  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT

For Renewal of Information Collection Requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

40 CFR Part 6:

Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and 

Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions

Table of Contents

  TOC \f \h \z    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196508"  1.	IDENTIFICATION OF THE
INFORMATION COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc168196508 \h  1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196509"  1(a)	Title of the Information Collection
  PAGEREF _Toc168196509 \h  1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196510"  1(b)	Abstract	  PAGEREF _Toc168196510 \h
 1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196511"  2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION	 
PAGEREF _Toc168196511 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196512"  2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection	 
PAGEREF _Toc168196512 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196513"  2(b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data
  PAGEREF _Toc168196513 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196514"  3.	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND
OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA	  PAGEREF _Toc168196514 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196515"  3(a)	Nonduplication	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196515 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196516"  (b)	Public Notice Requirement Regarding
ICR Submission to OMB	  PAGEREF _Toc168196516 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196517"  3(c)	Consultations	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196517 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196518"  3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection
  PAGEREF _Toc168196518 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196519"  3(e)	General Guidelines	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196519 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196520"  3(f)	Confidentiality	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196520 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196521"  3(g)	Sensitive Questions	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196521 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196522"  4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION
REQUESTED	  PAGEREF _Toc168196522 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196523"  4(a)	Respondents	  PAGEREF _Toc168196523
\h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196524"  4(b)	Information Required	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196524 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196525"  5.	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED -- AGENCY
ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196525 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196526"  5(a)	Agency Activities	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196526 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196527"  5(b)	Collection Methodology and
Management	  PAGEREF _Toc168196527 \h  12  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196528"  5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196528 \h  13  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196529"  5(d)	Collection Schedule	  PAGEREF
_Toc168196529 \h  14  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196530"  6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN OF THE
COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc168196530 \h  14  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196531"  6(a)	Estimated Respondent Burden	 
PAGEREF _Toc168196531 \h  15  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196532"  6(b)	Estimated Federal Government Burden
  PAGEREF _Toc168196532 \h  23  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196533"  6(c)	Estimated Annual and 3-Year
Aggregate Burden	  PAGEREF _Toc168196533 \h  30  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc168196534"  6(d)	Burden Statement Summary and Burden
Statement	  PAGEREF _Toc168196534 \h  33  

 

Part B of the Statistical Survey – Statistical Survey
…………………………………………….36



Attachments

Attachment 1:	  Exemptions from NEPA for Certain EPA Actions and EPA’s
Voluntary NEPA Policy and Procedures

Attachment 2:	Estimates of Hours and Contractor Costs for Applicants and
EPA

List of Acronyms

CE			Categorical Exclusion

CEQ Regulations	Council on Environmental Quality’s Regulations, 40 CFR
1500 – 1508

EA			Environmental assessment

EID			Environmental information document

EIS			Environmental Impact Statement

EPA			Environmental Protection Agency

FONSI			Finding of no significant impact

FMSD			Facilities Management and Services Division

ICR			Information collection request

MPRSA		Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Act, 33 U.S.C. 1401
et seq.

NEPA			National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 U.S.C. 4321 –
4347

NPDES		National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

OMB			Office of Management and Budget

PRF			Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

RFA			Regulatory Flexibility Act, 5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.

ROD			Record of Decision

SBREFA		Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996

STAG			State and Tribal Assistance Grants

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

For Renewal of Information Collection Requirements under the

Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.

40 CFR Part 6:

Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy Act and

Assessing the Environmental Effects Abroad of EPA Actions

1.	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION  TC "1.	IDENTIFICATION
OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION" \f C \l "1"  

	1(a)	Title of the Information Collection  TC "1(a)	Title of the
Information Collection" \f C \l "2"  :  "Procedures for Implementing the
National Environmental Policy Act and Assessing the Environmental
Effects Abroad of EPA Actions” – i.e., 40 CFR Part 6

	1(b)	Abstract  TC "1(b)	Abstract" \f C \l "2"  :

	In September 2007, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or Agency)
amended its procedures for implementing the requirements of the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA).  The final rule also includes
the Agency’s procedures for implementing Executive Order 12114,
“Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions.”

	EPA’s Procedures for Implementing the National Environmental Policy
Act.  The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), 42 U.S.C.
4321-4347 establishes the federal government’s national policy for
protection of the environment.  The Council on Environmental Quality
Regulations (CEQ Regulations) at 40 CFR parts 1500 through 1508
establish procedures implementing the national policy.  The CEQ
Regulations (40 CFR 1505.1) require federal agencies to adopt and, as
needed, revise their own implementing procedures to supplement the CEQ
Regulations and to ensure their decision-making processes are consistent
with NEPA.

	EPA amended its procedures for implementing the requirements of the CEQ
Regulations for NEPA.  Specifically, the final rule amended EPA’s NEPA
implementing procedures by:  (1) consolidating and standardizing the
procedural provisions and requirements of the Agency’s environmental
review process under NEPA; (2) clarifying the general procedures
associated with categorical exclusions, consolidating the categories of
actions subject to categorical exclusion, amending existing and adding
new categorical exclusions, and consolidating and amending existing and
adding new extraordinary circumstances; (3) consolidating and amending
the listing of actions that generally require an environmental impact
statement; (4) clarifying the procedural requirements for consideration
of applicable environmental review laws and executive orders; and (5)
incorporating other revisions consistent with CEQ’s Regulations.

	Those subject to the final NEPA rule include EPA officials who must
comply with NEPA and certain grant or permit applicants who must submit
environmental information documentation to EPA for their proposed
projects.  The final NEPA regulations consolidate and standardize the
environmental review process applicable to all EPA actions subject to
NEPA, including those actions now specifically addressed in the
regulations and other actions subject to NEPA but not specifically
addressed in the regulations (e.g., certain grants awarded for special
projects authorized by Congress through the Agency’s annual
Appropriations Act).

	Compliance with 40 CFR Part 6 is the responsibility of EPA's
Responsible Officials.  For applicant-proposed actions, certain
procedures apply to applicants (that is grantees and permit applicants)
who must submit environmental information to EPA as part of the
environmental review process.  The EPA Responsible Official is
responsible for the environmental review process, including any
categorical exclusion determination or the scope, accuracy, and contents
of a final environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact
statement (EIS) and any supporting documents.  The applicant contributes
by submitting environmental information to EPA as part of the
environmental review process.

	For actions subject to NEPA, the Responsible Official may determine
that the proposed action does not individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the human environment and may, therefore, be
categorically excluded from further NEPA review.  If the proposed action
is not categorically excluded, the Responsible Official may prepare an
EA in order to determine whether to prepare an EIS or a finding of no
significant impact (FONSI).  If necessary, the Responsible Official must
prepare an EIS if the proposed action will have a significant effect on
the human environment.  For applicant-proposed actions, the applicant
may submit information to the Responsible Official regarding the
applicability of a categorical exclusion and request a determination by
the Responsible Official.  Unless the applicant-proposed action is
categorically excluded, the Responsible Official may gather the
information and prepare the NEPA documents without assistance from the
applicant, or have the applicant prepare an environmental information
document (EID) or a draft EA and supporting documents or implement a
third-party contract agreement with the applicant.

	EPA’s Procedures for Implementing Executive Order 12114.  40 CFR Part
6 also includes EPA’s procedures, “Assessing the Environmental
Effects Abroad of EPA Actions,” that implement Executive Order 12114,
“Environmental Effects Abroad of Major Federal Actions" (see 46 FR
3364).  EPA’s Executive Order 12114 procedures further the purpose of
NEPA and provide that EPA may be guided by its NEPA procedures to the
extent they are applicable.  Therefore, when EPA conducts an
environmental assessment pursuant to its Executive Order 12114
procedures, the Agency generally follows its NEPA procedures. 
Compliance with the procedures is the responsibility of EPA’s
Responsible Officials and for applicant-proposed actions, applicants may
be required to provide environmental information to EPA as part of the
environmental review process.  For this Information Collection Request
(ICR), applicant-proposed projects subject to either NEPA or Executive
Order 12114 (and that are not addressed in other EPA programs’ ICRs)
are addressed through the NEPA process.

2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION  TC "2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE
COLLECTION" \f C \l "1"  

	2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection  TC "2(a)	Need/Authority for the
Collection" \f C \l "2"  : The CEQ Regulations (40 CFR 1505.1) require
federal agencies to adopt and, as needed, revise their own implementing
procedures to supplement the CEQ Regulations.  The purpose of 40 CFR
Part 6 is to satisfy the procedural requirements of the CEQ Regulations
for NEPA.  Additionally, 40 CFR Part 6 includes EPA's environment review
procedures implementing Executive Order 12114.  EPA is collecting
information from certain applicants as part of the process of complying
with either NEPA or Executive Order 12114.

	2(b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data  TC "2(b)	Practical
Utility/Users of the Data" \f C \l "2"  :  EPA’s NEPA regulations
apply to the actions of EPA that are subject to NEPA in order to ensure
that environmental information is available to the Agency's
decision-makers and the public before decisions are made and before
actions are taken.  This includes actions such as wastewater treatment
construction grants under Title II of the Clean Water Act, EPA’s
issuance of new source National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits, certain research and development projects, EPA actions
involving renovations at or new construction of EPA facilities, and
certain grants awarded for special projects authorized by Congress
through the Agency’s annual Appropriations Act.  EPA actions subject
to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals may include any of these
except EPA actions for construction of special purpose facilities or
facility renovations of EPA facilities.  The Part 6 regulations also
include EPA’s procedures implementing Executive Order 12114.  These
procedures ensure that environmental information is available to the
Agency’s decision-makers and other appropriate Federal agencies and
officials for actions subject to Executive Order 12114.

3.	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA  TC "3.
NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA" \f C \l
"1"  

	3(a)	Nonduplication  TC "3(a)	Nonduplication" \f C \l "2"  :  For both
the NEPA and Executive Order 12114 implementing procedures, the
information submitted by an applicant does not duplicate information
otherwise submitted to the government.  For an EPA action subject to
NEPA that is based on an applicant proposal, the applicant (e.g.,
grantee or permit applicant) would submit information used by the
Responsible Official during the environmental review process.  This
one-time submission is specific to the applicant's proposed action in
order to provide project-specific information necessary for the
Responsible Official’s environmental review of the proposed action.

