November
1,
2002
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
RENEWAL
for
CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION
SURVEYS
of
The
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
ICR
1711.04
OMB
No
2090­
0019
Table
of
Contents
Title
Page
1.
Identification
of
the
Information
Collection
1
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
1
1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
1
2.
Need
for
and
Use
of
the
Collection
1
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
1
2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
of
the
Data
3
3.
Non­
duplication,
Consultations,
and
Other
Collection
Criteria
4
3(
a)
Non­
duplication
5
3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
5
3(
c)
Consultations
5
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
5
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
5
3(
f)
Confidentiality
5
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
5
4.
The
Respondents
and
The
Information
Requested
5
4(
a)
Respondents/
SIC
Codes
5
4(
b)
Information
Requested
8
(
I)
Data
items,
including
record
keeping
requirements
8
(
II)
Respondent
Activities
8
5.
The
Information
Collected­­
Agency
Activities,
Collection
Methodology,
and
Information
Management
12
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
12
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
12
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
15
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
15
6.
Estimating
the
Burden
and
Cost
of
the
Collection
16
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
16
6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
21
(
I)
Labor
Costs
21
(
II)
Capital
and
Operations
and
Maintenance
Costs
21
(
III)
Capital/
Start­
up
vs.
Operations
and
Maintenance
(
O&
M)
Costs
22
(
IV)
Annualizing
Capital
Costs
22
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Cost
22
6(
d)
Estimating
the
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
and
Costs
23
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Tables
25
(
I)
Respondent
Tally
25
(
II)
The
Agency
Tally
25
(
III)
Variations
in
the
Annual
Bottom
Line
25
(
IV)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
25
(
V)
Burden
Statement
27
Table
of
Contents
(
continued)
Title
Page
List
of
Figures
Figure
1a
­
Customer
Groups
Surveyed
1995­
998
6
Figure
1b
­
Customer
Groups
Surveyed
1999­
2001
7
Figure
2a
­
Focus
for
Improvement
1995­
1998
8
Figure
2b
­
Focus
for
Improvement
1999­
2001
9
Figure
2c
­
Focus
for
Improvement
2003­
2005
10
Figure
3a
­
Use
of
Survey
Instruments
1995­
1998
13
Figure
3b
­
Use
of
Surveys
1999­
2001
13
Figure
4
­
Planned
Use
of
Surveys
FY
2003­
2005
15
List
of
Tables
Table
4­
1
­
ICR
Use
1995­
2001
7
Table
5­
1
­
Planned
Use
of
Surveys
2003
­
2005
16
Table
5­
2
­
Planned
Survey
Use
Averages
16
Table
6­
1
­
Burden
Table
2003­
2005
17
Table
6­
1a
­
Response
Time
Summary
20
Table
6­
2
­
Respondent
Universe,
Total
Burden
and
Costs
22
Table
6­
3
­
Agency
Burden/
Cost
for
Telephone
Surveys
23
Table
6­
4
­
Agency
Burden/
Cost
for
Mail
Surveys
24
Table
6­
5
­
Agency
Burden/
Cost
for
Customer
Feedback
Forms/
Internet
Screens
24
Table
6­
6
­
Agency
Burden/
Cost
for
Focus
Groups
25
Table
6­
7
­
Aggregate
Agency
Table
for
Annual
Burden/
Cost
26
Table
6­
8
­
Estimated
Agency
Costs
during
FY
2003
27
Table
6­
9
­
Estimated
Agency
Costs
during
FY
2004
28
Table
6­
10
­
Estimated
Agency
Costs
during
FY
2005
29
Table
6­
11
­
Aggregate
EPA
Bottom
Line
29
Exhibits
­
Samples
of
OMB
­
Approved
EPA
Survey
Instruments
Exhibit
1
­
Comment/
Feedback
Card
31
Exhibit
2
­
Telephone
Survey
32
Exhibit
3
­
Web
Site
Survey
35
Exhibit
4
­
Interview
Survey
40
Exhibit
5
­
Mail/
E­
Mail
Survey
42
Exhibit
6
­
Focus
Group
Guide
45
Exhibit
7
­
Evaluation
Form
46
Exhibit
8
­
Website
Feedback
Screen
(
no
clearance
needed)
47
1
U.
S.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
VOLUNTARY
CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION
SURVEYS
TO
IMPLEMENT
EXECUTIVE
ORDER
(
E.
O.)
12862
1.
Identification
of
the
Information
Collection
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection:
Voluntary
Customer
Satisfaction
Surveys
1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
In
accordance
with
Executive
Order
12862,
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
is
seeking
from
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
renew
of
its
generic
clearance
(
OMB
Control
No.
2090­
0019,
expiring
03/
31/
03)
for
a
period
of
three
years.
The
clearance
will
be
used
to
conduct
two
types
of
customer
satisfaction
surveys:
"
qualitative"
surveys
for
identifying
customer
perceptions
for
expectations
through
focus
groups
or
laboratory
evaluations;
and
"
quantitative"
surveys
for
establishing
general
attitudes
of
EPA
customers
through
a
statistical
sampling
of
customers.
A
customer,
as
described
in
E.
O.
12862,
is
considered
to
be
"...
an
individual
or
entity
who
is
directly
served
by
a
department
of
an
Agency."

By
seeking
renewal
of
the
generic
clearance
for
customer
surveys,
EPA
will
have
the
flexibility
to
gather
the
views
of
our
customers
to
better
determine
the
extent
to
which
our
services,
products
and
processes
satisfy
their
needs
or
need
to
be
improved.
The
generic
clearance
will
speed
the
review
and
approval
of
customer
surveys
that
solicit
opinions
from
EPA
customers
on
a
voluntary
basis,
and
do
not
involve
"
fact­
finding"
for
the
purposes
of
regulatory
development
or
enforcement.

EPA
sponsoring
organizations
seeking
approval
to
conduct
a
customer
survey
will
continue
to
submit
their
survey
instruments
with
a
brief
description
to
the
customer
service
staff
in
the
Office
of
Policy,
Economics
and
Innovation
within
the
Office
of
the
Administrator,
for
a
screening/
assistance
review
of
the
questions.
Following
review,
endorsed
survey
packages
will
be
sent
to
EPA's
Information
Collections
Division
within
the
Office
of
Environmental
Information
and
then
to
OMB.
OMB
will
continue
to
review
submissions
for
compliance
with
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
on
an
expedited
schedule.
EPA
will
provide
OMB
an
annual
summary
of
surveys
conducted
in
accordance
with
OMB's
Resource
Manual
for
Customer
Surveys
(
dated
October
1993).
The
EPA
estimates
that
a
combination
of
customer
satisfaction
surveys
(
mail,
telephone,
feedback
forms
and
Internet)
and
focus
group
studies
will
request
voluntary
responses
from
approximately
58,077
respondents
for
an
estimated
burden
of
8,898.8
hours
over
the
three­
year
period:
21,705
respondents
and
3,219.4
hours
in
FY
2003;
19,267
respondents
and
3,085
hours
in
FY
2004,
and
17,855
respondents
and
2,594.4
hours
during
FY
2005,
for
an
average
of
9.2
minutes
per
respondent
overall,
a
drop
from
13.4
minutes
per
response
during
the
last
three
year
period.

2.
Need
for
and
Use
of
the
Collection
2a.
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
Executive
Order
12862,
dated
September
11,
1993,
calls
upon
agencies
to
take
the
following
actions:
2
(
a)
identify
the
customers
who
are,
or
should
be,
served
by
the
agency;
(
b)
survey
customers
to
determine
the
kind
and
quality
of
services
they
want
and
their
level
of
satisfaction
with
existing
services;
(
c)
post
service
standards
and
measure
results
against
them;
(
d)
benchmark
customer
service
performance
against
the
best
in
business;
(
e)
survey
front­
line
employees
on
barriers
to,
and
ideas
for,
matching
the
best
in
business;
(
f)
provide
customers
with
choices
in
both
the
sources
of
service
and
the
means
of
delivery;
(
g)
make
information,
services,
and
complaint
systems
easily
accessible,
and
(
h)
provide
means
to
address
customer
complaints.

A
March
1995
Presidential
memo
called
upon
federal
agencies
to
enhance
their
customer
service
improvement
efforts.
A
March
1998
Presidential
memo
underscored
the
continuing
need
to
improve
customer
service
and
directed
agencies
to
provide
expanded
opportunities
for
customers
to
communicate
their
needs
and
expectations.
The
Governmental
Performance
and
Results
Act
of
1993
requires
that
agencies
gather
and
use
customer
feedback.
Finally,
the
President
Bush's
Management
Agenda
underscores
the
need
for
citizen­
centered
service
delivery,
increased
satisfaction
with
government
services,
and
the
ability
to
prove
government
is
doing
a
better
job
through
measuring
outcomes.

Using
OMB's
Resource
Manual
for
Customer
Surveys
(
dated
October
1993),
which
outlines
the
steps
an
Agency
must
take
to
obtain
a
generic
clearance
for
Customer
Satisfaction
Surveys,
and
provides
guidance
on
obtaining
quality
survey
results,
EPA
developed
its
1997
and
1999
generic
information
collection
requests
to
enable
staff
across
the
Agency
to
continue
sponsoring
customer
satisfaction
surveys.
To
reflect
the
Terms
of
Clearance
for
the
1997
ICR,
Customer
Service
Program
(
CSP)
staff
developed,
distributed
and
posted
on
the
CSP
web
site
a
fact
sheet
clearly
stating
the
restrictions
on
the
use
of
this
clearance.
Efforts
were
validated
when
the
2000
Terms
of
Clearance
supported
our
efforts
to
improve
screening,
encouraging
staff
to
consult
with
the
CSP
staff.

Under
the
2000
clearance
during
the
past
three
years,
EPA
has
worked
cooperatively
with
OMB
to
clear
approximately
30
survey
instruments.
CSP
staff
have
advised
many
more
individuals
and
their
contractors
that
their
survey
designs
could
not
fit
under
this
ICR.
CSP
staff
worked
with
others
to
develop
surveys
to
assist
them
in
gathering
information
that
could
serve
at
least
part
of
their
needs
through
this
ICR.
If
CSP
staff
could
not
work
with
regional
and
program
staff
to
modify
questions
to
fit
the
ICR
and
satisfy
the
needs
of
staff
and
their
managers,
we
rejected
their
use
of
the
ICR.
Our
goal
has
been
to
ensure
that
the
surveys
submitted
under
this
ICR
clearly
meet
the
Terms
of
Clearance
that
OMB
set
out
when
approving
it:

"
As
stated
in
OMB's
1999
terms
of
clearance:
"
The
generic
ICR
is
approved
to
allow
the
expedited
OMB
clearance
of
EPA
customer
satisfaction
surveys
that
are
simple,
straightforward,
and
narrowly
focused
to:
1.
current
or
former
customers
of
EPA
products
or
services;
2.
the
level
of
satisfaction
with
an
actual
service
or
product
provided
by
EPA
that
they
have
utilized;
and,
3.
their
recommendations
for
improving
said
product
or
service."

