Information Collection Request for the

National Wastewater Operator Training and

Technical Assistance Program

Section 104(g)(1) of the Clean Water Act

EPA ICR No. 1977.03

OMB Control No. 2040-0238

January 23, 2008.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Wastewater Management

Municipal Assistance Branch

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue (4204-M)

EPA East Building, 7th Floor

Washington, D.C.  20460

Table of Contents

  TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539056"  1.0
IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc186539056 \h
1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539057"  1.a	Title of the Information Collection
 PAGEREF _Toc186539057 \h  1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539058"  1.b	Short Characterization/Abstract
PAGEREF _Toc186539058 \h  1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539059"  2.0  	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION
  PAGEREF _Toc186539059 \h  1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539060"  2.a	Need and Authority for the
Collection	  PAGEREF _Toc186539060 \h  1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539061"  2.b	Practical Utility of the Data and
Users of the Data	  PAGEREF _Toc186539061 \h  1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539062"  3.0  	NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS,
AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA	  PAGEREF _Toc186539062 \h  2

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539063"  3.a	Non-duplication	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539063 \h  2

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539064"  3.b	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR
Submission to OMB	  PAGEREF _Toc186539064 \h  2

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539065"  3.c	Consultations	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539065 \h  2

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539066"  3.d	Effects of Less Frequent Data
Collection	  PAGEREF _Toc186539066 \h  3

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539067"  3.e	General Guidelines	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539067 \h  3

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539068"  3.f	Confidentiality	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539068 \h  3

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539069"  3.g	Sensitive Questions	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539069 \h  3

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539070"  4.0	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION
REQUESTED	  PAGEREF _Toc186539070 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539071"  4.a	Respondents and NAICS Codes
PAGEREF _Toc186539071 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539072"  4.b	Information Requested	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539072 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539073"  4.b(i)	Data Items, including
Record-keeping Requirements	  PAGEREF _Toc186539073 \h  4

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539074"  4.b(ii)	Respondent Activities	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539074 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539075"  5.0 	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED:  AGENCY
ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539075 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539076"  5.a	Agency Activities	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539076 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539077"  5.b	Collection Methodology and
Management	  PAGEREF _Toc186539077 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539078"  5.c	Small Entity Flexibility	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539078 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539079"  5.d	Collection Schedule	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539079 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539080"  6.0 	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF
THE COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc186539080 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539081"  6.a	Estimating Respondent Burden
PAGEREF _Toc186539081 \h  8

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539082"  6.b	Estimating Respondent Costs
PAGEREF _Toc186539082 \h  8

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539083"  6.c	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost
PAGEREF _Toc186539083 \h  8

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539084"  6.d	Estimating Respondent Universe and
Total Burden Hours and Costs	  PAGEREF _Toc186539084 \h  9

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539085"  6.e	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost
Tables	  PAGEREF _Toc186539085 \h  9

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539086"  6.f 	Reasons for Change in Burden
PAGEREF _Toc186539086 \h  10

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539087"  6.g 	Burden Statement	  PAGEREF
_Toc186539087 \h  10

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539088"  Attachment 1	  PAGEREF _Toc186539088 \h
11

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc186539089"  Attachment 2	  PAGEREF _Toc186539089 \h
14

1.0  	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION tc \l1 "1.0
IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1.a	Title of the Information Collection tc \l2 "1.a	Title of the
Information Collection

National Wastewater Operator Training and Technical Assistance

Program Section 104(g)(1) of the Clean Water Act.

EPA ICR No.: 1977.03

OMB Control No.: 2040-0238

1.b	Short Characterization/Abstract

In 1982 Congress recognized the need for wastewater operator training.
Sections 104(g)(1) and 308 of the Clean Water Act (CWA) authorize this
Information Collection Request (ICR) regarding the Wastewater Operator
Training and Technical Assistance Program, otherwise known as the 104(g)
Program.  The purpose of the 104(g) Program is to provide an adequate
supply of trained personnel to operate and maintain existing and future
treatment works and related activities, and to enhance substantially the
proficiency of those engaged in such activities.  The statute calls upon
U.S. EPA, in cooperation with state and interstate agencies,
municipalities, educational institutes, and other organizations, to
develop training and retrain people in the field of, or who are entering
into the field of, operations and maintenance of treatment works and
related activities.

2.0  	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2.a	Need and Authority for the Collection tc \l2 "2.a	Need and Authority
for the Collection

Sections 104(g)(1) and 308 of the Clean Water Act provide the authority
for the Wastewater Operator Training Program.  The U.S. EPA has made the
decision to collect information to track data pertaining to the 104(g)
Program.  The goal of this collection is to evaluate the outcomes and
environmental benefits of the 104(g) Program’s assistance activities.
This information will also help assistance providers to improve the
outreach activities that are provided through the 104(g) Program.

2.b	Practical Utility of the Data and Users of the Data tc \l2 "2.b
Practical Utility of the Data and Users of the Data

U.S. EPA uses the information collected to update its 104(g) Program
database that contains information on the wastewater treatment plants
assisted by the 104(g) Program.  The database is used as a source of
information to monitor the pollutant reduction progress, compliance
status, and other environmental outcomes and benefits to the wastewater
treatment plants assisted through the 104(g) Program.

3.0  	NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA tc
\l1 "3.0  NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS,	     AND OTHER COLLECTION
CRITERIA

3.a	Non-duplication tc \l2 "3.a	Non-duplication

U.S. EPA has researched and discussed the data collection
responsibilities with the Wastewater Operator Training and Technical
Assistance Program’s training centers.  There are no other reporting
requirements of this nature being conducted by these centers.  Our
research revealed no duplicative reporting requirements.

3.b	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB tc \l2 "3.b
Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

In compliance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act, any agency
developing a non-rule related ICR must solicit public comments for a
60-day period prior to submitting the ICR to Office of Management and
Budget (OMB).  The comments, which are used partly to determine
realistic burden estimates for respondents, must be considered when
completing the Supporting Statement that is submitted to OMB.  EPA has
published the Federal Register notice for this draft ICR renewal on
January 23, 2008, (Federal Register Vol. 73, No. 15, pages 3956-3958)
and is soliciting public comments.

3.c	Consultations

Participant trainers of  the National Operator Training Program were
requested  for comments on this information collection request.  The
following people were contacted:

Phillip Preston, Indiana Department of Environmental Management

Richard Weigand, West Virginia Environmental Training Center

Bill Patenaude, Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management

Brett Ward, University of Tennessee Municipal Technologies Advisory
Services

Steve Duerre, Minnesota Pollution Control Agency

Bill Engel, Director University of Florida TREEO Center

Robert Gott, Program Coordinator, New Mexico

Doug Hill, Michigan Department of Environmental Quality

Larry Murphree, Environmental Trainer, Mississippi

Six of the above trainers responded.  Two respondents from Mississippi
consider the actual burden to be more than in the ICR because of
difficulties in gathering the information from their main offices, where
all the records are kept. One respondent indicates that the reporting
requirements are appropriate for the 104(g) Program because the
pollutant reduction data is necessary to demonstrate the effectiveness
of the program. The last three respondents feel that the required
reporting burden is either less than or is same as the one reported in
the ICR, and stated that we should collect additional information about
biosolids, total phosphorus violations, and staffing problems.

3.d	 tc \l2 "3.d	 Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection tc \l2
"Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection

The EPA collects the information three times a year for the Wastewater
Operator Training and Technical Assistance Program ICR.  The EPA Office
of Wastewater Management collects annual pollutant load reduction
information.  The EPA Regions, under grant conditions,  require
semi-annual, mid-fiscal year (May) and the end of the fiscal year
(November), reporting on the status of any given year’s assistance
projects.  The pollution reduction information is essential to
illustrate the environmental benefits of the 104(g) Program.  The EPA
collects this information to track the number of facilities assisted and
the status of the projects.  Thus, EPA ensures that the training center
grantees’ commitments to the EPA Regions are met.  If EPA collects
data less frequently, it would impair EPA’s ability to monitor the
grantee’s progress per the grant conditions and may be detrimental to
the 104(g) Program.

3.e	General Guidelines tc \l2 "3.e	General Guidelines

This ICR is consistent with 5CFR 1320.5(D)(2), and adheres to all
guidelines for information collection requests.

