U.
S.
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION
AGENCY
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
FOR
REPORTING
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
BEACH
ACT
GRANTS
EPA
ICR
No.
2048.02
OMB
Control
No.
2040­
0244
March
2005
Table
of
Contents
1.
Identification
of
the
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
1(
a)
Title
Of
The
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
4
2.
Need
for
And
Use
of
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
For
The
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
Of
The
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
3.
Nonduplication,
Consultations,
and
Other
Collection
Criteria
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
3(
a)
Nonduplication
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
To
ICR
Submission
To
OMB
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
3(
c)
Consultations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
3(
d)
Effects
Of
Less
Frequent
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
3(
f)
Confidentiality
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
4.
The
Respondents
And
The
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
4(
a)
Respondents/
SIC
Codes
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
4(
b)
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
5.
The
Information
Collected­
Agency
Activities,
Collection
Methodology,
And
Information
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
And
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
9
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
6.
Estimating
The
Burden
And
Cost
Of
The
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10
6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Cost
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
Labor
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
Operation
and
Maintenance
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
And
Cost
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
6(
d)
Estimating
The
Respondent
Universe
And
Total
Burden
And
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Tables
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
6(
f)
Reasons
For
Change
In
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
6(
g)
Burden
Statement
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
List
of
Tables
Table
1.
BEACH
Act
Grant
Performance
Criteria
Summary
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
Table
2.
Individual
Respondent
3­
Year
State
Burden
Hours
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
11
Table
3.
Total
Agency
Burden
Hours
Per
Activity
over
3
Years
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
Table
4.
Annualized
Respondent
Burden
And
Cost
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
Table
5.
Total
Annualized
Respondent
and
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
Table
6.
Changes
in
State
and
Territory
Burden
Estimates
from
Original
2002
ICR
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
March
21,
2005
4
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
1.
Identification
of
the
Information
Collection
1(
a)
Title
Of
The
Information
Collection
Reporting
Requirements
for
BEACH
Act
Grants
1(
b)
Short
Characterization/
Abstract
The
Beaches
Environmental
Assessment
and
Coastal
Health
(
BEACH
)
Act
amends
the
Clean
Water
Act
(
CWA)
in
part
and
authorizes
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
to
award
BEACH
Act
Program
Development
and
Implementation
Grants
to
coastal
and
Great
Lakes
states,
tribes,
and
territories
for
their
beach
monitoring
and
notification
programs.
The
grants
will
assist
states
to
develop
and
implement
a
consistent
approach
to
monitor
recreational
water
quality;
assess,
manage,
and
communicate
health
risks
from
waterborne
microbial
contamination;
notify
the
public
of
pollution
occurrences,
and
post
beach
advisories
and
closures
to
prevent
public
exposure
to
microbial
pathogens.
To
qualify
for
a
BEACH
Act
Grant,
a
state
must
submit
information
to
EPA
documenting
that
its
beach
monitoring
and
notification
program
is
consistent
with
nine
performance
criteria
outlined
in
the
National
Beach
Guidance
and
Performance
Criteria
for
Recreation
Waters.
For
EPA
to
award
a
BEACH
Implementation
Grant,
a
state
must
document
that
its
coastal
monitoring
and
notification
program
includes
or
will
include
the
following:

°
Risk­
based
beach
evaluation
and
classification
°
Sampling
design
and
monitoring
implementation
plan
°
Monitoring
report
submission
and
delegation
°
Methods
and
assessment
procedures
°
Public
notification
and
risk
communication
plan
°
Measures
to
notify
EPA
and
local
governments
°
Measures
to
notify
the
public
°
Notification
report
submission
and
delegation
°
Public
evaluation
of
program
All
beach
program
information
will
be
collected
by
the
EPA
Office
of
Science
and
Technology,
stored
in
the
Beach
Database,
and
displayed
on
EPA's
Beaches
Website
for
use
by
the
public,
state
environmental
and
public
health
agencies,
and
EPA.

The
first
ICR
approval
period
expires
in
July
of
2005.
This
Supporting
Statement
is
for
the
renewal
ICR
being
submitted
to
OMB
for
re­
approval
of
the
Reporting
Requirements
for
BEACH
Act
Grants
information
collection.
For
the
second
ICR
approval
period
after
rule
promulgation,
EPA
estimates
that
the
Annualized
Respondent
Burden
and
Cost
for
40
eligible
coastal
and
Great
Lakes
states,
tribes,
and
territories
will
be
94,947
hours
and
$
11,388,919
for
all
40
states
March
21,
2005
5
annualized
(
1
year).
This
includes
annualized
Operations
and
Maintenance
(
O&
M)
costs
of
$
3,749,760
for
all
states.
There
are
no
start­
up
costs.
Since
the
Agency
does
not
incur
any
additional
O&
M
costs,
the
Total
Annualized
Respondent
and
Agency
Burden
and
Cost
estimate
is
98,147
hours
(
respondents
and
Agency)
and
$
11,582,506
(
which
includes
the
respondent
and
Agency
burden
costs
and
the
respondent
O&
M
costs
of
$
3,749,760).
EPA
requests
that
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
(
OMB)
review
and
approve
this
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
package
proposal
for
3
years.

