulations,
which
involves
collection
of
physical
samples
of
air,
water,
waste,
etc.

TERM:
Reconnaissance
or
Screening
Inspection
DEFINITION:
An
abbreviated,
initial
inspection
designed
to
obtain
a
preliminary
overview
of
a
facility's
compliance
program
and
status.

TERM:
Case
Development
Inspection
DEFINITION:
An
inspection
designed
to
collect
specific
information
to
support
an
ongoing
or
planned
enforcement
action.

INSTRUCTION:
If
you
do
not
keep
data
on
the
above
four
types
of
specific
compliance
inspection,
please
only
record
the
total
number
of
compliance
inspections.

Year
2000
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspection
___________________________________
Compliance
Sampling
Inspection
___________________________________
Reconnaissance
or
Screening
Inspection
___________________________________
Case
Development
Inspection
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2001
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspection
___________________________________
Compliance
Sampling
Inspection
___________________________________
Reconnaissance
or
Screening
Inspection
___________________________________
Case
Development
Inspection
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2002
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspection
___________________________________
Compliance
Sampling
Inspection
___________________________________
Reconnaissance
or
Screening
Inspection
___________________________________
Case
Development
Inspection
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2003
Compliance
Evaluation
Inspection
___________________________________
Compliance
Sampling
Inspection
___________________________________
Reconnaissance
or
Screening
Inspection
___________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
Case
Development
Inspection
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
2).
Number
of
Off­
Site
Record
Reviews
(
e.
g.
evaluations
or
assessments)

TERM:
Off­
Site
Record
Review
DEFINITION:
A
review
of
records,
conducted
at
the
government
agency's
offices,
for
the
purpose
of
reviewing
information
to
determine
compliance
of
a
regulated
entity.
The
types
of
off­
site
record
review
include
Required,
Self­
Policing
Policy
Submission,
and
Voluntary
offsite
record
reviews.

TERM:
Required
Off­
Site
Record
Review
DEFINITION:
The
regulated
entity
was
legally
required
to
submit
the
records.

TERM:
Self­
Policing
Policy
Submissions
DEFINITION:
The
records
reviewed
were
self­
reported
information
submitted
by
a
regulated
entity
under
EPA's
self­
policing
policies
(
i.
e.,
the
U.
S
EPA's
Audit
Policy
or
Small
Business
Compliance
Policy)
or
under
State,
Tribal,
or
Local
analogs)

TERM:
Voluntary
Off­
Site
Record
Review
DEFINITION:
The
records
were
self­
reported
information
submitted
voluntarily
by
a
regulated
entity,
but
not
pursuant
to
the
U.
S.
EPA's
self­
policing
policies
or
State,
Tribal,
or
Local
analogs.

INSTRUCTION:
If
you
do
not
keep
data
on
the
above
three
types
of
reviews,
please
only
record
the
total
number
of
Off­
Site
Record
Reviews.

Year
2000
Required
Off­
Site
Record
Review
___________________________________
Self­
Policing
Policy
Submissions
___________________________________
Voluntary
Off­
Site
Record
Review
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2001
Required
Off­
Site
Record
Review
___________________________________
Self­
Policing
Policy
Submissions
___________________________________
Voluntary
Off­
Site
Record
Review
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2002
Required
Off­
Site
Record
Review
___________________________________
Self­
Policing
Policy
Submissions
___________________________________
Voluntary
Off­
Site
Record
Review
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2003
Required
Off­
Site
Record
Review
___________________________________
Self­
Policing
Policy
Submissions
___________________________________
Voluntary
Off­
Site
Record
Review
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
3).
Number
of
Citizens'
Complaints
Received
TERM:
Citizen
Complaint
DEFINITION:
Includes
tips
or
other
information
received
from
individuals,
community
groups,
environmental
groups,
other
facilities
or
regulated
entities,
etc.