Surveys
that
target
these
elements
and
are
submitted
to
OMB
in
accordance
with
this
ICR
3
will
be
reviewed
by
OMB
within
20
working
days.
EPA
shall
provide
OMB
with
an
annual
report
outlining
the
use
of
this
generic
clearance,
including
the
number
of
surveys,
the
burden
imposed,
and
a
brief
description
of
their
purposes
(
a
condition
of
both
the
1994
and
1997
clearances).
OMB
encourages
agency
staff
to
consult
with
EPA's
Customer
Service
Program
(
CSP)
for
advice,
survey
evaluation,
and
clearance
assistance.
OMB
reserves
the
authority
to
disapprove
any
individual
survey
that
does
not
meet
the
conditions
outlined
in
this
ICR.
This
generic
clearance
does
not
extend
to
"
fact
finding"
for
the
purpose
of
regulatory
development
or
enforcement.
OMB
is
relying
in
large
part
on
EPA's
internal
review
and
quality
control
to
develop
useful
customer
information.
Finally,
this
generic
ICR
approval
does
not,
and
is
not
intended
to,
cover
all
types
of
surveys
that
EPA
may
wish
to
do
relating
to
customer
satisfaction
­­
only
the
narrow
range
of
surveys
discussed
above.
Surveys
that
do
not
meet
the
terms
of
clearance
for
this
expedited
clearance
process
may
be
entirely
valid
and
appropriate
surveys,
but
they
should
be
submitted
under
the
normal
PRA
clearance
process.
The
agency
is
required
to
display
the
OMB
control
number
and
inform
respondents
of
its
legal
significance
(
see
5
CFR
1320.5(
b))."

To
fulfill
its
broad
mandate
of
protecting
human
health
and
the
environment,
the
EPA
provides
a
wide
variety
of
voluntary
public
services
ranging
from
information
clearinghouses
to
educational
programs
and
emergency
hot
lines.
Corresponding
to
this
broad
range
of
services
is
a
diverse
universe
of
EPA
customers,
loosely
defined
by
E.
O.
12862
as
"...
an
individual
or
entity
who
is
directly
served
by
a
department
or
agency."

EPA
expands
this
definition
to
include
customers
who
could
have,
but
chose
not
to
participate
in
an
EPA
service
function,
such
as
persons
who
were
provided
the
opportunity
but
did
not
comment
on
a
permit,
participate
in
a
community
meeting,
join
a
partnership
program,
etc.
Learning
perceptions
of
our
services
from
those
who
select
not
to
use
them
may
also
assist
the
Agency
in
its
service
innovation
efforts.
As
we
continue
to
redesign
our
processes
and
practices,
we
will
be
asking
customers
who
use
our
current
services
what,
from
their
perspectives,
would
be
the
most
useful
improvements.

Because
Agency
services
and
customers
are
so
diverse,
the
Agency
is
requesting
a
generic
clearance
that
will
maximize
flexibility
in
the
methods
used
to
fulfill
the
requirements
for
the
Executive
Order
and
expedite
OMB
review
and
clearance
process
of
customer
satisfaction
surveys.
EPA
maintains
a
central
repository
of
surveys
submitted
to
OMB
in
the
Regulatory
Information
Division.
In
addition,
developed
a
summary
of
the
surveys
and
collected
the
analytical
reports
produced.
The
CSP
staff
has
shared
the
findings,
analysis
and
"
success
stories"
following
the
conduct
of
surveys
so
this
information
can
benefit
those
planning
future
surveys.

CSP
staff
continues
to
be
a
resource
to
individuals
considering
the
development
of
customer
satisfaction
measurement
programs
within
their
organizations,
explaining
what
the
customer
satisfaction
ICR
does
and
does
not
cover
and
how
to
make
the
best
use
of
it.

2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Uses
of
the
Data
Customer
service
standards
provide
a
basis
for
performance
measurement
systems
to
determine
our
success
at
reaching
customers,
and
provide
the
necessary
framework
for
a
management
role
in
the
development
and
use
of
the
survey
results.
Information
gathered
from
these
surveys
will
continue
to
assist
EPA
to
build
and
validate
measurement
systems.
Survey
results
may
be
used
to
identify:
4
1)
service
needs
and
expectations
of
EPA
customers;
2)
strengths
and
weaknesses
of
EPA
services;
3)
ideas
or
suggestions
for
improvement
of
EPA
services
from
its
customers;
4)
barriers
to
achieving
customer
service
standards;
and
5)
needed
changes
to
customer
service
standards.

While
the
information
will
not
be
used
for
regulatory
development,
the
results
of
customer
surveys
could
lead
to
reallocations
of
resources,
revisions
in
certain
Agency
processes
and
policies,
and
development
of
guidance
related
to
EPA's
customer
services.
Ultimately,
these
changes
could
result
in
improvements
in
services,
products
and
processes
the
Agency
provides
to
the
public,
and
in
turn,
the
public
perception
of
the
Agency.

The
CSP
purchased
survey
software
and
a
scanner
and
has
trained
numerous
individuals
across
the
agency
to
use
these
resources
to
simplify
satisfaction
measurement
work.
The
CSP
staff
members
have
provided
training
in
the
use
of
the
software,
assisted
individuals
to
prepare
survey
instruments
using
it,
and
guided
them
in
using
the
scanner
and
reporting
features.

To
ensure
proper
design
of
EPA
customer
feedback
and
customer
satisfaction
measurement
activities,
increase
the
use
and
application
of
customer
feedback,
and
build
internal
capacity
to
carry
out
these
activities,
the
CSP
coordinated
development
of
"
Hearing
the
Voice
of
the
Customer
­
Customer
Feedback
and
Customer
Satisfaction
Measurement
Guidelines."
The
"
Feedback
Guidelines"
were
first
published
in
November
1998.
The
CSP
has
sponsored
training
workshops
on
the
application
of
the
Guidelines.

A
five­
stage
model
for
feedback:
Plan,
Construct,
Conduct,
Analyze
and
Act,
is
the
foundation
for
the
Guidelines.
The
document
focuses
major
attention
on
the
planning
phase,
with
the
object
being
to
prevent
duplication
and
poor
design,
and
to
eliminate
survey
work
that
will
not
result
in
actions
that
can
benefit
customers
and
the
agency.
A
long
series
of
detailed
questions
supplement
the
Guidelines
to
further
assist
the
Feedback
Advisors
and
others.
The
document
is
available
on
the
Internet
(
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
customerservice/
guide.
htm),
and
is
being
used
by
individuals
in
other
federal
and
state
agencies
to
guide
their
feedback
efforts.

The
Guidelines
and
questions
are
not
our
only
resources.
To
help
ensure
that
feedback
information
used
in
an
appropriate
fashion,
CSP
staff
encourage
EPA
programs
to
develop
surveys
consistent
with
OMB's
Resource
Manual
for
Customer
Surveys,
EPA's
Survey
Management
Handbook
and
to
take
advantage
of
survey
development
training
such
as
that
offered
by
the
Joint
Program
in
Survey
Methodology
(
JPSM).
The
EPA
Customer
Service
will
continue
to
facilitate
sharing
of
information
gathered
from
customer
satisfaction
surveys,
and
explore
ways
to
aid
programs
in
survey
development.

As
a
result
of
past
survey
feedback,
sponsors
have
taken
actions
to
change
to
revamp
our
dockets,
to
streamline
processes
and
improve
regularly
issued
documents.
Most
recently,
focus
groups
and
web
based
survey
responses
were
used
to
guide
the
complete
redesign
of
EPA's
web
site.

3.
Non­
duplication,
Consultations,
and
Other
Collection
Criteria
3(
a)
Non­
duplication
5
EPA
service
providers
develop
customer
satisfaction
surveys
to
learn
how
their
customers
perceive
their
specific
services.
Therefore,
the
information
collected
will
not
overlap
with
other
customer
satisfaction
surveys.
Every
effort
will
be
made
to
channel
all
customer
related
surveys
through
this
ICR
and
to
prevent
misuse
of
this
ICR
for
program
effectiveness
surveys.

3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
EPA
conformed
to
the
requirement
for
public
notice
by
publishing
a
preliminary
and
final
Federal
Register
Notice
concerning
our
intent
under
this
ICR
and
requesting
comment.

3(
c)
Consultations
CSP
staff
used
the
same
process
for
developing
this
ICR
application
that
they
used
to
develop
the
1997
and
1999
applications.
Staff
in
all
regions
and
offices
received
a
request
for
input
to
the
application.
This
ICR
was
prepared
in
consultation
with
representatives
from
all
organizations
that
responded
to
the
opportunity
to
outline
their
survey
through
the
year
2005
and
into
2006.
This
feedback
was
used
to
develop
the
estimates
described
in
Figures
3b
and
4,
and
to
prepare
the
estimates
of
respondent
burden
(
See
Section
6.)
and
the
Estimated
Respondent
Burden
Table
(
Table
6­
1).

3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
This
information
collection
could
not
be
conducted
less
frequently.
EPA
will
gage
customer
reactions
to
and
perceptions
of
services
and
products
the
Agency
now
provides
in
order
to
improve
them.
Programs
will
not
survey
all
customers,
nor
will
each
program
survey
every
year.
There
will
be
sufficient
time
between
surveys
to
allow
the
actions
taken
in
response
to
customer
comments
to
show
results.
There
are
no
technical
or
legal
obstacles
to
reducing
the
burden.

3
(
e)
General
Guidelines
This
ICR
complies
with
OMB's
general
guidelines
for
the
collection
of
information.

3(
f)
Confidentiality
Not
applicable
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
No
sensitive
data
will
be
collected.

4.
The
Respondents
and
the
Information
Requested
4(
a)
Respondents/
SIC
Codes
The
Executive
Order
describes
a
customer
as
"...
an
individual
or
entity
who
is
directly
served
by
a
department
or
agency."
The
EPA,
by
the
very
nature
of
its
mandate,
serves
very
large
and
diverse
groups
that
receive
or
are
in
some
way
affected
by
EPA
services.
6
Figures
1a
and
b
display
information
about
past
EPA
customer
surveys
under
this
general
clearance.
They
provide
an
overview
of
EPA
customer
groups
targeted
for
customer
satisfaction
surveys.
Because
several
customer
groups
use
the
same
services,
a
survey
may
reach
more
than
one
of
the
designated
customer
categories.
(
The
code
standard
industrial
code
(
SIC)
for
"
General
Public"
is
99.)

Figures
1a
and
b
show
the
customer
segments
surveyed
before
and
after
1998,
respectively;
the
table
provides
the
annual
number
of
surveys,
respondents
and
burden
hours
for
the
years
1995
through
1998
(
under
previous
ICRs),
and
under
the
current
ICR,
as
well
as
the
averaged
numbers.

Figure
1a
7
Figure
1b
Table
4
­
1
ICR
Use
1995
­
2001
Year
#
Surveys
Respondents
Burden
Hours
1995
20
16,735
4,395.5
1996
12
12,144
3,476.5
1997
16
16,275
3,234.0
1998
22
16,279
1,478.4
Average
for
Previous
ICRs
17.5
15,358.25
3,146.1
1999
11
5,025
451.5
2000
12
5,804
570.25
2001
7
3,914
445.56
Average
for
Current
ICR
10
4,914
489.1
8
4(
b)
Information
Requested
(
I)
Data
items,
including
record
keeping
requirements
The
Agency
will
maintain
records
of
the
surveys
sent
to
OMB
in
the
ICD.
Offices
sponsoring
the
surveys
will
retain
files
of
the
surveys,
responses
and
analysis.
Since
customer
satisfaction
surveys
seek
to
gauge
public
opinions
on
Agency
services,
the
surveys
have
not
and
will
not
involve
respondents
in
extensive
searching
of
existing
sources,
or
reformatting
information
to
submit
to
the
Agency.
The
Agency
does
not
anticipate
any
public
record
keeping
activities
under
this
ICR.