2.
Need
for
And
Use
of
the
Collection
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
For
The
Collection
The
BEACH
Act
(
Public
Law
106­
284)
established
a
grant
program
to
assist
states
in
implementing
a
uniform
monitoring
and
notification
program
for
their
coastal
recreational
waters.
As
a
condition
of
receipt
of
a
BEACH
Grant,
states
must
show
evidence
of
meeting
the
nine
performance
criteria
and
the
conditions
under
the
BEACH
Act.
Therefore,
a
state
applying
for
a
grant
must
submit
information
on
its
programs
to
its
EPA
Regional
Coordinator
and
EPA
Headquarters
to
document
that
its
program
is
consistent
with
the
performance
criteria.

2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
Of
The
Data
Data
will
be
used
by
EPA,
state
and
local
environmental
and
public
health
agencies,
and
the
public.
EPA
will
use
the
information
submitted
by
a
state
to
determine
whether
the
state's
program
is
consistent
with
the
performance
criteria
and
the
BEACH
Act.
State
and
local
environmental
and
public
health
agencies
will
use
the
data
as
an
indicator
of
program
performance,
and
the
public
will
use
the
data
as
reference
to
make
informed
decisions
before
going
to
the
beach.
The
information
provided
by
each
state
will
also
be
used
to
report
the
status
of
beach
monitoring
and
notification
programs
nationwide.
A
state
must
implement
measures
to
notify
EPA
of
the
results
of
its
water
quality
sampling.
Therefore,
these
data
will
be
used
to
create
a
national
database
of
water
quality
trends,
advisories,
and
closings.

3.
Nonduplication,
Consultations,
and
Other
Collection
Criteria
3(
a)
Nonduplication
The
information
requested
from
the
respondents
is
required
for
receipt
of
a
BEACH
Grant
and
is
not
available
from
other
sources.
EPA
has
made
every
reasonable
attempt
to
ensure
that
the
beach
monitoring
and
notification
data
and
information
requested
through
the
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program
is
not
currently
available
through
less
burdensome
mechanisms.

3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
To
ICR
Submission
To
OMB
On
February
22,
2005,
EPA
published
a
notice
in
the
Federal
Register
(
70
FR
8581)
announcing
March
21,
2005
6
the
Agency's
intent
to
submit
the
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program
ICR
to
OMB.
The
FR
Notice
announced
a
60­
day
period
to
solicit
public
comments.
EPA
received
no
comments.

An
additional
Federal
Register
notice
will
be
published
prior
to
submission
of
this
ICR
to
OMB.
The
public
comment
period
for
this
additional
notice
is
30
days.

3(
c)
Consultations
EPA
solicited
public
comments
in
the
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
the
Agency's
intent
to
publish
the
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program
ICR.
In
addition
to
any
public
comments
received
in
the
docket,
EPA
contacted
several
states
requesting
comments
on
the
burden
estimates
in
the
original
ICR.
The
Agency
received
specific
comments
from
the
following
State
and
Territory
Beach
Program
Contacts:
Toni
Glymph,
Wisconsin
Department
of
Natural
Resources
(
608­
264­
8954);
J.
D.
Potts,
North
Carolina
Shellfish
Sanitation
Section
(
252­
726­
6827);
and
Lynn
Schneider,
Washington
State
Department
of
Ecology
(
360­
407­
6543).

3(
d)
Effects
Of
Less
Frequent
Collection
The
requirement
for
a
state
to
submit
its
monitoring
and
notification
data
is
a
statutory
requirement
under
the
BEACH
Act;
therefore,
EPA
is
requesting
an
annual
report
on
a
state's
program
as
a
grant
requirement.
Monitoring
and
notification
data
may
be
submitted
more
frequently.

3(
e)
General
Guidelines
The
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program
will
be
conducted
in
accordance
with
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
5
CFR
1320.5(
d)(
2))
and
will
adhere
to
OMB's
general
guidelines
for
information
collections.

3(
f)
Confidentiality
Measures
to
ensure
the
confidentiality
of
the
collected
beach
monitoring
and
notification
data
are
not
necessary
because
the
information
submitted
by
the
state
respondents
is
public
information.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
No
information
of
sensitive
nature
will
be
collected
as
a
result
of
this
ICR.

4.
The
Respondents
And
The
Information
Requested
4(
a)
Respondents/
SIC
Codes
Information
collected
by
EPA
under
the
BEACH
Act
will
be
submitted
by
state
environmental
March
21,
2005
7
and
public
health
agencies
in
coastal
and
Great
Lakes
states,
territories,
and
tribes.
No
private
industries
will
be
required
to
submit
information
and
therefore
no
SIC
codes
are
relevant.