Year
2000
Total
Number
___________________________________

Year
2001
Total
Number
___________________________________

Year
2002
Total
Number
___________________________________

Year
2003
Total
Number
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
IIIC.
NUMBER
OF
FACILITY
SITES
WITH
VIOLATIONS
TERM:
Violation
DEFINITION:
Noncompliance
with
one
or
more
legally
enforceable
obligations
by
a
regulated
entity,
as
determined
by
a
responsible
authority.
The
types
of
violation
include
Significant
or
High
Priority
Violation
and
Other
Violation.

TERM:
Significant
or
High
Priority
Violation
DEFINITION:
The
violation
meets
applicable
programmatic
criteria
for
those
terms,
set
by
the
U.
S.
EPA.

TERM:
Other
Violation
DEFINITION:
The
violation
does
not
meet
applicable
programmatic
criteria
for
"
Significant"
or
"
High
Priority"
violations.

INSTRUCTION:
If
you
do
not
keep
data
on
the
above
two
types
of
violations,
please
only
record
the
total
number
of
facility
sites
with
violations.

Year
2000
Significant
or
High
Priority
Violations
___________________________________
Other
Violations
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2001
Significant
or
High
Priority
Violations
___________________________________
Other
Violations
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2002
Significant
or
High
Priority
Violations
___________________________________
Other
Violations
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Year
2003
Significant
or
High
Priority
Violations
___________________________________
Other
Violations
___________________________________
Total
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
IIID.
ENFORCEMENT
MECHANISMS
Instruction:
Please
document
the
number
of
times
the
listed
enforcement
mechanisms
below
were
applied
to
companies
and/
or
individuals
violating
the
regulations
enforced
for
this
environmental
program
or
interest,
AND
report
or
estimate
the
percentage
of
times
that
each
enforcement
mechanism
resulted
in
compliance.

1).
Oral
Notification
of
Violation
DEFINITION:
An
oral
notification
to
the
regulated
entity
of
violation(
s)
of
applicable
laws,
where
no
further
action
is
contemplated
assuming
the
entity
achieves
compliance
in
a
timely
manner.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

2).
Field
Citation
DEFINITION:
A
legal
instrument
issued
by
an
inspector
in
the
field;
it
provides
the
Respondent
a
chance
to
certify
a
return
to
compliance
and
pay
a
reduced
penalty,
without
further
discussion
with
the
Regulatory
Authority
and
without
further
litigation.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

3).
Letter
to
Regulated
Entity
DEFINITION:
A
written
notification
to
the
regulated
entity
of
violation(
s)
of
applicable
laws,
such
as
a
warning
letter,
where
no
further
action
is
contemplated,
assuming
the
entity
timely
achieves
compliance.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

4).
Voluntary
Compliance
Agreement
DEFINITION:
A
consent
agreement
in
which
a
regulated
entity
agrees
to
come
into
compliance,
but
which
does
not
invoke
the
legal
enforcement
authority
of
the
government.
i.
e.,
the
agreement
is
enforceable
only
as
a
contract.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

5).
Written
Notice
of
Violation
DEFINITION:
A
written
notice
sent
to
a
regulated
entity,
initiating
the
enforcement
process
by
informing
the
entity
of
violation(
s)
of
the
applicable
law(
s),
and
requesting
that
the
regulated
entity
take
action
to
come
into
compliance,
with
the
expectation
of
further
follow­
up
action
by
the
regulatory
agency.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

6).
Complaint/
Proposed
Order
DEFINITION:
A
legal
instrument
that
formally
initiates
a
"
two­
step"
legal
procedure
(
in
which
the
Respondent
has
the
right
to
a
specified
further
process
such
as
a
hearing
or
trial),
the
objective
of
which
is
to
secure
an
independently
enforceable
Final
Order.
This
type
of
Enforcement
Action
can
be
either
administrative
or
judicial.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