	3(b)	Public Notice Requirement Regarding ICR Submission to O  TC "(b)
Public Notice Requirement Regarding ICR Submission to OMB" \f C \l "2" 
MB:  The Office of Federal Activities published a Notice in the Federal
Register on this ICR renewal requesting public 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 established a
public docket for this ICR renewal, under Docket ID number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0062.  EPA requested that any comments related to the
ICR renewal be submitted to EPA and OMB.  EPA's docket is available for
public viewing at the Public Reading Room, Room B102, Enforcement and
Compliance Docket and Information Center, EPA West Building, 1301
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC.  The 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 Public 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 at http://www.regulations.gov.  The
public may use the public docket to obtain a copy of the ICR including
the Supporting Statement, review 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.

	3(c)	Consultations  TC "3(c)	Consultations" \f C \l "2"  :

EPA’s NEPA Practitioners:  EPA actions subject to NEPA or Executive
Order 12114 that are based on applicant proposals are one-time only and
involve various government jurisdictions and businesses rather than
repeated requests for information from specific government jurisdictions
and businesses.  EPA relied on information available from its NEPA
practitioners and their experience working with grantees and permit
applicants to prepare the burden estimates in this ICR.  These are the
same EPA practitioners that conduct the assessments of
applicant-proposed actions subject to NEPA or Executive Order 12114 as
further discussed in Section 4(a) of this Supporting Statement.  As
provided for in Executive Order 12114, EPA’s NEPA procedures may be
used for assessing these projects.  EPA has, however, requested public
comment on this ICR as discussed in Section 3(b), above.

Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ):  40 CFR Part 6 was developed in
consultation with CEQ (see 40 CFR 1507.3(a)).

	3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection  TC "3(d)	Effects of Less
Frequent Collection" \f C \l "2"  :  Under 40 CFR Part 6, respondents
submit project-specific information only for EPA actions subject to NEPA
or Executive Order 12114 that are based on applicant proposals (as
further discussed in Section 4(a)).  Such actions are generally one-time
requests from EPA for environmental information from applicants
requesting grant assistance for specific projects subject to NEPA or for
new source NPDES permits to be issued by EPA.  There are no ongoing or
periodic reporting or recordkeeping requirements.

	3(e)	General Guidelines  TC "3(e)	General Guidelines" \f C \l "2"  : 
The information submitted by applicants would be consistent with the
guidelines of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 5 CFR 1320.6.
 For an applicant-proposed action, the applicant (e.g., grantee or
permit applicant) submits information to EPA's Responsible Official as
part of the environmental review process.  This is a one-time submission
specific to the applicant's proposed action in order to provide
project-specific information necessary for the environmental review of
the proposed action.  The Responsible Official, however, may ask the
applicant to provide additional information if the Responsible Official
needs it to prepare the EA or EIS.  There are no schedule requirements
or requirements on the number of copies of the documentation to be
submitted or requirements for ongoing reporting or recordkeeping or to
conduct statistical surveys.

	3(f)	Confidentiality  TC "3(f)	Confidentiality" \f C \l "2"  :  40 CFR
Part 6 does not require applicants to submit confidential, proprietary
or trade secret information.

	3(g)	Sensitive Questions  TC "3(g)	Sensitive Questions" \f C \l "2"  : 
40 CFR Part 6 does not require applicant response to sensitive questions
(e.g., questions concerning sexual behavior or attitudes, religious
beliefs, or other matters usually considered private).

4.	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED  TC "4.	THE RESPONDENTS
AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED" \f C \l "1"  

	4(a)	Respondents  TC "4(a)	Respondents" \f C \l "2"  :  Those subject
to 40 CFR Part 6 include EPA officials who must comply with NEPA or
Executive Order 12114, and certain grant or permit applicants who must
submit environmental information documentation to EPA for their
projects.  For purposes of delineating the information collection
requirements under the Paperwork Reduction Act, 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.,
"applicants" (e.g., grantees or permit applicants) are the respondents
(e.g., the persons who must generate, maintain, or provide information
to or for a Federal agency).

	EPA actions generally subject to NEPA include:  wastewater treatment
construction grants, issuance of new source NPDES permits by EPA,
certain research and development grants, EPA actions for construction of
special purpose facilities or facility renovations of EPA facilities,
and certain grants awarded for  projects authorized by Congress through
the Agency’s annual Appropriations Act.  EPA actions subject to NEPA
that are based on applicant proposals may include any of these except
EPA actions for construction of special purpose facilities or facility
renovations of EPA facilities.  The EPA Responsible Official is
responsible for the environmental review process, including any
categorical exclusion determination or the scope, accuracy, and contents
of a final EA or EIS and any supporting documents.  The applicant may
contribute by submitting environmental information to EPA as part of the
environmental review process.

	EPA actions typically subject to Executive Order 12114 include major
EPA actions which affect the environment of a foreign nation or the
global commons and may include:  major research or demonstration
projects, ocean dumping activities carried out under section 102 of the
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA) (33U.S.C. 1401
et seq.), major permitting or licensing of facilities by EPA, Wastewater
Treatment Construction Grant Program under section 201 of the Clean
Water Act when activities addressed in the facility plan would have
environmental effects abroad, and other EPA activities as determined by
EPA.

	Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Program facilities or new
source NPDES permits to be issued by EPA for facilities in the U.S.
bordering Mexico or Canada are subject to EPA’s NEPA implementing
procedures.  If these facilities could have significant environmental
effects abroad, generally they would also be subject to EPA’s
procedures implementing Executive Order 12114.  In addition, EPA has
determined that certain grants awarded for special projects authorized
by Congress through the Agency’s annual Appropriations Act are subject
to NEPA.  STAG special projects in the U.S. bordering Mexico or Canada
and that could have significant environmental effects abroad generally
would also be subject to EPA’s procedures implementing Executive Order
12114.

	Further, certain actions subject to EPA’s Executive Order 12114
implementing procedures are not subject to EPA’s NEPA implementing
procedures.  As with EPA’s current Part 6 regulations, EPA’s
Executive Order 12114 implementing procedures (with only minor,
technical amendments) provide that:  (a) for ocean dumping activities,
the information submitted under 40 CFR part 221 is sufficient to satisfy
the environmental assessment requirements; and (b) for permits issued
under section 3005 of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,
section 402 of the Clean Water Act, and section 165 of the Clean Air
Act, the information submitted by applicants for such permits or
approvals under the applicable consolidated permit regulations (40 CFR
parts 122 and 124) and Prevention of Significant Deterioration
regulations (40 CFR part 52) satisfy the environmental document
requirements of Executive Order 12114.

	In summary, the applicant burden for any applicant-proposed actions,
including permitting or licensing, under these authorities is already
addressed under EPA’s ICRs for these programs and is not further
addressed in this ICR.  However, the applicant burden for any EPA action
subject to NEPA and/or Executive Order 12114 that is based on an
applicant proposal, including Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants
Program facilities, STAG actions subject to NEPA and new source NPDES
permits issued by EPA, is addressed in this ICR.  EPA’s Executive
Order 12114 implementing procedures further the purpose of NEPA and
provide that EPA may be guided by the CEQ Regulations to the extent they
are applicable.  Therefore, when EPA conducts an environmental
assessment pursuant to its Executive Order 12114 procedures, the Agency
generally follows the CEQ Regulations and the procedures in EPA’s NEPA
implementing regulations.  For these reasons, for applicant-proposed
actions subject to either NEPA or Executive Order 12114 (and that are
not addressed in other EPA programs’ ICRs), the remainder of this ICR
Supporting Statement will evaluate the respondent burden only with
regard to EPA’s NEPA implementing procedures.

	For purposes of this ICR, EPA considers the model respondents to be two
types of applicants:

Grant applicants applying to EPA for funding of special projects
identified in the STAG account authorized by Congress through the
Agency’s annual Appropriations Act.  These applicants are generally
governmental jurisdictions.

Permit applicants applying to EPA for issuance of new source NPDES
permits under §402 CWA.  EPA issues new source NPDES permits only in
states and U.S. territories that have not assumed authority for this
program (i.e., New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Puerto Rico, New Mexico,
Oklahoma (for concentrated animal feeding operations only), Alaska, and
Idaho), the District of Columbia, off-shore waters (e.g., the
inter-continental shelf for Texas, all outer-continental shelf areas,
all deep-water port areas), and on federally-recognized Indian tribal
lands.  These permit applicants are not limited to a specific business
sector.  EPA has permitted, and anticipates continued permit activity,
with projects typically involving:  oil and gas extraction from
off-shore waters, hardrock mining (recently gold, silver, lead and zinc,
and copper), dairy cattle and milk production, seafood processing, and
concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), including poultry,
cattle, hogs and pigs.

										NAICS Code

	Crude petroleum and natural gas extraction				211111

	Hardrock mining

		Gold ore mining						212221

		Silver ore mining						212222

		Lead ore and zinc ore mining					212231

		Copper ore and nickel ore mining				212234

	Dairy cattle and milk production					112120

	Seafood fresh and frozen processing					311712

	Poultry and egg production

		Chicken egg production					112310

		Broilers and other meat type chicken production		112320

		Turkey production						112330

		Poultry hatcheries						112340

	Cattle feedlots								112112

	Hog and pig farming							112210

	4(b)	Information Required  TC "4(b)	Information Required" \f C \l "2" 
:  For EPA actions subject to NEPA, the Responsible Official may
determine that the proposed action does not individually or cumulatively
have a significant effect on the human environment and may, therefore,
be categorically excluded from further NEPA review.  If the proposed
action is not categorically excluded, the Responsible Official may
prepare an EA in order to determine whether to prepare an EIS or a
FONSI.  The Responsible Official prepares an EIS if the proposed action
will have a significant effect on the human environment.  For EPA
actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals, the
Responsible Official may gather the information and prepare the NEPA
documents without environmental information submitted by the applicant,
or have the applicant prepare an EID, or a draft EA and supporting
documents, or implement a third-party agreement with the applicant.

	The level of NEPA documentation and the project-specific information
the Responsible Official needs for decision-making is determined by the
potential for environmental impact of the action, or the facility to be
permitted or the project to be funded by the action rather than the
dollar amount of the project or whether the applicant is a grantee or
permit applicant.  Table 1 summarizes the information to be submitted by
an applicant for a categorical exclusion (CE) determination, an EA and
FONSI, and an EIS and Record of Decision (ROD).  There are no schedule
requirements or requirements on the number of copies of the information
document to be submitted or requirements for ongoing reporting or
recordkeeping.

Table 1.  Summary of Information Submitted by Applicants for CEs,
EAs/FONSIs, and EISs/RODs

Categorical Exclusion (CE) means a category of actions which do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment and have been found by EPA to have no such effect.  To find
that a proposed action is categorically excluded, the Responsible
Official needs to determine that the proposed action fits within a
categorical exclusion that is listed in the regulations, and the
proposed action does not involve any extraordinary circumstances as
listed in the regulations.  “Extraordinary circumstances” mean those
circumstances in which a normally excluded action may have a significant
environmental effect.  Based on review of information in the
applicant’s application and other available information, the
Responsible Official notifies the applicant if the action is
categorically excluded, or if EPA needs additional information to
support the application of a categorical exclusion.