4(
b)
Information
Requested
EPA
is
requiring
states
to
provide
information
on
how
a
beach
monitoring
and
notification
program
is
consistent
with
the
following
nine
performance
criteria,
developed
from
the
BEACH
Act
and
summarized
in
Table
1.

Table
1.
BEACH
Act
Grant
Performance
Criteria
Summary
Category
Performance
Criteria
Requirement
BEACH
Act
Section
Chapter
Discussed
Evaluation
and
Classification
1
Risk­
based
Beach
Evaluation
and
Classification
406(
b)(
2)(
A)(
ii­
iv)
406(
c)(
1)
3
Monitoring
2
Sampling
Design
and
Monitoring
Implementation
Plan
406(
c)(
3)
4
3
Monitoring
Report
Submission
and
Delegation
406(
b)(
3)(
A),
(
B)
406(
c)(
2)
4
4
Methods
and
Assessment
Procedures
406(
c)(
4)
4
Public
Notification
and
Prompt
Risk
Communication
5
Public
Notification
and
Risk
Communication
Plan
406(
c)(
7)
5
6
Measures
to
Notify
EPA
and
Local
Governments
406(
c)(
5)
5
7
Measures
to
Notify
the
Public
406(
c)(
6)
5
8
Notification
Report
Submission
and
Delegation
406(
b)(
3)(
A),
(
B)
406(
c)(
2)
5
Public
Evaluation
9
Public
Evaluation
of
Program
406(
b)(
2)(
A)(
v)
2
1)
Risk­
based
Beach
Evaluation
and
Classification
A
state
must
develop
a
risk­
based
beach
evaluation
and
classification
plan
and
apply
it
to
state
coastal
recreation
waters.
A
state
or
tribal
program
must
describe
the
factors
used
in
its
evaluation
and
classification
process
and
explain
how
its
beaches
are
ranked
as
a
result
of
the
process.
This
process
must
result
in
the
identification
of
a
list
of
coastal
recreation
waters
in
the
state,
including
coastal
recreation
waters
adjacent
to
beaches
or
similar
points
of
access
used
by
the
public.

2)
Sampling
Design
and
Monitoring
Plan
A
state
must
develop
a
sampling
design
and
monitoring
implementation
plan.
This
plan
must
adequately
address
the
frequency
and
location
of
monitoring
and
assessment
of
coastal
recreation
March
21,
2005
8
waters
based
on
the
periods
of
recreational
use
of
the
waters,
the
nature
and
extent
of
use
during
certain
periods,
the
proximity
of
the
waters
to
known
point
sources
and
nonpoint
sources
of
pollution,
and
any
effect
of
storm
events
on
the
waters.

3)
Monitoring
Report
Submission
and
Delegation
A
state
must
develop
a
mechanism
to
collect
relevant
information
and
submit
timely
reports
to
EPA
and
document
any
delegation
of
monitoring
responsibilities
to
local
governments.

Report
Submission
A
state
or
tribal
recipient
of
a
grant
must
submit
to
the
EPA
Administrator
timely
information
and
reports
that
describes
the
data
collected
as
part
of
the
monitoring
program,
and
the
actions
taken
to
notify
the
public
when
water
quality
standards
are
exceeded.

Delegation
If
monitoring
responsibilities
are
delegated
to
local
governments,
the
state
grant
recipient
must
describe
the
process
by
which
the
state
may
delegate
to
local
governments
responsibility
for
implementing
the
monitoring
program.

4)
Methods
and
Assessment
Procedures
A
state
must
develop
detailed
methods
and
assessment
procedures.
These
procedures
must
adequately
address
both
the
methods
to
be
used
for
detecting
levels
of
pathogens
and
pathogen
indicators
that
are
harmful
to
human
health
and
the
assessment
procedures
for
identifying
short­
term
increases
in
pathogens
and
pathogen
indicators
that
are
harmful
to
human
health.

5)
Public
Notification
and
Risk
Communication
Plan
A
state
must
develop
an
overall
public
notification
and
risk
communication
plan.
The
plan
must
describe
the
state's
public
notification
efforts
and
measures
to
inform
the
public
of
the
potential
risks
associated
with
water
contact
activities
in
the
coastal
recreation
waters
that
do
not
meet
applicable
water
quality
standards.

6)
Measures
to
Notify
EPA
and
Local
Governments
A
state
must
identify
measures
for
promptly
communicating
to
EPA
and
local
governments
of
the
occurrence,
nature,
location,
pollutants
involved,
and
extent
of
any
exceeding
of,
or
likelihood
of
exceeding,
applicable
water
quality
standards
for
pathogens
and
pathogen
indicators.
The
state
must
identify
how
this
information
will
be
promptly
communicated
to
EPA
and
to
a
designated
official
of
the
local
government
that
has
jurisdiction
over
land
adjoining
the
coastal
recreation
waters
for
which
the
failure
to
meet
applicable
standards
has
been
identified.

