ICR SUPPORTING STATEMENT

1.	Identification of the Information Collection

1(a)	Title of the Information Collection

Chesapeake Registry (previously titled Chesapeake Action Plan/Activity
Integration Plan (CAP/AIP)) Reporting System (EPA ICR Number 2365.02,
OMB Control Number 2003-0001)

1(b)	Short Characterization/Abstract

In 2008, EPA’s Region 3 Chesapeake Bay Program Office (CBPO) and its
partners developed the Chesapeake Action Plan (CAP) to strengthen and
expand partnerships in the watershed, enhance coordination of
restoration activities, and increase the collective accountability for
protecting the Chesapeake Bay.  The primary mechanism for input into the
CAP is the Web-based Chesapeake Registry (previously called Chesapeake
Action Plan/Activity Integration Plan (CAP/AIP)) reporting system. 
Through the Chesapeake Registry reporting system, partner and
stakeholder organizations provide data about the activities in which
they are engaged to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay and its
watershed.  The Chesapeake Registry was developed in response to
recommendations by the Government Accountability Office and directives
of the Explanatory Statement of the FY 2008 Consolidated Appropriations
Act (P.L. 110-161).  CBPO conducted its first activity data call in 2008
that included 10 federal, 7 state, and 2 local partners and
stakeholders.  

The ICR supports legislative mandate (P.L. 110-161) and more recently,
Executive Order (EO) 13508, signed by President Barack Obama on May 12,
2009.  Section 203(d) of the EO directs EPA to identify the
“mechanisms that will ensure that governmental and other activities,
including data collection and distribution, are coordinated and
effective, relying on existing mechanisms where appropriate.  Section
204 further directs that “Federal actions to protect and restore the
Chesapeake Bay are closely coordinated with actions by State and local
agencies in the watershed and the resources, authorities, and expertise
of Federal, State, and local agencies are used as efficiently as
possible.”  The Chesapeake Registry provides the tool to coordinate
activities among Bay partners and stakeholders, both federal and
non-federal, in support of these mandates.

The Web-based application reporting system is available at   HYPERLINK
"http://cap.chesapeakebay.net"  http://cap.chesapeakebay.net .  The
Chesapeake Registry reporting system includes detailed information about
the activities and funding conducted by participating organizations. 
The participants provide project information on the nature of the
activity, responsible organization, organizational point-of contact,
resource levels, geographic location, and major milestones on progress
towards Chesapeake Bay protection and restoration efforts.  Funds
reported in the Chesapeake Registry are linked to an organization’s
own resource base so that data associated with a set of funds is entered
only by the originator of the funding.  The information is organized by
programmatic goal and topic area, which aligns activities to the CAP
strategic framework and helps to provide an accurate depiction of
restoration activities, progress, and results as a whole.   The
information collection, as envisioned, will be conducted annually.

Each reporting organization is assigned a user ID and password. 
Security measures have been established to protect data that have been
entered, including maintaining the data on a secure server on a secure
network, and confirming the data with each reporting organization.
Participants in the information collection are able to search the
Chesapeake Registry database and view standard reports.  Partners will
use the enhanced and expanded data to update performance-management
dashboards that summarize and synthesize information so the program
partners can understand, at a glance, the progress being made in key
program areas.  The dashboards include measures of progress, information
about the resources CBP partners and stakeholders have dedicated to
their efforts described, and strategic analyses of what needs to be done
to improve implementation.  In addition, CBPO anticipates that some of
the partners will use the Chesapeake Registry reporting system as a tool
for their own management and planning efforts.

Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.13(d) EPA requested a waiver of the Federal
Register requirement for an emergency ICR and received approval from the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  Upon OMB approval (OMB Control
No. 2003-0001), EPA solicited comments in the Federal Register for a
renewal of the approved ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d) and received no
comments.  The ICR is scheduled to expire on February 28, 2010.  Other
than changing the name of the reporting system the consultation and
burden estimates remain the same.  CBPO estimates the total annual
respondent cost and burden to be $63,041.32 (as of January 13, 2010). 
The annual federal cost to administer this information collection is
estimated to be $36,008.00 (as of January 13, 2010), which results in a
total annual cost of $99.049.32.