7).
Final
Order
DEFINITION:
An
administrative
or
judicial
legal
instrument
that
formally
concludes
an
enforcement
action,
and
which
imposes
on
the
recipient
independently
enforceable
obligations.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

8).
Demand
for
Stipulated
Penalties
DEFINITION:
A
written
demand
that
a
regulated
entity,
which
is
subject
to
a
previous
Final
Order,
pays
stipulated
penalties
specified
therein
for
violation(
s)
of
its
terms.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

9).
Judicial
Referral
DEFINITION:
A
formal
written
request
to
another
agency
or
unit
of
government
to
proceed
with
judicial
enforcement
(
e.
g.,
criminal
or
civil
judicial
action)
relating
to
the
violation(
s)
in
question.

Year
2000
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2001
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2002
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Year
2003
Number
___________________________________
Percentage
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

IIIE.
COMPLIANCE
RATES
Please
use
the
most
recent
data
to
complete
the
following
three
questions
for
your
environmental
program
or
interest.

1).
What
method
do
you
use
to
calculate
compliance
rate?
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
___________________________________

2).
Please
enter
the
compliance
rate
calculated:
___________________________________

3).
Please
describe
your
experiences
with
using
the
above
compliance
rate
method.
How
have
you
used
these
data?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

4).
Do
you
report
this
compliance
rate
to
the
public?


Yes
(
please
explain
what
medium
you
use
and
how
often
you
use
below)


No
Comments
on
how
this
is
done:
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
IIIF.
PENALTIES
ASSESSED/
COLLECTED
This
section
contains
4
questions.
Please
answer
questions
for
which
you
have
information.

1).
Penalties
Assessed/
Collected
Instruction:
Please
specify
the
penalties
(
A
monetary
sanction
for
failure
to
comply
with
requirements)
assessed
AND/
OR
collected
for
the
enforcement
mechanisms
used
by
your
agency.
If
penalties
are
paid
in
installments,
please
estimate
the
interests
and
only
record
the
total
money.

Penalties
Assessed:

Year
2000
Administrative
___________________________________
Civil
___________________________________
Supplemental
Environmental
Projects
___________________________________
Criminal
___________________________________

Year
2001
Administrative
___________________________________
Civil
___________________________________
Supplemental
Environmental
Projects
___________________________________
Criminal
___________________________________

Year
2002
Administrative
___________________________________
Civil
___________________________________
Supplemental
Environmental
Projects
___________________________________
Criminal
___________________________________

Year
2003
Administrative
___________________________________
Civil
___________________________________
Supplemental
Environmental
Projects
___________________________________
Criminal
___________________________________

Penalties
Collected:

Year
2000
Administrative
___________________________________
Civil
___________________________________
Supplemental
Environmental
Projects
___________________________________
Criminal
___________________________________

Year
2001
Administrative
___________________________________
Civil
___________________________________
Supplemental
Environmental
Projects
___________________________________
Criminal
___________________________________

Year
2002
Administrative
___________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
Civil
___________________________________
Supplemental
Environmental
Projects
___________________________________
Criminal
___________________________________

Year
2003
Administrative
___________________________________
Civil
___________________________________
Supplemental
Environmental
Projects
___________________________________
Criminal
___________________________________

Comments:
Please
use
the
below
space
to
comment
on
or
explain
your
data
if
needed
(
e.
g.,
dollar
amount
listed
represents
the
result
of
a
final
settlement)
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

2).
Does
your
office
track
the
effectiveness/
benefits
of
enforcement
efforts
on
a
case
specific
basis
(
e.
g.
pounds
of
pollution
prevented,
remediation
costs
saved)?
?
Yes
(
please
explain
how
this
is
done
below)
?
No
Comments
on
how
this
is
done:
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

3).
Does
your
office
track
the
effectiveness/
benefits
of
regulatory
action
on
a
program
basis
(
e.
g.,
discharge
or
emissions
trends)?
?
Yes
(
please
explain
how
this
is
done
below)
?
No
Comments
on
how
this
is
done:
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

4).
Does
your
program
or
interest
have
administrative
penalty
authority?
?
Yes
?
No
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
IIIG.
State
Perspectives
on
Enforcement
Data
This
section
contains
5
questions.
Please
answer
questions
for
which
you
have
information.