(
II)
Respondent
Activities
EPA
customer
satisfaction
surveys
have
focused
on
services
(
hot
lines,
dockets,
clearinghouse,
websites),
products
(
technical
assistance,
documents,
information,
training,
workshops)
and
processes
(
grants,
inspections,
registrations,
permitting).
Figure
2a
displays
the
focus
of
customer
service
surveys
under
the
customer
service
ICR
through
1998.
Figure
2b
shows
the
focus
from
1999­
2001.
Figure
2c
arrays
the
focus
of
surveys
planned
for
2003­
2005.

Figure
2a
1
Customer
feedback
forms/
comment
cards/
evaluation
forms
are
considered
to
be
short,
5
to
15
question
forms
that
typically
accompany,
and
seek
feedback
for
a
specific
service
(
such
as
a
training
course,
or
"
over
the
counter"
service)
or
product
(
such
as
a
manual,
software,
etc).
Internet
(
web
based)
surveys
also
fit
into
this
category.
Mail
surveys
may
involve
more
extensive
questionnaires
and
may
require
more
rigorous
statistical
sampling
methodology
to
evaluate
a
certain
group
or
groups'
perceptions
about
a
service
the
Agency
offers.

9
Figure
2b
The
surveys
conducted
under
this
clearance
are
of
two
major
types,
"
quantitative"
and
qualitative.
Respondent
activities
related
to
"
quantitative"
are
dependent
on
the
survey
method;
feedback
instrument
types
and
the
activities
for
each
follow.

Mail
surveys
and
Customer
Feedback
Forms
(
including
comment
cards,
evaluation
forms
and
some
web­
based
surveys)
1.
Both
may
involve
the
following
activities:

­
Read
instructions;
­
Search
data
sources;
­
Complete
questionnaire;
­
Mail
questionnaire.
10
Figure
2c
Telephone
Surveys
­
Listen
to
instructions;
­
Answer
questions
(
oral
response)

EPA
expects
to
continue
its
use
of
these
surveys.
Respondent
activities
related
to
"
qualitative"
feedback
may
include:

Focus
Groups
or
Interviews

Listening
to
group
instructions

Participating
in
discussions;


Completing
any
forms
or
materials
provided
at
the
group
session.

EPA
uses
focus
groups
for
evaluating
various
aspects
of
its
programs,
to
assist
in
improving
and
testing
of
outreach
materials
and
web
sites,
and
to
explore
new
aspects
of
service
delivery.
2
EPA
interprets
this
to
preclude
any
EPA
purposes
of
regulatory
development
or
enforcement.

11
Training/
Education/
Outreach
products
and
services.
EPA
gathers
feedback
on
its
training,
outreach
products
and
educational
programs
through
a
variety
of
methods.
The
Agency
distributes
a
broad
array
of
materials
to
the
public
such
as
public
affairs
materials,
videos,
brochures
and
fact
sheets,
software,
manuals,
guidance
material,
reports,
etc.
It
also
hold
many
meetings,
workshops
and
training
sessions.
Corresponding
to
this
diverse
set
of
products
is
a
need
to
make
extensive
use
of
a
variety
of
methods
to
evaluate
customer
satisfaction.
EPA
uses
feedback
forms
in
publications
and
on
counters
in
service
delivery
areas,
focus
groups,
mail
and
telephone
surveys,
and,
when
publications
are
available
on
the
Internet,
the
Agency
is
using
short
on­
line
surveys
to
solicit
customer
input.
Offices
also
ask
for
feedback
on
the
usefulness
of
their
web
sites.

Many
of
these
evaluation
activities
can
use
feedback
forms
to
be
completed
by
attendees
after
an
EPA­
sponsored
event,
or
by
users
of
documents,
software
or
web
sites.
Focus
groups
are
also
useful
for
pre­
testing
EPA
training
materials
(
videos,
brochures,
etc.)
prior
to
their
dissemination
to
the
public.
Mail
or
telephone
surveys
help
EPA
identify
a
need
for
changes
in
training/
educational
programs,
outreach
products
or
services
to
assure
their
usefulness
to
a
specific
audience.

Hot
lines/
PICs/
clearinghouses.
Hotline
evaluations
are
conducted
on
selected
samples
of
hotline
users.
By
their
very
nature,
hotline
customers
will
most
often
be
surveyed
by
telephone.
However,
more
complex
surveys
may
require
face­
to­
face
interviews,
focus
sessions,
or
mail
questionnaires.
In
addition,
comment
cards
are
used
periodically
when
information
packets
are
mailed
by
hotline,
Public
Information
Center
(
PIC)
or
clearinghouse
staff.

Miscellaneous
Service
Related
Activities.
The
EPA
has
a
broad
network
consisting
of
its
headquarters
and
regional
offices,
laboratories,
and
field
offices
that
may
conduct
customer
surveys
on
outreach
and
other
services
that
they
provide.
Most
mail
and
telephone
surveys
are
conducted
under
this
"
miscellaneous"
category.

To
reduce
respondent
burden,
EPA
has
been
expanding
use
of
Internet
feedback
screens
and
comment
blocks
to
provide
increased
opportunity
for
customers
to
comment
on
attributes
of
our
services
and
web
sites.
Fewer
offices
each
year
develop
lengthy
questionnaires.
Focus
groups,
though
they
require
higher
respondent
burden,
are
still
used
because
of
the
specificity
and
the
depth
of
responses
that
offices/
regions
can
obtain
from
them.

The
redesign
of
EPA's
web
pages
required
comment
buttons
on
all
EPA
Internet
sites.
The
Agency
is
therefore
receiving
and
will
continue
to
receive
informal
feedback
and
questions
that
are
purely
voluntary
and
not
solicited
specifically
through
sets
of
Agency
questions
of
nine
or
more
individuals
outside
the
Federal
government.
We
plan
to
continue
to
manage
and
act
upon
such
customer
information,
particularly
to
improve
EPA's
on­
line
information
service
on
Internet.

OMB's
Resource
Manual
for
Customer
Surveys
(
dated
October
1993)
and
other
relevant
guidance
documents
state
that
the
generic
clearance
shall
be
used
for
"
strictly
voluntary
collections
of
opinion
information
from
clients
that
have
experience
with
the
program
that
is
the
subject
of
each
data
collection"
and
precludes
this
option
for
use:


by
regulatory
agencies
to
survey
regulated
entities2;


in
any
situation
where
a
respondent
may
perceive
that
a
response
will
result
in
risks
3
EPA
interprets
this
to
mean
random
sampling
of
the
general
public
in
a
"
market
research"
mode.

12
to
his
interests
through
potential
penalties
or
loss
of
benefits;


for
collecting
factual
information
(
other
than
simple
identifying
information,
where
needed);
or

for
collecting
data
from
the
general
public.
3
5.
The
Information
Collected
Agency
Activities,
Collection
Methodology,
and
Information
Management
5(
a)
Agency
Activities.
Agency
activities
associated
with
the
collection
of
information
include:


Developing
survey
design,
assembling
data
sources
(
mailing
lists,
etc.)
and
pretesting
questionnaire;


Internal
EPA
review
and
approval
of
questionnaire;


Disseminating
questionnaire
to
respondents;


Gathering
information
from
respondents;


Answering
respondent
questions,
follow­
up;


Reviewing
data;


Recording
submissions
and
analyzing
results;


Preparing
findings;


Storing
and
maintaining
results

Making
results
public
via
annual
reports
and
Internet.

We
do
not
account
for
the
work
of
implementing
and
tracking
actions
taken
as
a
result
of
customer
feedback.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Information
Management.

Figure
3a
displays
EPA's
use
of
different
types
of
customer
satisfaction
surveys
requiring
OMB
review
and
approval
from
1995
through
June
1999;
Figure
3b
shows
use
over
the
past
three
years.
Included
are
surveys
conducted
by
EPA
program
offices,
regions
and
headquarters
elements.
The
chart
shows
that:
mail
surveys
remained
the
most
popular
instrument,
use
of
focus
groups
dropped
off
(
highly
ambitious
plans
were
dropped),
and
the
proportion
of
web
surveys
increased.
Prior
to
initiating
any
survey,
sponsoring
programs
must
seek
final
approval
from
OMB.
EPA's
CSP
staff
will
continue
to
encourage
survey
sponsors
to
develop
instruments
using
the
twelve
step
process
outlined
in
OMB's
Resource
Manual
for
Customer
Satisfaction
Surveys
(
dated
October
1993).
The
following
internal
review
process,
independent
of
the
originating
program
office,
will
continue:

1.
To
obtain
approval,
sponsoring
programs
must
submit
a
clearance
package
consisting
of
a
memorandum
from
the
program
or
office
director
and
a
copy
of
the
survey
instrument
through
the
Customer
Service
Program
to
the
Information
Collections
Division
in
the
Office
of
Environmental
Information
that
will
forward
acceptable
packages
to
OMB.
13
Figure
3a
Figure
3b
4
For
customer
feedback
forms
and
short
questionnaires,
a
one
page
memorandum
should
be
sufficient.
Mail
or
telephone
surveys
making
use
of
statistical
sampling
must
include
the
statistician's
name/
phone,
and
a
brief
description
of
the
statistical
aspects
of
the
survey,
such
as
the
statistical
approach,
population
coverage,
survey
design,
precision
requirement,
and
pretests/
pilot
tests.

14
The
memorandum
must
address
the
following
4:
o
Survey
title,
identification
of
survey
originator
(
Office,
point
of
contact/
phone
number,)
o
Description
and
intended
purpose
of
the
survey
as
it
relates
to
EPA
customers
o
Methodology
and
use
of
anticipated
results
o
Collection
schedule,
follow­
up
plans
o
Costs
and
burden
to
the
Agency
and
respondents,
and
the
number
of
respondents
­
The
memorandum
will
vary
in
length
and
detail,
depending
on
the
complexity
of
the
survey.
ICD
staff,
experienced
with
the
requirements
of
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
PRA),
will
review
each
submission
to
ensure
that
it
meets
the
requirements
of
the
PRA
and
any
conditions
of
the
generic
approval,
and
may
reject
any
proposed
customer
survey
that
does
not
meet
the
criteria
outlined
in
Section
3(
b).

­
Statistical
methods
will
not
be
used
for
many
of
the
collections
covered
under
this
generic
clearance.
However,
if
a
collection
does
use
statistical
methods
to
select
a
sample,
answers
to
questions
1
through
5
in
the
section
of
the
OMB
guidelines
for
preparing
supporting
statements
will
be
provided
for
that
specific
survey
at
the
time
the
survey
instrument
is
sent
to
OMB
for
clearance.
If
statistical
design
or
methodological
issues
arise,
the
program
will
obtain
Agency
statistical
expertise
to
help
make
any
final
determinations
as
to
the
statistical
validity
of
the
customer
survey
prior
to
OMB
submittal.