Information Submitted by Applicant:  The applicant may provide
statements or documents to the Responsible Official to verify that the
proposed action would not involve any of the listed extraordinary
circumstances.

For example, the applicant might submit information to support a
categorical exclusion determination for an action that meets the
criteria for “Actions in unsewered communities relating to the use of
proposed wastewater on-site technologies where such technologies replace
existing systems.”  If the project area is known to be near a property
with nationally significant historic value, the applicant would likely
enclose a letter from the State Historic Preservation Officer that
confirms the proposed project will not have a significant environmental
effect on the historic property.  The applicant letter may also verify
there are no wetlands in the project area.

Environmental Assessments (EAs) need to include sufficient information
and analysis for the Responsible Official to determine whether to
prepare an EIS or to issue a FONSI.

  

Information Submitted by Applicant: The applicant submits an EID of
sufficient scope to enable the Responsible Official to prepare an EA,
and then determine whether to issue a FONSI or prepare an EIS.  At the
discretion of the Responsible Official, the applicant may prepare a
draft EA and supporting documents in lieu of an EID.

 An EID for an EA, or a draft EA and supporting documents, generally
will:  (1) include brief discussions of the need for the proposed
action; the alternatives, including the no action alternative;
description of the affected environment; and the environmental impacts
of the proposed action and alternatives; (2) include a listing or
summarize any coordination or consultation undertaken with any federal
agency, state or local government, or federally-recognized Indian tribe,
including compliance with applicable laws and executive orders; (3)
identify and describe any mitigation measures that must be considered,
including any mitigation measures that must be adopted to ensure the
action will not have significant impacts; and (4) incorporate documents
by reference.

Environmental Impact Statements (EISs) are generally prepared for major
actions that may significantly affect the quality of the human
environment, or when an EA indicates that significant impacts may occur
that cannot be reduced or eliminated by changes to or mitigation of the
proposed action.  A Record of Decision (ROD) documents the decision of
the Responsible Official.

Information Submitted by Applicant: The applicant submits an EID of
sufficient scope to enable the Responsible Official to prepare an EIS
and ROD.  In lieu of submitting documentation, the Responsible Official
and the applicant may enter into a third-party contract agreement.  The
information needed for an EIS parallels the information needed for an EA
with a focus on assessment of significant environmental issues and
alternatives.

 An EID for an EIS generally will: (1) provide EPA with information the
Agency will use to prepare an EIS; (2) analyze all reasonable
alternatives and the no action alternative; (3) describe the potentially
affected environment including, as appropriate, the size and location of
new and existing facilities, land requirements, operation and
maintenance requirements, auxiliary structures such as pipelines or
transmission lines, and construction schedules; (4) summarize any
coordination or consultation undertaken with any federal agency, state
or local government, or federally-recognized Indian tribe, including
compliance with applicable laws and executive orders; (5) the draft EIS
must summarize any public meetings during the scoping process, and the
final EIS must summarize the public participation process held after
publication of the draft EIS; (6) the draft EIS must consider
substantive comments received during the scoping process, and the final
EIS must summarize all comments on the draft EIS and respond to any
substantive comments and explain any changes to a revised draft EIS or
the final EIS and the reasons for the changes; and (7) include the names
and qualifications of the persons primarily responsible for preparing
the EIS including significant background papers.



5.	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED -- AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT  TC "5.	THE INFORMATION
COLLECTED -- AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT" \f C \l "1"  

	5(a)	Agency Activities  TC "5(a)	Agency Activities" \f C \l "2"  : 
Compliance with the regulations is the responsibility of EPA's
Responsible Officials.  For applicant-proposed actions, grantees or
permit applicants must submit environmental information to EPA as part
of the environmental review process unless the Responsible Official
decides to prepare the NEPA documents without assistance from the
applicant.  As noted in Table 1 above, the Responsible Official may
determine that the action is categorically excluded, or prepare an EA in
order to determine whether to prepare an EIS or issue a FONSI, or
prepare an EIS and ROD.

	5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management  TC "5(b)	Collection
Methodology and Management" \f C \l "2"  :  Whether the NEPA documents
are based on environmental information developed by the Responsible
Official or submitted by the applicant, the NEPA review and resulting
documents generally rely on the use of existing data and information,
including data and information from other federal agencies, state or
local governments, or federally-recognized Indian tribes with
jurisdiction by law or special expertise.

	Whether the NEPA documents are prepared by the Responsible Official or
based on environmental information submitted by the applicant, the
quality of the information provided by an applicant must be sufficient
to enable the Responsible Official to make a decision.  This is
accomplished under EPA’s NEPA implementing procedures through: (1)
early coordination and cooperation with federal agencies, state and
local governments, and federally-recognized Indian tribes with
jurisdiction by law or special expertise (see final rule § 6.202); and
(2) the public participation process associated with actions other than
those categorically excluded (see final rule § 6.203).  When the
environmental information is provided by the applicant, the Responsible
Official is responsible for the statements, analyses, and conclusions of
the EA or EIS and any supporting documents.

	The information compiled is a one-time submission in narrative text
format (see final rule §§ 6.205 and 6.207) rather than computerized
compilations of data and information.  There are no forms, checklists,
or ongoing reporting, recordkeeping or file-maintenance requirements for
applicants (see proposed rule Subpart C).  EPA maintains file records
for each action.

	

5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility  TC "5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility" \f C
\l "2"  :  The 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) incorporated the
Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) into it.  The RFA requires EPA to
prepare a regulatory flexibility analysis for any rule that has a
"significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities."
  As part of the certification requirement, the EPA must show that the
collection:

"reduces to the extent practicable and appropriate the burden on persons
who shall provide information to or for the agency, including with
respect to small entities, as defined in the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(5 U.S.C. 601(6)), the use of such techniques as:

	"(1) establishing differing compliance or reporting requirements or
timetables that take into account the resources available to those who
are to respond;

	"(2) the clarification, consolidation, or simplification of compliance
and reporting requirements; or

	"(3) an exemption from coverage of the collection of information, or
any part thereof”

	The requirements of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness
Act (SBREFA) of 1996 must also be considered.

	The information collected under this ICR is one-time only for
applicant-proposed actions; e.g., actions proposed by grantees seeking
funding assistance from EPA or for an NPDES permit application initiated
by the permit applicant.  In either case, EPA assumes the action will
directly benefit the applicant (such as a grantee seeking grant funding
for renovation of a community drinking water system, or a permit
applicant seeking a new source NPDES permit from EPA to further the
applicant’s business interests).  Nonetheless, if the applicant cannot
afford to provide the required environmental information to EPA, then
EPA would undertake the environmental review without input from the
applicant.  Further, grantees may be grant-eligible for certain costs
associated with providing environmental information to EPA.  Permit
applicants are not eligible for EPA financial assistance.

	EPA has attempted to reduce the burden on small entities (including
businesses and government jurisdictions) through the following
provisions in the final rule:

Section 6.300: An EID is not required when the action is categorically
excluded, or the applicant will prepare a draft EA and supporting
documents.  The Responsible Official may prepare the NEPA documents
without environmental information submitted by the applicant.

Section 6.302:

The Responsible Official may prepare generic guidance for categories of
actions involving a large number of applicants; and must ensure early
involvement of applicants, consult with the applicant and provide
guidance describing the scope and level of environmental information
required, and provide guidance on a project-by-project basis to any
applicant seeking assistance.

The Responsible Official must consider the extent to which the applicant
is capable of providing the required information, may not require the
applicant to gather data or perform analyses that unnecessarily
duplicate either existing data or the results of existing analyses
available to EPA, and must limit the request for environmental
information to that necessary for the environmental review.

Section 6.303: An applicant may enter into a third-party agreement with
EPA.  (For grantees, certain third-party contractor costs may be
eligible for cost reimbursement; see footnote 12.  However, new source
NPDES permit applicants are not eligible for EPA financial assistance.)

	5(d)	Collection Schedule  TC "5(d)	Collection Schedule" \f C \l "2"  : 
Information must be submitted by an applicant only for EPA actions
subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals unless EPA will
prepare the NEPA documents without environmental information submitted
by the applicant.  The information to be submitted is required only when
an applicant applies for a grant for an action subject to NEPA or a new
source NPDES permit to be issued by EPA, a one-time application process.
 The Responsible Official, however, may ask the applicant to provide
additional information if the Responsible Official needs it to prepare
the EA or EIS.  There are no schedules in the regulations for this
collection process.

6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN OF THE COLLECTION  TC "6.	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN
OF THE COLLECTION" \f C \l "1"  

	The content of the environmental information submitted by an applicant
for a draft EA and supporting documents and an EID for a draft EA and
supporting documents is similar.  There may be a financial difference
for grantees in that EPA financial assistance generally may be used to
prepare an EID but not to prepare a draft EA and supporting documents
(see footnote 12).  New source NPDES permit applicants are not eligible
for EPA financial assistance.  The applicant may also enter into a
third-party agreement whereby the applicant engages and pays for the
services of a contractor to prepare the draft EA and supporting
documents.  EPA’s experience with applicants has generally been that
they contract directly for preparation of an EID or a draft EA and
supporting documents.  Therefore, for purposes of estimating the maximum
burden, the calculations will be based on preparation of a draft EA by a
contractor whose services will be paid for by the applicant.  

	The content of the environmental information submitted by an applicant
for a draft EIS and supporting documents and an EID for a draft EIS and
supporting documents is similar.  For grantees, third-party contractor
costs may be eligible for cost reimbursement (see footnote 12).  New
source NPDES permit applicants are not eligible for EPA financial
assistance.  Although an applicant may contract for preparation of an
EID for a draft EIS, because EISs are generally more complex than EAs in
terms of the issues to be addressed and the associated analyses, it has
generally been EPA’s experience that applicants will enter into a
third-party agreement with EPA for preparation of the EIS and supporting
documents.  Therefore, for purposes of estimating the maximum burden for
this ICR, EPA assumes the applicant will enter into a third-party
agreement for the environmental review process and preparation of the
documents for the project. 

	6(a)	Estimated Respondent Burden  TC "6(a)	Estimated Respondent Burden"
\f C \l "2"  :  For an EPA action subject to NEPA that is based on an
applicant proposal, the applicant would generally submit information to
the EPA Responsible Official as part of the environmental review process
as delineated in Section 4(b), Table 1.  As noted above, EPA assumes the
applicant will use a contractor to compile and prepare the environmental
information to be submitted to the Responsible Official.  For the
applicant, the burden includes the time and costs needed to:

	

Procure contractor services.

Review instructions (such as the regulations and any program-specific
guidelines the Responsible Official may also provide) and/or meet with
the Responsible Official.

Research data sources.

Complete and review the collection of environmental information.

Transmit the information to the Responsible Official.

Meet with the Responsible Official on the need for any revisions to the
environmental information, and prepare and submit any necessary
revisions to the information.

	The applicant would not be required to develop, acquire, install, or
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; or train personnel to be able to respond to a collection
of information; nor would there be requirements for ongoing reporting or
recordkeeping.

	In summary, EPA assumes an applicant would expend time and incur
contractor costs to submit:  (1) information to support application of a
categorical exclusion with environmental information prepared directly
by the applicant’s contractor, or (2) a draft EA and supporting
documents prepared directly by the applicant’s contractor, or (3) a
draft and final EIS and supporting documents prepared by the
applicant’s contractor under a third-party agreement with EPA.

	Respondents include grant applicants applying to EPA for funding of
special projects identified in the STAG account authorized by Congress
through the Agency’s annual Appropriations Act.  These applicants are
generally governmental jurisdictions.  Until recently, such grants
authorized by Congress, and subsequently awarded by EPA, had generally
been increasing annually.  However, for the 3-year period 2007 through
2009, the number of grants awarded stabilized at about 300 annually. 
Therefore, EPA anticipates that approximately 900 STAG grants will be
awarded during the 3-year life of this ICR, with approximately 300
awarded annually.  EPA estimated that about 60% of the STAG projects
were documented with a CE, and about 40% with an EA/FONSI although EPA
anticipates that the STAG projects documented with a CE may increase 10%
to 15%.  Thus, based on experience, EPA anticipates there will be
approximately 300 grantee projects annually with about 75% of these
projects documented with a CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI.  In
addition, EPA estimates that one project (less than one percent of the
total annual grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the
3-year period of this ICR.  EPA estimated contractor costs and hours,
and hours for grantees and EPA for CE, EA/FONSI and EIS/ROD
documentation are summarized in Table 2 (also see Section 6(b) for
further information on estimates for EPA’s burden).

Table 2.  Summary of Estimated Contractor Costs and Hours for Grantees
and EPA

	CE Documents Project

Current	 3-Yr ICR Period	EA/FONSI Documents Project

Current	     3-Year ICR Period	EIS/ROD Documents Project

Current		3-Yr ICR Period

Grantee	$3,000

   5 hrs

	$3,000*

5 hrs	$15,000

60 hrs

	$19,000*

60 hrs	$300,000

440 hrs

	$372,000*

440 hrs

	*Contractor:  $75/hour(a)

$75/hr x 40 hrs = $3,000	*Contractor: $95/hour

$95/hr x 200 hrs =  $19,000	*Contractor: $155/hour

$155/hr x 2400 hrs = $372,000

EPA	$0	$0	

$5,000 for

25% of projects	$5,000 for 25%

of projects	$0	$0

	30 hrs

60%	40 hrs

75%	120 hrs

40%	120 hrs

25%	440 hrs

1 per 3-yrs	530 hrs

1 per 3-yrs

a Contractor cost/hour assumed to include consolidated wages for all
personnel working on the project, project expenses, overhead and profit.

	Respondents also include permit applicants applying to EPA for issuance
of new source NPDES permits under §402 CWA.  EPA issues new source
NPDES permits only in states and U.S. territories that have not assumed
authority for this program (see Section (4(a)).  Because most states
have assumed the NPDES program, few new source NPDES permits are issued
by EPA.  Regions 4, 6 and 10 currently handle the majority of these
projects.  As presented in Section 4(a) of this Supporting Statement,
most projects involve oil and gas extraction in off-shore waters areas,
hardrock mining, concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), dairy
farming, and seafood processing.  None of these projects have been
documented with a CE and, during the 3-year life of this ICR, EPA does
not anticipate any projects will be documented initially with a CE. 
Further, for the 3-year life of this ICR, EPA estimates that annually
about 11 projects will be documented with EAs/FONSIs.  In addition, EPA
estimates one project will have an EIS/ROD completed annually.  EPA
estimated contractor costs and hours, and hours for permit applicants
and EPA for EA/FONSI and EIS/ROD documentation are summarized in Table 3
(also see Section 6(b) for further information on estimates for EPA’s
burden).

Table 3.  Summary of Estimated Contractor Costs and Hours for Permit
Applicants and EPA

	CE Documents Project

Current	  3-Yr ICR Prd	EA/FONSI Documents Project

Current	          3-Year ICR Period	EIS/ROD Documents Project

Current		   3-Yr ICR Period

Permit Applicant	None	None

	$50,000

60 hrs

	$62,000*

60 hrs	$300,000*

440 hrs

	$372,000*

440 hrs



* Contractor: $155/houra

$155/hr x 400 hrs = $62,000	*Contractor: $155/hour

$155/hr x 2400 hrs = $372,000

EPA	None	None	$10,000 for 50% of projects

	$10,000 for 50% of projects	$0	$0



120 hrs

11 projects	120 hrs

11 projects	440 hrs

1 per year	530 hrs

1 per year

a Contractor cost/hour assumed to include consolidated wages for all
personnel working on the project, project expenses, overhead and profit.

	EPA does not anticipate any applicant capital or start up costs. 
Operating and maintenance (O&M) costs are the recurring dollar amount of
cost associated with O&M or purchasing services.  EPA assumes the O&M
costs associated with the paperwork requirements for respondents would
be costs for photocopying and mailing the compiled environmental
information for a CE, EA or EIS.  For a CE, EPA assumes up to 20 pages
may be copied at 10¢ per page, or $2.00.  For maximum cost estimate
purposes, EPA assumes the documentation is express mailed at a cost of
$15.00, for a total cost of $17.00 per CE.  For an EA, EPA assumes 100
pages will be submitted at a cost of $10.00 for copying and $30.00 for
express mail for a total cost of $40.00 per EA.  For an EIS, EPA assumes
800 pages will be submitted (4 x 200 pages per EIS - preliminary draft
EIS, draft EIS, preliminary final EIS, final EIS) at a cost of $80.00
for copying and $200.00 for express mail (4 x $50 per document) for a
total cost of $280.00 per EIS.  

	Based on the above assumptions and estimates for grantees and permit
applicants, Tables 4 and 5 list the estimated one-time, annual and
three-year contractor hours and costs, and hours, direct labor and O&M
costs for grantees and permit applicants (three years represents the
approval period for this ICR).  The direct labor rate, including
benefits, for state and local government (management and professional)
applicants is assumed to be $48; loaded at 25% for other non-benefits
overhead, this rate is $60.  The direct labor rate for
federally-recognized Indian tribe applicants is assumed to be the same
as for state and local government applicants.  Grantee applicants are
assumed to be state and local governments and federally-recognized
Indian tribes.  The direct labor rate, including benefits, for civilian
worker (professional) applicants is assumed to be $48; loaded at 50% for
other non-benefits overhead and including profit, this rate is about
$72.  Permit applicants are assumed to be civilian worker applicants. 
(Labor rates, including benefits, from the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
“Employer Costs for Employee Compensation – March 2010,”  
HYPERLINK "http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm" 
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.nr0.htm  )

Table 4. One-Time, Annual and 3-Year Total Estimated Costs and Hours
for Grant Applicants

Respondent	CE Projects	EA/FONSI Projects	EIS/ROD Projects	Totals

Grantee-Annual:

Number of Projects

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

Grantee

Hours

Grantee Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on One-Time Proj. Basis	

75% x 300 proj = 225 proj

225 proj x 40 hrs/proj = 

9,000 hours

225 proj x $3,000/proj = $675,000

225 proj x 5 hrs/proj =

1,125 hours

1,125 hours x $60/hour =

$67,500

225 proj x $17/proj =

$3,825

40 + 5 = 45 hours/project

$3,000 + ($60 x 5) + $17 = $3,317/project	

25% x 300 proj = 75 proj

75 proj x 200 hrs/proj =

15,000 hours

75 proj x $18,000/proj = $1,350,000

75 proj x 60 hrs/proj =

 4,500 hours

4,500 hours x $60/hour =

$270,000

75 proj x $40/proj =

$3,000

200 + 60 = 260 hours/proj

$18,000 + ($60 x 60) + $40= $21,640/project	

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-

year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)	Grantee-Annual:

300 projects

24,000 hours

$2,025,000

5,625 hours

$337,500

$6,825

Grantee-

3-Yr Total:

Number of Projects

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

Grantee Hours

Grantee Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on One-Time Proj. Basis	

3 yrs x 225 proj = 675 proj

3 yrs x 9,000 hours =

27,000 hours

3 yrs x $675,000/yr =

 $2,025,000

3 yrs x 1,125 hours =

3,375 hours

3 yrs x $67,500/yr =

$202,500

3 yrs x $3,825/yr = $11,475	

3 yrs x 75 proj = 225 proj

3 yrs x 15,000 hours =

45,000 hours

3 yrs x $1,350,000/yr =

 $4,050,000

3 yrs x 4,500 hours =

13,500 hours

3 yrs x $270,000/yr =

$810,000

3 yrs x $3,000/yr = $9,000	

1 project on a 3-year basis

1 proj x 2,400 hours/proj =

2,400 hours

1 proj x $372,000/proj =

 $372,000

1 proj x 440 hours/proj =

 440 hours

440 hrs x $60/hour =

$26,400

1 proj x $280/proj = $280

2,400 + 440 = 2,840 hours

$372,000 + ($60 x 440) + $280 = $398,680	Grantee-

3-Yr Total:

901 projects

74,400 hours

$6,447,000

17,315 hours

$1,038,900

$     20,755

Table 5.  One-Time, Annual and 3-Year Total Estimated Costs and Hours
for Permit Applicants

Respondent	CE Projects	EA/FONSI Projects	EIS/ROD Projects	Totals

Permitee-Annual:

Number of Projects

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

Permitee Hours

Permitee Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on One-Time Proj. Basis	

None

None

None

None

None

None

(None)	