3.f	Confidentiality tc \l2 "3.f	Confidentiality

Where information submitted in conjunction with this ICR contains trade
secrets or similar confidential business information, the respondent has
the authority to request that this information be treated as
confidential business information.  All data so designated will be
handled pursuant to 40 CFR Part 2.  This information will be maintained
according to procedures outlined in EPA’s Security Manual Part III,
Chapter 9, dated August 9, 1976.  Pursuant to Section 308(b) of the CWA,
effluent data may not be treated as confidential.

3.g	Sensitive Questions

The reporting requirements addressed in this ICR do not include
sensitive questions.

4.0	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED tc \l1 "4.0  THE
RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4.a	Respondents and NAICS Codes tc \l2 "4.a	Respondents and SIC and
NAICS Codes

	The following is a list of North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) codes associated with the Wastewater Operator Training
Program:

924110 - Environmental Protection Program Administration

611310 - Colleges

611210 - Junior Colleges

4.b	Information Requested

 tc \l2 "4.b	Information Requested

4.b(i)	Data Items, including Record-keeping Requirements

Reporting:

1) Spreadsheet reporting categories:

A.) Number of Facilities that have Completed Assistance: achieved
compliance, maintained compliance, improved performance, and no
improvement; and

B.) Number of Facilities that are Continuing Assistance: achieved
compliance, maintained compliance, improved performance, and no
improvement.

(See Attachment 1 for spreadsheet and guidance.)

2) Database reporting categories for each facility assisted:

EPA Region, Facility Name, Facility Street Address, City/Town, State,
Zip Code, Start Assistance Date, Compliance Status at the Start,
Compliance Achieved Date, Conclusion Assistance Date, Type of Facility,
Top Five Performance Limiting Factors, Repeat Assistance Facility, If
Repeat - Date of Last Assistance, Tribal Assistance, Design Size of the
Plant, Comments, Other Benefits, Permit Number, Biological Oxygen Demand
Average Start, Total Suspended Solids Average Start, Nitrogen Average
Start, Biological Oxygen Demand Average End, Total Suspended Solids
Average End, Nitrogen Average End, Longitude, Latitude, and Annual
Average Flow.

(See Attachment 2 for database and guidance.)

U.S. EPA requires that the Wastewater Operator Training and Technical
Assistance Program training center grantees report this information.  It
will be to the training center grantee’s benefit to keep the requested
information on hand after reporting, but it will not be required by the
U.S. EPA.  The 104(g) Program’s trainers will use the reporting
requirements covered by this ICR to measure an assisted facility’s
improvement and the subsequent environmental benefits of the assistance
efforts.

4.b(ii)	Respondent Activities

Under the grant compliance requirements, the EPA Regions require the
respondents to submit status data semi-annually on a spreadsheet created
by EPA. The training center grantee will submit the information
electronically to the corresponding U.S. EPA Regional Office, with a
copy to U.S. EPA Headquarters.  The information collected is based on
the trainer’s activity at the assisted site.  The trainer knows the
status of the facility being assisted, and hence, no extraneous paper
work will be required.

The respondents, under the grant conditions, will be required to submit
the pollutant data information on an annual basis in the format
established by U.S. EPA.  This information will be submitted
electronically from the training center grantee to the corresponding
U.S. EPA Regional Office, with a copy to U.S. EPA Headquarters.  The
majority of the information collected will be obtained while the trainer
is at the facility being assisted.  The pollution reduction information
will be obtained via either an on-site visit or the telephone.

5.0 	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED:  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT tc \l1 "      	5.0 THE
INFORMATION COLLECTED:  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5.a	Agency Activities tc \l2 "5.a	Agency Activities

In collecting and analyzing the information associated with Wastewater
Operator Training Program ICR, the U.S. EPA will compile and maintain up
to five years of data.  The spreadsheet forms and 104(g) Program
database format will be created by U.S. EPA and sent to the 104(g)
Program’s training center grantees.  The U.S. EPA will review the
provided information, and create an annual accomplishment report that
will be placed on the EPA’s website.

5.b	Collection Methodology and Management tc \l2 "5.b	Collection
Methodology and Management

The data will be entered into the spreadsheet form and the database form
by the 104(g) Program training centers, the information will be
submitted electronically to the appropriate U.S. EPA Regional Office,
with a copy to U.S. EPA Headquarters.  The U.S. EPA will ensure the
accuracy and completeness of information collected by reviewing each
submittal upon receipt.  The data will be stored at U.S. EPA
Headquarters’ Wastewater Operator Training Program coordinator’s
desk top computer.  The public may access the data upon request to the
U.S. EPA.

5.c	Small Entity Flexibility

 tc \l2 "5.c	Small Entity Flexibility

The Wastewater Operator Training Program ICR does not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Therefore,
this section does not apply to this ICR.

5.d	Collection Schedule tc \l2 "5.d	Collection Schedule

Information will be collected three times a year for the Wastewater
Operator Training Program ICR.  Annual reporting for the database
information is required in November of each year.   Semi-annual
reporting for the status of any given year’s assistance projects in
spreadsheet format is required mid-fiscal year (May) and the end of the
fiscal year (November).

6.0 	ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

The total number of respondents is estimated to be the forty-six 104(g)
Program training center grantees.  The responses are collected three
times per year.  The projected combined annual cost of this ICR to all
forty-six 104(g) training center grantee respondents and the federal
government will be approximately $24,600.  The average annual cost to
each 104(g)(1) training center will be $312.20, for a total cost of
$14,361.20 per year.  The average annual cost to EPA’s Regional
Offices and Headquarters will be $930.88, for a total cost of $10,239.68
per year.  The projected combined annual burden hours of this ICR will
be 498 hours.  The average annual burden hours to each State or training
center grantee will be 7 hours, for a total of 322 hours per year for
all 46 public respondents.  The average annual burden hours to each EPA
Regional Office and Headquarters will be 16 hours, for a total of 176
burden hours.

Data will be collected on an annual basis, in November of each year, for
the database collection, and data for the spreadsheet information will
be collected on a semi-annual basis, in May and November of each year.
This information collection is required under the grant requirements;
EPA expects that 100% of the 104(g) training centers will respond to
this collection request.  All forty-six (46) training centers grantees
and U.S. EPA have the necessary equipment, desk-top computers with
appropriate software to collect and manage this information.  There will
be no additional start-up or maintenance costs associated with this
project to perform this information collection request.  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.

Salaries for the 104(g) Program training center grantee staff are based
on the Bureau of Labor statistics weekly earnings as of October, 2007.
The U.S. EPA salaries are based on the 2007 federal salary, GS-level 13
step 5.  A loaded wage estimate was calculated by multiplying the
federal wage by 1.6.

The cost imposed on the training center grantees to the requirements
discussed in this ICR is a function of the burden placed on them for
record keeping and reporting the information described above and the
wages of a typical worker performing these activities.

Estimates of civilian salaries associated with this information
collection have been prepared using the Bureau of Labor’s statistics
for October, 2007.  This information is on the Bureau of Labor’s
web-page at the following Internet address:    HYPERLINK
"http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t02.htm"
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t02.htm

This ICR estimates the average loaded annual salary for a civilian
professional employee is $89,200 per year, at the hourly rate of $44.60;
and

U.S. EPA estimates that the total annual civilian employee response cost
is $14,361.20 for record keeping and reporting.

Estimates of the federal government respondent costs associated with
this information collection have been prepared using the Federal Salary
Table 2007.  This information is on the Office of Personnel
Management’s web-page at the following Internet address:    HYPERLINK
"http://opm.gov/oca/07tables/html/gs_h.asp"
http://opm.gov/oca/07tables/html/gs_h.asp

The average annual salary for a federal employee working on data
collection and submission for this ICR is estimated to be equivalent to
a GS-13, Step 5, and a loaded salary of $116,360 per year, at the hourly
rate of $58.18; and

EPA estimates that the total annual federal employee response cost is
$10,239.68 for record keeping and reporting.

6.a	Estimating Respondent Burden  tc \l2 "6.a	Estimating Respondent
Burden for each Grantee

Activity:  Spreadsheet

No. of

Respondents

No. of

Person Hours/ Respondent

Total Annual Hours

Training center grantees, civilian professional specialty and technical
staff; record keeping and reporting for the spreadsheet (semi-annual).

46

2

92

Activity: Database

No. of

Respondents

No. of

Person Hours/ Respondent

Total Annual Hours

Training center grantees, civilian professional specialty and technical
staff; record keeping and reporting for the database (annual).

46

5

230

6.b	Estimating Respondent Costs

Activity:  Spreadsheet

Cost  Per     Hour

Total Annual Labor Cost

Training center grantees, civilian professional specialty and technical
staff; record keeping and reporting for the spreadsheet (semi-annual).

$44.60

$4,103.20

Activity: Database

Cost Per     Hour

Total Annual Labor Cost

Training center grantees, civilian professional specialty and technical
staff; record keeping and reporting for the database (annual).

$44.60

$10,258.00

6.c	Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

Activity:  Spreadsheet

No. of

Respondents

No. of

Person Hours Per Respondent

Cost   Per     Hour

Total Annual Hours

Total Annual Labor

Cost

U.S. EPA staff; record keeping and reporting for the spreadsheet
(semi-annual).

11

8

$58.18

88

$5,119.84

                              Activity: Database

No. of

Respondents

No. of

Person Hours per Respondent

Cost   Per     Hour

Total Annual Hours

Total Annual Labor

Cost

U.S. EPA staff; record keeping and reporting for the database (annual).

11

8

$58.18

88

$5,119.84

Total annual hours per each EPA respondent is 16 hours.

6.d	Estimating Respondent Universe and Total Burden Hours and Costs

Activity:  Spreadsheet

No. of

Respondents

No. of

Person Hours

Cost     Per     Hour

Total Annual Hours

Total Annual Labor

Cost

Training center grantees, civilian professional specialty and technical
staff; record keeping and reporting for the spreadsheet

(semi-annual).

46

2

$44.60

92

$4,103.20

U.S. EPA staff; record keeping and reporting for the spreadsheet
(semi-annual).

11

8

$58.18

88

$5,119.84

SUB-TOTALS
                                                               180
 $9,223.04

Activity: Database

No. of

Respondents

No. of

Person Hours

Cost     Per     Hour

Total Annual Hours

Total Annual Labor

Cost

Training center grantees, civilian professional specialty and technical
staff; record keeping and reporting for the database (annual).

46

5

$44.60

230

$10.258.00

U.S. EPA staff; record keeping and reporting for the  database (annual).

11

8

$58.18

88

$5,119.84

SUB-TOTALS
                                                              318
 $15,377.84

6.e	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

No. of

respondents includes the 46 grantees and the 10 EPA Regional Offices and
EPA Headquarters

Total Annual Hours

Total Annual Labor

Cost

TOTALS:

57

498

$24,600.88

6.f 	Reasons for Change in Burden

There is no change in the burden hours from the previous ICR approved by
the OMB as the 104(g) Program and the number of reporting States or
training centers remains the same. Increase in the cost is due to the
increase in the wages of the professional staff.

6.g 	Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to be seven hours per respondent for 46
respondents with a total burden of 322 hours.  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.
EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0078, which is available for public viewing at the Water
Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 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 the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at
http://www.regulations.gov/.  Use FDMS to submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket,
and to access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  Once in the system, 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. EPA-HQ-OW-2003-0078 and OMB control
number 2040-0238 in any correspondence.

Attachment 1

National Wastewater Operator Training and Technical Assistance Program

Excel Reporting Spreadsheet

Region

	State

	Grant amount

Training Completed

	Achieved Compliance

	Maintained Compliance

	Improved Performance

	No Improvement

Training Ongoing

	Achieved Compliance

	Maintained Compliance

	Improved Performance

	No Improvement

Total

Carry-overs from previous year

Number new projects

Diagnostic Evaluations

New Initiatives (BNR)

	Continuing Work (BNR)

Attachment 1 continued

Wastewater Operator Training Program / 104(g) Excel Spreadsheet
Reporting

Definitions of Categories / Reporting Fields for Training Completed
Facilities:

Achieved Compliance: Starts with the facility out of compliance with its
NPDES permit at the beginning of the compliance assistance.  After the
facility has completed its assistance, the facility was in compliance
with its NPDES permit.  In order to be rated as achieved compliance at
the end of assistance, the facility needs to be in compliance with all
elements of its NPDES permit for three consecutive months.

Maintained Compliance: Starts with the facility in compliance with its
NPDES permit at the beginning of the compliance assistance.  However,
the facility is demonstrating performance problems which could lead to
non-compliance with its NPDES permit.  After the facility completed its
assistance, the facility has halted any further deterioration in
performance, improved its performance, and continued to stay in
compliance with its NPDES permit.  The underlying theme with compliance
maintenance facilities is that there is “something wrong” with
performance but it is not “wrong” enough to exceed NPDES permit
levels.

Improved Performance: Starts with the facility out of compliance with
its NPDES permit at the beginning of the compliance assistance.
However, compliance assistance is leading the facility to better
operation and maintenance.  After the assistance has been completed at
the facility, “total” compliance may have not been achieved on a
consistent basis, but the facility is definitely operating better.  The
facility has reduced periods of non-compliance, reduced levels of
pollutants discharged, or has had significant increases in efficiencies
such as: lower energy usage, better (and often lower) chemical usage for
proper operation, and adequate financial support enabling operators to
better address problems in a more timely fashion.  The facility may not
be in “total” compliance with its NPDES permit, but it has
“significantly” increased its performance.  The facility has
completed its compliance assistance training with the Program and may
still be out of compliance, this is due to circumstances beyond the
Program’s control such as, the need for an upgrade to the treatment
facility.

No Improvement: Starts with the facility out of compliance with its
NPDES permit at the beginning of the compliance assistance training, and
continues to be out of compliance with little or no improvement.  The
facility has opted to discontinue its participation in the Program.

Definitions of Categories / Reporting Fields for Training Continuing
Facilities:

Achieved Compliance: Starts with the facility out of compliance with its
NPDES permit at the beginning of the compliance assistance.  Even though
the facility has achieved compliance, it is continuing its assistance to
ensure a permanent compliance status.

Maintained Compliance: Starts with the facility in compliance with its
NPDES permit at the beginning of the compliance assistance.  However,
the facility is demonstrating performance problems which could lead to
non-compliance with its NPDES permit.  After the facility has completed
its assistance, the facility has halted any further deterioration in
performance, improved its performance, and has continued to stay in
compliance with its NPDES permit.

Improved Performance: Starts with the facility out of compliance with
its NPDES permit at the beginning of the compliance assistance.
However, the assistance is leading the facility to better operation and
maintenance.  After the assistance has been completed at the facility,
“total” compliance may have not been achieved, but the facility is
definitely operating better.  The facility has reduced periods of
non-compliance, reduced levels of pollutants discharged, or has had
significant increases in efficiencies such as; lower energy usage,
better (and often lower) chemical usage for proper operation, and
adequate financial support enabling operators to better address problems
in a more timely fashion.  The facility may not be in “total”
compliance with its NPDES permit, but it has “significantly”
increased its performance.  The facility is continuing its compliance
assistance efforts with the Program and the trainer is working on
bringing the facility into “total” compliance with its NPDES permit,
but has not achieved this status on a consistent basis.

No Improvement: Starts with the facility out of compliance with its
NPDES permit at the beginning of the compliance assistance training, and
continues to be out of compliance with little or no improvement.  The
facility has decided to continue to work with the Program to solve its
compliance problems.

Attachment 2

	Fields requested in MS Access Database

	ID

	Region

	Facility Name

	Facility Street Address

	City/Town

	State

	Zip code

	Start Assist Date

	Compliance status at start

	Conclusion Assist Date

	Type of Facility

	Performance Limiting Factors (in order of priority)

	Repeat Assist Facility

	If repeat, last assist date

	Tribal assistance

	Design size of plant (MGD)

	Comments

	Other Benefits

	Permit Number

	CBOD/BOD AVG - Start

	CBOD/BOD AVG - End

	Lbs of CBOD/BOD reduced

	Nitrogen AVG - Start

	Nitrogen AVG - End

	Lbs of Nitrogen reduced

	TSS AVG - Start

	TSS AVG - End

	Lbs of TSS reduced

	Annual AVG Flow (MGD)

Attachment 2 continued

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 104(g)(1) DATABASE GUIDANCE

The following information corresponds to the data input form of the
104(g)(1) Program database.

(1a) COMPLIANCE ACHIEVED DATE:  The assistance work at the facility has
resulted in the facility being in compliance for at least  ninety (90)
days.  The date entered into this field should be the day the facility
continuously achieved compliance for ninety (90) days.  If the
compliance achieved date is entered so must the compliance achieved
date.

(1b) CONCLUSION ASSISTANCE DATE: Enter the date that the assistance work
has been completed at the facility.  This date will be the same as of
most likely after the compliance achieved date.

(2)   TYPE OF FACILITY:    Choose the one option that most applies to
the facility using the drop-down box.

         Options:  AL, AS, CS, EA, L, OD, PO, RBC, SBR, SP, TF, TF/SC,
WTL, OTH

AL         -	Aerated Lagoon

AS         -	Activated Sludge

CS	 -	Contact Stabilization

EA	 -	Extended Aeration

L		 -	Lagoon

OD	 -	Oxidation Ditch

PO	 -	Primary Treatment Only

SBR       -	Sequencing Batch Reactors

RBC	 -	Rotating Biological Contactors

SP	 -	Stabilization Pond

TF	 -	Trickling Filter

TF/SC    -	Trickling Filter/Solids Contact

WTL      - 	Wetlands to Lagoons

OTH	  -	Other {Type OTH in this field and use the comment field (4) to
explain.}

(3)  PERFORMANCE LIMITING FACTORS  = PLFs:

     Options: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S,
T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z

Up to four letters can be assigned to each facility based on the
"performance limiting factors" that were found at each facility that
most contributed to its non-compliance or its poor state of O&M. These
should be listed from top to bottom from the PLF that most contributed
to the PLF that least contributed to the facility’s non-compliance or
poor state of O&M. Use your best judgement in applying these factors.

A	-	Poor understanding and application of process control by operator

B	-	Staffing (too few staff , low pay, turnover, etc.)

C	-	Support from municipality (administrative and technical)

D	-	Operating budget and user charge system

E	-	Operability/maintainability considerations (process flexibility,
automation, standby units, alternate power source)

F	-	Inflow and infiltration

G	-	Lagoon leakage

H	-	Process design errors (clarifiers, aerators, disinfection, etc.)

I	-	Over loaded

J	-	Under loaded

K	-	Solids handling and sludge disposal

L	-	Pretreatment, industrial dischargers, and toxics

M	-	O&M manual (lack of or deficient)

N	-	QA/QC problems

O	-	Spare parts inventory

P	-	Chemical inventory

Q	-	Laboratory deficiencies (process control / NPDES testing)

R	-	NPDES reporting / record keeping

S	-	Equipment / unit processes broken down/inoperable

T	-	Hydraulic related problems

U	-	Poor aeration system

V           -	Sludge accumulation

W	-	Job description (performing operator evaluations without a written
operator job description)

X	-	Illegal dischargers / non-dischargers

Y           -	Algae problems in lagoons

Z	-	Other  (Type OTH in this field and use the comment field (5) to
explain.)

(4)  REPEAT ASSISTANCE FACILITY: Indicate with either a yes or no, if
this facility has been assisted by the program in the past five years.
A drop-down box is present for easier data entry purposes.

(*) LAST ASSISTANCE DATE: Applies only to Repeat Assistance Facilities.
If applicable indicate the date of the last conclusion assistance date -
(1b) at this facility, otherwise leave blank.

(5) COMMENTS:  Pertinent facility information, the type of facility -
(2) or the need to expand on the type of facility, or PLFs - other (3).

(6) OTHER BENEFITS:  Energy savings, cost savings, chemical addition
savings, etc.

(7) POLLUTANT (CBOD/BOD, NITROGEN, & TSS) AVG. - Start: The average of
the effluent monthly averages of the particular pollutant (CBOD/BOD,
Nitrogen, & TSS) on the facility’s Discharge Monitoring Report for the
three months prior to the start of assistance date.

(8) POLLUTANT (CBOD/BOD, NITROGEN, & TSS) AVG. - End: The average of the
effluent monthly averages of the particular pollutant (CBOD/BOD,
Nitrogen, & TSS) on the facility’s Discharge Monitoring Report for the
three months after the conclusion of assistance date (1b).

(9) ANNUAL AVERAGE FLOW {MGD}: The annual average of the effluent flow,
in millions of gallons per day, during the assistance period.

The Pounds of CBOD/BOD Reduced , Pounds of Nitrogen Reduced, and Pounds
of TSS Reduced are fields that will automatically calculate information,
data input is not required.

 PAGE

 PAGE   2


[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 127 (Monday, July 2, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 30928]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14126]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL18-179-000]

Notice of Complaint: MD Solar 3, LLC v. PJM Interconnection,
L.L.C.

    Take notice that on June 22, 2018, pursuant to sections 206 and 306
of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e and 825e and Rule 206 of the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) Rules of Practice
and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.206, MD Solar 3, LLC (Complainant) filed a
formal complaint against PJM Interconnection, L.L.C. (Respondent)
alleging that, Respondent violated its Open Access Transmission Tariff
by terminating an interconnection service request submitted on behalf
of the Complainant, all as more fully explained in the complaint.
    The Complainant certifies that copies of the complaint were served
on the contacts listed for the Respondent in the Commission's list of
Corporate Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
eLibrary link and is available for electronic review in the
Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an
eSubscription link on the website that enables subscribers to receive
email notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s).
For assistance with any FERC Online service, please email
[email protected], or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For
TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 12, 2018.

    Dated: June 25, 2018.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14126 Filed 6-29-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


EPA Human Studies Review Board Chair's Comments April, 4 2006 Celia B. Fisher, Ph. D.

Fordham University Chair HSRB Responsibilities ° The Human Studies Review Board shall comment on the scientific and ethical aspects of research proposals and reports of completed research with human subjects submitted by EPA for its review and, on request, advise EPA on ways to strengthen its programs for protection of human subjects of research. 26.1603 ( b) Charter 3. Objectives and Scope of Activities ° HSRB will provide advice, information and recommendations on issues related to scientific and ethical aspects of human subjects research.

° The major objectives are to provide advice and recommendations on:

  Research Proposals and Protocols   Reports of completed research with human subjects; and   How to strengthen EPA's programs for protection of human subjects of research. Board Process Board members assigned as primary and secondary discussants will begin each board discussion 1. Answer questions posed by EPA 2. If applicable raise significant issues that were not posed by EPA Board Process Science Evaluation followed by Ethics Evaluation Rationale:

° To be of benefit a study must be scientifically valid ( Nuremberg Code)

° Risk benefit ratio can only be calculated if there is benefit Scientific Aspects of Research ° Did the research design and implementation meet scientific standards?

° Do the data generated by the protocol have implications for the Agency's Weight of the Evidence ( WOE) determination and when applicable aspects of the risk assessment. Ethics Evaluation 1. Did the study fail to fully meet specific ethical standards prevalent at the time the research was conducted?

Examples ° FIFRA Section 12( a) 2( P)

° Declaration of Helsinki or other International Code of Conduct for Research or other well established International Ethics Code ° 1991 Common Rule 40CFR26 ( after 1991 International Codes must be at least equivalent to Common Rule standards) If the study did If the study did not not fully meet ethical fully meet ethical standards prevalent at the time:

standards prevalent at the time: 2. Was the conduct of the study Fundamentally Unethical?

There is clear and convincing evidence that the research was intended to seriously harm participants or failed to obtain informed consent ( Final Rule 26.104) 3. Was the conduct of the study Significantly Deficient relative to the ethical standards prevailing at the time?

Is there is clear and convincing evidence that:

a. The deficiencies identified could have resulted in serious harm ( based on knowledge available at the time the study was conducted); or b. The information provided to participants could seriously impair informed consent


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 199 (Monday, October 15, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 62596-62601]
[FR Doc No: 2012-25261]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary of Transportation

Interim Guidance on State Freight Plans and State Freight
Advisory Committees

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST), U.S.
Department of Transportation (DOT), Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Motor Carriers
Administration (FMCSA) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), Maritime
Administration (MARAD), Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety
Administration (PHSMA), Research and Innovative Technology
Administration (RITA), St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
(SLSDC).

ACTION: Notice of Interim Guidance and Request for Comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On July 6, 2012, the President signed into law Public Law 112-
141, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21).
Section 1118 of MAP-21 directs the Secretary of Transportation to
encourage each State to develop a comprehensive State Freight Plan that
outlines immediate and long-range plans for freight-related
transportation investments. Section 1117 of MAP-21 directs the
Secretary to encourage each State to establish a State Freight Advisory
Committee. The Department of Transportation is issuing this Notice to
provide Interim Guidance on both State Freight Plans and State Freight
Advisory Committees. It encourages States to develop State Freight
Plans and provides guidance to States on the required elements of a
State Freight Plan and information on funding and on the relationship
of State Freight Plans to other provisions of MAP-21. It encourages
States to develop State Freight Advisory Committees as part of the
process for developing a State Freight Plan. The Department requests
public comments on all aspects of this Interim Guidance.

DATES: All public comments must be received by November 15, 2012.

ADDRESSES: You may send comments identified by Docket Number DOT-OST-
2012-0168 using any of the following methods:
    Government-wide rulemaking Web site: http://www.regulations.gov and
follow the instructions for sending your comments electronically.
    Mail: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590-0001.
Fax 1-202-493-2251.
    Courier: commercial delivery service, such as, but not limited to
the following--Federal Express or United Parcel Service, addressed to
Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590.
    Hand Delivery: Docket Management Facility, U.S. Department of
Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC between 9
a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays.
    The Department will post all comments received, without change, to
http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information. If you
mail or hand deliver your comments and want the Department to
acknowledge receipt of your comments, include with your comments a pre-
addressed, stamped postcard on which the docket number appears. We will
stamp the date on the postcard and mail it to you.
    Docket: To read background documents or comments received, go to
http://www.regulations.gov or to Docket Management Facility, U.S.
Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington,
DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m. Monday through Friday, except Federal
holidays.
    Privacy Act: Anyone is able to search the electronic form of all
comments

received in any of our dockets by the name of the individual submitting
the comment (or signing the comment if submitted on behalf of an
association, a business, a labor union, etc.). You may review the
Department's complete Privacy Act statement in the Federal Register
published on April 11, 2000 (65 FR 19477-78), or you may visit http://www.dot.gov/privacy.html.
    This Interim Guidance will also be posted on the Department's MAP-
21 Web site (www.dot.gov/map21).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jack Wells, Chief Economist, 1200
New Jersey Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20590. Telephone Number (202)
366-9224 or Email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Table of Contents

I. Background and Program Purpose
II. Policy
III. Funding
IV. Contents of State Freight Plans
V. The State Freight Planning Process
VI. Data and Analytical Resources for State Freight Planning
VII. Request for Comments

I. Background and Program Purpose

    The purpose of this document is to provide guidance on the
implementation of Section 1118 (State Freight Plans) and Section 1117
(State Freight Advisory Committees) of the Moving Ahead for Progress in
the 21st Century Act (MAP-21). Section 1118 directs the Secretary of
Transportation to encourage States to develop freight plans that are
comprehensive and that include both immediate and long-term freight
planning activities and investments. Section 1117 directs the Secretary
to encourage each State to establish a State Freight Advisory Committee
consisting of a representative cross-section of public and private
freight stakeholders. Section 1118 specifies certain minimum contents
for State Freight Plans, and states that such a plan may be developed
separate from or be incorporated into the statewide strategic long-
range transportation plan required by section 135 of title 23, United
States Code.
    Section 1116 of MAP-21 (Prioritization of Projects to Improve
Freight Movement) authorizes the Secretary to increase the Federal
share payable for any project to 95 percent for projects on the
Interstate System and 90 percent for any other project if the Secretary
certifies that the project:
     Demonstrates the improvement made by the project to the
efficient movement of freight (including making progress on freight
performance measures established under MAP-21) and
     Is identified in a State Freight Plan developed pursuant
to section 1118.
    The Federal Highway Administration will be issuing separate
guidance on the implementation of Section 1116. One purpose of this
guidance is to inform States of the freight planning process they must
undertake to qualify for the freight prioritization provisions of
Section 1116.

II. Policy

    The U.S. Department of Transportation strongly encourages all
States to develop State Freight Plans. The Department believes that
freight transportation, because its effects are often regional or
national in scope, and includes freight providers that own and operate
private infrastructure, has often been more difficult for States to
incorporate into their planning process than has passenger
transportation, and that accordingly infrastructure investments and
other State policy initiatives related to freight transportation have
often received less funding and attention than passenger-related
initiatives. Because freight transportation is critical to the economic
vitality of the United States, renewed attention to safe and efficient
freight transportation can have a positive effect on the economic
growth of the United States.
    State Freight Plans can identify freight transportation facilities
that are critical to each State's economic growth and give appropriate
priority to investments in such facilities. In doing so, such Plans can
enhance economic growth at both the State and National level, thus
enhancing the Nation's economic competitiveness. State Freight Plans
can also help to guide investments and other policies that will help to
achieve the Department's other strategic goals, including safety, state
of good repair, livability, and environmental sustainability. State
Freight Plans can also identify freight transportation facilities that
are critical to export movements and, by directing resources toward
improving those facilities, assist the United States in meeting the
goals of the President's National Export Initiative.
    The State Freight Plan may be developed separate from or
incorporated into the statewide strategic long-range transportation
plan required by section 135 of title 23, United States Code. If the
State Freight Plan is separate from the statewide strategic long-range
transportation plan, each plan should show how the findings of the
State Freight Plan are incorporated into the statewide strategic long-
range transportation plan. If the two plans are combined, the statewide
strategic long-range transportation plan should include a separate
section focused on freight transportation, and must include the
elements specified in section 1118. Other State transportation plans,
such as State Rail Plans, are required by statute to be coordinated
with section 135 of title 23, and as a consequence the freight
component of those plans should be incorporated into the State Freight
Plan to ensure a comprehensive and system-wide planning approach.
    The Department also strongly encourages all States to establish
State Freight Advisory Committees. Such Advisory Committees are an
important part of the process needed to develop a thorough State
Freight Plan. Bringing together the perspectives and knowledge of
public and private partners, including shippers, carriers, and
infrastructure owners and operators, is important to developing a
quality State Freight Plan.
    The Department will be developing a multimodal National Freight
Strategic Plan in accordance with the requirements of Section 1115 of
MAP-21, and intends to rely significantly on the freight plans prepared
by the States.

III. Funding

    Authorization level under MAP-21: There is no formula or
discretionary funding specifically associated with State Freight Plans
or State Freight Advisory Committees.
    States may use funding allocated under the Surface Transportation
Program (23 U.S.C. 133) for developing State Freight Plans, as well as
funding under the State Planning and Research Program (23 U.S.C. 505).
They may also use carryover balances from National Highway System funds
authorized under SAFETEA-LU (23 U.S.C. 103(b)(6)(E) as in effect on the
day before enactment of MAP-21) that can be used for transportation
planning in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 134 and 135 (23 U.S.C. 103 was
amended by MAP-21 section 1104, which eliminated the National Highway
System Program under section 103, and hence eliminated the funding for
planning under section 103 as amended).

IV. Contents of State Freight Plans

    Section 1118 of MAP-21 requires that a State Freight Plan developed
pursuant to Section 1118 include, at a minimum, the following elements:
     An identification of significant freight system trends,
needs, and issues with respect to the State;

     A description of the freight policies, strategies, and
performance measures that will guide the freight-related transportation
investment decisions of the State;
     A description of how the plan will improve the ability of
the State to meet the national freight goals established under section
167 of title 23, United States Code;
     Evidence of consideration of innovative technologies and
operational strategies, including intelligent transportation systems,
that improve the safety and efficiency of freight movement;
     In the case of routes on which travel by heavy vehicles
(including mining, agricultural, energy cargo or equipment, and timber
vehicles) is projected to substantially deteriorate the condition of
roadways, a description of improvements that may be required to reduce
or impede the deterioration; and
     An inventory of facilities with freight mobility issues,
such as truck bottlenecks, within the State, and a description of the
strategies the State is employing to address those freight mobility
issues.

In addition to these minimum elements required by section 1118, the
Department has provided additional recommended elements based on what
States have found useful to include in freight plans that have already
been prepared, as well as on consistency with the requirements for the
National Freight Strategic Plan, found in 23 U.S.C 167(f).
    State Freight Plans may be organized in any structure that works
best for individual States, as long as they cover the required
elements; however, in order to aid States in addressing the required
criteria, and to facilitate the incorporation of analysis from the
State Freight Plans into the National Freight Strategic Plan, as well
as to aid in conceptualizing the detailed issues surrounding robust
freight planning, DOT is suggesting the following structure as a
recommended model for states to follow.

1. Strategic Goals

    As specified in section 1118, a State Freight Plan must include a
description of how the plan will improve the ability of the State to
meet the national freight goals established under 23 U.S.C. 167. The
following is a summary of the goals of the National Freight Policy
established in 23 U.S.C. 167:
     Improving the contribution of the freight transportation
system to economic efficiency, productivity, and competitiveness;
     Reducing congestion on the freight transportation system;
     Improving the safety, security, and resilience of the
freight transportation system;
     Improving the state of good repair of the freight
transportation system;
     Using advanced technology, performance management,
innovation, competition, and accountability in operating and
maintaining the freight transportation system;
     Reducing adverse environmental and community impacts of
the freight transportation system.

The Department recommends that each State Freight Plan also include a
discussion of the State's strategic goals for freight transportation.
These goals would include the goals of the National Freight Policy
summarized above, but States may also add other strategic goals. The
Department recommends that State Freight Plans indicate which goals are
most important to the State.

2. The Economic Context of Freight Transportation Planning

    The Department recommends that each State Freight Plan include a
discussion of the role that freight transportation plays in the State's
overall economy. This section would identify what industries are most
important to the State, and what supply chains (including the
transportation modes that support them) are critical to the State's
industries. In particular, it would indicate what supply chains
involving the State are important to exports, whether the exports of
that State or of other States.

3. Freight Policies, Strategies, and Institutions

    As specified in section 1118, a State Freight Plan must include a
discussion of the State's freight policies and strategies that will
guide the freight-related transportation investment decisions of the
State. The Department recommends that this section also discuss how
these freight policies and strategies will guide not just freight-
related transportation investment decisions of the State, but also the
broader freight improvement strategy of the State, including
operational strategies and policy changes. The Department recommends
that this discussion also:
     Include the State's grant and loan programs that are
available to pay for freight-related transportation infrastructure;
     Identify the State's freight-related institutions,
including transportation-related infrastructure owners and regulatory
authorities, such as the State DOT, port authorities, toll roads, and
bridge and tunnel authorities;
     Explain the governance structures and funding mechanisms
for such authorities (e.g., whether the authorities are controlled by
the governor or are independent, and whether the authority has a
dedicated source of revenue);
     Identify private transportation infrastructure owners,
such as railroads, terminals, pipelines, and freight transfer
facilities;
     Identify statutory and constitutional constraints on
freight-related investments and policies, such as prohibitions on
spending State funds for certain kinds of freight infrastructure;
     Discuss regional freight planning activities in which the
State participates, such as planning for key multi-state freight
corridors, multi-state metropolitan areas, or for other regional groups
of States; and
     Set out the State's priorities in freight transportation
infrastructure development.

4. State Freight Transportation Assets

    As specified in section 1118, a State Freight Plan must include an
inventory of facilities with freight mobility issues. The Department
recommends that this inventory also include a complete inventory of the
State's freight transportation assets. This would include a description
of the State's transportation infrastructure in all freight-carrying
modes, the warehousing and intermodal facilities located in the State,
and the freight gateways and corridors that are located in or that pass
through the State. MAP-21 places particular emphasis on transportation
infrastructure that is used to serve areas of the State that are
significant for energy development, mining, agriculture, and timber
production, and the Department recommends that the State Freight Plan
inventory note particularly routes that are used to move equipment for
these productive activities into those areas and for moving the output
of those productive activities out of those areas.

5. The Conditions and Performance of the State's Freight Transportation
System

    As specified in section 1118, a State Freight Plan must include the
performance measures that will guide the freight-related transportation
investment decisions of the State. The Department recommends that this
discussion also include an analysis of the conditions and performance
of the State's freight transportation system. This analysis would
include the identification of bottlenecks in the

freight transportation system that cause delays and unreliability in
freight movements, as well as other specific locations that are in a
poor state of good repair, create safety hazards, or create other
performance problems. The National Freight Strategic Plan also is
required to include an analysis of the conditions and performance of
the national freight system, and when those measures of freight
conditions and performance are established, the Department recommends
that State Freight Plans include those measures. Until those measures
are established, however, the Department recommends that States use the
measures of condition and performance that they consider to be most
reasonable and appropriate. In general, the Department recommends that
measures of conditions and performance reflect the State's freight
transportation goals--for each goal, there would be at least one
measure of condition or performance that indicates how well the freight
transportation system is doing in achieving that goal.
    The Department recommends that States use measures of conditions of
transportation infrastructure that reflect the quality of service that
this infrastructure provides to users of that infrastructure and to the
general public. Similarly, measures of the performance of the freight
transportation system would reflect the quality of freight service
provided to freight shippers and the impact of the freight
transportation system on the general public. Measures of conditions and
performance would reflect outcomes that are directly important to the
system's users and to the general public (for example, reductions in
crashes, fatalities, and injuries; reduced delay and congestion; and
reduced vehicle operating costs); The Department recommends that States
try to avoid using measures that are not of direct importance to users
and the general public (for example, miles of track or number of
bridges inspected each year).

6. Freight Forecast

    Consistent with one of the required elements of the National
Freight Strategic Plan, which must be developed in consultation with
the States, the Department recommends that State Freight Plans include
a 20-year forecast of freight transportation demands, broken down by
mode of transportation and commodity classification, and showing
demands for transportation of freight coming into the State, outbound
from the State, passing through the State between outside origin and
destination points, and moving intrastate between origin and
destination points within the State. The freight forecast could draw
upon the forecast prepared by the Federal Highway Administration's
(FHWA) Office of Freight Management and Operations and on the Federal
Aviation Administration's national and airport-level forecasts of air
cargo. The FHWA forecast includes projected tonnage for each mode--
truck, rail, air (air and truck), water, and pipeline.

7. Overview of Trends, Needs, and Issues

    As specified in section 1118, a State Freight Plan must identify
significant freight system trends, needs, and issues with respect to
the State. The Department recommends that this discussion also include
how emerging trends make those needs and issues of greater
significance, or how these trends affect how those needs and issues can
be addressed.

8. Strengths and Problems of the State's Freight Transportation System

    The Department recommends that a State Freight Plan include an
analysis of the strengths of the State's freight system that it wishes
to preserve and the problems that it wishes to solve. This analysis
would show what the strengths of the State's freight system are that
the State wishes to build upon; it would also show in what respects the
State's freight system does not meet the State's goals, and indicate
which problems are most important for the State to address. Some of
these might include problems that the State expects to develop in the
future as a result of increasing demand for freight transportation or
other trends that the State is anticipating.

9. The State's Decision-Making Process

    The Department recommends that a State Freight Plan include a
discussion of the State's decision-making process on freight
transportation improvements, including how the State conducted outreach
to stakeholders and the public and how the State prioritized the
various strategies, projects, and policy changes it considered. This
discussion would show how the State coordinated improvements to
different modes of transportation in order to achieve its goals in the
most cost-effective way. It would also discuss ways in which the State
coordinated with other States in regional freight planning efforts, and
with metropolitan areas within the State that have done freight
planning.
    The Department encourages States to conduct economic analysis as
part of the State Freight Plan, including analyses of benefits and
costs of various improvements that they are considering. If economic
analysis has been conducted, the results of that analysis should be
reported in this portion of the State Freight Plan. The discussion
would show how the State compared alternative approaches to achieving
the same goal. As specified in section 1118, the discussion must also
show evidence of consideration of operational strategies (such as
congestion pricing) or innovative technologies (such as use of
intelligent transportation systems (ITS)) that improve the safety and
efficiency of freight movement. If an economic analysis is provided, it
would be particularly useful to estimate benefits and costs of each
alternative considered.

10. The State's Freight Improvement Strategy

    As specified in section 1118, a State Freight Plan must include a
description of the strategies the State is employing to address freight
mobility issues. The Department recommends that this description also
include a presentation of the State's complete freight improvement
strategy, with different improvements ranked in order of priority (or
grouped into higher and lower priority groups). This presentation of
the State's freight improvement strategy would include an analysis of
how each improvement will advance the State's strategic goals, relating
to:
     Capital investments;
     Operational improvements, such as congestion pricing and
travel demand management;
     Policy changes, including performance management,
competition, and accountability initiatives; and
     Expanded use of ITS and other innovative technologies.

The strategy would also include:

     An analysis of how proposed improvements will affect
specific supply chains and industries that have been identified as
important to the State in Section 2;
     Because MAP-21 places particular emphasis on
infrastructure that is used for transporting mining, agricultural,
energy, and timber equipment and products, a discussion of how those
freight transportation routes would be affected (and in particular how
the strategy would impede the deterioration in the condition of
infrastructure on those routes);
     An analysis of the improvements in outcomes that are
expected to result from the proposed freight improvements;
     A discussion of how the freight plan relates to other
transportation

plans, such as a state rail plan, a long-range statewide transportation
plan, or a metropolitan area freight plan; and

A discussion of how the State's Freight Improvement Strategy
coordinates with plans of other adjacent States, including groups of
States that work together to plan for freight transportation along key
multi-state freight corridors, in multi-state metropolitan areas, or
through other regional groupings.

11. Implementation Plan

    Finally, the Department recommends that a State Freight Plan
include a comprehensive implementation plan, showing both short-term
and long-term strategies, and including an approximate time schedule
for each proposed freight improvement. This implementation plan would
include an analysis of which capital improvements have the potential to
generate a revenue stream, and hence which projects have the potential
to be funded with loans (repaid from the revenue stream) rather than
solely through grants or general funds. The Plan would include a
funding plan, showing how each project will be funded, including those
funded by grants, loans, and public-private partnerships. The Plan
would discuss the State's proposed partnerships with private
infrastructure owners, such as railroads, terminal operators, and
pipeline companies. Finally, the Plan would discuss how the State
proposes to work with adjacent States on projects that cross State
lines, or on freight corridors that cross State lines (even if the
project itself is all in one State).

V. The State Freight Planning Process

    The Department recommends that States use a collaborative process
for freight planning that involves all of the relevant stakeholders
affected by the freight transportation system. These stakeholders would
include owners of freight transportation infrastructure (both public
and private); carriers operating on publicly-owned freight
infrastructure; shippers and freight forwarders; representatives of
employees of these stakeholders; State, local, and tribal governments;
and the general public. Stakeholders might be domiciled both inside the
State and outside of the State.
    States are strongly encouraged to establish State Freight Advisory
Committees to facilitate this collaborative process. As specified in
section 1117 of MAP-21, State Freight Advisory Committees should
include representatives of a cross-section of public and private sector
experts and stakeholders. These might include representatives of:
     The transportation department of the State;
     Metropolitan planning organizations, councils of
government, regional councils, and other regional and planning
organizations;
     Local and tribal governments;
     Independent transportation authorities, such as seaport
and airport authorities, toll highway authorities, and bridge and
tunnel authorities;
     Private infrastructure owners, such as railroads and
pipelines;
     Carriers, including carriers operating on their own
infrastructure and carriers operating on publicly-owned infrastructure;
     Shippers and freight forwarders;
     Freight-related associations;
     Organizations representing the freight industry workforce;
     Environmental, safety, and community organizations; and
     Independent transportation experts, including academic
specialists and consultants.
    State Freight Advisory Committees should be charged with
     Advising the State on freight-related priorities, issues,
projects, and funding needs;
     Serving as a forum for discussion of State decisions
affecting freight transportation;
     Communicating and coordinating regional priorities with
other organizations;
     Promoting the sharing of information between the private
and public sectors on freight issues; and
     Participating in the development of the State's Freight
Plan.

VI. Data and Analytical Resources for State Freight Planning

    The modal administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation
and other departments in the U.S. Government can provide a wide range
of data and analysis to assist States in the freight planning process.
The following is a series of links to internet Web sites that provide
useful data and analysis resources:

General Data and Analysis Sources on Freight

Commodity Flow Survey: http://www.bts.gov/publications/commodity_flow_survey/
Data Sources Related to Freight Transportation: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/data_sources/index.htm
Freight Analysis Framework: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/faf/index.htm
Freight Performance Measures: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/freight_analysis/travel_time.htm
Quick Response Freight Manual: http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/freight/publications/qrfm2/index.htm

Maritime Statistics

USA Trade Online (The Official Source for U.S. Merchandise Trade
Data), U.S. Census Bureau: https://www.usatradeonline.gov/
Navigation Data Center, Waterborne Commerce Statistics Center, U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers: http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil/wcsc/wcsc.htm
Navigation Data Center, Vessel Entrances and Clearances, U.S. Army
Corps of Engineers: http://www.ndc.iwr.usace.army.mil/data/dataclen.htm
Maritime Statistics, U.S. Maritime Administration: http://www.marad.dot.gov/library_landing_page/data_and_statistics/Data_and_Statistics.htm
Marview Statistics, U.S. Maritime Administration: www.marview.gov/

Rail Freight Resources and Statistics

The Preliminary National Rail Plan: http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/RailPlanPrelim10-15.pdf
The National Rail Plan Progress Report: http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/NRP_Sept2010_WEB.pdf
The Proposed State Rail Plan Guidance: http://www.fra.dot.gov/rpd/passenger/fp_Proposed_State_Rail_Plan_Guidance.shtml
Comparative Evaluation of Rail and Truck Fuel Efficiency on
Competitive Corridors: http://www.fra.dot.gov/Downloads/Comparative_Evaluation_Rail_Truck_Fuel_Efficiency.pdf
Discussion of the confidential Carload Waybill Sample and State
access: http://www.stb.dot.gov/stb/industry/econ_waybill.html
National Transportation Atlas Database includes FRA rail network:
http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_atlas_database/
Online highway rail grade crossing investment analysis tool: http://gradedec.fra.dot.gov/
Interactive mapping application that allows users to view aspects of
railroad infrastructure: http://fragis.frasafety.net/GISFRASafety/default.aspx

Air Freight Statistics

FAA Air Cargo forecasts: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/apl/aviation_forecasts/aerospace_forecasts/2012-2032/

    Click on ``Forecast Tables, US Commercial and Foreign Flag
Carriers, Tables 5-23.'' Cargo forecasts are Tables 19 and 20.

VII. Request for Comments

    DOT invites interested parties to submit comments on any aspect of
the Department's implementation of MAP-21 requirements for State
Freight Plans or State Freight Advisory Committees. The Department will
consider these comments as it continues to implement the freight
provisions of the law. The instructions for submitting comments can be
found in the Addresses section above. Late-filed comments will be
considered to the extent practicable.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on October 5, 2012.
Ray LaHood,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-25261 Filed 10-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 41 (Thursday, March 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 13113]
[FR Doc No: 2023-04309]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. ER23-1165-000]

McFarland Solar A, LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-
Based Rate Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204
Authorization

    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of
McFarland Solar A, LLC's application for market-based rate authority,
with an accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes
a request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR part 34, of future
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington,
DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). Anyone
filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a copy of that
document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18
CFR part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of
liability, is March 16, 2023.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with internet
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically may mail similar pleadings to
the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE,
Washington, DC 20426. Hand delivered submissions in docketed
proceedings should be delivered to Health and Human Services, 12225
Wilkins Avenue, Rockville, Maryland 20852.
    In addition to publishing the full text of this document in the
Federal Register, the Commission provides all interested persons an
opportunity to view and/or print the contents of this document via the
internet through the Commission's Home Page (http://www.ferc.gov) using
the ``eLibrary'' link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three
digits in the docket number field to access the document. At this time,
the Commission has suspended access to the Commission's Public
Reference Room, due to the proclamation declaring a National Emergency
concerning the Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19), issued by the
President on March 13, 2020. For assistance, contact the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission at [email protected] or call toll-free,
(886) 208-3676 or TYY,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

    Dated: February 24, 2023.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-04309 Filed 3-1-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 226 (Friday, November 22, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64533-64535]
[FR Doc No: 2019-25327]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2016-N-0736]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Proposed Collection;
Comment Request; Tracking Network for PETNet, LivestockNet, and
SampleNet

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA, the Agency, or we) is
announcing an opportunity for public comment on the proposed collection
of certain information by the Agency. Under the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995 (PRA), Federal Agencies are required to publish notice in the
Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information,
including each proposed extension of an existing collection of
information, and to allow 60 days for public comment in response to the
notice. This notice solicits comments on our use of a tracking network
to collect and share safety information about animal food from Federal,
State, and Territorial Agencies.

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on the collection
of information by January 21, 2020.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments as follows. Please note that late,
untimely filed comments will not be considered. Electronic comments
must be submitted on or before January 21, 2020. The https://www.regulations.gov electronic filing system will accept comments until
11:59 p.m. Eastern Time at the end of January 21, 2020. Comments
received by mail/hand delivery/courier (for written/paper submissions)
will be considered timely if they are postmarked or the delivery
service acceptance receipt is on or before that date.

Electronic Submissions

    Submit electronic comments in the following way:
     Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov.
Follow the instructions for submitting comments. Comments submitted
electronically,

including attachments, to https://www.regulations.gov will be posted to
the docket unchanged. Because your comment will be made public, you are
solely responsible for ensuring that your comment does not include any
confidential information that you or a third party may not wish to be
posted, such as medical information, your or anyone else's Social
Security number, or confidential business information, such as a
manufacturing process. Please note that if you include your name,
contact information, or other information that identifies you in the
body of your comments, that information will be posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
     If you want to submit a comment with confidential
information that you do not wish to be made available to the public,
submit the comment as a written/paper submission and in the manner
detailed (see ``Written/Paper Submissions'' and ``Instructions'').

Written/Paper Submissions

    Submit written/paper submissions as follows:
     Mail/Hand Delivery/Courier (for written/paper
submissions): Dockets Management Staff (HFA-305), Food and Drug
Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane, Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.
     For written/paper comments submitted to the Dockets
Management Staff, FDA will post your comment, as well as any
attachments, except for information submitted, marked and identified,
as confidential, if submitted as detailed in ``Instructions.''
    Instructions: All submissions received must include the Docket No.
FDA-2016-N-0736 for ``Agency Information Collection Activities;
Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Tracking Network for PETNet,
LivestockNet, and SampleNet.'' Received comments, those filed in a
timely manner (see ADDRESSES), will be placed in the docket and, except
for those submitted as ``Confidential Submissions,'' publicly viewable
at https://www.regulations.gov or at the Dockets Management Staff
between 9 a.m. and 4 p.m., Monday through Friday.
     Confidential Submissions--To submit a comment with
confidential information that you do not wish to be made publicly
available, submit your comments only as a written/paper submission. You
should submit two copies total. One copy will include the information
you claim to be confidential with a heading or cover note that states
``THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION.'' The Agency will
review this copy, including the claimed confidential information, in
its consideration of comments. The second copy, which will have the
claimed confidential information redacted/blacked out, will be
available for public viewing and posted on https://www.regulations.gov.
Submit both copies to the Dockets Management Staff. If you do not wish
your name and contact information to be made publicly available, you
can provide this information on the cover sheet and not in the body of
your comments and you must identify this information as
``confidential.'' Any information marked as ``confidential'' will not
be disclosed except in accordance with 21 CFR 10.20 and other
applicable disclosure law. For more information about FDA's posting of
comments to public dockets, see 80 FR 56469, September 18, 2015, or
access the information at: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-09-18/pdf/2015-23389.pdf.
    Docket: For access to the docket to read background documents or
the electronic and written/paper comments received, go to https://www.regulations.gov and insert the docket number, found in brackets in
the heading of this document, into the ``Search'' box and follow the
prompts and/or go to the Dockets Management Staff, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jonnalynn Capezzuto, Office of
Operations, Food and Drug Administration, Three White Flint North, 10A-
12M, 11601 Landsdown St., North Bethesda, MD 20852,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Under the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3501-3521), Federal
Agencies must obtain approval from the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) for each collection of information they conduct or sponsor.
``Collection of information'' is defined in 44 U.S.C. 3502(3) and 5 CFR
1320.3(c) and includes Agency requests or requirements that members of
the public submit reports, keep records, or provide information to a
third party. Section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA (44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A))
requires Federal Agencies to provide a 60-day notice in the Federal
Register concerning each proposed collection of information, including
each proposed extension of an existing collection of information,
before submitting the collection to OMB for approval. To comply with
this requirement, FDA is publishing notice of the proposed collection
of information set forth in this document.
    With respect to the following collection of information, FDA
invites comments on these topics: (1) Whether the proposed collection
of information is necessary for the proper performance of FDA's
functions, including whether the information will have practical
utility; (2) the accuracy of FDA's estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information, including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used; (3) ways to enhance the quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to be collected; and (4) ways
to minimize the burden of the collection of information on respondents,
including through the use of automated collection techniques, when
appropriate, and other forms of information technology.

Tracking Network for PETNet, LivestockNet, and SampleNet

OMB Control Number 0910-0680--Extension

    The Center for Veterinary Medicine and the Partnership for Food
Protection developed a web-based tracking network (the tracking
network) to allow Federal, State, and Territorial regulatory and public
health Agencies to share safety information about animal food.
Information is submitted to the tracking network by regulatory and
public health Agency employees with membership rights. The efficient
exchange of safety information is necessary because it improves early
identification and evaluation of a risk associated with an animal food
product. We use the information to assist regulatory Agencies to
quickly identify and evaluate a risk and take whatever action is
necessary to mitigate or eliminate exposure to the risk. Earlier
identification and communication with respect to emerging safety
information may also mitigate the potential adverse economic impact for
the impacted parties associated with such safety issues. The tracking
network was developed under the requirements set forth under section
1002(b) of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act of 2007
(FDAAA) (Pub. L. 110-085). Section 1002(b) of the FDAAA required FDA,
in relevant part, to establish a pet food early warning alert system.
    The tracking network collects: (1) Reports of pet food-related
illness and product defects associated with dog food, cat food, and
food for other pets, which are submitted via the Pet Event Tracking
Network (PETNet); (2) reports of animal food-related illness and
product defects associated with animal food for livestock animals,
aquaculture species, and horses (LivestockNet); and (3) reports about
animal food laboratory samples considered adulterated by State or FDA
regulators (SampleNet).

    PETNet and LivestockNet reports share the following common data
elements, the majority of which are drop down menu choices: product
details (product name, lot code, product form, and the manufacturer or
distributor/packer (if known)), the species affected, number of animals
exposed to the product, number of animals affected, body systems
affected, product problem/defect, date of onset or the date product
problem was detected, the State where the incident occurred, the origin
of the information, whether there are supporting laboratory results,
and contact information for the reporting member (i.e., name, telephone
number will be captured automatically when member logs in to the
system). For the LivestockNet report, additional data elements specific
to livestock animals are captured: Product details (indication of
whether the product is a medicated product, product packaging, and
intended purpose of the product), class of the animal species affected,
and production loss. For PETNet reports, the only additional data field
is the animal life stage. The SampleNet reports have the following data
elements, many of which are drop down menu choices: Product information
(product name, lot code, guarantor information, date and location of
sample collection, and product description); laboratory information
(sample identification number, the reason for testing, whether the food
was reported to the Reportable Food Registry, who performed the
analysis); and results information (analyte, test method, analytical
results, whether the results contradict a label claim or guarantee, and
whether action was taken as a result of the sample analysis).
    Description of Respondents: Voluntary respondents to this
collection of information are Federal, State, and Territorial
regulatory and public health Agency employees with membership access to
the Animal Feed Network.
    FDA estimates the burden of this collection of information as
follows:

                                                     Table 1--Estimated Annual Reporting Burden \1\
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Number of
                 Activity                      Number of     responses per   Total annual            Average burden per response            Total hours
                                              respondents     respondent       responses
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PETNet....................................              20               5             100  0.25 (15 minutes)...........................              25
LivestockNET..............................              20               5             100  0.25 (15 minutes)...........................              25
SampleNet.................................              20               5             100  0.25 (15 minutes)...........................              25
                                           -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total.................................  ..............  ..............  ..............  ............................................              75
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no capital costs or operating and maintenance costs associated with this collection of information.

    Based on a review of the information collection since our last
request for OMB approval, we have made no adjustments to our burden
estimate.

    Dated: November 14, 2019.
Lowell J. Schiller,
Principal Associate Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2019-25327 Filed 11-21-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4164-01-P