­
ICD
will
submit
surveys
and
attached
materials
to
OMB
for
an
expedited
review
and
determination.
On
an
annual
basis,
the
EPA
shall
submit
a
summary
of
the
surveys
cleared
under
the
generic
clearance
to
OMB.
The
summary
shall
include
the
survey
title,
sponsoring
office,
number
of
respondents
and
estimated
burden
hours.

­
Sponsoring
organizations
within
the
EPA
should
maintain
records
according
to
each
survey
schedule.
In
general,
survey
results
should
be
maintained
for
three
years
or
until
after
follow­
up
activities
have
been
completed.

­
All
offices
will
provide
copies
of
their
approved
surveys,
analytical
reports
and
follow­
up
actions
taken
based
on
survey
results
to
customer
service.

­
The
customer
service
staff
will
share
results
and
success
stories
with
other
offices
and
provide
feedback
to
ICD
on
overall
survey
results.
This
base
of
experiences/
lessonslearned
could
be
useful
in
establishing
model
surveys
for
developing
customer
measurement
programs
within
the
EPA
and
other
Agencies.

Figure
4
depicts
the
planned
use
of
survey
instruments
for
2003
­
2005.
Averages
for
the
15
2003
2004
2005
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Mail/
Detailed
Evaluation
Focus
Group
Web
Based
Feedback/
Comment/
Evaluation
Telephone
2003
­
2005
Planned
Use
of
Survey
Instruments
survey
types
were
computed
based
on
five
basic
types:
feedback
(
to
include
comment
cards,
feedback
and
short
evaluation
forms),
web
based
questionnaires,
mail
surveys,
telephone
surveys/
short
interviews
and
focus
groups/
long
interviews.
These
are
displayed
in
Table
5­
2.

Figu
re
4
5
(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility.
Not
applicable.

5
(
d)
Collection
Schedule.

This
will
be
dependent
upon
the
needs
of
each
originator
of
a
survey.
Schedules
for
customer
surveys
will
be
documented
in
the
package
submitted
to
the
Information
Collections
16
Division
for
review
and
submittal
to
OMB.

Table
5­
1
Planned
Use
of
Surveys
2003
­
2005
Survey
Type
2003
2004
2005
Total
Feedback/
Comment
Evaluation
Form
6
5
5
16
Mail/
detailed
evaluation
form
28
(
3
instruments)
28
28
84
Telephone
2
4
(
2
new
instruments)
2
8
Web
based*
12
10
9
31
Focus
Group
15
(
1
instrument)
16
(
1
new
instrument)
15
46
Total
63
63
59
185
Unless
noted
in
the
table
above,
all
instruments
will
be
developed
in
2003.

Table
5­
2
Planned
Survey
Averages
Survey
Type
Average
Uses/
year
2003­
2005
Feedback/
evaluation
form
5.33
Web­
based
surveys
10.33
Mail
Surveys*
28.0
Telephone
Surveys
2.6
Focus
Groups**
15.33
Instruments
61.59
*
26
of
the
uses
in
each
year
will
be
for
the
same
instrument
to
evaluate
a
training
guide.
**
45
of
the
46
focus
groups
over
the
3
year
period
will
use
the
same
instrument.
In
2004,
one
new
focus
group
instrument
will
be
developed
for
a
one
time
use.
17
6.
Estimating
the
Burden
and
the
Cost
of
the
Collection
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden.

The
estimate
was
based
on
the
survey
plans
of
EPA
programs
as
summarized
in
Table
6­
1.
Table
6­
1a
summarizes
respondent
burden
over
the
three
years
by
survey
type.
18
Table
6­
1
EPA
CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION
SURVEYS
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
BURDEN
TABLE
2003
­
2005
2003
2004
2005
Feedback
Instrument
Office
Time/
response
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
Time
/
respons
e
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
Time
/
respons
e
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
web
site
user
surveys;
email
surveys
OEI
website
(
3
min
x
2,000
people)
100
hours
2000
(
3
min
x
2,000
people)
100
hours
2000
(
3
min
x
2,000
people)
100
hours
2000
OEI
services
(
30
min
x
60
people
x
5
uses/
yr)
150
hours
300
30
min
x
60
people
x
5
uses/
yr)
150
hours
300
(
30
min
x
60
people
x
5
uses/
yr)
150
hours
300
R3
(
2min
x
250
people)
8.33
hours
250
OW*
training
guide
(
10
min
x
1500)
250
hours
1,500
(
10
min
x
1500)
250
hours
1,500
(
10
min
x
1500)
250
hours
1,500
OSW
(
10
min
x
1,000
people)
166.66
hours
1,000
(
10
min
x
1,000
people)
166.66
hours
1,000
(
10
min
x
1,000
people)
166.66
hours
1,000
OSWER
(
10
min
x
1,000
people
166.66
1,000
(
10
min
x
1,000
people
166.66
1,000
OPEI
website
(
3
min
x
2,000
people)
100hours
2,000
(
3
min
x
2,000
people)
100
hours
2,000
(
3
min
x
2,000
people)
100
hours
2,000
Feedback
Instrument
Office
Time/
response
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
Time
/
respons
e
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
Time
/
respons
e
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
19
OPEI
e­
mail
(
10
min
x
500
people)
83.3
500
(
10
min
x
500
people)
83.3
500
(
10
min
x
500
people)
83.3
500
OSWER
database
(
5
min
x
3,600
people)
300
hours
3,600
OECA
(
5
min
x
275
people)
22.9
hours
275
(
5
min
x
275
people)
22.9
hours
275
(
5
min
x
275
people)
22.9
hours
275
OPPTS
(
3
min
x
1,000
people)
50
hours
1,000
(
3
min
x
1,500
people)
75
hours
1,500
(
3
min
x
2,000
people)
100
hours
2,000
OPPTS
(
3
min
x
1,000
people)
50
hours
1,000
(
3
min
x
1,500
people)
75
hours
1,500
(
3
min
x
2,000
people)
100
hours
2,000
feedback
card
OSW
(
10
min
x
2,000
people)
333
hours
2,000
(
10
min
x
2,000
people)
333
hours
2,000
(
10
min
x
2,000
people)
333
hours
2,000
OPPTS
(
3
min
x
350
people)
17.
Hours
350
(
3
min
x
350
people)
17.
Hours
350
(
3
min
x
350
people)
17.
Hours
350
focus
groups
OEI
2hrs/(
20
people
x15uses/
yr
)
600
hours
300
2hrs/(
20
people
x15uses/
y
r)
600
hours
300
2hrs/(
20
people
x15uses/
y
r)
600
hours
300
R3
(
2hr
x
12
people)
24
hours
12
Feedback
Instrument
Office
Time/
response
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
Time
/
respons
e
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
Time
/
respons
e
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
20
evaluations
of
meetings/
workshops/
tr
ainings/
publicationm
setc.
OAR
Toolkit
for
teachers
(
15
min
x
1,
000)
250
hours
1,000
OW*
training
(
10
min
x
40
people
x
25
uses)
166.66
hours
1,000
(
10
min
x
40
people
x
25
uses)
166.66
hours
1,000
(
10
min
x
40
people
x
25
uses)
166.66
hours
1,000
OW*
training
guide
(
10
min
x
500
people)
83.33
hours
500
(
10
min
x
500
people)
83.33
hours
500
(
10
min
x
500peopl
e)
83.33
hours
500
OECA
10
min
x
550
people)
91.66
hours
550
10
min
x
550
people)
91.66
hours
550
10
min
x
550
people)
91.66
hours
550
OECA
(
10
min
x
600
people)
100
hours
600
(
10
min
x
600
people)
100
hours
600
(
10
min
x
600
people)
100
hours
600
OPEI
(
10
min
x
500
people)
83.3
hours
500
(
10
min
x
500
people)
83.3
hours
500
(
10
min
x
500
people)
83.3
hours
500
mail
survey
R3
10min
x
75
people)
12.5
hours
10min
x
75
people)
12.5
hours
75
75
10min
x
75
people)
12.5
hours
10min
x
75
people)
12.5
hours
75
75
10min
x
75
people)
12.5
hours
10min
x
75
people)
12.5
hours
75
75
Feedback
Instrument
Office
Time/
response
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
Time
/
respons
e
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
Time
/
respons
e
#
uses
hours
Total
People
Respondin
g
21
telephone
survey
OAR
(
15
min
x
1,
000
people)
250
hours
1,
000
R3
(
10
min
x
30
people)
5
hours
30
(
10
min
x
30
people)
5
hours
30
(
10
min
x
30
people)
5
hours
30
OSW
(
15
min
x
400
people)
100
hours
400
RCRA
10
min
x
300
people)
50
hrs
300
10
min
x
300
people)
50
hrs
300
10
min
x
300
people)
50
hrs
300
TOTALS
3,
219.4
21,
705
3,
085
19,
267
2,
594.41
17,
855
*
OW
will
use
the
same
survey
instrument
for
the
three
applications
(
following
training,
in
the
training
guide
and
on
the
web
site)

Table
6
­
1a
Response
Time
Summary
Year
Respondents
Burden
Hours
Average
Response
Time*

2003
21,
705
3,
219.4
8.9
minutes
2004
19,267
3,
085.0
9.6
minutes
2005
17,
855
2,
594.4
8.7
minutes
Total
58,
827
8,
898.8
9.07
minutes
*
Average
Response
Time
has
dropped
from
the
1999
ICR
level
of
13.4
minutes
(
14.1,
13.1,
12.7
minutes
for
2000,
2001
and
2002)
22
Recent
feedback
from
EPA
programs
suggests
continuing
interest
in
using
customer
satisfaction
surveys
as
part
of
the
overall
long­
term
strategy
of
these
organizations.
The
EPA
estimates
3,
219.4
hours
of
respondent
burden
on
the
part
of
21,705
individuals
in
FY
2003;
3,
085
hours
from
19,
267
respondents
in
FY
2004,
and
2,594.4
hours
of
burden
from
17,855
respondents
in
FY
2005,
a
three
year
total
of
8,898.8
hours
and
58,827
respondents,
for
an
average
of
9.2
minutes
per
respondent.

The
EPA
program
staff
planning
to
use
this
generic
clearance
know
that
burden
should
be
as
low
as
possible
in
keeping
with
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act.
Survey
designs
will
be
simple,
convenient,
easy
to
respond
to,
and
clear
in
content
and
purpose.
Few
long
surveys
will
be
designed;
most
surveys
will
be
of
limited
scope
and
require
only
a
short
time
to
complete.
Many
comments
card/
feedback
forms
will
be
used,
and
programs
will
continue
to
increase
their
use
of
web
based
feedback.
However,
several
major
projects
are
planned:

Figure
4
(
page
15)
displays
the
types
and
number
of
uses
for
five
types
of
survey
instruments.
If
programs
succeed
in
their
expanded
use
of
Internet
for
customer
satisfaction
surveys,
burden
could
be
further
reduced.
EPA
may
achieve
additional
reductions
by
eliminating
some
planned
surveys
through
sharing
results
of
completed
surveys
across
the
Agency.