2.	Need for and use of the Collection

2(a)	Need/Authority for the Collection

Collecting information from more than 10 non-federal organizations is
needed to effectively coordinate project activities and funding among
partners and stakeholders in the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and as a
means to provide transparency and accountability to the public. 
Specifically, in a report entitled, Chesapeake Bay Program:  Improved
Strategies are Needed to Better Assess, Report and Manage Restoration
Progress, dated October 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office
(GAO) recommended that CBPO:

complete efforts to develop and implement an integrated assessment
approach;

revise its reporting approach to improve effectiveness and credibility;
and

develop a comprehensive, coordinated implementation strategy that takes
into account available resources.

In the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-161), Congress
directed EPA to:

immediately implement all of the recommendations of the 2005 GAO Report;

submit a report to Congress and to GAO, with supporting evidence, that
demonstrates the GAO recommendations have been implemented; and

develop a Chesapeake Action Plan for the remaining years of the
Chesapeake 2000 agreement.

Specifically, Congress stated that the Chesapeake Bay Program must:  (1)
clearly articulate realistic targets the Chesapeake Bay Program expects
to achieve in each of the remaining years; (2) describe the actual
activities the Chesapeake Bay Program will implement in each year to
achieve these annual targets; (3) identify the amount and source of
funding that will be used to accomplish each of these activities; and,
(4) describe the process the Chesapeake Bay Program will use to track
and measure the progress of these actions. 

Consistent with GAO’s recommendations and the Consolidated
Appropriations Act (P.L. 110- 161) of 2008, CBPO and its partners
developed the Chesapeake Action Plan (CAP) to strengthen and expand
partnerships in the watershed, enhance coordination of restoration
activities, and increase the collective accountability for protecting
the Chesapeake Bay.  The primary mechanism for input into the CAP is the
Web-based Chesapeake Registry (previously called Chesapeake Action
Plan/Activity Integration Plan (CAP/AIP)) reporting system.  The
Chesapeake Registry reporting system provides the tools necessary to
support a management system that more closely aligns implementation
responsibilities with the unique capabilities and missions of the CBP
partners.  

This collection of information is pursuant to Section 117 of the Clean
Water Act, the purpose of which is to expand and strengthen cooperative
efforts to restore and protect the Chesapeake Bay.  

This information collection also is necessary to address the priorities
outlined in Presidential Executive Order (E.O.) 13508 dated May 12,
2009, titled “Chesapeake Bay Protection and Restoration.”  The E.O.
establishes a new framework for federal leadership, planning, and
accountability, through a Federal Leadership Committee, chaired by the
Administrator of EPA.  The Committee is required to, among other things,
coordinate data information mechanisms among federal, state, local, and
private partners.  Specific sections of the Executive Order include:

Section 203(d):   Identify the “mechanisms that will ensure that
governmental and other activities, including data collection and
distribution, are coordinated and effective, relying on existing
mechanisms where appropriate; and 

Section 204:   Ensure that “Federal actions to protect and restore the
Chesapeake Bay are closely coordinated with actions by State and local
agencies in the watershed and the resources, authorities, and expertise
of Federal, State, and local agencies are used as efficiently as
possible.” The Chesapeake Registry has been identified as an existing
data collection mechanism that can aid in improving coordination.

2(b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The primary users of the data are EPA and the EPA partners.  EPA will
use the information collection to identify and catalogue CBPO
partners’ and stakeholders’ resources and actions that are
associated with efforts to protect and restore the Chesapeake Bay.  CBPO
partners and stakeholders will be able to view each other’s activities
across the watershed with details such as where the activity is
occurring, how much funding the activity has received, and which
partners are involved.  With improved visibility of Bay-wide activities
and comprehensive progress reporting, the Chesapeake Registry will help
EPA to promote enhanced coordination among the CBPO partnership and
improve their progress in protecting and restoring the Bay.  

EPA and its partners will use the Chesapeake Registry reporting system
to summarize and synthesize information so the program partners can
understand, at a glance, the progress being made in key program areas. 
Publically available reports will include measures of progress,
information about the resources invested, and strategic analyses of
actions necessary to improve implementation.  In addition, CBPO
anticipates that some of the partners will use the Chesapeake Registry
reporting system as tool for their own management and planning efforts. 
Bay restoration and protection efforts will be made transparent and
maintained in a centralized database to enable the partnership to
identify potential activity overlap and gaps.  This will reduce
duplication of effort and better target resources.  As a whole, the CAP
represents an important enhancement to the way the CBP partnership will
operate.

3.	Non duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

3(a)	Non duplication

EPA conducted research into other EPA programs and other federal agency
programs, and state agency/department or non-government organizations to
determine whether any organization had information pertinent to the
Chesapeake Registry.  Within EPA, it was confirmed that only the
Chesapeake Bay Program Office had the pertinent information.  Other
Federal agencies investigated include the habitat and restoration
agencies within the U.S. Departments of Interior and Commerce.  EPA
confirmed that none of these agencies maintains or requests information
duplicative of the information entered into the Chesapeake Registry
reporting system.  Only one non-profit organization, Defenders of
Wildlife, was identified for possible duplicative information,
specifically   HYPERLINK "http://www.conservationregistry.org" 
www.conservationregistry.org , which is funded through Department of
Interior resources.  Research concluded that the newly developed
conservation registry is presently focused on the Pacific Northwest,
came online after Chesapeake Registry and is uncertain of a sustainable
funding base.  Hence, no information similar to the Chesapeake Registry
reporting system was identified.

Within the Chesapeake Bay watershed states, only the State of Maryland
was identified for possible duplication, specifically,   HYPERLINK
"http://www.baystat.maryland.gov"  www.baystat.maryland.gov .  However,
Maryland’s information was not Bay-wide; it was specific to Maryland
and most of the information originates from EPA project activity funds.
Hence, no information similar to the information requested for the
Chesapeake Registry reporting system was identified in the state
agencies.  

Pursuant to this research, EPA concluded that activity and funding
information required in the Chesapeake Registry is specific and unique
to the Chesapeake Bay's goals of protection and habitat restoration. 
The Chesapeake Registry is the only reporting system used to annually
collect comprehensive information about funding levels, which allows EPA
to align funding and activities to specific strategic target areas
identified in the Chesapeake Action Plan.

3(b)	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR submission to OMB

Pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.13(d) EPA requested a waiver of the Federal
Register requirement for an emergency ICR and received approval from the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB).  Upon OMB approval (OMB Control
No. 2003-0001), EPA solicited comments in the Federal Register for a
renewal of the approved ICR pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.8(d) and received no
comments.  The ICR is scheduled to expire on February 28, 2010.  Other
than changing the name of the reporting system the consultation and
burden estimates remain the same.

3(c)	Consultations

CBPO invited nine non-federal organizations to participate in
consultation to estimate their annual cost and burden for using the
Chesapeake Registry reporting system.  The consultations are in keeping
with ICR guidance to consult with no-more than nine non-federal
organizations. Organizations that did not participate in the 2008 data
call were provided a questionnaire for new users prior to phone
consultations.  Those organizations that participated in the 2008 data
call were provided a questionnaire designed for previous users prior to
phone consultations with respondents.  Respondents were asked to
estimate burdens for labor costs associated with reporting activities,
capital/startup costs, and operations and maintenance costs.  Table 1
provides a list of organizations asked to participate in consultations. 
Not all chose to participate.

Table 1.  Consultation Participants by Type of Organization

Name	Phone Number	Affiliation

State and Local Government

Susan Block	(804) 371-7486	VA Dept. of Conservation and Rec.

Diane Davis	(202) 741-0847	District of Columbia

Penny Gross	(703) 354-8419	Fairfax County Council

Brenton McCloskey	(410) 260-8722	State of Maryland 

Patricia Buckley	(717) 772-1675	Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental
Protection

Private / Non-Government Organizations

Amanda Bassow	(202) 595-2476	National Fish and Wildlife Foundation

Dr. Jana Davis	(410) 974-2941, ext. 101	Chesapeake Bay Trust

Bydon Lidle	(717) 238-0425, ext. 317	Susquehanna River Basin Commission
(SRBC)

Kirk Mantay	(410) 224-6620	Ducks Unlimited

As of January 13, 2010, CBPO has received completed questionnaires from
six previous users and no new users.  CBPO conducted several phone
interviews with representatives of the participating respondents to
clarify responses to the questionnaires.

Federal consultations are not required.  However, due to CBP’s unique
partnership with federal partners, CBPO consulted and estimated the
federal partners’ annual burden and cost for using the Chesapeake
Registry reporting system.  See Table 2 below for federal consultations.
 CBP based the estimate on EPA’s experience because it has the most
data reporting into the Chesapeake Registry and it was the only federal
agency to respond.  One federal respondent stated that they had no
experience with the Chesapeake Registry and could not provide estimates.
 

Table 2.  Federal Consultation Participants

Name	Phone Number	Affiliation

Lori Mackey	(410) 267-5715	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Brian Burch	(202) 566-0120	U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Bob Campbell	(410) 267-5747	National Park Service

3(d)	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

The frequency of this information collection coincides with the federal
and state budgetary processes.  Annual submissions of information are
required to accurately align funding resources to ongoing restoration
and protection activities and to track progress against established
performance measures.  Less frequent reporting would preclude CBPO from
using the information collection to effectively evaluate and publish the
results of program activities. 

3(e)	General Guidelines

This information collection is consistent with all of OMB’s general
guidelines.

Respondents are asked to report annually;

Respondents are provided more than 30 days to respond to the data call;

Respondents are not required to submit more than one copy of original
documents;

This information collection does not use a statistical survey;

Respondents do not receive a pledge of confidentiality in regard to the
information collection.  No information is confidential or personal; all
is considered public.

Respondents are not asked to submit proprietary or confidential
information.

3(f)	Confidentiality

Information in the Chesapeake Registry reporting system is not of a
confidential nature. The Chesapeake Registry is collecting project and
funding information with point of contact name and all submittals are
voluntary.

3(g)	Sensitive Questions

None of the requested information is considered to be of a sensitive
nature.

4.	The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a)	Respondents/NAICS Codes

The respondents for this ICR include the partners and stakeholders of
the Chesapeake Bay Program, which includes federal, state and local
agencies (NAICS 924110 and 924120), non-governmental organizations
(NAICS 813312), and others..  

4(b)	Information Requested

Information from the CAP partners is collected through the web-based
Chesapeake Registry reporting system.  

(i)	Data items, including record keeping requirements

CAP partners provide detailed information about the activities they
undertake to restore and protect the Chesapeake Bay and its watershed. 
Once logged in to the Chesapeake Registry reporting system, the partners
enter data about their activities which are grouped by partnership goals
and topic areas.  Each data item is designated as a reporting item. 
CBPO does not impose additional recordkeeping requirements on any
respondent.  States and other entities may impose their own
recordkeeping that is separate from Chesapeake Registry.  Specific data
items entered into the AIP electronic record about each activity
include: 

Activity description;

Lead organization / Agency;

Point of contact;

Source of funding;

Status of funding;

Activity phase;

Hard dollars allocated to activity;

Number of FTEs allocated to activity;

Year of funding;

Pertinent geography; and

Pertinent C2K commitment.

Additionally, users have the option of entering other activity-related
information, including the following:

Collaborating organization;

Performance measures/units; and

Milestones.

Respondent Activities

CBP partners and stakeholders conduct the following activities to
assemble, submit, and store the data items identified above.  These
activities reflect the items of burden mandated by the 1995 Paperwork
Reduction Act.  

Table 3.  List of Respondent Activities 

Activity	Record Keeping	Reporting	CBP

Preparing to Use the System.  Detailed instructions for entering data
are provided in hard copy format and online and through training
workshops.  Gathering and reviewing the data to be entered, and
organizing it by CBP goal is a typical activity as part of common
business practices.  

X	X

Obtaining Access.  No special technology or systems are required for
this collection as the Chesapeake Registry reporting system is
Web-based.  Internet access is a standard business tool.  EPA
establishes user IDs and passwords for each reporting organization.

X	X

Entering Records.  CAP partners will review pre-populated system
elements, and review data entered by other partners to ensure no
duplicative data.  Records about new activities will be entered as
appropriate. 

X

	Reviewing and Verifying Records.  Reviewing and verifying the accuracy
of the data entered into the system is typical of standard business
practice.   

X	X

Feedback and Evaluation.  Users of the Chesapeake Registry reporting
system are encouraged to provide feedback on the system.  

X

	5.	The Information Collected–Agency Activities, Collection
Methodology, and Information Management

5(a)	Agency Activities   

Activities undertaken by CBPO on an annual basis for this information
collection include:

Update reporting guidance and system instructions;

Notify system users of data call;

Conduct training;

Update Web site;

Solicit and compile feedback from users; and

Respond to user comments and questions.

5(b)	Collection Methodology and Management

The Chesapeake Bay Program Office will use the Web-based Chesapeake
Registry reporting system available at:  http://cap.chesapeakebay.net to
collect data from the CAP partners.  Each reporting organization will be
assigned a user ID and password.  Security measures have been
established to protect data that have been entered, including
maintaining the data on a secure server on a secure network, confirming
the data with each reporting organization, and making only summarized
information available to the public.  

In preparation for the annual data call, EPA/CBPO will provide detailed
guidance about the database to the CBP partners and stakeholders (e.g.,
organize training/workshops, facilitate hands-on demonstrations as
necessary).  CBPO will also verify the accuracy of the data entered into
the system during and after the data call.  Annual updating by the CBP
partners and stakeholders will be streamlined in light of the automated
nature of compiling the information.  To improve the efficiency of
entering data, a cloning button is available during data entry that
allows users to make a copy of the data for the next fiscal year, i.e.,
clone the 2008 data to create and modify a record for 2009.

5(c)	Small Entity Flexibility

EPA expects that small entities such as non-profit organizations (e.g.,
National Fish and Wildlife Association), local environmental community
associations (e.g., River Keeper Organizations), and local governments
(e.g., Fairfax County) will participate in the Chesapeake Registry.  EPA
has designed its information collections to minimize respondent burden
while obtaining sufficient and accurate information.  For example, EPA
has tailored the Chesapeake Registry system so that it requests only the
minimum information needed to establish contact with small entities. 
Providing information to the AIP is not a regulatory requirement and is
voluntary on the part of participants.  EPA has established several
methods for participating in the Chesapeake Registry and is fully
prepared to help small entities (e.g., training, workshops, conference
calls, hands-on assistance, etc.).   

5(d)	Collection Schedule

The information collection is based on an annual collection of data on
the activities of the CBP partners and stakeholders.  A typical annual
schedule is as follows:

Table 4.  Collection Schedule 

DATE 	ACTIVITY 

September/October	Outreach to Bay-wide Partnership

Conduct workshops / feedback sessions 

November/December	Data call sent to CAP partners 

January 	Data entry complete  

February 	Cross-functional QA and analysis by CBPO

6.	Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection 

The consultations to determine the annual cost and burden estimates for
using the Chesapeake Registry reporting system are ongoing and
incomplete.  EPA will complete the consultations and provide a final
estimate for the burden and cost of the collection before submitting the
renewal ICR.

6(a)	Estimating Respondent Burden

Burden hour estimates are based on the responses to the consultation
questionnaires and follow-up discussions where needed with respondents. 
The respondents include state and local government agencies and
non-governmental organizations identified in Section 3(c). 
Additionally, federal burden is included on using the database by
consulting with EPA, a large user of the system as identified in Section
3(c).  Annual estimates for each type of respondent are provided in
table 5.

Table 5.  Annual Burden Estimate Per Response

Respondent Type 	Annual Burden Per Response

State and Local Government Agencies 	64.8 hours

Non-governmental Organizations	11.5 hours

Federal Partner Agencies	9 hours

6(b)	Estimating Respondent Costs

 (i)	Estimating Labor Costs

Table 6 presents the annual respondent burden/cost estimate for state
and local government respondents.  Labor rates were derived from
information published by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics and include
a benefits multiplier of 1.6.  Labor rates were also increased by 17
percent to account for overhead.  For each labor category, the labor
rate is the average of a calculated rate for state employees and a
calculated rate for local government agency staff.  

Table 6.  Annual Burden/Cost Estimate Per Response for State and Local
Government Agencies 

Information Collect Activity	Hours Per Response/ Year*	Labor Cost Per
Response/ Year	Capital or Startup Costs Per Response/ Year	O&M Cost Per
Response/ Year	Total Hours and Costs Per Response

	Managerial ($67.18/

hour)	Technical ($49.60/

hour)	Clerical ($31.68/

hour)



Total Hours/ Year	Total Costs/ Year

Preparing to Use the System	4.7	18.0	9.7	$1,512.55	$0.00	$0.00	32.3
$1,512.55

Obtaining Access	0.0	0.3	0.5	$32.37	$0.00	$0.00	0.8	$32.37

Entering Records	3.7	12.0	6.7	$1,052.73	$0.00	$0.00	22.3	$1,052.73

Reviewing and Verifying Records	1.3	2.0	2.7	$273.25	$0.00	$0.00	6.0
$273.25

Feedback and Evaluation	0.0	0.0	1.0	$31.68	$0.00	$0.00	1.0	$31.68

Other Activities	0.0	0.0	2.3	$73.92	$0.00	$0.00	2.3	$73.92

Total	9.7	32.3	22.8	$2,976.50	$0.00	$0.00	64.8	$2,976.50

*Source:	State agencies,
http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/naics4_999200.htm

	Local government agencies,
http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/naics4_999300.htm

Table 7 presents the annual respondent burden/cost estimate for
non-governmental organizations.  Labor rates were derived from
information published by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics and include
a benefits multiplier of 1.6.  Labor rates were also increased by 17
percent to account for overhead.

Table 7.  Annual Burden/Cost Estimate Per Response for Non-governmental
Organizations 

Information Collect Activity	Hours Per Response/ Year*	Labor Cost Per
Response/ Year	Capital or Startup Costs Per Response/ Year	O&M Cost Per
Response/ Year	Total Hours and Costs Per Response

	Managerial ($67.18/

hour)	Technical ($49.60/

hour)	Clerical ($31.68/

hour)



Total Hours/ Year	Total Costs/ Year

Preparing to Use the System	4.0	0.0	0.0	$272.68	$0.00	$0.00	4.0	$272.68

Obtaining Access	1.0	0.0	0.0	$68.17	$0.00	$0.00	1.0	$68.17

Entering Records	4.0	0.0	0.0	$272.68	$0.00	$0.00	4.0	$272.68

Reviewing and Verifying Records	1.5	0.0	0.0	$102.26	$0.00	$0.00	1.5
$102.26

Feedback and Evaluation	1.0	0.0	0.0	$68.17	$0.00	$0.00	1.0	$68.17

Other Activities	0.0	0.0	0.0	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	0.0	$0.00

Total	11.5	0.0	0.0	$783.96	$0.00	$0.00	11.5	$783.96

*Source:	  HYPERLINK "http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/" 
http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/ 

Table 8 presents the annual respondent burden/cost estimate for federal
respondents.  The federal labor rates were derived from information
published by the Bureau of Labor and Statistics and include a benefits
multiplier of 1.6.  

Table 8.  Annual Burden/Cost Estimate Per Response for Federal Agencies 

Information Collect Activity	Hours Per Response/ Year	Labor Cost Per
Response/

Year	Capital or Startup Costs Per Response/

Year	O&M Cost Per Response/

Year	Total Hours and Costs Per Response

	GS14	GS13



Total Hours/

Year	Total Costs/

Year

	($72.51/ hour)	($61.36/

hour)





	Preparing to Use the System	0	0	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	0	$0.00

Obtaining Access	0	0	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	0	$0.00

Entering Records	6	2	$527.11	$0.00	$0.00	8	$527.11

Reviewing and Verifying Records	1	1	$103.19	$0.00	$0.00	2	$103.19

Feedback and Evaluation	0	0	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	0	$0.00

Other Activities	0	0	$0.00	$0.00	$0.00	0	$0.00

Total	7.0	2.0	$630.30	$0.00	$0.00	9.0	$630.30

*Source:  http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/html/gs_h.asp (step 5); rates
include a benefits multiplier of 1.6

(ii)	Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs

Respondents will not incur capital or operations and maintenance costs
for this information collection.

6(c)	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

As shown in Table 9, the estimated annual cost to the federal government
for administering this collection of information is $36,008.00.

Table 9.  Total Annual Federal Administrative Burden/Cost Estimate

Information Collect Activity	Hours / Year*	Labor Cost/

Year	O&M Cost/

Year	Total Hours and Costs

	GS14	GS13	GS12

	Total Hours/

Year	Total Costs/

Year

	$72.51/

hour	$61.36/

hour	$51.87/

hour





Update Reporting Guidance and System Instructions	24	0	0	$1,740.29	$0.00
24	$1,740.29

Notify System Users of Data Call	24	0	0	$1,740.29	$0.00	24	$1,740.29

Conduct Training	40	0	0	$2,900.48	$0.00	40	$2,900.48

Update Web Site	0	12	16	$1,566.27	$0.00	28	$1,566.27

Solicit and Compile Feedback from Users	16	0	0	$1,160.19	$0.00	16
$1,160.19

Respond to User Comments and Questions	40	0	0	$2,900.48	$0.00	40
$2,900.48

Contractor support



	$24,000.00

$24,000.00

Total Administrative Burden	144	12	16	$12,008.00	$24,000.00	172
$36,008.00

*Source:  http://www.opm.gov/oca/09tables/html/gs_h.asp (step 5); rates
include a benefits multiplier of 1.6

6(d)	Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

CBPO estimates that 50 non-federal organizations and 10 federal agencies
are likely to participate in the annual data call for the Chesapeake
Registry.  CBPO’s intent is to increase the number of participants
over time to better coordinate activities and resources in keeping with
E.O. 13508.  The total burden and costs are summarized in Table 10.

Table 10.  Annual Burden Estimate* 

Respondent Type	Hours Per Response	Cost Per Response	Number of Responses
Per Year	Total Annual Cost

State and Local Government Agencies 	64.8	$2,976.50	8	$23,812.00

Non-governmental Organizations	11.5	$783.96	42	$32,926.32

Federal Agencies	9	$630.30	10	$6,303.00

Total	Varies	Varies	60	$63,041.32

*Note:  Respondents will not incur capital or operations and maintenance
costs for this information collection

6(e)	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

As of January 13, 2010, the non Federal Government total annual burden
is 1,001 hours and the total annual cost  is estimated to be $56,738.32.
 This is identical to the estimate contained in the emergency ICR dated
August 6, 2009. The bottom line burden hours and costs for each
respondent group, federal administrative hours, and operations and
maintenance costs are listed in Table 11.

Table 11.  Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs

Line Item	Hours Per Response	Cost Per Response	Number of Responses Per
Year	Total Cost

State and Local Government Agency Responses	64.8	$2,976.50	8	$23,812.00

Non-governmental Organization Responses	11.5	$783.96	42	$32,926.32

Federal Agency Responses	9	$630.30	10	$6,303.00

Total Respondent Cost	Varies	Varies	60	$63,041.32

Federal Administrative Hours	2.87	$200.13	60	$12,008.00

Federal Operations and Maintenance (Contractor Support)



$24,000.00

Total 

	60	$99,049.32

(iii)	Variations in the Annual Bottom Line

CBPO does not anticipate significant variations in the annual bottom
line.

6(f)	Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in burden. 

6(g)	Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to average 64.8 hours per response for state
and local government agencies, 11.5 hours per response for
non-government organizations, and 9 hours per response for federal
agencies.  Burden is defined as 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 estimate
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 Number
EPA-R03-CBP-2009-0500, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from
8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays.
 The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the
telephone number for the Enforcement and Compliance Docket is (202)
566-1752.  An electronic version of the public docket is available at
www.regulations.gov.  This site can be used to submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket,
and to access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  When 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, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk
Officer for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number
EPA-R03-CBP-2009-0500 and OMB Control Number 2003-0001 in any
correspondence.

 Common Business Practice

CBPO ICR Supporting Statement Part A	  PAGE  1  of   NUMPAGES  13 
January 13, 2010