1).
Preferred
Enforcement
Reporting
Measures
If
your
environmental
program
or
interest
had
a
choice
of
statistics
to
report
to
the
U.
S.
EPA
to
best
demonstrate
the
extent
of
your
enforcement
efforts
and/
or
describe
the
effectiveness
of
your
enforcement
actions,
which
statistics
do
you
feel
would
most
accurately
represent
your
work
(
Please
select
your
top
three
from
the
list
below)?


Compliance
Rate

Amount
of
Pollutants
Removed
by
Enforcement
Actions

Number
of
Cases

Facilities
Regulated
vs.
Facilities
Found
in
Violation

Number
of
Inspections

Notices
of
Violations
(
NOVs)


Compliance
Assistance

Informal
Enforcement
Actions

Departmental
Annual
Reports

Inspection
(
coverage)
Rates

Other(
Please
specify)
___________________________________

2).
What
data
do
you
currently
report
to
the
U.
S.
EPA
that
you
believe
has
the
most
value
in
demonstrating
the
extent
of
your
enforcement
efforts
and/
or
describing
the
effectiveness
of
your
enforcement
actions?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

3).
What
data
do
you
currently
report
to
the
U.
S.
EPA
that
you
believe
has
least
value
in
demonstrating
the
extent
of
your
enforcement
efforts
and/
or
describing
the
effectiveness
of
your
enforcement
actions?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

4).
Please
use
the
space
below
to
make
any
additional
comments
relative
to
your
office's
enforcement
efforts
and/
or
ways
that
you
believe
current
reporting
practices
to
the
U.
S.
EPA
could
be
changed.
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

5).
Please
use
the
space
below
to
make
any
additional
comments
about
any
element
of
this
document
and/
or
your
responses.
Include
any
matter
that
you
believe
to
be
important
that
we
have
not
asked
about.
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
IV.
COMPLIANCE
ASSISTANCE
The
following
questions
address
about
state
compliance
assistance
activities
and
how
they
measure
success.
There
are
no
EDSC
data
standards
for
these
activities
since
State
Compliance
Assistance
Programs
are
not
uniform.
The
data
in
this
survey
will
assist
in
ascertaining
common
elements
across
states.

Compliance
Assistance
 
Compliance
Assistance
includes
activities,
tools,
or
technical
assistance
that
provides
clear
and
consistent
information
for
helping
the
regulated
community
understand
and
meet
its
regulatory
obligations,
or
helping
other
compliance
assistance
providers
(
including
government
agencies,
contractors
and
grantees)
to
aid
the
regulated
community
in
complying
with
environmental
regulations.
Compliance
assistance
may
also
help
the
regulated
community
find
cost­
effective
ways
to
comply
with
regulations
and
improve
environmental
performance
through
the
use
of
pollution
prevention,
environmental
management
practices,
and
innovative
technologies.
However,
at
least
one
objective
of
compliance
assistance
must
be
related
to
achieving
or
advancing
regulatory
compliance.

Does
your
program
conduct
any
compliance
assistance
activity?


Yes

No
(
Note:
In
web­
based
survey,
if
states
choose
"
No"
in
the
above
question,
they
will
skip
the
following
questions
and
the
survey
is
completed)
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
IVB.
COMPLIANCE
ASSISTANCE
ACTIVITIES
This
section
contains
16
questions.
Please
answer
questions
for
which
you
have
information.

1).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
on­
site
assistance
inspection
visits?


Yes

No
2).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
workbooks
or
other
written
material
that
describe
regulatory
obligations
and
how
to
comply?


Yes

No
3).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
education
seminars?