6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
I
Labor
Costs
Since
the
respondents
represent
such
a
diverse
group,
EPA
based
wage
estimates
on
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
BLS)
of
the
U.
S.
Department
of
Labor
weekly
earnings
of
wage
and
salary
workers
as
reported
on
July
22,
2002,
in
the
BLS
news
release
"
Usual
Weekly
Earnings
of
Wage
and
Salary
Workers:
Second
Quarter
2002."
The
weekly
earnings
are
$
608.00;
this
computes
to
$
15.20
per
hour
for
a
40
hour
week.

There
is
no
need
for
"
developing,
acquiring,
or
utilizing
technology
and
systems
for
the
purpose
of
collecting,
validating
or
verifying
information,"
"....
disclosing
and
providing
information,"
"
adjusting
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
or
requirements,"
"
training
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information,"
"
searching
data
sources,"
nor
a
need
for
the
respondents
to
keep
records.
Burden
activities
include
only
a
few
steps:
reviewing
instructions,
responding,
and
sending
(
e­
mail
or
mail)
responses
when
the
surveys
are
not
performed
in
person
or
over
the
telephone.

Table
6­
2
displays
the
annual
burden
estimates
for
respondents
and
total
estimated
respondent
costs.
The
average
burden
estimate
was
derived
by
dividing
the
total
hours
for
years
one
through
three
(
8,898.8)
and
dividing
by
the
total
respondents
(
58,827).
The
average
hours
per
response
is
0.15
hours,
or
9.19
minutes
per
respondent.
The
average
cost
per
response
over
the
three­
year
period
is
estimated
to
be
$
2.33
($
15.20/
hour=
$
0.253/
minute;
9.19
x
$
0.253=$
2.33
per
response).

II
Capital
and
Operations
and
Maintenance
Costs
Not
applicable.
5
Agency
hourly
wages
estimates
were
made
using
the
1999
figure
plus
10%.

23
III
Capital/
Start­
up
vs.
Operating
and
Maintenance
(
O
&
M)
Costs
Not
applicable.

IV
Annualizing
Capital
Costs
Not
applicable.

6
(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Cost.

Tables
6­
3
through
6­
7
provide
the
annual
estimates
for
agency
burden
associated
with
developing,
disseminating
customer
surveys
and
analyzing
the
results.
Wage
estimates
were
divided
into
three
categories
of
labor:
Management
(
GS­
15),
Technical
(
GS­
13),
and
Clerical
(
GS­
7).
5
Rates
used
in
1999
were
increased
by
10%.
(
See
Figure
4
and
Table
5
­
1
for
yearly
plan
totals
by
survey
instrument
type.)

Table
6­
2
Respondent
Universe,
Total
Burden
and
Costs
Survey
Type
3
years
Surveys
Respondents
(
Thousands)
Burden
Hours/
Survey
Total
Hours
Total
Cost
Mail
84
4.95
0.207
hours
1,024.88
15,578.17
Telephone
8
2.39
0.169
hours
405
6,156.00
Feedback
cards,
evaluations
+
Web­
based
47
50.57
0.115
hours
5,836.61
88,716.47
Focus
Groups
46
.91
2.0
hours
1,824
27,724.80
Totals
185
58.82
(
58,827)
9,090.49
$
138,175.44
The
Customer
Service
Program
and
Information
Collection
staffs
will
be
sharing
information
and
survey
instruments
across
the
Agency.
Feedback
Advisors
will
also
use
this
information
to
assist
people.
Costs
per
instrument
should
continue
to
be
reduced
as
Agency
staff
members
gain
experience
with
feedback
through
Internet,
and
with
developing
and
analyzing
surveys
of
other
types.
However,
since
these
cost
reductions
cannot
be
accurately
estimated,
aggregate
annual
costs
that
follow
do
not
reflect
these
cost
reductions
to
the
Agency.

Based
on
past
use
of
the
ICR
over
the
years,
the
Agency
is
not
likely
to
issue
every
survey
now
planned;
some
may
be
recognized
as
duplicative
during
internal
clearance.
Development
costs
may
be
reduced
if
several
organizations
use
the
same
instrument
(
as
has
been
done
with
the
agency
wide
web
site
users
survey),
or
if
results
of
one
group's
survey
can
be
applied
to
one
or
more
units
within
the
Agency.
24
In
the
tables
presenting
the
cost
estimates,
when
an
instrument
is
to
be
used
many
times
as
they
will
be
for
focus
groups,
feedback
cards/
web
surveys
and
an
evaluation
of
training,
development
costs
will
not
be
reflected
for
each
use.
Costs
for
activities
after
survey
development
and
approval
will
be
reflected
for
each
use.
Even
this
methodology
does
not
properly
represent
the
reduced
costs
for
multiple
uses
of
the
same
instrument.

6(
d)
Estimating
the
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
and
Costs
Burden
Table
6­
1
provides
information
on
each
survey
by
instrument
type,
specific
issuing
office,
number
of
respondents
expected,
burden
per
response,
number
of
uses
(
if
more
than
one)
and
burden
hours
requested
per
survey.
Table
6­
11
summarizes
the
total
burden
and
costs
for
respondents,
and
the
Agency.
Activities
have
been
grouped
to
reflect
the
various
types
of
surveys
and
the
total
respondents
expected
for
each
instrument
type.
In
all
cases,
the
activities
performed
remain
only
the
time
required
to
read,
respond
and
transmit
the
survey
instruments.
Burden
estimates
were
calculated
using
the
median
weekly
earnings
of
the
nation's
97.6
million
full­
time
wage
and
salary
workers
in
the
second
quarter
of
2002,
$
608.00,
or
$
15.20
per
hour
for
a
40
hour
week.
Table
6­
3.
Agency
Burden/
Cost
for
Telephone
Surveys
Activities
Manager
@
$
46.30
Burden
Technical
@
$
33
Hours
Clerical
@
$
21
Total
Hrs.
Total
Cost
Developing
survey
Obtaining
EPA
approval
Gathering
information
Reviewing
data;
follow­
ups
Analyzing
results
Storing
and
maintaining
results
Preparing
survey
findings
1.5
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
1.0
40.0
4.0
60.0
16.0
80.0
4.0
80.0
20.0
1.0
20.0
8.0
0.0
5.0
8.0
61.5
6.0
80.0
24.0
82.0
9.0
89.0
$
1,809.45
199.30
2,400.00
696.00
2,732.60
237.00
2,854.30
Totals
hours
Category
costs
5.5
$
245.65
284.0
$
9,372.00
62.0
$
1,302.00
351.5
$
10,928.6
5
25
Table
6­
4.
Agency
Burden/
Cost
for
Mail
Surveys
and
Evaluation
Forms*

Activities
Manager
@
$
46.3
Burden
Technical
@
$
33
Hours
Clerical
@$
21
Total
Hours
Total
Cost
Developing
survey
Obtaining
EPA
approval
Gathering
information
Reviewing
data
Analyzing
results
Storing
and
maintaining
results
Preparing
survey
findings
1.5
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
5.0
80.0
4.0
40.0
8.0
40.0
2.0
40.0
8.0
1.0
16.0
8.0
0.0
3.0
8.0
89.5
6.0
56.0
16.0
42.0
5.0
53.0
$
2,877.45
199.30
1,656.00
432.00
1,412.60
129.00
1,719.50
Totals
hours
Category
costs
9.5
$
439.85
214.0
$
7,062.00
44.0
$
924.00
267.5
$
8,425.85
*
Two
training
evaluation
questionnaires
planned
are
similar
in
length
and
depth
to
mail
surveys.

Table
6­
5.
Agency
Burden/
Cost
for
Customer
Feedback
Forms/
Internet
Screens*

Activities
Manager
@
$
46.3
Burden
Technical
@
$
33
Hours
Clerical
@
$
21
Total
Hours
Total
Cost
Developing
feedback
instruments
Obtaining
EPA
approval
Gathering
information
Reviewing
data
Analyzing
results
Storing
and
maintaining
results
Preparing
survey
findings
1.0
1.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
2.0
20.0
4.0
20.0
8.0
20.0
2.0
20.0
2.0
1.0
16.0
8.0
0.0
3.0
8.0
23.0
6.0
36.0
16.0
22.0
5.0
30.0
$
748.30
199.30
996.00
432.00
752.60
129.00
920.60
Total
hours
Category
costs
6.0
$
277.80
94.0
$
3,102.00
38.0
$
798.00
138.0
$
4,177.80
*
Internet
feedback
forms,
comment
cards,
short
publication/
meeting/
workshop
evaluation
forms
and
short
web­
based
surveys
are
grouped
into
this
one
category.
26
Table
6­
6.
Agency
Burden/
Cost
for
Focus
Groups
Activities
Manager
@
$
46.3
Burden
Technical
@
$
33
Hours
Clerical
@
$
21
Total
Hours
Total
Cost
Developing
Focus
Sessions
Obtaining
EPA
approval
Conducting
Focus
Groups
Reviewing
data
Analyzing
results
Storing
and
maintaining
result
Preparing
findings
1.5
1.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
0.0
3.0
40.0
4.0
8.0
4.0
20.0
2.0
20.0
40.0
2.0
8.0
4.0
0.0
3.0
8.0
81.5
7.0
16.0
8.0
21.0
5.0
31.0
$
2,229.45
220.30
432.00
216.00
706.30
129.00
966.90
Totals
hours
Category
costs
6.5
$
300.95
98.0
$
3,234.00
65.0
$
1,365.00
169.5
$
4,899.95
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Tables
I
Respondent
Tally
See
Table
6­
1.

II
The
Agency
Tally
Tables
6­
8
through
6­
11
provide
the
Agency
Tally
estimates.
Many
surveys
will
be
used
more
than
once.
Development
and
approval
costs
should
be
counted
only
once
per
instrument.
Since
there
are
many
uses
of
the
same
instrument,
costs
were
calculated
counting
development
and
approval
costs
for
new
instruments
and
all
other
costs
for
any
repeat
uses.
Total
EPA
tally
for
the
three­
year
period
is
$
840,
046.05.

III
Variations
in
the
Annual
Bottom
Line
EPA
burden
hour
projections
are:
13,219.5
hours
for
2003;
8,570.0
hours
for
2004;
and
8,
497.0
hours
for
2005.
Since
almost
all
surveys
will
be
developed
in
the
first
year,
there
is
a
difference
of
4,600
fewer
hours
in
years
two
and
three.
Most
development
and
approval
costs
for
surveys
will
fall
into
2003.
In
2004
and
2005
programs
and
regions
will
use
the
same
surveys
developed
in
2003.
A
few
surveys
will
be
done
only
once.

IV
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
Within
the
Agency
fewer
organizations
than
in
past
years
have
decided
to
do
customer
satisfaction
surveys
during
the
next
three
years,
and
more
of
them
plan
to
use
web­
based
or
short
surveys.
Offices
and
regions
will
be
using
a
variety
of
techniques,
but
will
repeatedly
use
the
same
survey
instruments.
The
number
of
respondent
burden
hours
will
continue
to
drop
as
more
27
organizations
use
web­
based
surveys
and
feedback
options,
rather
than
longer
and
more
formal
survey
instruments.
Respondent
burden
hours
are:
3,219.4
hours
for
2003;
3,085.0
hours
for
2004
and
2,594.4
hours
for
2005.