11 projects/year

11 proj x 400 hrs/proj =

4,400 hours

11 proj x $62,000/proj = $682,000

11 proj x 60 hrs/proj =

 660 hours

660 hours x $72/hour = 

$47,520

11 proj x $40/proj = $440

400 + 60 = 460 hours

$62,000 + ($72 x 60) + $40 = $66,360	

1 project/year

1 proj x 2,400 hrs/proj =

2,400 hours

1proj x $372,000/proj = $372,000

1 proj x 440 hrs/proj =

 440 hours

440 hours x $72/hour =

$31,680

1 proj x $280/proj = $280

2,400 + 440 = 2,840 hours

$372,000 + ($72 x 440) + $280 = $403,960	Permitee-Annual:

12 projects

6,800 hours

$1,054,000

1,100 hours

$79,200

$       720

Permitee-

3-Yr Total:

Number of Projects

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

Permitee Hours

Permitee Labor Costs

O&M	

None

None

None

None

None

None	

3 yrs x 11 proj/yr = 33 proj

3 yrs x 4,400 hours =

13,200 hours

3 yrs x $682,000/yr =

 $2,046,000

3 yrs x 660 hours =

 1,980 hours

3 yrs x $47,520 =

$142,560

3 yrs x $440/yr = $1,320	

3 yrs x 1 proj/yr = 3 proj

3 yrs x 2,400 hours =

7,200 hours

3 yrs x $372,000/yr = $1,116,000

3 yrs x 440 hrs/yr =

 1,320 hours

3 yrs x $31,680 =

$95,040

3 yrs x $280/yr = $840	Permitee-

3-Yr Total:

36 projects

20,400 hours

$3,162,000

3,300 hours

$237,600

$       2,160



	As discussed in Section 5, the information collected under this ICR is
one-time only for applicant-proposed actions.  Grantees or permit
applicants must submit environmental information to EPA as part of the
environmental review process unless the Responsible Official decides to
prepare the NEPA documents without assistance from the applicant.  If
the applicant cannot afford to provide the required environmental
information to EPA, then EPA would undertake the environmental review
without input from the applicant (see footnote 11).  Further, grantees
may be grant-eligible for certain costs associated with providing
environmental information to EPA (see footnote 12); permit applicants
are not eligible for EPA financial assistance.  Table 6 summarizes the
one-time total estimated applicant costs, including contractor hours and
costs, applicant hours and direct labor costs, and O&M for documentation
to support a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD.  Based on EPA
experience, under 40 CFR Part 6, EPA anticipates that for grantees there
will be approximately 300 projects with about 75% of the projects
documented with a CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA
estimates that one project (less than one percent of the total annual
grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life
of this ICR.  For permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be
approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 of the projects
documented with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates one project
will have an EIS/ROD completed annually.  None will be documented
initially with a CE.

Table 6.  Summary of Estimated One-Time Total Costs and Hours for
Applicants

Respondent	One-Time Total Costs and Hours

CE			EA/FONSI			EIS/ROD

Grant Applicant

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

Total	Hours	Cost		Hours	Cost			Hours	Cost

40	$3,000		200	$18,000			2,400	$372,000

 5	     300		  60	    3,600			   440	    26,400

                     $17			       $40				       $280

45	$3,317		260	$21,640			2,840	$398,680

                                                                        
                                       ONE PER 3-YEARS

Permit Applicants

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

Total	Hours	Cost		Hours	Cost			Hours	Cost

None	None		400	$62,000			2,400	$372,000

None	None		  60	    4,320			   440	    31,680

None	None			$       40				$       280

None	None		460	$66,360			2,840	$403,960



	The information collected under this ICR is one-time only for EPA
actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals (see
Section 5).   For purposes of this ICR, Table 7 summarizes the estimated
total annual and 3-year applicant costs, including contractor hours and
costs, applicant hours and direct labor costs, and O&M for the
three-year period of this ICR.  Based on EPA’s experience, EPA
anticipates there will be approximately 300 grantee projects annually
with about 75% of these projects documented with a CE, and about 25%
with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates that one project (less
than one percent of the total annual grantee projects) will have an
EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life of this ICR.  For permit
applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually
with about 11 of the projects documented with an EA/FONSI.  In addition,
EPA estimates one project will have an EIS/ROD completed annually.  None
will be documented initially with a CE.

Table 7. Summary of Total Estimated Annual and 3-Year Costs and Hours
for Applicants

Respondent		Annual	3-Year Life of ICR

Grant Applicant

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

    Number of Projects

   Sub-Totals	                 Hours		       Cost

                24,000		$2,025,000

                  5,625		     337,500

                                                       $6,825

300

300	29,625		$2,369,325	                Hours		Cost

                 74,400		$6,447,000

                 17,315		  1,038,900

                                                $     20,755

901

901	91,715		$7,506,655

Permit Applicant

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

    Number of Projects

    Sub-Totals	               Hours		       Cost

                6,800		$1,054,000

                1,100		       79,200

                                                 $          720

12

12	7,900		 $1,133,920	 	Hours		Cost

                20,400		$3,162,000

                  3,300		     237,600

                                                $       2,160

36

36	23,700		$3,401,760

Totals	312	47,200		$3,503,245	937	144,440		$10,908,415



	6(b)	Estimated Federal Government Burden  TC "6(b)	Estimated Federal
Government Burden" \f C \l "2"  :  For EPA actions subject to NEPA that
are based on applicant proposals, EPA may: (1) prepare the NEPA
documents without assistance from the applicant, with or without using
EPA contractor support; or (2) prepare the NEPA documents based on
information submitted by the applicant (and any other supplemental
information) with or without using EPA contractor support.  If an EPA
contractor is used, the contractor is generally tasked with technical
assistance for reviewing any applicant-submitted information, gathering
any other necessary information, and preparing the EA or EIS and
supporting documents for EPA’s Responsible Official.  EPA generally
does not use its contractors on projects documented with a CE or for
which EPA and the applicant enter into a third-party agreement.

For CEs, EPA estimates it prepares CE documentation without assistance
from the applicant for five STAG projects per year based on the
information in a grantee’s grant application and supplemental
information gathered directly by EPA using about 50 hours per project. 
For CE-documented projects based on grantee-submitted information, EPA
uses an estimated 40 hours.  

For EAs, EPA estimates contractor costs for technical assistance with
reviewing an applicant’s draft EA and supporting documents and
subsequent preparation of the EA at  $5,000, with EPA using an estimated
120 hours.  EPA estimates use of a contractor on about 25% of the
grantee projects and 50% of the permit applicant projects. 

Most applicant EISs are prepared under a third-party agreement with EPA
directly reviewing the third-party contractor-prepared EIS and
supporting documents using an estimated 530 hours per project.  EPA has
also, and will likely continue to prepare EISs for new source NPDES
permit projects in conjunction with other federal agencies.  In these
cases, EPA is usually a Cooperating Agency and either adopts or
supplements and reissues the lead agency’s EIS.  EPA may also
supplement and reissue one of its own EISs for a project.  EPA generally
uses a contractor in these cases with contractor costs ranging widely
with an average of $50,000 per project.  For purposes of this ICR and
based on EPA’s experience with adoption or supplementation of another
EIS, EPA estimates that for direct preparation of one such EIS/ROD
annually, EPA’s contractor costs are estimated to be $50,000 with EPA
using an estimated 530 hours.  

	Estimated contractor costs and hours for EPA for applicant-proposed
projects are compiled on a document-type basis with the burden assumed
to be the same for environmental information submitted by either a
grantee or permit applicant.  The following lists EPA’s tasks
generally associated with preparation of NEPA documents based on
environmental information submitted by an applicant and the estimated
hours for these tasks:

Consult with the applicant as early as possible in the planning process
to provide guidance with respect to the appropriate level and scope of
information that EPA may require; for CEs, EPA estimates 10 hours, for
EAs 20 hours, and for EISs 40 hours.

Review and independently evaluate the applicant-submitted and other
project-related documents, including the grant or permit application and
any appropriate public comments, and provide comments or guidance to the
applicant about any additional information needed.  For purposes of this
ICR, these cost and hour estimates include using EPA contractor
technical assistance during the review process for EAs.  For CEs, EPA
estimates 5 hours, for EAs 40 hours, and for EISs 160 hours.

Meet with the applicant on the need for any revisions to the
environmental information and supporting documents, and review any
revised documentation; for CEs, EPA estimates 5 hours, for EAs 10 hours,
and for EISs 40 hours.

Consult with the applicant, when appropriate, on a third-party
agreement.  EPA assumes this will generally be done only for an EIS and
estimates 20 hours for this task.

Complete the required environmental review and NEPA documentation before
rendering a final decision regarding the applicant’s proposed action;
for CEs, EPA estimates 5 hours, for EAs 40 hours, and for EISs 160
hours.

Maintain files; for CEs, EPA estimates 5 hours, for EAs 10 hours, and
for EISs 20 hours.

	On occasion, EPA may prepare the NEPA documentation without assistance
from the applicant for an applicant’s project, using an EPA contractor
for technical assistance with preparation of EAs/FONSIs and EISs/RODs. 
EPA tasks, and the estimated hours for these tasks, generally include
the following:

Issue a Statement of Work for the project; for CEs EPA estimates 0
hours, for EAs 15 hours, and for EISs 40 hours.

For EPA’s direct consultations for CEs, and for coordination with the
contractor and/or for direct consultations during EA or EIS preparation,
on issues related to consulting with federal agencies, states or
federally-recognized Indian tribes regarding extraordinary circumstances
and/or potential impacts; for CEs EPA estimates 23 hours, for EAs 20
hours, and for EISs 60 hours.

Review the contractor-prepared documents; for CEs EPA estimates 0 hours,
for EAs 40 hours, and for EISs 160 hours.

Complete the required NEPA review and documents; for CEs EPA estimates
15 hours, for EAs 35 hours, and for EISs 160 hours.

Maintain files; for CEs EPA estimates 2 hours, for EAs 10 hours, and for
EISs 20 hours.

	There are no one-time capital/start-up costs for EPA, and the O&M hours
for maintaining files are included in the EPA hours estimate.

	For EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals
with applicants submitting environmental information, EPA’s annual and
three-year estimated contractor costs and hours are summarized in Table
8 for grantee projects and Table 9 for permit applicant projects.  Table
10 summarizes EPA’s annual and three-year estimated contractor costs
and hours for preparation of CE, EA and EIS documentation by EPA without
assistance from the applicant and with EIS preparation based on adoption
of another federal agency’s EIS or supplementation of another EIS. 
For purposes of this Supporting Statement, EPA assumes its contractor
rate is $75/hour for CE’s, $95/hour for EA/FONSI’s and $155/hour for
EIS’s which includes consolidated wages for all personnel working on a
project, project expenses and profit.  EPA’s hourly salary rate of
about $65 is based on the pay for a GS-12, step 10, with 70% overhead,
including benefits, O&M and other overhead expenses; see federal wages
at:  http://www.opm.gov.  For this Supporting Statement, O&M is listed
as a zero line item in the tables for ease of comparison to the
applicant tables; specific O&M expenses are not included as these are
included in EPA’s overhead.

Table 8. Grantee Projects - Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs and Hours
Per Document Type for EPA

Respondent	CE Projects	EA/FONSI Projects	EIS/ROD Projects	Totals

Grantees - Annual

Number of Projects

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on One-Time Project Basis	

225 projects

0

$0

225 proj x 40 hrs/proj = 9,000 hours

9,000 hrs x $65/hr = $585,000

$0

0hrs + 40hrs = 40 hrs

$0 + (40hrs x $65/hr) + $0 = $2,600	

75 projects

25% x 75 proj x 70 hrs/proj = 1,313 hours

25% x 75 proj x  $5,000/proj = $93,750

75 proj x 120 hrs/proj = 9,000 hours

9,000 hrs x $65/hr =

$585,000

$0

70hrs + 120hrs = 190 hours

$5,000 + (120hrs x $65/hr) + $0 = $12,800	

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis

	

300 projects

1,313 hours

$93,750

18,000 hours

$1,170,000

$0

Grantees - 

3-Yr Total:

Number of Projects

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on One-Time Project Basis	

3 yrs x 225 proj/yr = 675 proj

3 yrs x 0 hours/yr =

0

3 yrs x $0 =$0

3 yrs x 9,000 hrs/yr =

 27,000 hours

3 yrs x $585,000/yr = $1,755,000

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0	

3 yrs x 75 proj/yr  = 

225 projects

3 yrs x 1,313 hours/yr =

3,939 hours

3 yrs x $93,750/yr  = $281,250

3 yrs x 9,000 hrs/yr =

27,000 hours

3 yrs x $585,000/yr =

$1,755,000

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0	

1 project on a 3-yr basis

1 proj x 0 hrs/yr =

0 hours

1 proj x $0 = $0

1 proj x 530 hours = 530 hours

530 hrs x $65/hr = $34,450

$0

0 + 530hrs = 530hrs

$0 + $34,450 + $0 = $34,450	

901 projects

3,939 hours

$218,250

54,530 hours

$3,544,450

$0



a Project assumed to be under third-party contract with no technical
support by EPA’s contractor.

Table 9. Permit Applicant Projects - Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs
and Hours Per Document Type for EPA

Respondent	CE Projects	EA/FONSI Projects	EIS/ROD Projects	Totals

Permitees - Annual

No. Projects

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on One-Time Project Basis	

None

None

None

None

None

None

(None)	

11 projects/year

50% x 11 proj x 135 hr/proj = 

~740 hours

50% x 11 proj x  $10,000/proj = $55,000

11 proj x 120 hrs/pr= 1,320 hrs

1,320 hrs x $65/hr = $85,800

$0

135 hrs + 120 hrs = 255 hours

$10,000 + (120 hr x $65/hr) + $0 = $17,800	

1 project/year

1 proj x 0 hr/proj = 0 hours

1 proj x $0/proj = $0

1 proj x 530hrs/proj = 530 hours

530 hrs x $65/hr = $34,450

$0

0 hrs + 530 hrs = 530 hours

$0 + $34,450 + $0 =

$34,450	

12 projects

~740 hours

$55,000

1,850 hours

$120,250

$0



PERMITEES - 3-Yr Total:

No. Projects

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct Labor
潃瑳൳伍䴦ഇ不湯൥഍潎敮഍不湯൥不湯൥഍潎敮഍潎
敮ഇ㌍礠獲砠ㄠ‱牰橯礯⁲㴠㌠″牰橯捥獴഍

3 yrs x 740 hrs/yr = 2,220 hours

3 yrs x $55,000/yr  = $165,000

3 yrs x 1320 hrs/yr = 3,960 hrs

3 yrs x $85,800/yr = $257,400

3 yrs x $0/yr = 0	

3 yrs x 1 proj/yr = 3 proj

3 yrs x 0 hrs/yr = 0 hours

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0

3 yrs x 530 hrs/yr = 1,590 hrs

3 yrs x $34,450/yr = $103,350

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0	

36 projects

~2,200 hours

$165,000

5,550 hours

$360,750

$0

a Project assumed to be under third-party contract with no technical
support by EPA’s contractor.



Table 10. Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs and Hours by Document Type
for Direct Preparation of Documents by EPA for Applicant Projects

Respondent	CE Projects	EA/FONSI Projects	EIS/ROD Projects	Totals

Annually

No. Projects -

Grantees only

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on One-Time Project Basis	

5 projects

0

$0

5 proj x 50 hrs/proj = 250 hrs

250 hrs x $65/hr = $16,250

$0

0 + 50hrs = 50 hrs

$0 + (50hr x $65/hr) + $0 = $3,250	

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)	

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis)

(None annually, one on a 3-year basis	

5 projects

0

$0

250 hours

$16,250

$0

3-Yr Total

No. Projects

Grantees and Permitees

Contractor Hours

Contractor Costs

EPA Hours

EPA Direct Labor Costs

O&M

Totals on One-Time Project Basis	

3 yrs x 5 proj = 

15 proj

3 yrs x 0 hrs/yr = 

0 hours

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0

3 yrs x 250 hrs/yr = 750 hours

3 yrs x $16,250/yr = $48,750

3 yrs x $0/yr = $0	

1 proj/3-yrs  = 1 project

1 proj x 670 hours/proj = 670 hours

1 proj  x $62,000/proj  = $62,000

1 proj x 120 hrs/yr = 

120 hours

120 hrs x $65/hr =

$7,800

$0

670hr + 120hr = 790 hrs

$62,000 + $7,800 + $0 = $69,800	

1 proj/3-yrs = 1 project

1 proj x 670 hours/proj = 670 hours

1 proj x $50,000/proj = $50,000 (adopt/supplement)

1 proj x 530 hrs/proj = 

530 hrs

530 hours x $65/hr =

$34,450

$0

670hrs + 530hrs = 1,200 hrs

$50,000 + $34,450 + $0 = $84,450	

17 projects

1,340

$112,000

1,400 hours

$91,000

$0



	As discussed in Section 5, the information collected under this ICR is
one-time only for EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on
applicant proposals.  Grantees or permit applicants submit environmental
information to EPA as part of the environmental review process unless
the Responsible Official decides to prepare the NEPA documents without
assistance from the applicant.  Table 11 summarizes the one-time total
estimated EPA costs, including contractor hours and costs and EPA hours
and direct labor costs for preparation of a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an
EIS/ROD.  For this Supporting Statement, O&M is listed as a zero line
item in the table for ease of comparison to the applicant tables;
specific O&M expenses are not included as these are included in EPA’s
overhead.  Based on EPA’s experience,EPA anticipates that for grantees
there will be approximately 300 projects with about 75% of the projects
documented with a CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA
estimates one project (less than one percent of the total annual grantee
projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life of this
ICR.  For permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12
projects annually with about 11 of the projects documented with an
EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates one project will have an EIS/ROD
completed annually.  None will be documented initially with a CE.

Table 11.  Summary of Estimated One-Time Total Costs and Hours for EPA

Respondent	One-Time Total Costs and Hours

CE			EA/FONSI			EIS/ROD

Grant Applicant Projects

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

Total	Hours	Cost		Hours	Cost			Hours	Cost

  0	$      0		  70	$  5,000			    0	$         0

40	 2,600		120	    7,800			530	  34,450

                $      0			$         0				$         0

40	$2,600		190	$12,800			530	$34,450

Permit Applicant Projects

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

Total	Hours	Cost		Hours	Cost			Hours	Cost

135	$10,000			    0	$         0

None	None		   120	    7,800			530	  34,450

None	None			$         0				$         0

None	None		   255	$17,800			530	$34,450

Prepared Directly by EPA

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

Total	Hours	Cost		Hours	Cost			Hours	Cost

  0	$       0		670	$62,000			670	$50,000

50	  3,250		   120	    7,800			   530	  34,450

                $       0			$         0				$         0

50	$3,250		   790	$69,800			1,200	$84,450



	The information collected under this ICR is one-time only for EPA
actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals (see
Section 5).  For purposes of this ICR, Table 12 summarizes the total
annual and 3-year estimated EPA costs, including contractor hours and
costs and EPA hours and direct labor costs for the three-year period of
this ICR.  For this Supporting Statement, O&M is listed as a zero line
item in the table for ease of comparison to the applicant tables;
specific O&M expenses are not included as these are included in EPA’s
overhead.  Based on EPA’s experience, under the final rule, EPA
anticipates there will be approximately 300 grantee projects annually
with about 75% of these projects documented with a CE, and about 25%
with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates that one project (less
than one percent of the total annual grantee projects) will have an
EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life of this ICR.  For permit
applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually
with about 11 of the projects documented with an EA/FONSI.  In addition,
EPA estimates one project will have an EIS/ROD completed annually.  None
will be documented initially with a CE.

Table 12. Summary of Total Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs and Hours
for EPA for Applicant-Proposed Projects

Respondent		Annual	3-Year

Grant Applicant Projects

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

    Number of Projects

    Sub-Totals	                  Hours		Cost

                  1,313		$   93,750

                18,000		 1,170,000

                                               $              0

300

300	19,313		$1,263,750	                 Hours		Cost

                    3,939		$   218,250

                  54,530		  3,544,450

  740	                $  55,000

                  1,850		  120,250

                                $              0

  12

  12	  2,590		$175,250	                   Hours		Cost

                    2,200		$165,000

                    5,550		  360,750

                                             $              0

  36

  36	  7,750		$525,750

Prepared Directly by EPA

    Contractor Hrs/Cost

    Direct Hrs/Labor Cost

    O&M

    Number of Projects

    Sub-Totals	                 Hours		Cost

1,340		$   112,000

                 1,400		       91,000

                                $              0

  17

  17	  2,740		$   203,000

Totals	317	22,153		$1,455,250	954	68,959		$4,491,450



	6(c)	Estimated Annual and 3-Year Aggregate Burden  TC "6(c)	Estimated
Annual and 3-Year Aggregate Burden" \f C \l "2"  :  As discussed in
Sections 5, 6(a) and 6(b), the information collected under this ICR is
one-time only for EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on
applicant proposals.  Grantees or permit applicants must submit
environmental information to EPA as part of the environmental review
process unless the Responsible Official decides to prepare the NEPA
documents without assistance from the applicant.  If the applicant
cannot afford to provide the required environmental information to EPA,
then EPA would undertake the environmental review without input from the
applicant (see footnote 11).  Further, grantees may be grant-eligible
for certain costs associated with providing environmental information to
EPA (see footnote 12); permit applicants are not eligible for EPA
financial assistance.  Table 13 summarizes the aggregate one-time total
estimated applicant and EPA costs, including contractor hours and costs,
direct labor hours and costs, and O&M for documentation to support a CE,
or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD.  For any specific project, only one of
these levels of documentation is generally prepared.  Based on
experience, EPA anticipates that for grantees there will be
approximately 300 projects with about 75% documented with a CE, and
about 25% with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates that one project
(less than one percent of the total annual grantee projects) will have
an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year life of this ICR.  For permit
applicants, EPA assumes there will be approximately 12 projects annually
with about 11 of the projects documented with an EA/FONSI.  In addition,
EPA estimates one project will have an EIS/ROD completed annually.  None
will be documented initially with a CE.

Table 13.  Summary of Aggregate One-Time Estimated Costs and Hours for
Applicants and EPA

	One-Time Total Costs and Hours

CE			EA/FONSI			EIS/ROD

Hours	Cost		Hours	Cost			Hours	Cost

Grant Applicants

Permit Applicants

EPA

    Grant Applicant Projects

    Permit Applicant Projects

    Prepared Directly by EPA	45	$3,317		260	$21,640			2,840	$398,680

                                                                        
                                       One per 3-years

None	None		460	$66,360			2,840	$403,960

                                                                        
                                       One annually

40	$2,600		190	$12,800			   530	$  34,450

                                                                        
                                        One per 3-years

None	None		255	$17,800			   530	$  34,450

                                                                        
                                        One annually

50	$3,250		790	$69,800			1,200	$  84,450

Totals	135	$9,167		1,955	$188,400			7,940	$955,990

                                                                        
                      “Third-Year” calculation represents

                                                                        
                        maximum hours/costs in a year



	The information collected under this ICR is one-time only on a
per-project basis for EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on
applicant proposals.  Grantees or permit applicants submit environmental
information to EPA as part of the environmental review process unless
the Responsible Official decides to prepare the NEPA documents without
assistance from the applicant.  The NEPA review for a project may result
in a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD.  For any specific project, only
one of these levels of documentation is generally prepared.  Based on
EPA’s experience, under the final rule, EPA anticipates there will be
approximately 300 grantee projects annually with about 75% of these
projects documented with a CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI.  In
addition, EPA estimates that one project (less than one percent of the
total annual grantee projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the
3-year life of this ICR.  For permit applicants, EPA assumes there will
be approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 of the projects
documented with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates one project
will have an EIS/ROD completed annually.  None will be documented
initially with a CE.  Table 14 summarizes the aggregate total annual and
3-year estimated applicant and EPA hours and costs, including contractor
hours and costs, direct labor hours and costs, and O&M for documentation
to support a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an EIS/ROD.

Table 14. Summary of Aggregate Total Annual and 3-Year Estimated Costs
and Hours for Applicants and EPA

Respondents and EPA		Annual

Projects	          Hours	Cost	3-Year

Projects	          Hours	Costs

Grant Applicants

Permit Applicants

Sub-Totals	300	          30,572	$2,369,325

 12	            7,900	  1,133,920

312	          38,472	$3,503,245	901	          91,715	$7,506,655

 36	          23,700	  3,401,760

937	          115,415	$10,908,415

EPA

    Grant Applicant Projects

    Permit Applicant Projects

    Prepared Directly by EPA

Sub-Totals	

300	          19,313	$1,263,750

 12	            2,590	     175,250

   5	               250	       16,250

317	          22,153	$1,455,250	

901	            58,469	$  3,762,700

  36	              7,750	       525,750

  17	              2,740	       203,000

954	            68,959	$  4,491,450

Totals	629	          60,625	$4,958,495	1,891	          184,374
$15,399,865



	6(d)	Change in Burden: 

	Currently Approved Hours	Requested Hours	Change	Currently Approved
Costsa	Requested Costs	Change

Grant Applicants-CE	8,100	10,125	+2,025	$3,060.00	$3,825	+$765

Grant Applicants-EA	31,200	19,500	-11,700	$4,800.00	$3,000	-$1,800

Grant Applicants-EISb	947	947	0	$93.34c	$93.34	$0

Permit Applicants-EA	5,060	5,060	0	$440.00	$440	$0

Permit Applicants-EIS	2,840	2,840	0	$280.00	$280	$0

Total	48,147	38,472	-9,675	$8,673.34	$7,638.34	-$1,035

aThe costs only include O&M.

bApproximately 1 EIS is completed every three years; for this table, the
cost and hour estimates have been annualized.

cThis is an adjustment from the previous burden, where the cost of an
EIS had not been annualized.  The other changes in burden are due to
program changes, based on the regulation changes.

The reduction in burden is achieved by increasing the number of projects
that are documented with a categorical exclusion (CE) rather than an
environmental assessment (EA).  Under the current ICR, approximately 60%
of the annual 300 grant projects were documented with a CE, and 40% with
an EA.  Under the renewal ICR, however, we estimate that out of the 300
annual grant projects, 75% will be documented with a CE and 25% will be
documented with an EA.  Annually, then, the burden would shift to 10,125
hours and $3,825 for CE documentation, and 19,500 hours and $3,000 for
EA documentation.   With the current ICR, the total annual burden is
48,147 hours and $8,673.34.  Under the renewal ICR, the total annual
burden is 38,472 hours and $7,638.34.  The renewal ICR reduces the total
annual burden by 9,675 hours and $1,035.

6(e)	Burden Statement Summary and Burden Statement  TC "6(d)	Burden
Statement Summary and Burden Statement" \f C \l "2"  :  EPA is
collecting information from certain applicants as part of the process of
complying with either NEPA or Executive Order 12114.  EPA’s procedures
further the purpose of NEPA and provide that EPA may be guided by these
procedures to the extent they are applicable.  Therefore, when EPA
conducts an environmental assessment pursuant to its Executive Order
12114 procedures, the Agency generally follows its NEPA procedures.  For
this ICR, applicant-proposed projects subject to either NEPA or
Executive Order 12114 (and that are not addressed in other EPA
programs’ ICRs), are addressed through the NEPA assessment process.

	Those subject to 40 CFR Part 6 include EPA officials who must comply
with NEPA and certain grant and permit applicants who must submit
environmental information to EPA for their proposed projects.  The EPA
Responsible Official is responsible for the environmental review
process, including any categorical exclusion determination or the scope,
accuracy, and contents of an EA or EIS and any supporting documents. 
The applicant contributes by submitting environmental information to EPA
as part of the environmental review process.  The information collected
from grant or permit applicants is one-time only on a per-project basis
for EPA actions subject to NEPA that are based on applicant proposals.  
Grantees (primarily grants for special projects identified in EPA’s
annual Appropriations Act) or permit applicants (for new source NPDES
permits issued by EPA) are required to provide environmental information
to EPA as part of the environmental review process unless the EPA
Responsible Official decides to prepare the NEPA documents without
assistance from the applicant.  If the applicant cannot afford to
provide the required environmental information to EPA, then EPA would
undertake the environmental review without input from the applicant. 
Further, certain grantees may be grant-eligible for certain costs
associated with providing environmental information to EPA; permit
applicants are not eligible for EPA financial assistance.

	The NEPA review for a project may result in a categorical exclusion
(CE), or an EA documented with a FONSI, or an EIS documented with a
record of decision (EIS/ROD).  (EPA assumes a project may be documented
with a CE only for grantee-proposed projects.  EPA does not anticipate
that an initial new source NPDES permit application would be documented
with a CE.)  For any specific project, only one of these levels of
documentation is generally prepared.  Applicants may submit an
environmental information document (EID) to EPA as part of the
environmental review process.  Alternately, an applicant may submit a
draft EA or a draft EIS and supporting documents.  Applicants may
prepare and submit the information directly, or may enter a third-party
contract agreement with EPA for preparation of an EA or EIS and
supporting documentation.  For purposes of determining the maximum costs
to applicants for this ICR, EPA assumed that grant and permit applicants
would expend time and contractor costs to submit:  (1) information to
support application of a CE with environmental information prepared
directly by the applicant’s contractor; or (2) a draft EA and
supporting documents prepared directly by the applicant’s contractor;
or (3) a draft and final EIS and supporting documents prepared by the
applicant’s contractor under a third-party contract agreement with
EPA.

	Based on experience, EPA anticipates there will be approximately 300
grantee projects annually with about 75% of these projects documented
with a CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates
that one project (less than one percent of the total annual grantee
projects) will have an EIS/ROD completed during the 3-year period of
this ICR.  For permit applicants, EPA assumes there will be
approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 of the projects
documented with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates one project
will have an EIS/ROD completed annually.  None will be documented
initially with a CE.  EPA estimated the one-time costs for applicants to
prepare the environmental documentation by including contractor hours
and costs, direct labor hours and costs, and O&M for documentation
submitted to EPA to support a CE determination, or an EA/FONSI, or an
EIS/ROD.  For a grantee, EPA estimates an applicant’s one-time costs
for submitting environmental information will be:  45 hours and $3,317
for CE documentation, or 260 hours and $21,640 for EA/FONSI
documentation, or 2,840 hours and $398,680 for EIS/ROD documentation. 
For a permit applicant, EPA estimates an applicant’s one-time costs
for submitting environmental information will be:  460 hours and $66,360
for EA/FONSI documentation, or 2,840 hours and $403,960 for EIS/ROD
documentation.  These figures may vary depending on the complexity of
issues associated with the project and the availability of relevant
information, particularly for EISs.  (For example, EPA’s experience
with a limited number of EISs has included one-time costs ranging from
nominal for information submitted by letter to supplement an existing
oil and gas extraction EIS to over a million dollars for new EISs for a
mining project and an oil and gas extraction project with multiple
complex issues.)  EPA believes the calculations for this ICR are
representative of most projects.

	Burden Statement:  The total annual public reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information is estimated at 38,472 hours
and $3,503,245 for contractor hours and costs, direct labor hours and
costs, and O&M costs.  This burden reflects an annual one-time
submission of documentation for an anticipated 312 applicant-proposed
projects that may be documented with a CE, or an EA/FONSI, or an
EIS/ROD.  Under the ICR renewal, EPA assumes there will be approximately
300 grantee projects annually with about 75% of these projects
documented with a CE, and about 25% with an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA
estimates that one project will have an EIS/ROD completed during the
3-year period of this ICR.  For permit applicants, EPA assumes there
will be approximately 12 projects annually with about 11 documented with
an EA/FONSI.  In addition, EPA estimates one project will have an
EIS/ROD completed annually.  None will be documented initially with a
CE.  Over the 3-year period of this ICR, EPA anticipates 937
applicant-proposed projects with a 3-year total burden estimate of
115,415 hours and $10,908,415.  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; research 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.

	EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2005-0062, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at Enforcement and Compliance
Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA
West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20004.  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 Public 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 at www.regulations.gov.  This site can be used to 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.  When in the system, select “search,” then key in
the Docket ID Number identified above.  

	PART B OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

	STATISTICAL SURVEY

	This collection of information does not use or is otherwise based on a
statistical survey.

	ATTACHMENT 1 TO THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

	Exemptions from NEPA for Certain EPA Actions and

	EPA’s Voluntary NEPA Policy and Procedures

Exemptions from NEPA for Certain EPA Actions

	Certain EPA actions are exempt from the procedural requirements of
NEPA, including the CEQ Regulations.  Congress has provided specific
statutory exemptions for certain EPA actions taken under the Clean Water
Act (CWA) and all EPA actions taken under the Clean Air Act (CAA). 
Specifically, under CWA Section 511(c)(1), EPA is exempt from preparing
EISs for all actions taken under the CWA except for issuance of NPDES
permits under CWA Section 402 for  “new sources” as defined in
Section 306, and for Federal financial assistance provided for assisting
construction of publicly owned treatment works under CWA Section 201 (33
U.S.C. 1371(c)).  Under the Energy Supply and Environmental Coordination
Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 793(c)(1)), all actions taken under the CAA are
deemed not to be major federal actions significantly affecting the
environment.

	Further, the courts have exempted certain EPA actions from the
procedural requirements of NEPA through the functional equivalence
doctrine.  Under the functional equivalence doctrine, courts have found
EPA to be exempt from the procedural requirements of NEPA for certain
actions under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
(FIFRA); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Toxic
Substances Control Act (TSCA), the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA), and
the Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA).  The
courts reasoned that EPA actions under these statutes are functionally
equivalent to the analysis required under NEPA because they are
undertaken with full consideration of environmental impacts and
opportunities for public involvement.  See, e.g., EDF v. EPA, 489 F.2d
1247 (D.C. Cir. 1973) (FIFRA); State of Alabama v. EPA, 911 F. 2d 499
(11th Cir. 1990) (RCRA); Warren County v. North Carolina, 528 F. Supp.
276 (E.D. N.C. 1981) (TSCA); Western Nebraska Resources Council v. US
EPA, 943 F.2d 867 (8th Cir. 1991) (SDWA); Maryland v. Train, 415 F.
Supp. 116 (D. Md. 1976) (MPRSA).

	Agency actions exempt from the requirements of NEPA remain exempt under
this final rule.  If a question arises regarding the applicability of
the NEPA requirements to certain actions, the Responsible Official
should consult with the NEPA Official and the Office of General Counsel.

EPA's Voluntary NEPA Policy and Procedures

	In 1974, EPA Administrator Russell Train determined that the Agency
could voluntarily prepare EISs for certain regulatory activities that
were exempt from NEPA.  In 1998, Administrator Carol Browner amended
this policy to permit the preparation of non-EIS NEPA documents for
certain EPA regulatory actions.  The Agency’s current "Notice of
Policy and Procedures for Voluntary Preparation of National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Documents" (see 63 FR 58045) sets out
the policy and procedures EPA uses when preparing environmental review
documents under the Voluntary NEPA Policy.  This final rule does not
make any changes to the voluntary NEPA policy and procedures.  However,
the final rule can serve as a framework for the preparation of voluntary
NEPA documents.

ATTACHMENT 2 TO THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

List of Tables

	Table 1-1.	Summary of STAG Awards by Region for the 3-Year Period 2002
Through 2004

	Table 1-2. 	Estimated Hours for Applicants and EPA for Preparation of
NEPA Documentation 

Table 1-1. Summary of STAG Awards by Region for the 5-Year Period 2005
Through 2009

Region















Year 	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	HQ	Total

2005	34	43	32	61	75	40	29	18	61	20	1	414

2006	48	26	61	108	104	49	23	46	75	50	6	596

2007	44	6	35	84	58	20	15	9	29	10	1	311

2008	10	3	34	29	27	3	11	11	10	12	1	151

2009	30	16	36	61	37	8	10	17	18	12	2	247



Table 1-2.  Estimated Hours for Applicants and EPA for Preparation of
NEPA Documentation

	CE Documents Project	EA/FONSI Documents Project	EIS/ROD Documents
Project

Applicants	assume 5 hours	120 hrs for EPA/2 	= 60 hours	Same as EPA 		=
440 hours

EPA	Applicant submits info:	40 hours

Direct preparation:	50 hours	Applicant submits info:	120 hours

Direct preparation:	170 hours	Applicant submits info:	530 hours

Direct preparation:	570 hours



	Certain EPA actions are exempt from the procedural requirements of NEPA
and the CEQ Regulations.  See Attachment 1.

	The courts have determined, and CEQ has issued guidelines, that NEPA
does not apply to Federal agency actions significantly affecting the
environment of the global commons or the environment of a foreign nation
not participating with the United States and not otherwise involved in
the action.  The Executive Order is “... solely for the purpose of
establishing internal procedures for Federal agencies to consider the
significant effects of their actions on the environment outside the
[U.S.], its territories and possessions ...” [Executive 0rder 12114,
Section 3-1]

	This may include such actions as EPA-issued permits for hazardous waste
treatment, storage, or disposal facility under section 3005 of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (42 U.S.C. 6925), NPDES permits
under section 402 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1342), and
prevention of significant deterioration approvals under Part C of the
Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7470 et seq.).

	Approximately 75% of EPA’s grants are under the STAG appropriations
account.  Certain line items in the STAG appropriations account are not
subject to NEPA (see Attachment 1).  Grantee actions subject to NEPA are
predominately under the STAG appropriations account (including
consideration of the Wastewater Treatment Construction Grants Program
and other actions subject to NEPA, including those under the Agency’s
Environmental Programs and Management (EPM) account).

	North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes, NAICS
2002, http://www.census.gov/epcd/www/naics.html, and
http://www.sba.gov/size/sizetable2002.html. 

	If an EA or EIS is to be prepared for an action subject to NEPA, the
Responsible Official and the applicant may enter into an agreement
whereby the applicant engages and pays for the services of a third-party
contractor to prepare an EA or EIS and any supporting documents.  The
Responsible Official has sole authority for approval and modification of
the statements, analyses, and conclusions of the EA or EIS and any
supporting documents.   Because EISs are generally more complex than EAs
in terms of the issues to be addressed and the associated analyses, it
has generally been EPA’s experience that grantees and permit
applicants will enter into third-party agreements with EPA for
preparation of the EIS and supporting documents.  

	For example, a grantee action for renovation of an existing wastewater
treatment or drinking water supply system may be categorically excluded.
 An EA may be required for a grantee action to construct a new sewage
treatment system in a small governmental jurisdiction; or to assess a
new source NPDES permit for a discharge from a confined animal feedlot
operation for chickens, cattle, hogs or pigs.  An EIS may be required
for a grantee action to construct a new sewage treatment plant with
potential for significant impacts to wetlands, or cultural or
archaeological features; or to assess a new source NPDES permit for
discharges from an oil and gas extraction facility, or mining operation,
or a confined animal feedlot operation with potential for significant
impacts to wetlands, or cultural or archaeological features, or
threatened or endangered species.

	Categorical exclusions are subject to notice and comment rulemaking
and, thus, public scrutiny.

	EPA’s Peer Review Guidelines recognize the public review process for
NEPA documents.  Also, EPA’s Quality System may apply to certain
information gathering activities undertaken directly by EPA.

K

¶

c

Î

	

)

*

+

E

F

G

H

I

J

K

L

M

i

j

j

k

l

p

q

”

•

–

°

±

²

³

´

µ

¶

·

¸

Ô

Õ

Ö

×

Ù

Ú

	



,

-

.

/

3

4

A

B

C

]

^

_

`

a

b

c

d

e

‚

+‚

ƒ

„

ˆ

‰

¬



®

È

É

Ê

Ë

Ì

Í

Î

Ï

Ð

ì

í

î

ï

ó

ô

j¸

j;

j/

j¬

j

㄀$

¶

h•

h O

	

	

,

1

=

B

G

H

S

Y

a

h

r

w

‡

˜

Ÿ

¦

¯

h O

#

#

$

=

I

J

i

j

Ž

¥

°

±

Ä

Å

Æ

à

á

õ

ý

þ

-

.

™

£

¤

¯

°

Á

Â

Ò

Ó

Ù

Ú

Û

ht

ht

hŠ

ᄀ킄㄂$葠ː摧⽥a

㄀$

n Collection Requests Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Planning, and
Evaluation, Regulatory Information Division, revised February 1999.

	Applicants would normally be requested to demonstrate financial
hardship, including inability to provide the requested environmental
information.  If so demonstrated, then EPA would undertake the
environmental review necessary for the grant or permit action.

	Under appropriate grant conditions, grantees generally may use EPA
financial assistance to prepare an EID but not to prepare a draft EA and
supporting documents.  Third-party contract costs for an EID may also be
grant-eligible.  For grantee contractor costs to be reimbursable,
grantees must meet certain contractor requirements, including
procurement criteria.

	It has been EPA’s experience that applicants often use in-house
engineering contractors for preparing CE- and EA-related environmental
documents usually without seeking cost reimbursement.

	EPA believes the calculations for this ICR are representative of most
projects.  EPA’s experience with a limited number of EISs has included
one-time costs ranging from nominal for information submitted by letter
to supplement an existing oil and gas extraction EIS to over a million
dollars for new EISs for a mining project and an oil and gas extraction
project with multiple complex issues. 

	For purposes of this ICR:  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; research data sources; complete and review
the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the
information.

	One-time capital/start-up costs usually include any produced physical
good needed to provide the necessary information.  Start-up capital must
be purchased for the specific purpose of satisfying EPA's reporting or
recordkeeping requirements.  Capital goods include computers, machinery,
or equipment.  Start-up capital costs are usually incurred at the
beginning of an information collection period and are usually incurred
only once.

	EPA actions for construction of special purpose facilities or facility
renovations of EPA facilities are actions undertaken directly by EPA and
do not involve applicants.  Therefore, EPA’s burden (contractor costs
and hours) for these actions is not included in this ICR Supporting
Statement.

 PAGE   6 

 PAGE   5 

 PAGE   40 

 PAGE   39 