7)
Measures
to
Notify
the
Public
A
state
must
develop
measures
to
notify
the
public
through
the
posting
of
signs
at
beaches
or
similar
points
of
access
or
through
functionally
equivalent
communication
measures
that
are
sufficient
to
give
notice
to
the
public
that
the
coastal
recreation
waters
are
not
meeting
or
are
not
expected
to
meet
applicable
water
quality
standards
for
pathogens
and
pathogen
indicators.
March
21,
2005
9
8)
Notification
Report
Submission
and
Delegations
A
state
must
develop
a
mechanism
to
collect
relevant
information
and
submit
timely
reports
to
EPA
and
document
any
delegation
of
notification
responsibilities
to
local
governments.

Report
Submission
A
state
or
tribal
recipient
of
a
grant
must
submit
to
the
Administrator
timely
information
and
reports
that
describes
data
collected
as
part
of
the
notification
program
and
the
actions
taken
to
notify
the
public
when
water
quality
standards
are
exceeded.

Delegation
If
notification
responsibilities
are
delegated
to
local
governments,
the
state
grant
recipient
must
describe
the
process
by
which
the
state
may
delegate
to
local
governments
responsibility
for
implementing
the
notification
program.

9)
Public
Evaluation
of
Program
A
state
must
identify
how
to
provide
the
public
with
an
opportunity
to
review
the
program
through
a
process
that
provides
for
public
notice,
review,
and
an
opportunity
to
comment.
This
can
be
accomplished
through
a
record
of
public
comments,
meetings,
forums,
or
workshops.

5.
The
Information
Collected­
Agency
Activities,
Collection
Methodology,
And
Information
Management
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
The
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program
will
be
administered
by
EPA
Headquarters
and
EPA
Regional
Offices,
which
have
planned
for
and
allocated
resources
for
the
efficient
and
effective
management
of
the
grant
program.
EPA
is
conducting
the
following
activities
in
administering
the
BEACH
Act
grants:

°
EPA
Headquarters
to
monitor
state
programs
annually
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
performance
criteria.
°
EPA
Regions
to
monitor
state
programs
annually
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
performance
criteria.
°
EPA
Regions
and
EPA
Headquarters
to
provide
miscellaneous
support
to
the
states.
°
EPA
Regions
to
revise
work
plans
and
update
Quality
Management
Plan.
°
EPA
Regions
to
perform
technical
review
on
Quality
Assurance
Project
Plan
and
Grants
Management
Plan.
°
Regions
to
ensure
that
Quality
Assurance
Project
Plan
is
complete
prior
to
implementation.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
And
Management
The
EPA
Beach
Program
encourages
states
to
electronically
transmit
beach
monitoring
and
March
21,
2005
10
notification
data
directly
to
EPA.
Electronic
reporting
is
intended
to
achieve
data
collection
efficiencies
and
reduce
the
possibility
of
data
input
error.

It
is
the
State's
responsibility
to
conduct
ongoing
data
analysis,
including
performing
data
QA/
QC
to
check
for
anomalies
in
the
data
that
may
be
related
to
data
entry
or
laboratory
errors.
Data
quality
review
and
analysis
will
include:
continuous
analysis
of
laboratory
results,
pollution
occurrence
events,
public
notification,
and
review
of
all
program
data.
The
beach
monitoring
and
notification
data
will
be
maintained
in
the
BEACH
Database.
Historically,
reporting
of
beach
data
to
EPA
through
the
National
Beach
Health
Survey
has
been
limited
to
beach
program
information
and
notification
data.
The
new
BEACH
Database
will
maintain
monitoring
and
locational
data
and
grants
information.
The
data
collected
under
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program
will
be
used
for
program
performance
evaluation
to
determine
if
a
state
program
is
consistent
with
BEACH
Guidance
and
Performance
Criteria
document,
to
analyze
pollution
occurrences
at
beaches
across
Nation,
and
report
to
Congress
on
status
of
Nation's
recreation
waters.

5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
Measures
to
assist
small
entities
are
not
applicable
because
the
respondents
for
the
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program
are
state
government
agencies.
However,
EPA
may
make
a
grant
to
a
local
government
for
implementation
of
a
monitoring
and
notification
program
only
if,
after
the
1­
year
period
beginning
on
the
date
of
publication
of
performance
criteria,
EPA
determines
that
the
State
is
not
implementing
a
program
that
meets
the
performance
criteria.

5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
A
state
must
show
evidence
documenting
its
compliance
with
the
nine
performance
criteria
as
listed
in
the
Federal
Register
to
be
eligible
for
a
BEACH
Grant.

6.
Estimating
The
Burden
And
Cost
Of
The
Collection
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
The
BEACH
Act
requires
states
to
devote
time
and
resources
to
implement
a
monitoring
and
notification
program
to
meet
the
performance
criteria
outlined
in
the
National
Beach
Guidance
and
Performance
Criteria
for
Recreation
Waters.
To
develop
burden
estimates,
EPA
estimated
the
number
of
hours
that
will
be
required
by
states
to
adhere
to
the
performance
criteria.

The
Agency
estimated
that
implementing
a
monitoring
and
notification
program
in
accordance
with
the
nine
performance
criteria
will
take
94,947
annualized
hours
and
$
3,749,760
O&
M
for
all
40
respondents.

The
following
assumptions
were
made
for
this
ICR
based
on
data
collected
by
EPA
and
consultations
with
respondents
listed
in
Section
3(
c):
March
21,
2005
11
°
The
average
beach
(
monitoring)
season
was
assumed
to
be
18
weeks.
°
The
average
number
of
samples
collected
per
week
at
each
beach
during
the
beach
season
was
assumed
to
be
2
samples.
°
The
average
cost
of
sample
analysis
was
assumed
to
be
$
30/
sample.

6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Cost
The
annual
cost
for
a
state
or
territory
to
implement
the
performance
criteria
necessary
to
comply
with
the
BEACH
Grant
Program
are
attributed
to
labor
costs
and
operation
and
maintenance
(
O&
M)
costs.
The
total
cost
burden
over
3
years
for
the
40
states
and
territories
are
estimated
to
be
$
34,166,756
which
consists
of
$
22,917,476
in
labor
costs,
and
$
11,249,280
in
O&
M
costs.

Labor
Costs
To
develop
labor
costs,
EPA
multiplied
the
number
of
hours
that
will
be
required
to
implement
a
monitoring
and
notification
plan
by
the
state
employee
hourly
rate
to
generate
a
cost
estimate.
Because
labor
rates
vary
so
widely
among
the
state
government
personnel
involved
in
implementing
a
state
monitoring
and
notification
program,
EPA
used
an
average
loaded
hourly
rate
that
is
representative
of
the
average
salary
for
a
managerial
and
technical
state
employee
as
listed
by
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
for
full­
time
state
and
local
government
workers
in
the
National
Compensation
Survey
(
September
2004).
The
managerial
salary
of
$
111.70
per
hour
was
calculated
using
a
rate
of
$
42.96
per
hour
plus
an
overhead
rate
of
1.6%.
The
technical
salary
of
$
78.08
per
hour
was
calculated
using
a
rate
of
$
30.03
per
hour
plus
an
overhead
rate
of
1.6%.
Table
2
presents
an
estimate
of
the
burden
that
state
governments
will
incur
to
meet
each
performance
criterion
outlined
in
the
National
Beach
Guidance
and
Grant
Performance
Criteria
for
Recreation
Waters.
The
table
identifies
the
activities
to
be
performed
by
the
state,
the
associated
hours
required
for
each
activity,
and
the
labor
cost
for
each
activity.
Annualized
totals
are
presented
at
the
end
of
Table
2.

Table
2.
Individual
Respondent
3­
Year
State
Burden
Hours
Performance
Criterion
State
Activity
3
Year
Managerial
Burden
3
Year
Technical
Burden
Total
3
Year
Burden
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
111.70/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
78.08/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
(
Dollars)

1
­
Risk­
based
Beach
Evaluation
and
Classification
Identify
coastal
recreation
waters.
a
1
111.70
6
468.47
7
580.16
Identify
and
submit
list
of
monitored
waters.
a
1
111.70
6
468.47
7
580.16
Performance
Criterion
State
Activity
3
Year
Managerial
Burden
3
Year
Technical
Burden
Total
3
Year
Burden
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
111.70/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
78.08/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
(
Dollars)

March
21,
2005
12
Collect
and
submit
beach
lat/
long
coordinates
(
georeference
beaches
using
maps,
gps,
etc.).
a
20
2,233.92
180
14,054.04
200
16,287.96
Identify
bathing
beaches
and
submit
beach
miles.
a
20
2,233.92
80
6,246.24
100
8,480.16
Determine
legal
authority
for
administering
monitoring
and
notification
programs.
a
3
335.09
6
468.47
9
803.56
Review
available
information.
5
558.48
15
1,171.17
20
1,729.65
Rank
beaches.
3
335.09
100
7,807.80
103
8,142.89
Performance
Criterion
1
Total
53
5,919.89
393
30,684.65
446
36,604.54
2
­
Sampling
Design
and
Monitoring
Implementati
on
Plan
Identify
sampling
plan
(
when
and
where
to
sample,
what
depth
to
sample,
etc.).
3
335.09
5
390.39
8
725.48
Ensure
data
quality.
12
1,340.35
100
7,807.80
112
9,148.15
Staff
monitoring
programs.
4
446.78
7
546.55
11
993.33
Train
monitoring
staff.
16
1,787.14
200
15,615.60
216
17,402.74
Create
database
and
data
submission
process.
a
40
4,467.84
360
28,108.08
400
32,575.92
Manage
data
for
beach
season.
20
2,233.92
180
14,054.04
200
16,287.96
Program
implementation
and
oversight.
120
893.57
120
9,369.36
240
22,772.88
Performance
Criterion
State
Activity
3
Year
Managerial
Burden
3
Year
Technical
Burden
Total
3
Year
Burden
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
111.70/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
78.08/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
(
Dollars)

March
21,
2005
13
Performance
Criterion
2
Total
215
24,014.64
972
75,891.82
1,187
99,906.46
3
­
Monitoring
Report
Submission
and
Delegation
Submit
report
that
describes
data
collected
and
public
notification
activities.
8
893.57
30
2,342.34
38
3,235.91
Describe
process
by
which
the
state
may
delegate
to
local
governments
the
responsibility
for
implementing
a
monitoring
program.
6
670.18
18
1,405.40
24
2,075.58
Performance
Criterion
3
Total
14
1,563.74
48
3,747.74
62
5,311.49
4
­
Methods
and
Assessment
Procedures
Identify
laboratories
for
analysis.
1
111.70
12
936.94
13
1,048.63
Determine
analytical
procedures.
0
0.00
4
312.31
4
312.31
Identify
sample
collection
techniques.
1
111.70
6
468.47
7
580.16
Collect
water
sample
0
0.00
1350
105,405.30
1,350
105,405.30
Determine
data
validation
and
verification
procedures.
2
223.39
9
702.70
11
926.09
State
analyze
and
submit
monitoring
data
to
EPA.
135
15,078.96
2565
200,270.07
2,700
215,349.03
Identify
the
use
of
predictive
tools
in
beach
monitoring.
(
If
currently
using
predictive
tools,
identify
what
type
of
tool,
how
used,
how
applicable,
etc.)
4
446.78
20
1,561.56
24
2,008.34
Performance
Criterion
4
Total
143
15,972.53
3966
309,657.35
4,109
325,629.88
Performance
Criterion
State
Activity
3
Year
Managerial
Burden
3
Year
Technical
Burden
Total
3
Year
Burden
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
111.70/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
78.08/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
(
Dollars)

March
21,
2005
14
5
­
Public
Notification
and
Risk
Communication
Plan
Perform
a
problem
assessment
and
audience
identification.
2
223.39
22
1,717.72
24
1,941.11
Determine
and
develop
content
and
procedures
for
advisories
and
closings.
4
446.78
44
3,435.43
48
3,882.22
Performance
Criterion
5
Total
6
670.18
66
5,153.15
72
5,823.32
6
­
Measures
to
Notify
EPA
and
Local
Governments
Determine
the
mechanisms
for
states
to
notify
local
governments
of
advisories
and
closings,
and
removal
of
advisories
and
closings
3
335.09
23
1,795.79
26
2,130.88
Determine
the
mechanisms
for
states
to
notify
EPA
of
advisories,
closings,
and
removal
of
advisories
and
closings.
1
111.70
13
1,015.01
14
1,126.71
Collect
and
submit
notification
data
to
EPA.
1
111.70
12
936.94
13
1,048.63
Performance
Criterion
6
Total
5
558.48
48
3,747.74
53
4,306.22
7
­
Measures
to
Notify
the
Public
Determine
the
mechanisms
for
states
to
notify
the
public
of
advisories,
closings,
and
removal
of
advisories
and
closings.
2
223.39
20
1,561.56
22
1,784.95
Performance
Criterion
State
Activity
3
Year
Managerial
Burden
3
Year
Technical
Burden
Total
3
Year
Burden
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
111.70/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
$
78.08/
hour
(
Dollars)
Total
Burden
Per
Activity
(
Hours)
Total
Labor
Cost
(
Dollars)

March
21,
2005
15
State
to
implement
notification
program.
This
may
include
the
posting
of
signs
or
functional
equivalent.
45
5026.32
855
66,756.69
900
71,783.01
Performance
Criterion
7
Total
47
5,249.71
875
68,318.25
922
73,567.96
8
­
Notification
Report
Submission
and
Delegation
Submit
report
that
describes
data
collected
and
the
public
notification
activities.
3
335.09
35
2,732.73
38
3,067.82
Describe
process
by
which
the
state
may
delegate
to
local
governments
the
responsibility
for
implementing
a
notification
program.
2
223.39
22
1,717.72
24
1,941.11
Performance
Criterion
8
Total
5
558.48
57
4,450.45
62
5,008.93
9
­
Public
Evaluation
of
Program
Ensure
the
monitoring
and
notification
program
meets
the
needs
of
the
audiences
and
the
objectives
of
the
Agency.
8
893.57
96
7,495.49
104
8,389.06
Evaluate
the
monitoring
and
notification
program.
8
893.57
96
7,495.49
104
8,389.06
Performance
Criterion
9
Total
16
1,787.14
192
14,990.98
208
16,778.11
TOTAL
504
56,294.78
6617
516,642.13
7121
572,936.91
ANNUALIZED
TOTAL
168.00
18,764.93
2,205.67
172,214.04
2,374
190,978.97
a
Indicates
that
most
of
the
burden
for
this
activity
incurred
during
the
initial
ICR
period.

Operation
and
Maintenance
Costs
March
21,
2005
16
In
addition
to
labor
costs,
the
states
and
territories
incur
O&
M
costs
associated
with
the
analytical
fees
and
shipping
for
the
water
quality
samples.
Non­
labor
costs
for
the
40
states
and
territories
are
solely
attributed
to
the
laboratory
fees
that
will
be
charged
for
analysis
and
to
shipping
charges
for
sending
the
sample
bottles
to
the
appropriate
laboratory.

The
O&
M
costs
were
calculated
as
an
average
based
on
the
3,472
coastal
and
Great
Lakes
beaches
identified
in
EPA's
2003
National
List
of
Beaches
(
the
most
recent
version
currently
available)
for
the
40
states
and
territories
eligible
to
participate
in
the
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program.
EPA
obtained
laboratory
fees
and
shipping
costs
from
testing
labs
and
estimated
the
cost
to
be
$
30
per
sample.
The
cost
for
each
state
was
calculated
using
the
equation
below:

3,472
beaches
X
36
samples
(
twice
per
week
for
18
week
season)
X
$
30
per
sample
=
$
93,744/
state
40
states
EPA
estimated
an
annualized
O&
M
cost
of
$
93,744
per
state,
an
Annualized
Total
O&
M
cost
of
$
3,749,760
for
all
40
states,
and
a
Total
O&
M
cost
of
$
11,249,280
for
40
states
over
3
years.

6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
And
Cost
The
BEACH
Act
requires
EPA
to
devote
time
and
resources
to
manage
the
grant
program.
To
develop
burden
estimates,
EPA
estimated
the
number
of
hours
that
will
be
required
to
administer
this
program.
The
Agency
estimated
that
it
will
take
80
hours
per
respondent
to
review
and
process
the
applications.
When
multiplied
by
40
respondents,
the
Annualized
Agency
Burden
is
3,200
hours
to
administer
the
program
and
a
Total
Agency
Burden
of
9600
hours
over
3
years.
The
Agency
used
an
average
hourly
salary
for
Agency
employees
of
$
60.50,
which
was
calculated
using
a
rate
of
$
37.81
plus
an
overhead
rate
of
1.6
percent.
The
labor
rate
was
obtained
using
2005
salary
tables
provided
by
the
Office
of
Personnel
Management.

Table
3
presents
an
estimate
of
the
burden
that
EPA
will
incur
to
manage
the
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program
for
Years
1
through
3
of
this
ICR.
The
annualized
totals
are
presented
at
the
bottom
of
the
table.

Table
3.
Total
Agency
Burden
Hours
Per
Activity
over
3
Years
Activities
Agency
Burden
Hours
Agency
Burden
Dollars
($)

EPA
Headquarters
to
monitor
state
programs
annually
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
performance
criteria
1371
$
82,966
EPA
Regions
to
monitor
state
programs
annually
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
performance
criteria
2057
$
124,449
EPA
Headquarters
and
EPA
Regions
to
provide
miscellaneous
support
to
states.
1371
$
82,966
EPA
Regions
to
revise
work
plans
and
update
beach
monitoring
and
notification
program
procedures.
1371
$
82,966
Activities
Agency
Burden
Hours
Agency
Burden
Dollars
($)

March
21,
2005
17
EPA
Regions
to
perform
technical
review
on
Quality
Assurance
Project
Plan
and
Grants
Management
Plan,
DQOs
and
SOPs
prior
to
implementation.
3429
$
207,415
Total
over
3
years
9600
$
580,762
Annualized
total
3200
$
193,587
6(
d)
Estimating
The
Respondent
Universe
And
Total
Burden
And
Costs
Table
4
presents
an
estimate
of
the
total
respondent
burden
and
costs
expected
for
the
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program.
The
Total
Annualized
Respondent
Burden
is
expected
to
be
94,947
hours
and
$
3,749,760
O&
M
Costs.
There
are
no
start­
up
costs,
and
the
burden
estimate
does
not
include
labor
costs.

Table
4.
Annualized
Respondent
Burden
And
Cost
Performanc
e
criteria
Respondent
hrs/
yr
Respondent
labor
cost/
yr
O&
M
cost/
yr
Number
of
Respondents
/
yr
Total
Hrs/
yr
Total
cost/
yr
1
149
$
12,202
40
5,947
$
488,061
2
396
$
33,302
40
15,827
$
1,332,086
3
21
$
1,770
40
827
$
70,820
4
1,370
$
108,543
40
54,787
$
4,341,732
5
24
$
1,941
40
960
$
77,644
6
18
$
1,435
40
707
$
57,416
7
307
$
24,523
40
12,293
$
980,906
8
21
$
1,670
40
827
$
66,786
9
69
$
5,593
40
2,773
$
223,708
Total
2,374
$
190,979
$
3,749,760
40
94,947
$
7,639,159
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Tables
Table
5
presents
an
estimate
of
the
Total
Annualized
State
and
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
expected
for
the
BEACH
Act
Grant
Program.
As
shown
in
Table
5,
the
Annualized
Burden
for
the
Agency
and
40
states,
tribes,
and
territories
with
coastal
recreation
waters
is
98,147
hours
and
$
11,582,506
O&
M
costs.
March
21,
2005
18
March
21,
2005
19
Table
5.
Total
Annualized
Respondent
and
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
Burden
(
Hours)
Burden
Cost
O&
M
Cost
(
Dollars)
Total
Cost
40
States
94,947
$
7,639,159
$
3,749,760
$
11,388,919
Agency
3200
$
193,587
$
0
$
169,389
Total
98,147
$
7,832,746
$
3,749,760
$
11,582,506
6(
f)
Reasons
For
Change
In
Burden
The
respondent
average
annual
burden
increased
from
5979
to
7121
hours
which
represents
a
19.1%
increase
and
the
total
average
annual
number
of
respondents
increased
from
35
to
40
respondents.
This
also
caused
the
Agency
annual
burden
to
increase
from
2,800
to
3,200
hours
because
it
is
based
on
the
number
of
respondents.
EPA
used
the
higher
number
of
respondents
because
the
Agency
expects
several
tribes
to
apply
for
BEACH
Act
Grants
that
had
not
done
so
during
the
original
ICR
period.
The
annual
operation
and
maintenance
costs
for
all
respondents
also
increased
from
$
473,040
to
$
3,749,760
for
all
states.
This
is
because
the
estimated
number
of
beaches
monitored
by
grant
recipients
increased
from
1,314
(
estimated
from
the
2000
National
Beaches
Survey)
to
3,472
(
estimated
from
EPA's
2003
National
List
of
Beaches),
a
164.2%
percent
increase.
In
addition,
EPA
changed
its
estimate
of
the
number
of
samples
collected
at
each
beach
from
one
sample
per
week
sample
to
two
and
changed
the
length
of
the
beach
season
from
12
weeks
to
18
weeks
based
on
data
that
EPA
collected
and
comments
received
from
several
state
Beach
Program
contacts.

EPA
also
revised
the
labor
rates,
which
increased
from
$
40.26
to
$
42.96
for
a
Managerial
employee
and
from
$
26
to
$
30.03
for
a
Technical
employee
based
on
the
average
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
salaries
for
managerial
and
technical
employees
in
state
and
local
governments
as
shown
in
their
September
2004
publication.

Several
burden
estimates
for
specific
tasks
under
the
performance
criteria
listed
in
Table
2
were
also
changed
based
on
consultations
with
several
of
the
respondents
consulted
in
updating
this
ICR.
The
original
estimates
for
these
tasks
were
significantly
lower
than
the
actual
burden
reported
by
these
respondents.
These
changes
are
summarized
in
Table
6.

Table
6.
Changes
in
State
and
Territory
Burden
Estimates
from
Original
2002
ICR
Performance
Criteria
State
Activity
Total
Annual
Burden
(
hours)
Change
Between
Current
and
Previous
ICR
Current
ICR
Previous
ICR
1.
Risk­
based
Beach
Evaluation
and
Classification
Collect
and
submit
beach
lat/
long
coordinates
(
georeference
beaches
using
maps,
gps,
etc.).
200
20
180
March
21,
2005
20
Identify
bathing
beaches
and
submit
beach
miles.
100
6
94
Rank
beaches.
103
13
90
2.
Sampling
Design
and
Monitoring
Implementation
Plan
Ensure
data
quality.
112
10
102
Train
monitoring
staff.
216
24
192
Create
database
and
data
submission
process.
400
200
102
Manage
data
for
beach
season.
200
108
102
Program
implementation
and
oversight.
240
48
200
6(
g)
Burden
Statement
The
Annualized
Respondent
Burden
and
Cost
Estimate
for
40
states
for
the
BEACH
Grant
Program
is
estimated
to
be
94,947
hours
and
$
11,388,919.
There
are
no
start­
up
costs.
Since
the
Agency
does
not
incur
any
additional
O&
M
costs,
the
Total
Annualized
Respondent
and
Agency
Burden
and
Cost
estimate
is
98,147
hours
and
$
11,582,506
(
includes
respondent
burden
costs,
O&
M
costs,
and
Agency
burden
costs).
Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9
and
48
CFR
chapter
15.
To
comment
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques,
EPA
has
established
a
public
docket
for
this
ICR
under
Docket
ID
No.
OW­
2003­
0039,
which
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Water
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,
Washington,
DC.
The
EPA
Docket
Center
Public
Reading
Room
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566­
1744,
and
the
telephone
number
for
the
Water
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
2426.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA
Dockets
(
EDOCKET)
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Use
EDOCKET
to
submit
or
view
public
comments,
access
the
index
listing
of
the
contents
of
the
public
docket,
and
to
access
those
documents
in
the
public
March
21,
2005
21
docket
that
are
available
electronically.
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
docket
ID
number
identified
above.
Also,
you
can
send
comments
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Office
for
EPA.
Please
include
the
EPA
Docket
ID
No.
(
OW­
2003­
0039)
and
OMB
control
number
(
2040­
0244)
in
any
correspondence.