Table
6­
7.
Aggregate
Agency
Table
for
Annual
Burden/
Cost
Survey
Collection
Type
Annual
#
of
Collections
(
Avg)
Annual
Hours/
Survey
Annual
Cost
Annual
Hours
Survey
Type
Annual
Cost
Survey
Type
Telephone
Mail
Feedback
(
cards,
webbased
e­
mail
&
evaluation
forms)

Focus
Groups
2.6
28.0*
(
all
3
instruments
developed
in
year
1)

15.6
15.33
**
(
2
instruments
total)
351.5
267.5*
(
95.5
for
instrument
development
&
approval
year
1
only;
156
all
else)

138.0
(
9
for
development
and
approval)

169.5**
(
88.5
for
instrument
development
&
approval;
81.0
all
else)
$
10,928.65
$
1,024.12*
(
3instruments
development
&
approval
year
1
only;
0
hours
in
years
2
and
3;
$
3072.35/
3
=$
1024.12)

$
5,349.10
(
all
else
x
28)

$
4,177.80
$
2,229.45
**
(
instrument
development
&
approval,

$
2,670.50
(
all
else)
913.9
95.5
(
3
x
95.5
in
year
1
only;
0
hours
in
years
2
and
3;
286.5/
3
=
95.5
)*

4,368
(
28
x
156)

2,111.4
117.70
**
(
88.5
x
1.33)

1,241.73
(
81
x
15.33)
$
28,414.49
$
150,798.92*
($
1,024.12
+
$
149,774.80)

$
65,173.68
$
43,903.94
($
2,965.17
+
$
40,938.76)

Totals
61.53
$
288,291.03
*
26
of
the
uses
in
each
year
will
be
for
the
same
evaluation
of
a
training
guide,
using
the
same
instrument
for
the
3­
year
period.
**
45
of
the
46
focus
groups
over
the
3­
year
period
will
use
the
same
instrument.
In
2004,
one
new
instrument
will
be
developed
for
a
one
time
use.
28
Table
6­
8
Estimated
Agency
Costs
during
FY
2003
Survey
Collection
Type
Number
of
Collections
Annual
Hours/
Survey
Annual
Cost
Annual
Hours
Survey
Type
Annual
Cost
Survey
Type
Telephone
Mail/
Complex
Evaluation
Forms
Feedback
(
cards,
electronic
&
short
evaluation
forms)

Focus
Groups
2
28
(
all
3
instruments
developed
in
year
1)

18
15
351.5
267.5
138
(
29
develop/
approve
;
109
all
else)

169.5
(
88.5
to
develop
&
approval;
81.0
all
else)
$
10,
928.65
$
8,
425.85
($
3,076.75
develop/
approve;
$
5,349.10
all
else)

$
4,
177.80
($
947.30
develop/
approve;
$
3,230
all
else)

$
4,
889.95
($
2,449.45
develop/
approve;
$
2,450.50
all
else)
703
7,
490
2,
484
2,
542.5
$
21,
857.3
149,
774.80
75,200.40
73,
349.25
Totals
63
13,219.5
$
320,
181.75
V
Burden
Statement
The
following
statement
applies
overall
to
the
planned
surveys
for
the
next
three
years:

Public
reporting
burden
for
this
collection
of
information
is
estimated
to
average
9.2
minutes
per
response,
including
the
time
for
reviewing
instructions,
gathering
information,
and
completing
and
reviewing
the
collection
of
information.
Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggestions
for
reducing
the
burden,
including
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Information
Collections
Division,
Office
of
Environmental
Information,
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
Mail
Code
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Avenue
,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
&
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
&
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
and
the
OMB
control
number
in
any
29
correspondence.

Table
6­
9
Estimated
Agency
Costs
during
FY
2004
Survey
Collection
Type
Number
of
Collections
Annual
Hours/
Survey
Annual
Cost
Annual
Hours
Survey
Type
Annual
Cost
Survey
Type
Telephone
Mail/
Complex
Evaluation
Forms
Feedback
(
cards,
electronic
&
short
evaluation
forms)

Focus
Groups
&
Interviews
4
(
2
new)

28
15
16
351.5
267.5
138
169.5
$
10.928.65
($
2,008
to
develop/
approve;
$
8,920.65
for
all
else)

$
5,349.10
($
3,076.75
develop/
approve;
$
5,349.10
all
else:

28
x
$
5,349.10)

4,177.80
(
947.60
develop/
approve;
3,230.20
all
else;
15
x
3,230.20)

$
4,
889.95
($
2,225.50
develop/
approve
2,229.00
all
else,
$
2,229
x
16)
1,
271
(
67.5
to
develop/
approve;
284
for
all
else
=
135+
1,136)

4,
368
(
95.5
develop/
approve
in
2003
only;
156
all
else:
156
x
28)

1,
635
(
29
develop/
approve;
109
all
else;
109
x
15)

1,
296
(
88.5
for
instrument
development
&
approval;
81.0
all
else)
$
39,
698.60
($
4,016
+
$
35,682.60)

$
149,
774.80
(
28
x
$
5,349.10)

$
48,
453.00
(
15
x
3,230.20)

$
35,
664.00
(
16
x
$
2,229
)

Totals
63
8,
570
$
273,590.40
30
Table
6­
10
Estimated
Agency
Costs
during
FY
2005
Survey
Collection
Type
Number
of
Collections
Annual
Hours/
Survey
Annual
Cost
Annual
Hours
Survey
Type
Annual
Cost
Survey
Type
Telephone
Mail/
Complex
Evaluation
Forms
Feedback
(
cards,
electronic
&
short
evaluation
forms)

Focus
Groups
2
28
14
15
351.5
267.5
138.0
169.5
(
88.5
for
instrument
development
&
approval;
81.0)
$
10.928.65
($
2,008
to
develop/
approve;
$
8,920.65
for
all
else)

$
5,349.10
($
3,076.75
develop/
approve;
$
5,349.10
all
else:
28
x
$
5,349.10)

4,177.80
(
947.60
develop/
approve;
3,230.20
all
else;
14
x
3,230.20)

$
4,
889.95
($
2,225.50
develop/
approve
2,229.00
all
else,
$
2,229
x
15)
1,
271
(
67.5
to
develop/
approve;
284
for
all
else;
135+
1,136)

4,
368
(
95.5
develop/
approve
in
2003
only;
156
all
else;
156
x
28)

1,
562
(
29
develop/
approve;
109
all
else;
109
x
14)

1,
296
(
88.5
for
instrument
development
&
approval;
81.0
all
else;
81
x
15)
$
17,
841.30
(
2
x
$
8,920.65)

$
149,
774.80
(
28
x
$
5,349.10)

$
45,222.80
(
14
x
3,230.20)

$
33,435.00
($
2,229
x
15)

Totals
59
8,497
$
246,
273.90
Table
6­
11
Aggregate
EPA
and
Respondent
Costs
Surveys
EPA
hours
EPA
costs
Respondent
hours
Respondent
costs
2003
63
13,
219.5
$
320,
181.75
3,
219.4
$
48,
934.88
31
2004
63
8,
570.0
$
273,
590.40
3,
085.0
46,
892.00
2005
59
8,
497.0
$
246,
273.90
2,
594.4
39,
434.88
Total
185
30,
286.5
$
840,
046.05
8,
898.8
$
135,261.76
Three
year
total
respondents:
58,827
EXHIBITS
Samples
of
past
OMB
­
Approved
EPA
Survey
Instruments
Eight
different
OMB
approved
survey
instruments
follow
as
Exhibits
1
­
7.

Comment/
Feedback
Card
31
Telephone
32
Interview
Surveys
35
Website
Survey
40
Mail/
E­
Mail
Survey
42
Focus
Group
Guide
45
Evaluation
Survey/
Form
46
Website
Feedback
Screen
47
All
future
surveys
under
this
ICR
are
to
include,
on
or
near
the
first
page
of
the
survey,
a
burden
statement
specific
to
that
survey
explaining
the
number
of
hours/
minutes
per
year
per
respondent
and
what
that
burden
entails
(
E.
g.:
Respondent
burden
for
this
survey
is
estimated
to
be
five
minutes
for
reading
and
responding
to
the
questions.)
as
well
as
the
following
paragraphs.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
1711.04
and
OMB
control
number
2090­
2119
in
any
correspondence.
32
All
future
surveys
under
this
ICR
are
to
include
the
following
OMB
number
and
expiration
date
information
at
the
top
right
hand
corner
of
the
survey's
first
page:
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
03/
31/
2003
At
the
request
of
OEI's
Collections
Division
Staff,
the
preparer
of
this
ICR
application
added
the
above
paragraphs,
a
burden
statement
specific
to
the
survey,
and
the
OMB
number
and
the
ICR
expiration
date
space
to
each
previously
approved
sample
survey
if
these
items
were
lacking.

Exhibit
1
Comment/
Feedback
card
OFFICIAL
BUSINESS
NO
POSTAGE
NECESSARY
PENALTY
FOR
PRIVATE
USE
IF
MAILED
$
300
IN
THE
UNITED
STATES
BUSINESS
REPLY
MAIL
FIRST
CLASS
MAIL
PERMIT
NO.
WASHINGTON,
DC
POSTAGE
WILL
BE
PAID
BY
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave,
NW
(
Mail
Code)
Washington,
DC
20460
­­­­­
­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­­
­­­­­­­
­­
­­­
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
XX/
XX/
XXXX
CUSTOMER
SATISFACTION
FEEDBACK
CARD
FOR
EPA'S
PARTNERSHIP
PROGRAMS
HOW
ARE
WE
DOING?
Please
help
us
understand
how
well
our
service
at
the
U.
S.
EPA
is
meeting
your
needs
by
completing
this
comment
card.
Respondent
burden
for
this
survey
is
estimated
to
be
five
minutes
for
reading
and
responding
to
the
questions.

1.
The
information
we
provided:
COMMENTS/
SUGGESTIONS
met
your
needs
did
not
meet
your
needs
Why
not?

2.
Was
the
person
who
assisted
you
knowledgeable
and
polite?

Yes

No
If
you
have
questions
or
comments
on
this
card,
please
Please
explain:
call
our
office
at
(
fill
in
partnership
program
number)

3.
How
long
did
it
take
to
get
the
THANK
YOU
VERY
MUCH!
33
information
you
requested?
days
NAME
PHONE
NUMBER
Was
this
reasonable?

Yes

No
MAIL
CODE
What
would
have
been
reasonable?

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.

The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
1711.04
and
OMB
2090­
0019
control
number
in
any
correspondence.

Printed
on
recycled
paper
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
XX/
XX/
XXXX
Exhibit
2
­
Telephone
Survey
RCRA,
Superfund
&
EPCRA
Call
Center
Survey
Questionnaire
Hello,
this
is
­­­­­,
calling
on
behalf
of
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
May
I
please
speak
with
<
First
NAME><
Last
NAME>?

You
recently
made
a
call
to
the
RCRA,
Superfund
&
EPCRA
Call
Center
and
agreed
to
participate
in
a
follow­
up
survey
about
that
call.
That
is
the
purpose
of
this
call
today.
With
the
information
you
provide
on
this
survey,
EPA
can
continually
improve
how
services
are
provided
to
its
Call
Center
customers.
This
survey
will
take
about
five
minutes
of
your
time
to
complete.
It
is
purely
a
research
effort
and
any
information
you
provide
will
be
held
in
strict
confidence.