Yes

No
If
you
select
Yes,
please
indentify
your
target
audience
and
enter
the
number
of
people
who
participate
on
an
annual
basis
in
the
adjacent
space:


Big
business
___________________________________


Small
Business
___________________________________


Both
___________________________________

4).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
800­
hotline
number?


Yes

No
If
you
select
Yes,
please
indentify
who
staffs
your
Hot
Lines
(
please
choose
one
or
more):


Full­
time
State
Employees

Part­
time
State
Employees

Contractors
5).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
a
web
site?


Yes

No
If
you
selected
Yes,
please
identify:
URL
for
the
web
site
___________________________________
Number
of
hits
per
year
___________________________________

6).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
Permits?


Yes

No
If
you
selected
Yes,
please
identify
type
and
method(
s)
(
please
choose
all
that
apply):
Type

Single­
media
Permits

Multi­
media
Permits
Methods

Electronic
Application

Electronic
Issuance

Paper
Application

Paper
Issuance
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
7).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
report
pollution
prevention
results?


Yes

No
8).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
materials
accounting/
chemical
use
reporting
efforts?


Yes

No
9).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
pollution
prevention
and
facility
planning
laws
and
programs?


Yes
(
please
list
the
laws
and
programs
below)


No
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

10).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
ISO
14001
and
other
environmental
management
systems
efforts?


Yes

No
11).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
Grants
or
Loans?


Yes

No
If
you
select
Yes,
please
identify
type
and
enter
annual
total
value
in
the
adjacent
space:


Grants
___________________________________


Loans
___________________________________


State
Revolving
loans
___________________________________

12).
Do
your
compliance
assistance
activities
include
state
tax
incentive
environmental
assistance
programs?


Yes

No
13).
Do
you
have
pollution
prevention
and
compliance
assistance
personnel?


Yes
(
please
describe
resources
and
staffing
below)


No
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

14).
Do
you
have
a
budget
for
compliance
assistance/
pollution
prevention
activities?


Yes
(
please
provide
annual
budget
amount)
___________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx

No
15).
Do
you
have
other
regulatory
compliance
assistance
activities?


Yes
(
please
describe
below)


No
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

16).
Do
you
have
other
non­
regulatory
compliance
assistance
activities?


Yes
(
please
describe
below)


No
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
IVC.
COMPLIANCE
ASSISTANCE
ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS
Please
use
the
most
recent
data
to
complete
the
questions
below.

Does
your
program
calculate
Environmental
Benefits
resulting
from
Compliance
Assistance
Activities?


Yes

No
(
Note:
In
web­
based
survey,
if
states
choose
"
No"
in
the
above
question,
they
will
skip
the
following
questions
and
the
survey
is
completed)

IVC.
COMPLIANCE
ASSISTANCE
ENVIRONMENTAL
BENEFITS
This
section
contains
4
questions.
Please
answer
as
many
as
you
have
information.

1).
Please
enter
the
method
used
to
calculate
the
Environmental
Benefits
resulting
from
Compliance
Assistance
Activities:
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

2).
Please
enter
the
environmental
benefits
calculated:
___________________________________

3)
Please
describe
your
experiences
with
using
the
above
environmental
benefit
measure?
How
have
you
used
these
data?
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

4)
Do
you
report
this
rate
to
the
public?


Yes
(
please
specify
what
medium
you
use
and
how
often
you
use
below)


No
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________

IVD.
STATE
PERSPECTIVES
1).
Please
use
the
space
below
to
make
any
additional
comments
relative
to
Compliance
Assistance
program(
s).
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
OMB
Control
Number
2020­
xxxx
Expiration
Date
xx/
xx/
xxxx
2).
Please
use
the
space
below
to
make
any
additional
comments
about
any
element
of
this
document
and/
or
your
responses.
Include
any
matter
that
you
believe
to
be
important
and
we
have
not
asked
about.
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________