2.
Which
one
of
the
following
reflects
how
often
you
use
the
Call
Center?
(
LIMIT
1
RESPONSE)

My
last
experience
was
my
first
call
1
I
use
the
Call
Center
less
than
once
a
month
2
I
use
the
Call
Center
1­
3
times
per
month
3
I
use
the
Call
Center
more
than
4
times
per
month
4
DK/
RF
9
2.
How
would
you
categorize
the
reason
for
your
most
recent
call
to
the
Call
Center?
Was
the
call
mainly
for 
Work
1
School
2
Personal
interest
3
34
Some
other
reason
(
specify)
8
Now
I'd
like
to
ask
your
opinions
about
your
last
Call
Center
inquiry.

Burden
Statement
Respondent
burden
for
this
survey
is
estimated
as
five
minutes
to
listen
and
respond
to
the
questions
asked.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
1711.04
and
OMB
control
number
2090­
0019
in
any
correspondence.

3.
On
a
scale
of
1
to
5
with
1
being
very
dissatisfied
and
5
being
very
satisfied,
what
was
your
overall
satisfaction­
level
with
the
Call
Center?

Very
Very
Dissatisfied
Satisfied
DK/
RF
1
2
3
4
5
9
4.
Considering
your
standards
for
quality,
how
well
did
the
Call
Center
meet
your
expectations
in
(
READ
ITEM)?
Would
you
say
it
was
much
worse
than
expected,
worse
than
expected,
just
as
expected,
better
than
expected,
or
much
better
than
expected?
What
about
(
READ
ITEM)...

Much
Just
Much
Worse
Worse
As
Better
Better
DK/
RF
1
2
3
4
5
9
c)
Providing
regulatory
information?
d)
Referring
to
other
sources
of
information?
e)
Providing
general
information
about
environmental
issues?
f)
Locating
and
ordering
documents?
5.
Consider
your
most
recent
Call
Center
contact,
on
a
scale
of
1­
5
where
1
totally
missed
your
expectations
and
5
fully
exceeded
your
expectations,
how
well
did
the
Call
Center's
telephone
system
meet
your
expectations
with...
Totally
Fully
Missed
Exceeded
DK/
RF
1
2
3
4
5
9
g)
Providing
a
variety
of
information
on
recorded
messages
h)
The
length
of
on­
hold
wait
time
35
i)
The
ease
of
navigating
the
phone
system
j)
The
length
of
recorded
messages
k)
The
hours
of
operation
l)
Access
to
Call
Center
on
the
first
call
attempt
6.
How
much
do
you
agree
with
the
following
descriptions
about
the
Call
Center
staff
person
with
whom
you
most
recently
spoke?
Would
you
strongly
disagree,
somewhat
disagree,
agree,
mostly
agree
or
strongly
agree
that
the
staff
person....(
READ
ITEM)....
Strongly
Somewhat
Mostly
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
Agree
Agree
Agree
DK/
RF
1
2
3
4
5
9
m)
Performed
the
service
adequately
n)
Provided
prompt
service
o)
Had
the
knowledge
needed
to
perform
the
service
p)
Told
you
what
you
needed
to
know
clearly
q)
Understood
what
you
needed
to
know
r)
Provided
accurate
information
s)
Was
courteous
to
you
7.
Using
a
scale
of
1
to
5
with
1
being
not
at
all
important
and
5
being
extremely
important,
how
important
is
it
to
you
that
the
Call
Center
(
READ
ITEM)....
Not
Extremely
At
All
Important
DK/
RF
1
2
3
4
5
9
i)
Provides
you
with
regulatory
information
j)
Refers
you
to
other
sources
of
information
k)
Provides
you
with
general
information
about
environmental
issues
l)
Locates
and
orders
documents
8.
Considering
the
various
electronic
options
for
your
inquiry
with
the
Call
Center,
on
a
scale
of
1
to
5
with
1
being
not
likely
at
all
and
5
being
extremely
likely,
how
likely
would
you
use....(
READ
ITEM)...
Not
Likely
Extremely
At
All
Likely
DK/
RF
1
2
3
4
5
9
m)
the
Telephone
for
direct
contact
with
Call
Center
staff
(
SKIP
TO
Q
10)
n)
an
Automated
telephone
system
to
obtain
information
(
SKIP
TO
Q
10)
o)
Email
to
receive
a
response
within
24
hours
(
ONLY
IF
1
OR
2
GO
TO
Q
9)
36
p)
On­
line
email
"
chat"
(
SKIP
TO
Q
10)
q)
Fax/
fax­
on­
demand
(
SKIP
TO
Q
10)

9.
What
are
your
reasons
for
not
being
likely
to
use
email
for
your
inquiry
with
the
Call
Center?(
OPEN­
CODED
RESPONSE)

10.
If
you
could
make
one
Call
Center
service
improvement,
what
would
it
be?
(
OPEN­
CODED
RESPONSE)

That
is
all
the
questions
I
have
for
you
today.
Thank
you
for
participating
in
this
survey.

Exhibit
3
­
Web
Site
Survey
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
XX/
XX/
XXXX
Office
of
Transportation
and
Air
Quality
(
OTAQ)
Web
Site
Customer
Satisfaction
Survey
xxx
NAME
xxx,

As
someone
with
whom
we
work
closely,
and
whose
opinion
we
value
greatly,
we'd
like
your
feedback,
as
we
start
a
comprehensive
review
and
possible
redesign
of
the
Office
of
Transportation
and
Air
Quality
(
OTAQ)
web
site.
We
are
interested
in
whether
our
web
site
meets
your
needs
and
expectations.
We
invite
your
forthright
responses
to
these
questions,
along
with
any
other
comments
or
suggestions
you
can
offer.
We
would
appreciate
hearing
back
from
you
by
(
one
week
after
survey
is
sent
out).

A.
Questions
About
You
As
Our
Customer
1.
Please
check
the
box
that
best
describes
you:


Academic
/
Teacher

Student

Non­
profit
/
non­
governmental
organization

State
/
local
government
37

Consumer
/
concerned
citizen

Federal
government

Manufacturing

Media

Trade
Association

Consultant

Librarian

Lawyer

Other
_____________________________

Burden
Statement
Respondent
burden
for
this
survey
is
estimated
as
ten
minutes
to
read
and
respond
to
the
questions
asked.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
1711.04
and
OMB
control
number
2090­
0019
in
any
correspondence.

2.
Please
check
all
of
the
boxes
below
that
describe
how
you
use
the
Web
site:


Find
environmental
information
about
my
car
or
my
company's
vehicles

Find
information
about
a
specific
regulation

Find
information
about
a
policy
or
guidance

Find
general
information
on
federal
auto
regulations

Find
information
on
how
federal
government
can
help
my
State/
local
government

Find
information
re
how
I
can
help
control
air
pollution

Find
information
on
test
procedures
or
modeling
emissions

Find
information
on
how
I
can
get
federal
assistance
or
a
grant

Find
EPA
press
releases

Find
information
on
voluntary
programs
like
diesel
retrofit,
commuter
choice

Find
educational
materials

Research
an
issue
in
the
news

Find
data
on
automotive
emissions

Just
browse

Other
________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________

3.
How
often
do
you
visit
the
OTAQ
web
site?
38

More
than
4
times
per
week

Three
to
4
times
a
week

Once
or
twice
a
week

One
to
three
times
a
month

Less
than
once
a
month
/
regularly,
but
only
occasionally

Have
only
visited
it
a
few
times
ever
in
my
life
Please
list
any
specific
sites
or
pages
within
the
OTAQ
web
site
that
you
would
say
you
visit
frequently:

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

B.
Questions
About
Your
Satisfaction
with
Service
Provided
by
the
OTAQ
Web
Site
4.
How
satisfied
are
you
generally
with
the
ease
of
finding
the
information
you
need?


Extremely
dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very
satisfied

Extremely
satisfied

Don't
know/
Not
applicable
Please
list
any
comments
that
you
may
have
about
how
the
site
meets
your
information
needs:

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

5.
How
satisfied
are
you
with
the
site
content
and
subject
matter?


Extremely
dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very
satisfied

Extremely
satisfied

Don't
know/
Not
applicable
Please
list
any
comments
that
you
may
have
about
the
site
content
and
subject
matter:
39
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

6.
How
satisfied
are
you
with
the
ease
of
understanding
the
language
on
the
OTAQ
Web
site?


Extremely
dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very
satisfied

Extremely
satisfied

Don't
know/
Not
applicable
Please
list
any
comments
that
you
may
have
about
the
language
of
the
site:

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

7.
How
satisfied
are
you
with
the
navigability
of
the
site
(
ease
of
moving
around,
site
structure,
links,
search
feature,
etc.)?


Extremely
dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very
satisfied

Extremely
satisfied

Don't
know/
Not
applicable
Please
list
any
comments
that
you
may
have
about
the
navigability
of
the
site:

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

8.
Overall,
how
satisfied
are
you
with
the
OTAQ
Web
site?
40

Extremely
dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very
satisfied

Extremely
satisfied

Don't
know/
Not
applicable
9.
What
would
make
the
OTAQ
Web
site
even
more
satisfactory
for
you?

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

10a.
How
satisfied
are
you
with
the
performance
(
workable
links,
downloading
time,
etc.)
of
the
OTAQ
Web
site?


Extremely
dissatisfied

Very
dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very
satisfied

Extremely
satisfied

Don't
know/
Not
applicable
10b.
If
extremely
dissatisfied,
very
dissatisfied
or
dissatisfied,
please
check
as
many
items
as
apply:


Broken
links

Navigational
difficulty
(
e.
g.,
not
finding
what
I
need)


Lengthy
download
time

Other:

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

Thanks
so
much
for
taking
the
time
to
review
this
site!
Based
on
all
the
comments
we
receive,
we
hope
to
make
improvements
to
the
site
to
make
it
easier
for
you
to
use.
41
Also
see:
http://
www.
varitools.
com/
EPAProd/
FormNew.
asp
42
Exhibit
4
­
Interview
Sample
Interview
Guide
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
XX/
XX/
XXXX
Personal
information
1.
Name
______________________________________________
2.
Member/
District
______________________________________
3.
Job
title/
location
4.
Phone
number/
e­
mail
address
____________________________
5.
Years
of
congressional
experience
________________________
6.
Years
dealing
with
EPA
Region
3
Importance
of
EPA's
products
and
services
On
a
scale
of
1
to
5,
with
5
being
very
important
and
1
being
unimportant
or
of
little
value,
how
important
are
these
EPA
products
and
services
to
your
office?

7.
Prompt
responses
to
correspondence
8.
Prompt
responses
to
phone
calls
___________________
9.
Periodic
office
visits
____________________________
10.
Participation
in
meetings
11.
Participation
in
site
visits
________________________
12.
Briefings
(
e.
g.,
Superfund,
Chesapeake
Bay,
air
quality)
13.
An
effective
working
relationship
with
a
single
EPA
liaison
officer
14.
Occasional
access
to
senior
EPA
officials
___________________
15.
Occasional
access
to
EPA's
technical
experts
________________
16.
EPA's
web
site
17.
EPA
pamphlets
and
reports
18.
Assistance
in
developing
and
reviewing
legislation
____________
19.
Advance
notice
of
EPA
grants
20.
Advance
notice
of
EPA
policy
decisions
21.
Advance
notice
of
EPA
enforcement
_______________

Evaluation
of
EPA's
products
and
services
On
a
scale
of
1
to
5,
with
5
being
very
satisfied
and
1
being
very
dissatisfied,
how
would
you
rate
your
experience
with
EPA
for
these
products
and
services.
If
you
haven't
had
significant
experience
with
any
of
these
activities,
score
0.

22.
Prompt
responses
to
correspondence
23.
Prompt
responses
to
phone
calls
24.
Periodic
office
visits
25.
Participation
in
meetings
26.
Participation
in
site
visits
27.
Briefings
(
e.
g.,
Superfund,
Chesapeake
Bay,
air
quality)
28.
An
effective
working
relationship
with
a
single
EPA
liaison
officer
29.
Occasional
access
to
senior
EPA
officials
30.
Occasional
access
to
EPA's
technical
experts
31.
EPA's
website
_____________
43
32.
EPA
pamphlets
and
reports
33.
Assistance
in
developing
and
reviewing
legislation
34.
Advance
notice
of
EPA
grants
35.
Advance
notice
of
EPA
policy
decisions
36.
Advance
notice
of
EPA
enforcement
Letters
and
phone
calls
37.
Within
how
many
working
days
do
you
consider
a
written
response
to
be
prompt?
38.
Within
how
many
hours
do
you
consider
a
phone
response
to
be
prompt?
39.
Do
you
want
a
prompt
interim
response
if
a
complete
response
will
take
more
than
10
days?
40.
Does
your
office
have
a
policy
about
when
to
write
or
call
EPA
headquarters
and
when
to
contact
EPA
Region
3?
41.
On
a
scale
of
1
to
5,
with
5
being
rarely
and
1
being
frequently,
how
often
are
you
dissatisfied
with
the
quality
of
EPA's
written
and
telephone
responses?

Overall
satisfaction
42.
On
a
scale
of
1
to
5,
with
5
being
much
better,
3
being
about
the
same,
and
1
being
much
worse,
how
does
EPA
compare
with
other
federal
agencies
you
deal
with
in
being
responsive
to
your
office's
and
constituent's
needs?
43.
On
a
scale
of
1
to
5,
with
5
being
very
satisfied
and
1
being
very
dissatisfied,
what
is
your
overall
satisfaction
with
EPA's
responsiveness
to
your
office
and
constituents?
44.
What
has
been
your
office's
most
memorable
or
interesting
experience
with
EPA?

Requests
and
concerns
44.
How
should
EPA
change
or
improve
its
service
to
your
office
and
constituents?
45.
Are
there
any
environmental
issues
or
problems
that
you
would
like
to
learn
more
about
from
EPA?

Burden
Statement
Respondent
burden
for
this
survey
is
estimated
as
thirty
minutes
to
hear
and
respond
to
the
questions
asked.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
1711.04
and
OMB
control
number
2090­
0019
in
any
correspondence.
44
Exhibit
5
­
Mail/
E­
mail
Survey
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
XX/
XX/
XXXX
EPA
OIG
Customer/
Client
Survey
FY
2002
Products
and
Services
EMAIL
Introduction
to
Survey:

The
Office
of
Inspector
General
is
focusing
on
providing
products
and
services
that
are
valuable
to
out
customers,
partners,
and
stakeholders;
and
performed
professionally,
courteously
and
constructively.
We
rely
on
client
feedback
for
planning
and
performance
measurement
to
improve
our
products,
services
and
operations.
Data
from
this
survey
is
used
to
compile
statistics
for
achieving
our
OIG
Strategic
Goal
3.
Produce
timely,
quality
&
cost
effective
products
and
services
that
meet
customer
needs.
Measure:
%
Customer
service
satisfaction
rating.
Compiled
data
is
distributed
to
Deputy
IGs,
and
OIG
Human
Capital
Managers
in
regional
offices
to
aid
them
in
providing
better
products
to
OIG
customers.
Summary
data
in
percent
and
ratios
is
presented
annually
to
the
entire
OIG
staff
to
show
trends
on
how
we
are
serving
our
customers.
Names
of
survey
respondents
(
voluntary,
if
returned)
are
kept
only
for
tracking
status
of
responses
and
are
not
placed
on
a
public
database
open
to
EPA
staff.

Attached
is
a
Customer
Survey
of
the
Office
of
the
Inspector
General.
Please
take
a
few
minutes
to
complete
and
return
the
short
survey
form
your
screen
by
opening
the
attached
Word
Perfect
SURVEY.

Burden
Statement
Respondent
burden
for
this
survey
is
estimated
as
not
more
than
ten
minutes
to
read
and
respond
to
the
questions.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
1711.04
and
OMB
control
number
2090­
0019
in
any
correspondence.
45
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
XX/
XX/
XXXX
EPA
Office
of
Inspector
General
Customer
Survey
on
2002
Products/
Services
Name
&
Phone
(
optional)
Report
No.
(
or
Assignment
No.)

Name
of
Report,
Product
or
Service:

1.
Please
specify
your
location
by
number
(
box),
then
office
or
agency
(
0.)
HQ/
NPM/
Office;
(
1­
10.)
Region/
Div/
Office;
or
(
11.)
Other/
State
2.
Please
specify
(
by
number)
the
OIG
product/
service
on
which
you
are
basing
your
responses
(
1.)
Financial/
ADP
Systems
Audit
(
2.)
Evaluation/
Performance
Audit
(
3.)
Contract
Audit
(
4.)
Assistance
(
grant)
Audit
(
5.)
Special
Review/
Comments
(
6.)
Projects/
Assistance/
Analysis
(
7.)
Training/
Presentations
(
8.)
Testimony/
Information
(
9.)
Other
OIG
Strategic
Area
Yes
A
little
No
3.
Are
you
familiar
with
the
IG
Act
&
OIG
mission
and
role
?

This
OIG
Product/
Service
1
2
3
4
5
6
4.
Is
factually
accurate
and
consistent
with
available
information
5.
Is
objective
&
balanced
(
recognizes
Agency
assistance,
progress
and
limitations)

6.
Addresses
relevant
or
significant
issues
7.
Is/
was
useful
for
decisions,
actions
and
improvements
8.
Contains
recommendations
or
information
that
are
practical
&
appropriate
9.
Is
clear,
logical
and
understandable
10.
Is/
was
timely
(
for
your
needs
&
purposes)

11.
Is/
was
responsive
to
Agency
needs
or
requests
for
assistance
12.
Contributes
to
the
attainment
of
EPA's
Strategic
Goals
or
resolution
of
problems
OIG
Staff
13.
Are
professional
and
courteous
14.
Are
knowledgeable
about
the
programs
and/
or
issues
involved
15.
Communicate
clearly
(
purpose,
process,
progress,
issues,
results
&
recommendations)

16.
Seek
and
consider
input,
comments
and
clarification
on
issues
17.
Encourage
a
constructive
working
relationship
Suggestions
and
Comments:

18.
How
can
we
improve
the
OIG
products/
services,
processes
or
results?
(
continue
on
back
or
next
page
if
needed)
46
19.
With
what
products
or
services,
and
in
what
program
areas
can
the
OIG
best
serve
EPA?
(
continue
on
back
or
next
page
if
needed)

20.
How
do
OIG
products
or
services
add
value?
If
you
do
not
believe
they
add
value,
why
not?
(
continue
on
back
or
next
page
if
needed)

Additional
Space
For
Comments:

Customer
Surveys
Coordinator
­
Office
of
Planning,
Analysis
and
Results
Office
of
Inspector
General
Rm
3708
NE
Mail
Code
2450
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
N.
W.
Washington
D.
C.
20460­
0001
FAX
(
202)
260­
4214
47
Exhibit
6
­
Focus
Group
Guide
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
03/
31/
2003
GILS
Functional
Requirements
Analysis
GILS
PRIORITIZATION
SHEET
NAME
(
OPTIONAL):

Please
list
the
top
5
Information
Categories
that
are
most
important
to
you:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

For
each
Category
you've
listed,
Please
give
an
example
of
specific
information
you
might
request,
and
how
you
would
use
it:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Which
Information
Categories
are
the
hardest
for
you
to
obtain
information
about
now?

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Burden
Statement
Respondent
burden
for
this
survey
is
estimated
as
not
more
than
two
hours
to
travel,
complete
the
form,
and
participate
in
focus
groups
discussion.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
1711.04
and
OMB
control
number
2090­
0019
in
any
correspondence.
48
Exhibit
7
­
Evaluation
Form
OMB
CONTROL
NO:
2090­
0019
EXPIRATION
DATE:
XX/
XX/
XXXX
EVALUATION
AND
SURVEY
CARD
FOR
PRE­
RENOVATION
LEAD
INFORMATION
RULE
PRESENTATION
presented
by
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
­
Region
III,
Philadelphia,
PA
Saturday,
March
8,
1999
"
REMODEL
AMERICA
99"
ATLANTIC
CITY
CONVENTION
CENTER
YES
NO
1.
Were
you
aware
of
the
"
Pre­
renovation
Rule"
before
today's
presentation?

a)
Where
did
you
first
obtain
information
about
the
Pre­
renovation
Rule?

YES
NO
b)
Do
you
now
understand
the
rule's
requirements?

2.
Please
rate
the
presentation
using
this
scale:
5=
Excellent
4=
Very
Good
3=
Good
2=
Fair
1=
Poor
RATING
a)
Discussion
of
the
Pre­
renovation
Rule's
requirements:

b)
Expertise
of
the
presenter:

c)
Appropriateness
of
the
teaching
strategies
used
(
lecture,
Overheads,
question
and
answer
sessions,
etc.)

Burden
Statement
Respondent
burden
for
this
survey
is
estimated
as
not
more
two
minutes
to
read
and
respond
to
the
questions.

Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
Collection
Strategies
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2822T),
1200
Pennsylvania
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
1711.04
and
OMB
control
number
2090­
0019
in
any
correspondence.
49
In
EPA's
web
site
redesign,
all
pages
are
linked
to
comment
screens.
This
is
a
typical
form,
and
is
included
purely
as
an
example
since
OMB
does
not
have
to
clear
these
feedback
forms.

Exhibit
8
­
Internet
Feedback
(
Comment)
Screens
The
EPA
welcomes
your
comments,
especially
comments
on
how
we
can
improve
our
web
site.
Comments
on
specific
EPA
programs
will
be
forwarded
to
the
responsible
office
within
the
Agency.
We
strive
to
respond
to
every
comment
with
an
answer
or
an
appropriate
referral
as
quickly
as
possible.
Most
comments
will
be
responded
to
within
10
business
days.

Please
help
us
to
answer
your
request
by
including
a
correct
e­
mail
address.
We
have
answered
thousands
of
requests,
but
we
receive
many
messages
that
we
can't
respond
to
because
of
incorrect
e­
mail
addresses.
Also,
if
you
are
referring
to
a
specific
page
within
EPA's
web
site,
please
include
a
URL
or
title
for
the
site.
If
your
browser
doesn't
support
forms,
you
can
e­
mail
your
comment
to
us
at
public­
access@
epa.
gov.

Your
Name:

Your
Organization:

Your
E­
mail
Address:

Your
Comment:
