INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE TRACK OUTREACH AWARD, MENTORING PROGRAM REGISTRATION, AND CUSTOMER SATISFACTION QUESTIONNAIRE December 5, 2003 Prepared by:

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Policy, Economics, and Innovation 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D. C., 20003  2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Identification Of The Information Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1( a) Title of The Information Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Need For And Use Of The Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2( b) Use/ Users of the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. Nonduplication, Consultations, And Other Collection Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3( a) Nonduplication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3( c) Consultations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3( e) General Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3( f) Confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3( g) Sensitive Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4. Respondents and the Information Requested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4( a) Respondents/ NAICS Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4( b) Information Requested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 ( i) Data Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 ( ii) Respondent Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5. The Information Collected   Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5( a) Agency Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5( b) Collection Methodology and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 5( c) Small Entity Flexibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 5( d) Collection Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 ( i) Estimating Labor Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 ( ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . 28  3 6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 ( i) Respondent Tally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 ( ii) Agency Tally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 6( g) Burden Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Index of Tables Table 4.1 Primary North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) Codes of Current Performance Track Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Table 5.1 Collection Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Table 6.1 Projected Membership and Response Levels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Table 6.2 Detailed Annualized Respondent Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 Table 6.3 Detailed Annualized Agency Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 Table 6.4 Bottom Line Respondent Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Table 6.5 Bottom Line Agency Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Appendices Appendix A: Federal Register Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 Appendix B: National Environmental Performance Track Outreach Award Application . . . . . . 39 Appendix C: National Environmental Performance Track Mentoring Program Registration . . . 43 Appendix D: National Environmental Performance Track Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46  4 SECTION I: PART A OF THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENT 1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title of Information Collection National Environmental Performance Track ( Performance Track) Outreach Award Application, Mentoring Program Registration, and Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire.

1( b) Short Characterization US Environmental Protection Agency announced the National Environmental Performance Track Program ( Performance Track) on June 26, 2000. The program is voluntary and is designed to recognize and encourage facilities that consistently meet their legal requirements; that have implemented environmental management systems to monitor and improve performance; that have achieved environmental improvements beyond compliance; and that publicly commit to specific environmental improvements and report on progress. A total of 309 facilities are current members.

The Performance Track Outreach Award is sponsored by the EPA's Performance Track Program. While Performance Track rewards all members for their commitment to improving their role in protecting the environment, the Outreach Award is a special award offered to current members and partners who are educating the public and encouraging prospective facilities to join Performance Track. Educating prospective facilities on the merits of joining the program helps increase membership in the Performance Track program, which in turn provides additional environmental benefits as more and more facilities make commitments to continuous environmental improvement.

Outreach Award applications will be accepted between October and December, and may be submitted by any facility or organization that was a member of Performance Track during the calendar year. To be considered for the award, facilities/ organizations may self nominate or may be nominated by other facilities, local or state entities, or EPA Performance Track staff. The applications will be reviewed by a panel of EPA judges and the recipients of the Outreach Award will be announced at the following year's Annual Member Event. It is estimated that between 27 and 42 facilities will complete the application annually over the life of this information collection request, with a burden of 1.5 hours for each application.

The Performance Track Mentoring Program was developed to facilitate information sharing among facilities and to help potential Performance Track applicants improve their environmental performance and strengthen their Performance Track applications. The Performance Track Mentoring Program is available to any current program member or any facility that has considered applying to the Performance Track program and is seeking assistance in setting environmental goals from the top performing facilities currently in the program. Mentees  5 are matched together with Performance Track sites that volunteer their time and resources to share their experiences and expertise in environmental best practices.

The Performance Track Mentoring Program Registration form may be completed by any facility that is currently a Performance Track member, or any facility interested in joining the Performance Track program. As both membership to the Performance Track program and applying to serve as a mentor/ mentee is voluntary, facilities are not obligated to provide information associated with this collection request. EPA estimates that between 39 and 60 facilities will complete the Mentoring Program Registration annually over the life of this information collection request, with a burden of 0.25 hours needed to complete the registration form.

In addition to increasing membership in the Performance Track program, EPA is interested in improving and increasing the value that Performance Track members receive from the Performance Track Program through membership services. EPA plans to gather feedback from all current Performance Track members through a Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire, which will be administered biannually. Current Performance Track members reflect a broad array of industry categories and their opinions about the program's effectiveness and level of service will be used to shape the development of future member services. The questionnaire will assess the satisfaction level of current members as well as identify improvements to services that the program can implement to increase long term member satisfaction. The questionnaire will ascertain the following information: program benefits and services that are important to members; member satisfaction with current services; potential improvements in communicating with members about the program; the level of promotion/ publicity that members desire for their participation in the program; and any additional benefits and services that would increase member satisfaction.

The Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire will be administered every two years online, via the worldwide web, to reduce the burden on respondents and encourage a high response rate. Email notification will be sent to all current members with passwords to allow them to access the survey. The questionnaire will be administered for one month to further encourage all members to respond, allowing EPA to accurately assess member satisfaction and desired improvements to the program. Member responses will be analyzed in a report at the conclusion of the one month survey period. EPA estimates that 358 members will complete the survey in the first year, and 554 members will complete the survey in the third year of this information collection request, with an estimated burden of 0.5 hours needed to complete the questionnaire.  6 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection In a July 1999 report, Aiming for Excellence: Actions to Encourage Stewardship and Accelerate Environmental Progress, EPA committed to developing and launching a National Performance Track Program that uses incentives and promotes environmental management systems to reward and encourage environmental leaders.

EPA views this program as a way to build upon and integrate a range of innovative programs that have been underway for some time at both the federal and state level. The Performance Track Program will increase the use of environmental management systems, public participation, and performance reporting, which will help improve the environment while shifting EPA's resources from the oversight of good performers.

The Outreach Award is meant to show appreciation to facilities that continually work to strengthen Performance Track and to encourage other facilities to do the same. The information to be collected is needed for assessing the most deserving candidates to receive the awards.

The mentor/ mentee program is meant to assist facilities considering the program in meeting the program criteria and completing acceptable applications. EPA believes establishing a mentor/ mentee program will help it achieve its target rate of 25 percent annual growth in Performance Track membership by allowing current members to share their expertise in environmental best practices with facilities that are considering becoming members in Performance Track. This sharing of knowledge will facilitate establishment of meaningful and achievable performance goals for potential members, and will provide an additional source of information available to potential members about the Performance Track program application process. EPA believes this feedback will strengthen the quality of potential members' applications and streamline the application process. The information to be collected is necessary to match the skills and knowledge of mentors to the appropriate mentees.

To further the goals of the Performance Track program, EPA needs to assess the level of satisfaction of current members and identify additional benefits and services through the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire. More than 300 members have participated in the program since its inception, and the survey mechanism allows an assessment of changes in their needs. Focus groups of Performance Track members have introduced desired benefits. Performance Track is now in its third year, and EPA will use the survey results to identify services and benefits that all members would find useful.

EPA has tried to structure each instrument so that the information collected is the minimum amount needed to achieve the goals for each component of the Performance Track program. As each instrument of this information collection request is voluntary in nature, EPA seeks to minimize the information collected and associated burden in order to increase  7 participation in each area. Failure to obtain the information requested may harm EPA's goal of increasing membership in Performance Track by not recognizing those facilities that are exemplary in their environmental stewardship practices, not providing assistance through the mentoring program to facilities that may be considering joining Performance Track, and not allowing EPA to tailor the Performance Track program to provide maximum benefits to current members and facilities in consideration of joining the program.

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data The Performance Track Outreach Award application will be submitted to EPA by facilities and organizations affiliated with Performance Track within the reporting year ( e. g. member facilities, network partners, state and local governments, and EPA staff). A panel of five EPA judges will consider all submitted applications to select recipients of the Outreach Award. Performance Track members selected for the award will be notified at the following years' Annual Member event.

The Performance Track Mentoring Program Registration form will be submitted to EPA by facilities and organizations affiliated with Performance Track whom wish to serve as mentors, as well as facilities and organizations who are seeking to join Performance Track and will serve as mentees. EPA will use these registration forms to match prospective members with Performance Track mentor facilities who volunteer their time and resources to promote to prospective members the value of becoming a Performance Track member, as well as sharing their expertise in environmental best practices and applying for membership.

EPA will use results compiled from the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire to identify priority areas of the program to improve. Information obtained on effective means of communicating with members will be used to adjust how members receive information on services and events ( e. g., making more information available through conferences or trade associations rather than mailings). Respondents can also enter new benefits or services they desire for their continued participation, and these suggestions will be evaluated by EPA as potential additions to the program. Responses will be stored in an electronic database accessible only to the project personnel. Personally identifiable information will not be shared with other agencies or organizations. The data analysis will focus on groups of respondents and not individual members, and the results will not be linked to member facilities or companies in any presentation of the results. A report will be developed for the purpose of presenting the results to Performance Track program staff.  8 3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) Nonduplication As the Outreach Award is meant to formally recognize those facilities and organizations that go above and beyond the requirements of Performance Track in working to improve the environment by educating the public and encouraging prospective facilities to join Performance Track, EPA deems the nomination process for the Outreach Award to be the best way to collect information on what activities the nominees are performing to strengthen Performance Track. Since the program and award application process is voluntary, and EPA does not require Performance Track members to report on outreach activities that go above and beyond the program criteria, the Outreach Award application will be the only available way for EPA to collect information necessary in determining recipients of the Outreach Award.

EPA believes the Performance Track Mentoring Program registration will provide a means for prospective members to learn about the benefits of the program and gain valuable insight from current members on environmental best practices which will, in turn, increase membership in the Performance Track program. There is currently no source of information as to which facilities/ organizations would like to serve as mentors for Performance Track, as well as no information as to which potential facilities/ organizations may wish to serve as mentees under the program. This information collection will allow EPA to identify those facilities that wish to be involved in either capacity in efforts to grow the Performance Track Program and improve environmental stewardship.

Similarly, the information to be obtained through the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire is not collected by EPA or any other agency. Member satisfaction with current benefits and services, information on the most effective means of communicating with members, and desired benefits can only be obtained partially through anecdotes from EPA's periodic contact with members. Use of the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire will allow member facilities to provide regular feedback on the services provided by Performance Track, giving EPA the information necessary to make changes that will better suit the program as a whole.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB In compliance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act, EPA solicited public comments for a 60 day period prior to submission of the ICR to OMB. EPA issued a Federal Register Notice announcing the request to implement the National Environmental Performance Track ( Performance Track) Outreach Award Application, Mentoring Program Registration, and Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire. See Appendix A for a copy of the Federal Register Notice.  9 3( c) Consultations The Performance Track Outreach Award, Mentoring Program, and Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire have been discussed with member facilities at Performance Track Annual Member events, through Performance Track newsletters, and Regional meetings. Responses to the initiatives have been positive, leading to the formation of this information collection request. In addition, a number of facilities have contacted EPA on their own accord to ask for mentoring assistance and to nominate members for the Outreach Award. On a number of occasions, EPA has had general discussions with these facilities regarding the anticipated burden of providing information to support these programs.

3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection The Performance Track Outreach Award is given annually to recognize those facilities and organizations associated within Performance Track during the reporting year that have gone above and beyond the requirements associated with being a Performance Track member. The Outreach Award will be presented during the existing Annual Members event. As such, EPA will collect Outreach Award applications annually to determine which facilities are to receive the Outreach Award. Less frequent collection would miss the opportunity to recognize facilities or organizations that are striving to improve the environment through their efforts in attempting to strengthen Performance Track and hamper efforts to reach the 25 percent growth in Performance Track membership that EPA seeks.

The Performance Track Mentoring Program Registration forms will be accepted on a rolling basis. Because registration for the program is voluntary and facilities/ organizations have the opportunity to enter the program at the time that is most convenient for them, EPA has sought to minimize the burden on facilities. By accepting Mentoring Program Registration forms on a rolling basis, the burden on the Agency is also minimized.

The Performance Track Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire will be given to members on a biennial schedule. This will allow EPA the time necessary to implement changes the members suggest through their responses to the questionnaire, and gauge how beneficial the changes are to the overall membership of Performance Track. EPA believes a two year schedule for the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire is an appropriate timetable to implement suggestions and monitor what effects they have on the program.  10 3( e) General Guidelines This information collection is consistent with the provisions at 5 CFR 1320.5( d)( 2)( i) through ( iv). There are no special circumstances with respect to 5 CFR 1320.5( d)( 2)( v) through ( viii), as the collection is not a statistical survey and does not use statistical classifications; nor does it include a pledge of confidentiality that is not supported by authority established in statute or regulation; or require proprietary, trade secret, of other confidential business information not protected by Agency procedures.

3( f) Confidentiality EPA shall treat information claimed as confidential business information ( CBI) in accordance with the requirements of 40 CFR part 2. If the participant fails to claim the information as confidential upon submission, it may be made available to the public without further notice. EPA cannot guarantee that information submitted in the Outreach Award application, Mentoring Program registration, or Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire and claimed as confidential will be protected from release under the Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA). State participants will maintain CBI confidentiality to the extent allowed by relevant state law. Note that some state laws provide for a greater degree of access to and narrower protections for information considered confidential under federal law.

3( g) Sensitive Questions Sensitive questions are defined in the ICR instructions as " questions concerning sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, or other matters usually considered private." The instruments addressed in this information collection request do not include sensitive questions.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) Codes Potential applicants include all facilities and organizations who have voluntarily elected to participate in Performance Track for the reporting year. Thus, potential respondents may fall under any NAICS code. Table 4.1 on the following page lists the Primary NAICS Codes for Performance Track members as of June 2003.

Table 4.1: Primary North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) Codes of Current Performance Track Members 339113 Surgical Appliance and Supplies Manufacturing 40 339111 Laboratory Apparatus and Furniture Manufacturing 33 325412 Pharmaceutical Preparation Manufacturing 28 325998 All Other Miscellaneous Chemical Product and Preparation Manufacturing 18 221112 Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation 12 812320 Dry Cleaning and Laundry Services ( except Coin Operated) 12 Table 4.1: Primary North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) Codes of Current Performance Track Members  11 454311 Heating Oil Dealers 10 322121 Paper ( except Newsprint) Mills 8 334220 Radio and Television Broadcasting and Wireless Communications Equipment 8 339113 Surgical and Appliance and Supplies Manufacturing 8 541710 Research and Development in the Physical, Engineering, and Life Sciences 8 325211 Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing 7 321114 Wood Preservation 6 325199 All Other Basic Organic Chemical Manufacturing 6 332991 Ball and Roller Bearing Manufacturing 6 326211 Tire Manufacturing ( except Retreading) 5 334413 Semiconductor and Related Device Manufacturing 5 336399 All Other Motor Vehicle Parts Manufacturing 5 311421 Fruit and Vegetable Canning 4 322130 Paperboard Mills 4 323113 Commercial Screen Printing 4 326113 Unlaminated Plastics Film and Sheet ( except Packaging) Manufacturing 4 334111 Electronic Computer Manufacturing 4 336322 Other Motor Vehicle Electrical and Electronic Equipment Manufacturing 4 339112 Surgical and Medical Instrument Manufacturing 4 339115 Ophthalmic Goods Manufacturing 4 339999 All Other Miscellaneous Manufacturing 4 221111 Hydroelectric Power Generation 3 221121 Electric Bulk Power Transmission and Control 3 221122 Electric Power Distribution 3 325411 Medicinal and Botanical Manufacturing 3 327999 All Other Miscellaneous Nonmetallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 3 334418 Printed Circuit Assembly ( Electronic Assembly) Manufacturing 3 336211 Motor Vehicle Body Manufacturing 3 311514 Dry, Condensed, and Evaporated Dairy Product Manufacturing 2 314110 Carpet and Rug Mills 2 321912 Cut Stock, Re sawing Lumber, and Planing 2 325188 All Other Basic Inorganic Chemical Manufacturing 2 325611 Soap and Other Detergent Manufacturing 2 325991 Custom Compounding of Purchased Resins 2 326199 All Other Plastics Product Manufacturing 2 327331 Concrete Block and Brick Manufacturing 2 331111 Iron and Steel Mills 2 331521 Aluminum Die Casting Foundries 2 332812 Metal Coating, Engraving ( except Jewelry and Silverware), and Allied 2 333111 Farm Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing 2 333313 Office Machinery Manufacturing 2 333911 Pump and Pumping Equipment Manufacturing 2 334411 Electron Tube Manufacturing 2 Table 4.1: Primary North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) Codes of Current Performance Track Members  12 334511 Search, Detection, Navigation, Guidance, Aeronautical, and Nautical System 2 334515 Instrument Manufacturing for Measuring and Testing Electricity and 2 334612 Prerecorded Compact Disc ( except Software), Tape, and Record Reproducing 2 334613 Magnetic and Optical Recording Media Manufacturing 2 335312 Motor and Generator Manufacturing 2 336350 Motor Vehicle Transmission and Power Train Parts Manufacturing 2 336411 Aircraft Manufacturing 2 336414 Guided Missile and Space Vehicle Manufacturing 2 339920 Sporting and Athletic Goods Manufacturing 2 562213 Solid Waste Combustors and Incinerators 2 928110 National Security 2 212391 Potash, Soda, and Borate Mineral Mining 1 311213 Malt Manufacturing 1 312221 Cigarette Manufacturing 1 314912 Canvas and Related Product Mills 1 321219 Reconstituted Wood Product Manufacturing 1 321911 Wood Window and Door Manufacturing 1 322110 Pulp Mills 1 322215 Nonfolding Sanitary Food Container Manufacturing 1 325132 Synthetic Organic Dye and Pigment Manufacturing 1 325212 Synthetic Rubber Manufacturing 1 325222 Noncellulosic Organic Fiber Manufacturing 1 325413 In Vitro Diagnostic Substance Manufacturing 1 325520 Adhesive Manufacturing 1 325612 Polish and Other Sanitation Good Manufacturing 1 325613 Surface Active Agent Manufacturing 1 325910 Printing Ink Manufacturing 1 326291 Rubber Product Manufacturing for Mechanical Use 1 326299 All Other Rubber Product Manufacturing 1 332313 Plate Work Manufacturing 1 332431 Metal Can Manufacturing 1 332995 Other Ordnance and Accessories Manufacturing 1 333293 Printing Machinery and Equipment Manufacturing 1 333294 Food Product Machinery Manufacturing 1 333314 Optical Instrument and Lens Manufacturing 1 333315 Photographic and Photocopying Equipment Manufacturing 1 333611 Turbine and Turbine Generator Set Units Manufacturing 1 334412 Bare Printed Circuit Board Manufacturing 1 334414 Electronic Capacitor Manufacturing 1 334512 Automatic Environmental Control Manufacturing for Residential, 1 334513 Instruments and Related Products Manufacturing for Measuring, Displaying, 1 335929 Other Communication and Energy Wire Manufacturing 1 335931 Current Carrying Wiring Device Manufacturing 1 Table 4.1: Primary North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) Codes of Current Performance Track Members  13 336111 Automobile Manufacturing 1 336212 Truck Trailer Manufacturing 1 336312 Gasoline Engine and Engine Parts Manufacturing 1 336391 Motor Vehicle Air Conditioning Manufacturing 1 339114 Dental Equipment and Supplies Manufacturing 1 339992 Musical Instrument Manufacturing 1 562219 Other Nonhazardous Waste Treatment and Disposal 1 812332 Industrial Launderers 1 926120 Regulation and Administration of Transportation Programs 1 927110 Space Research and Technology 1 4( b) Information Requested ( i) Data Items Initially, all facilities and organizations that are members of Performance Track will be sent the Outreach Award application via e mail. The Mentoring Program registration form will be available online on the Performance Track website. The Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire will be made available online to all members. Since nomination for the Outreach Award and registration in the Mentoring Program are voluntary, only those facilities interested in consideration for the Outreach Award, or being mentors/ mentees in the Mentoring Program, will submit an application to EPA. Submission of the Questionnaire is also voluntary and there are no benefits tied to completing it.

The Outreach Award Application ( attached as Appendix B) is made up of two parts:

° Section I asks for general information, such as the name and address of the facility; name, phone number, fax number, and e mail address of the primary contact person; and name, phone number, fax number, and e mail address of a communications contact. This section also asks the facility how it heard of the Outreach Award.

° Section II asks the respondent to describe the special efforts the facility/ organization has undertaken to promote the public value of environmental performance and/ or partnership in Performance Track. Examples of such efforts are provided for the respondent in this section as well.

The Mentoring Program Registration form ( attached as Appendix C) is made up of six parts:

° Section 1 asks for general information, such as the name and title of the submitter; name and address of the facility; phone number, fax number, and e mail address of the primary contact person; and NAICS code of the facility.  14 ° Section 2 asks whether the respondent is seeking to become a mentor or mentee. If the respondent is seeking to become a mentor, he/ she proceeds directly to Section 6.

° Section 3 asks the respondent to briefly describe what the site produces and/ or its functions, as well as the number of employees at the site.

° Section 4 asks in which areas the site wishes the mentoring relationship to provide additional guidance.

° Section 5 asks the applicant if it is currently working with a Performance Track site, and if so, to provide the name of the site with which they are currently working, the name and phone number of a contact person at the site, and if the applicant would like to work with this site as its official mentor.

° Section 6 asks which characteristics of the mentoring match are most important to the applicant, such as similar industry, geographic proximity, or size of business.

The Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire ( attached as Appendix D) contains 30 questions. The questions are grouped together in the following sections:

° Question 1 asks for the job title of the respondent. It will be important to know if the respondent works at the facility level, parent company level, or in another position to determine whether certain types of Performance Track services should be aimed at certain job responsibilities ° Questions 2 through 6 ask about the specific benefits of Performance Track that are important to members. This tells EPA which aspects of the program are most satisfactory and which might need more or less emphasis.

° Questions 7 through 10 ask about the specific entities ( e. g., EPA or state environmental agency, community members, customers, etc.) that are important to Performance Track members. This will be used to assess if promotion efforts have been satisfactorily targeted.

° Question 11 asks about potential concerns members may have had when joining the program. This information will be used to potentially alter aspects of the program so that prospective members will experience less burden in applying ( e. g. application process or annual reporting). For example, if members respond that there was a lack of top management support, more outreach can be directed towards individuals at this level of facilities.  15 ° Questions 12 and 13 ask members about the Performance Track services they have used, and how useful they found these services. There is also an option to check if they were not aware of any of the services, so that EPA can determine which services have not been communicated effectively. EPA will use results from these questions to maintain or expand services that are widely used, and reevaluate services that members do not find useful.

° Questions 14 through 17 request member preferences for regulatory incentives. Members are asked which regulatory areas they would be interested in receiving incentives, and the particular types of incentives they would find most beneficial.

° Questions 18 and 19 ask members to rate how satisfied they are with the recognition their facility has received for its membership in Performance Track and ask respondents for recommendations for ways to improve recognition members receive.

° Questions 20 and 21 ask about the most effective means for communicating with members regarding Performance Track services or events. If, for example, members agree that conferences and speaker events are effective ways to communicate program information, EPA can target these events to provide information about new Performance Track services.

° Questions 22 through 25 ask members about their presence at conferences in the past three years and their preferences for receiving Performance Track information at these events. This information will assist EPA in determining the types of conferences, as well as the particular parts of the conferences, where Performance Track presence would be most useful to members.

° Questions 26 through 29 ask about the ways that members utilize to promote and receive value for their participation in Performance Track. With this information, EPA can assist in promotional efforts to increase the value of Performance Track membership.

° Question 30 is an open ended question soliciting suggestions for improvements to the services Performance Track offers. These suggestions will also be evaluated as potential improvements to the program.

As EPA anticipates making changes to the program based on responses received from the questionnaire, it may be necessary to add or delete or otherwise slightly alter the questions asked in the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire administered in year three of this information collection request. EPA does not expect such changes to significantly differ from the general outline above, nor does it expect any changes to add additional burden in completion of the  16 questionnaire and will seek OMB approval for any changes to the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire prior to its administration.

( ii) Respondent Activities The respondent must perform the following activities during the application phase for the Outreach Award:

1. Read the application directions. 2. Gather information to complete both sections of the application. 3. Complete both sections of the application. 4. Submit the application to EPA. 5. Wait for notification from EPA if facility has been selected to receive the Outreach Award.

The respondent must perform the following activities associated with the Mentoring Program Registration form:

1. Read the registration form instructions. 2. Gather information to complete the seven sections of the application. 3. Complete the seven sections of the application. 4. Submit the application to EPA. 5. Wait for notification from EPA if facility has been selected for participation in the mentoring program.

Members conduct the following activities to complete and submit the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire:

1. Read the e mail announcing the survey and asking for their participation. 2. Read the e mail containing instructions for taking the survey. 3. Complete and submit the survey online.

The activities required by the components of this information collection request are not customary and are usual business practice.

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities Performance Track Outreach Award recipients will be selected by a panel of five EPA judges. EPA will consider all applications submitted by the deadline set and announce the award winners at the following years' Annual Member event. Selection for the award will be based on  17 the description of efforts submitted in the application that the facility/ organization has undertaken to promote public education, environmental stewardship, and strengthening of Performance Track.

The following activities must be performed by the Agency in relation to the Outreach Award Application:

1. Setup e mail database and send out applications. 2. Review all submitted applications submitted by the deadline. 3. Notify recipients of award. 4. Recognize award recipients at Annual Member Event.

EPA will accept Performance Track Mentoring Program Registration forms from current members and prospective members of the Performance Track Program on a rolling basis. EPA will use these registration forms to match companies based on the responses in the registration form. EPA will notify both the mentor and mentee facilities when a mentor relationship is made.

The following activities must be performed by the Agency in relation to the Performance Track Mentoring Program Registration form:

1. Receive registration forms from interested facilities/ organizations on a rolling basis. 2. Review submitted applications. 3. Notify recipients of acceptance into the mentoring program. 4. Notify facilities of their mentoring partner.

The following activities must be performed by the Agency in relation to the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire:

1. Set up e mail database with passwords, create mail merge, configure internet mail outlet, and test system. 2. Send e mail notification announcing the survey and asking for member participation. 3. Send e mail containing instructions on taking the survey, password for survey, and link to survey. 4. Send reminder e mail notice at the end of the next two weeks. 5. Make phone calls to members who have not completed the survey within three weeks. 6. Analyze results from survey and compile report.

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management Applicants wishing to be considered for the Performance Track Outreach Award must submit a copy of their award application to EPA. The application will be evaluated for completeness by Performance Track staff. If Performance Track program staff consider the application to be incomplete, or requiring additional information, the applicant may be contacted  18 via e mail or telephone to elaborate on the information submitted. A panel of five EPA judges will review each application and select recipients of the Outreach Award.

Facilities interested in joining the Performance Track Mentoring Program will submit a copy of their registration form to EPA by mail, fax, or e mail. EPA will review each form, and based on the information provided regarding what the registering facility seeks in the mentor relationship, will match facilities with similar objectives.

The Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire will be available online for facilities to complete. EPA will use electronic databases to store results from the questionnaire. The Agency will use software to aggregate and analyze responses to the questionnaire. A report will be generated that will identify areas of the program that members have identified as needing strengthening, benefits they would like to see, as well as aspects of the program that are working well for the members. This report will allow EPA to tailor the program to provide the greatest benefit to its members, and increase the attractiveness of the program to facilities that are considering becoming members of Performance Track.

EPA and its contractor support staff do not intend to distribute the information collected through the Outreach Award application, Mentoring Program Registration, and Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire, as well as the subsequent analysis and report( s), to anyone outside of the Performance Track program. However, EPA cannot guarantee that information collected through these instruments and claimed as confidential will be protected from release under the Freedom of Information Act ( FOIA).

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility EPA understands that members of its Performance Track Program vary in size. The burden to small businesses was taken into account when developing the Performance Track Program, its application, reporting requirements and this information collection. Due to the voluntary nature of submission and limited amount of information requested in this information collection request, EPA does not believe small business will incur any undue burden.

5( d) Collection Schedule Table 5.1 on the following page summarizes the program's collection schedule.  19 Table 5.1: Collection Schedule Performance Track Outreach Award Application Activity Schedule EPA sends applications to members Annually, first quarter of fiscal year ( FY Q1)

EPA receives applications Annually, FY Q1 EPA panel of judges reviews all submitted applications Annually, FY Q2 EPA notifies recipients of award Annually, FY Q2 EPA formally recognizes recipients of award At the Annual Member Events Performance Track Mentoring Program Registration Activity Schedule EPA sends registration form to facility Based on request of facility EPA receives registration form from facility Rolling basis EPA reviews registration form Within days of receipt EPA informs facilities of mentor relationship Within four weeks of receipt of registration form Performance Track Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire Activity Schedule EPA sends e mail notice announcing questionnaire Upon OMB Information Collection Request approval EPA sends e mail notice with instructions One week after announcing questionnaire EPA sends reminder e mail after one week to remaining non respondents One week after sending e mail with instructions EPA sends reminder e mail after two weeks to remaining non respondents Two weeks after sending e mail with instructions EPA makes phone calls after three weeks to remaining non respondents Three weeks after sending e mail with instructions EPA analyzes results and compiles report Within six weeks of sending e mail with instructions 6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden This section presents EPA's estimates of respondent burden necessary to complete the activities associated with this information collection. Respondents to this information collection are considered to be the members of Performance Track for the reporting year. EPA is the  20 recipient and reviewer of the data collected. In using this analysis, it should be noted again that all submissions of this information collection are voluntary.

Based on member feedback, EPA estimates that approximately 7 percent of the facilities that are members of Performance Track will submit Outreach Award applications under this information collection request. EPA expects 10 percent of current member facilities to register in the Performance Track Mentoring Program, and 90 percent of the current member facilities and corporate participants will complete the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire.

As of October 2003, there were 309 members in Performance Track. For future year's estimates of number of respondents, EPA's goal of 25 percent annual increase in membership will be used to calculate projected membership in Performance Track. The 7 percent submission rate estimate for the Outreach Award and 10 percent submission rate estimate for the Mentoring Program will be applied to the projected membership levels to estimate the number of respondents in subsequent years. The estimated number of respondents to the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire is based on 90 percent of Performance Track members and 12 corporate participants completing the survey.

Table 6.1 summarizes the number of submissions expected to be received under this information collection.

Table 6.1: Projected Membership and Response Levels Year 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Membership1 198 247 309 386 483 604 Expected number of Outreach Award applications2 N/ A N/ A N/ A 27 34 42 Expected number of Mentoring Program Registration forms3 N/ A N/ A N/ A 39 48 60 Expected number of Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire responses4 N/ A N/ A N/ A 358 N/ A 554 1 Actual number of members for 2001, 2002, and 2003. Estimate number of members based on EPA annual target growth rate of 25% for each year thereafter. 2 Based on an estimated 7% of Performance Track members submitting applications for Outreach Award. 3 Based on an estimated 10% of Performance Track members submitting registration forms for the Mentoring Program. 4 In addition to the current members, 12 corporate participants will be asked to complete the questionnaire. Estimated number of respondents is based on 90 percent of members and corporate participants completing the survey.

Based on discussions with Performance Track members, the Agency estimates respondents to the Outreach Award Application will take approximately 1.5 hours to read the instructions, gather the information needed, and complete the application. Since there is no further action required by the facility/ organization, total annual burden hours for each respondent for the Outreach Award Application is 1.5 hours.  21 Based on consultations with Performance Track members, the Agency estimates respondents to the Mentoring Program Registration form to take about 0.25 hours to read the instructions and complete the registration form. As there is no further action required by the facility/ organization, total annual burden hours for each respondent to the Mentoring Program is 0.25 hours.

Based on timed pre tests of the questionnaire instrument, in which EPA contractor staff and seven Performance Track members completed the questionnaire online, EPA estimates that respondents to the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire will take 0.5 hours to read the instructions and complete the online survey.

In order to be conservative in estimating labor costs associated with this information collection, EPA assumes the respondent to the applications and questionnaire to be managers. However, in some cases, EPA suspects that managers may delegate the task to their staff. To be consistent with previous Performance Track ICR's, EPA used the Managerial wage rate set out in the Information Collection Request for EPA Performance Track Program of June 13, 2003 ( ICR 1949.02). Table 6.2 on the following page details the annual respondent burden for each year covered by this information collection request.

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs ( i) Estimating Labor Costs EPA estimates the total annualized respondent cost for the number of expected submissions and responses to be $ 16,153. For an individual facility/ organization, the Outreach Award Application cost is estimated to be $ 112, the Mentoring Program Registration form cost is estimated to be $ 19, and the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire cost is estimated to be $ 37.

Table 6.2 uses the following equation to obtain labor costs for each task associated with this information collection request: ( Manager Hours x $ 74.87/ Hour) = Labor Cost/ Year/ Respondent. As stated, cost estimates for labor were taken from the Information Collection Request for EPA Performance Track Program of June 13, 2003 ( ICR 1949.02), which were derived from Bureau of Labor Statistics Data, and reflect benefits and overhead costs. In order to obtain total hourly burden and total cost estimates for Table 6.2, the following equations were used:

Respondent Hours/ Year x Number of Respondents = Total Hours/ Year Labor Cost/ Year/ Respondent x Number of Respondents = Total Cost/ Year ( ii) Estimating Capital and Operations Maintenance Costs There are no capital or operations maintenance costs associated with this information collection.  22

Table 6.2: Detailed Annualized Respondent Burden and Costs, January 1, 2004  December 31, 2006 Respondent Burden, January 1, 2004  December 31, 2004 Information Collection Activity Manager ($ 74.87/ Hour) Respondent Hours/ Year Labor Cost/

Year/ Respondent Number of Respondents Total Hours/

Year Total Cost/

Year Outreach Award Application Read Instructions 0.2 0.2 $ 14.97 27 5.4 $ 404.30 Complete Application 1.3 1.3 $ 97.33 27 35.1 $ 2,627.94 Subtotal 1.5 1.5 $ 112 27 40.5 $ 3,032 Mentoring Program Registration Form Read Instructions 0.05 0.05 $ 3.74 39 1.95 $ 146.00 Complete Registration Form 0.2 0.2 $ 14.97 39 7.8 $ 583.99 Subtotal 0.25 0.25 $ 19 39 9.75 $ 730 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire Read Instructions 0.1 0.1 $ 7.49 358 35.8 $ 2,680.35 Complete Questionnaire 0.4 0.4 $ 29.95 358 143.2 $ 10,721.38 Subtotal 0.5 0.5 $ 37 358 179 $ 13,402 Totals for 2004 424 229.25 $ 17,164 Respondent Burden, January 1, 2005  December 31, 2005 Information Collection Activity Manager ($ 74.87/ Hour) Respondent Hours/ Year Labor Cost/

Year/ Respondent Number of Respondents Total Hours/

Year Total Cost/

Year Outreach Award Application Read Instructions 0.2 0.2 $ 14.97 34 6.8 $ 509.12 Complete Application 1.3 1.3 $ 97.33 34 44.2 $ 3,309.25 Subtotal 1.5 1.5 $ 112 34 51 $ 3,818  23

Mentoring Program Registration Read Instructions .05 .05 $ 3.74 48 2.4 $ 179.69 Complete Registration Form 0.2 0.2 $ 14.97 48 9.6 $ 718.75 Subtotal 0.25 0.25 $ 19 48 12 $ 898 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire ( Not administered this year)

Subtotal 0.00 0.00 $ 0.00 0.0 0.0 $ 0.00 Totals for 2005 82 63 $ 4,716 Respondent Burden, January 1, 2006  December 31, 2006 Information Collection Activity Manager ($ 74.87/ Hour) Respondent Hours/ Year Labor Cost/

Year/ Respondent Number of Respondents Total Hours/

Year Total Cost/

Year Outreach Award Application Read instructions 0.2 0.2 $ 14.97 42 8.4 $ 628.91 Complete application 1.3 1.3 $ 97.33 42 54.6 $ 4,087.90 Subtotal 1.5 1.5 $ 112 42 63 $ 4,717 Mentoring Program Registration Form Read Instructions 0.05 0.05 $ 3.74 60 3 $ 224.61 Complete Registration Form 0.2 0.2 $ 14.97 60 12 $ 898.44 Subtotal 0.25 0.25 $ 19 60 15 $ 1,123 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire Read Instructions 0.1 0.1 $ 7.49 554 55.4 $ 4,147.80 Complete Questionnaire 0.4 0.4 $ 29.95 554 221.6 $ 16,591.19 Subtotal 0.5 0.5 $ 37 554 277 $ 20,739 Totals for 2006 656 355 $ 26,579  24

Totals over the life of this ICR 1162 647.25 $ 48,459  25 6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs In preparation for the delivery of Outreach Award applications, EPA estimates it will spend 4 hours to develop an e mail database for distribution of the applications. This is a onetime setup cost that is not affected by the number of respondents. EPA estimates it will expend 5.5 hours of burden per Outreach Award Application. This estimate includes one hour for each of five judges to review each application, and 0.5 hours for writing notification letters to each facility as to whether they have been chosen to receive the Outreach Award.

The Agency estimates that the Mentoring Program Registration forms will require 0.75 hours of burden in order to review each submission, find a matching mentor/ mentee, and communicate to both parties the mentoring match via phone call or e mail.

In administering the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire, EPA incurs costs due mostly to the set up of the e mail notification system, testing, responding to problems in delivery of e mails, and analysis of the responses. These are up front costs that are independent of the number of respondents, therefore, the number or responses has negligible effect on the overall cost associated with implementing the questionnaire. The only cost directly related to number of responses is the cost associated with the number of reminder calls to facilities that have not completed the survey after three weeks. If a facility has not completed the survey within three weeks of receiving the link and password to the questionnaire, EPA will make phone calls to the remaining non respondents to encourage increased participation. EPA estimates that 15% of members will not have responded at that time.

EPA estimates the total annualized Agency cost for the number of expected responses to the instruments in this information collection request to be $ 28,662. EPA estimates a cost of $ 202 to set up an e mail database for sending out Outreach Award applications, and an additional agency cost of $ 384 for each application received. Estimated Agency cost for each Mentoring Program Registration form is $ 38. As stated above, costs for the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire are incurred mostly in the setup and administration of the questionnaire. EPA estimates an annualized cost of $ 20,118 to administer the questionnaire twice over the life of this collection request.

Table 6.3 uses the following equation to obtain labor costs: ( GS 15 Hours x $ 83.41/ Hour) + ( GS 14 Hours x $ 70.90/ Hour) + ( GS 12 Hours x $ 50.45/ Hour) + ( Contractor Hours x $ 69.48/ Hour) = Labor Cost/ Year/ Response. Labor cost estimates were derived from the Office of Personnel Management's Salary Table 2003 DCB, with the base rate multiplied by 1.6 to account for benefits and overhead. In order to obtain total hourly burden and total cost estimates for Table 6.3, the following equations were used:

Agency Hours / Response x Number of Responses = Total Hours / Year Labor Cost / Response x Number of Responses = Total Cost / Year Table 6.3 on the following page summarizes the annualized agency burden associated with this information collection.  26

Table 6.3: Detailed Annualized Agency Burden and Costs, January 1, 2004  December 31, 2006 Agency Burden, January 1, 2004  December 31, 2004 Information Collection Activity Agency Labor1 Agency Hours/

Response Labor Cost/

Response Number of Responses Total Hours/ Year Total Cost/

Year GS 15 ($ 83.41/ Hour) GS 14 ($ 70.90/ Hour) GS 12 ($ 50.45/ Hour) Contractor2 ($ 69.48/ Hour)

Outreach Award Application Setup e mail database and send out application 4 N/ A N/ A N/ A 4 $ 201.80 Review Application 2 2 1 5 $ 359.07 27 135 $ 9,694.89 Write Notification Letter 0.5 0.5 $ 25.23 27 13.5 $ 681.08 Subtotal 2 2 5.5 0 5.5 $ 384 27 152.5 $ 10,578 Mentoring Program Registration Form Review Registration form 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 39 9.75 $ 491.89 Find mentoring partner 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 39 9.75 $ 491.89 Communicate match to both parties 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 39 9.75 $ 491.89 Subtotal 0 0 0.75 0 0.75 $ 38 39 29.25 $ 1,476 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire3 Set up and testing of e mail database 60 60 $ 4,168.80 N/ A 60 $ 4,168.80 Send e mail announcement 3 3 $ 208.44 N/ A 3 $ 208.44 E mail survey link and passwords 3 3 $ 208.44 N/ A 3 $ 208.44 Send reminder e mail after 1 week 3 3 $ 208.44 N/ A 3 $ 208.44 Send reminder e mail after 2 weeks 3 3 $ 208.44 N/ A 3 $ 208.44 Make reminder phone call4 0.25 0.25 $ 17.37 60 15 $ 1,042.20 Analyze results and compile report 200 200 $ 13,896.00 N/ A 200 $ 13,896.00 Subtotal 0 0 0 272.25 272.25 $ 18,916 60 287 $ 19,941 Total for 2004 2 2 6.25 272.25 278.5 $ 19,338 126 468.75 $ 31,994 1 Taken from US Office of Personnel Management's Salary Table 2003  DCB. Assumes 2 judges at GS 15, step 5, and GS 14, step 5, and 1 judge at GS 12, step 5, each spending 1 hour to review application. Base hourly wage multiplied by loading factor of 1.6 to account for benefits and overhead.

2 Taken from US Bureau of Labor Statistics Employer Cost for Employee Compensation for Professional Specialty Occupations in Private Service Producing Industry. Base hourly wage of $ 28.95 multiplied by loading factor of 2.4 to account for benefits, overhead, G& A, and fee.

3 Costs for Agency tasks relating to the administration of the questionnaire, with the exception of the reminder phone call, are not dependent on the number of respondents, as once a database with e mail information is established, additional e mail announcements can be done with negligible burden, other than resolving problems with delivery.

4 Assumes 15% of members and corporate participants will not have completed the questionnaire at the end of three weeks.  27

Table 6.3: Detailed Annualized Agency Burden and Costs, January 1, 2004  December 31, 2006 Agency Burden, January 1, 2005  December 31, 2005 Information Collection Activity Agency Labor1 Agency Hours/ Response Labor Cost/

Response Number of Responses Total Hours/

Year Total Cost/ Year GS 15 ($ 83.41/ Hour) GS 14 ($ 70.90/ Hour) GS 12 ($ 50.45/ Hour) Contractor2 ($ 69.48/ Hour)

Outreach Award Application Setup e mail database and send out application 4 N/ A N/ A N/ A 4 $ 201.80 Review Application 2 2 1 5 $ 359.07 34 170 $ 12,208.38 Write Notification Letter 0.5 0.5 $ 25.23 34 17 $ 857.65 Subtotal 2 2 5.5 0 5.5 $ 384 34 191 $ 13,268 Mentoring Program Registration Form Review Registration form 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 48 12 $ 605.40 Find mentoring partner 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 48 12 $ 605.40 Communicate match 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 48 12 $ 605.40 Subtotal 0 0 0.75 0 0.75 $ 38 48 36 $ 1,816 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire ( Not administered this year)

Send e mail announcement E mail survey link and passwords Send reminder e mail after 1 week Send reminder e mail after 2 weeks Make phone calls Analyze results and compile report Subtotal Total for 2005 2 2 6.25 0 6.25 $ 422 82 227 $ 15,084 1 Taken from US Office of Personnel Management's Salary Table 2003  DCB. Assumes 2 judges at GS 15, step 5, and GS 14, step 5, and 1 judge at GS 12, step 5, each spending 1 hour to review application. Base hourly wage multiplied by loading factor of 1.6 to account for benefits and overhead.

2 Taken from US Bureau of Labor Statistics Employer Cost for Employee Compensation for Professional Specialty Occupations in Private Service Producing Industry. Base hourly wage of $ 28.95 multiplied by loading factor of 2.4 to account for benefits, overhead, G& A, and fee.  28

Table 6.3: Detailed Annualized Agency Burden and Costs, January 1, 2004  December 31, 2006 Agency Burden, January 1, 2006  December 31, 2006 Information Collection Activity Agency Labor1 Agency Hours/ Response Labor Cost/

Response Number of Responses Total Hours/

Year Total Cost/ Year GS 15 ($ 83.41/ Hour) GS 14 ($ 70.90/ Hour) GS 12 ($ 50.45/ Hour) Contractor2 ($ 69.48/ Hour)

Outreach Award Application Set up e mail database and send out application 4 N/ A N/ A N/ A 4 $ 201.80 Review Application 2 2 1 5 $ 359.07 42 210 $ 15,080.94 Write Notification Letter 0.5 0.5 $ 25.23 42 21 $ 1,059.45 Subtotal 2 2 5.5 0 5.5 $ 384 42 235 $ 16,342 Mentoring Program Registration Form Review Registration form 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 60 15 $ 756.75 Find mentoring partner 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 60 15 $ 756.75 Communicate match 0.25 0.25 $ 12.61 60 15 $ 756.75 Subtotal 0 0 0.75 0 0.75 $ 38 60 45 $ 2,270 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire3 Set up and testing of e mail database 60 60 $ 4,168.80 N/ A 60 $ 4,168.80 Send e mail announcement 3 3 $ 208.44 N/ A 3 $ 208.44 E mail survey link and passwords 3 3 $ 208.44 N/ A 3 $ 208.44 Send reminder e mail after 1 week 3 3 $ 208.44 N/ A 3 $ 208.44 Send reminder e mail after 2 weeks 3 3 $ 208.44 N/ A 3 $ 6.40 Make reminder phone call4 0.25 0.25 $ 17.37 92 23 $ 1,598.04 Analyze results and compile report 200 200 $ 13,896.00 N/ A 200 $ 13,896.00 Subtotal 0 0 0 272.25 272.25 $ 18,916 92 295 $ 20,295 Total for 2006 2 2 6.25 272.25 278.5 $ 19,338 194 575 $ 38,907 1 Taken from US Office of Personnel Management's Salary Table 2003  DCB. Assumes 2 judges at GS 15, step 5, and GS 14, step 5, and 1 judge at GS 12, step 5, each spending 1 hour to review application. Base hourly wage multiplied by loading factor of 1.6 to account for benefits and overhead.

2 Taken from US Bureau of Labor Statistics Employer Cost for Employee Compensation for Professional Specialty Occupations in Private Service Producing Industry. Base hourly wage of $ 28.95 multiplied by loading factor of 2.4 to account for benefits, overhead, G& A, and fee.

3 Costs for Agency tasks relating to the administration of the questionnaire, with the exception of the reminder phone call, are not dependent on the number of respondents, as once a database with e mail information is established, additional e mail announcements can be done with negligible burden, other than resolving problems with delivery.

4 Assumes 15% of members and corporate participants will not have completed the questionnaire at the end of three weeks.  29 6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs Based on the program's goal of a 25 percent annual growth rate in membership for the Performance Track program, EPA estimates membership in Performance Track to range from 386 to 604 facilities/ organizations over the life of this ICR. Assuming the 7 percent Outreach Award application submission rate remains constant over the life of this information collection request, EPA expects to receive between 27 and 42 Outreach Award applications annually through this ICR. Assuming the 10 percent submission rate for the Mentoring Program, EPA estimates it will receive between 39 and 60 registration forms annually over the life of this ICR. EPA estimates for responses to the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire are 347 responses the first year, and 544 responses in the last year of this information collection request, based on a 90 percent completion rate for members and corporate participants. As all of the information requested in this collection is of a voluntary nature, there may be some degree of variability in the actual number of facilities subject to this information collection request.

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables ( i) Respondent Tally Bottom line burden hours and costs for respondents are summarized in Table 6.4.

Table 6.4: Bottom Line Respondent Burden and Costs Submission Number of Respondents Burden Hours Total Costs Year 1 Outreach Award Application 27 40.5 $ 3,032 Mentoring Program Registration 39 9.75 $ 730 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire 358 179 $ 13,402 Year 1 Bottom Line 424 229.25 $ 17,164 Year 2 Outreach Award Application 34 51 $ 3,818 Mentoring Program Registration 48 12 $ 898 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire N/ A N/ A N/ A Year 2 Bottom Line 82 63 $ 4,716 Year 3 Outreach Award Application 42 63 $ 4,717 Mentoring Program Registration 60 15 $ 1,123 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire 554 277 $ 20,739 Year 3 Bottom Line 656 355 $ 26,579  30 ( ii) Agency Tally Bottom line burden and costs for the Agency are summarized in Table 6.5 below.

Table 6.5: Bottom Line Agency Burden and Costs Submission Number of Respondents Burden Hours Total Costs Year 1 Outreach Award Application 27 152.5 $ 10,578 Mentoring Program Registration 39 29.25 $ 1,476 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire1 60 287 $ 19,941 Year 1 Bottom Line 126 468.75 $ 31,994 Year 2 Outreach Award Application 34 191 $ 13,268 Mentoring Program Registration 48 36 $ 1,816 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire N/ A N/ A N/ A Year 2 Bottom Line 82 227 $ 15,084 Year 3 Outreach Award Application 42 235 $ 16,342 Mentoring Program Registration 60 45 $ 2,270 Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire1 92 295 $ 20,295 Year 3 Bottom Line 194 575 $ 38,907 1 Number of respondents are only those facilities that receive a reminder phone call.

6( f) Reasons for Change In Burden This is the initial request for the information collection, and as such, there is no change in burden. Burden estimates have been provided in this information collection and upon renewal of this information collection, changes in burden will be addressed.

6( g) Burden Statement The burden for information collection requirements associated with the Outreach Award Application is estimated to be 1.5 hours per respondent. The burden estimate includes time to review the instructions, gather information, and complete and submit the application.  31 The burden for information collection requirements associated with the Mentoring Program Registration form is estimated to be 0.25 hours per respondent. The burden estimate includes time to review the registration form, and complete and submit the registration.

The burden for information collection requirements associated with the Customer Satisfaction Questionnaire is estimated to be 0.5 hours per respondent. The burden estimate includes time to read the instructions for the questionnaire and complete the online survey.

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; adjusting the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a 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. OA 2003 0008, which is available for public viewing at the Office of Environmental Information Docket in the EPA Docket Center ( EPA/ DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8: 30 a. m. to 4: 30 p. m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is ( 202) 566 1744, and the telephone number for the Office of Environmental Information Docket is ( 202) 566 1752. An electronic version of the public docket is available through EPA Dockets ( EDOCKET) at http:// www. epa. gov/ edocket. Use EDOCKET to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Once in the system, select " search," then key in the docket ID number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No. ( OA 2003 0008) in any correspondence.  32


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 22 (Thursday, February 2, 2012)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 5169]
[FR Doc No: 2012-1794]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2011-1144; Airspace Docket No. 11-AGL-24]

Amendment of Class D Airspace; Saginaw, MI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule, technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This action amends Class D airspace within the Saginaw, MI,
area by changing the name of the airport from Tri-City International
Airport to MBS International Airport, and updating the airport's
geographic coordinates. This action does not change the boundaries or
operating requirements of the airspace.

DATES: Effective date: 0901 UTC, April 5, 2012. The Director of the
Federal Register approves this incorporation by reference action under
1 CFR Part 51, subject to the annual revision of FAA Order 7400.9 and
publication of conforming amendments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Scott Enander, Central Service Center,
Operations Support Group, Federal Aviation Administration, Southwest
Region, 2601 Meacham Blvd., Fort Worth, TX 76137; telephone (817) 321-
7716.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Rule

    This action amends Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR)
part 71 by changing the airport formerly known as Tri-City
International Airport to MBS International Airport and updating the
geographic coordinates within Class D airspace to coincide with the
FAA's aeronautical database. This is an administrative change and does
not affect the boundaries, altitudes, or operating requirements of the
airspace, therefore, notice and public procedures under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)
are unnecessary.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
Therefore, this regulation: (1) Is not a ``significant regulatory
action'' under Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule''
under DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26,
1979); and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation
as the anticipated impact is so minimal. Since this is a routine matter
that will only affect air traffic procedures and air navigation, it is
certified that this rule, when promulgated, will not have a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities under the
criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
    The FAA's authority to issue rules regarding aviation safety is
found in Title 49 of the U.S. Code. Subtitle 1, Section 106, describes
the authority of the FAA Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation
Programs, describes in more detail the scope of the agency's authority.
This rulemaking is promulgated under the authority described in
Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart I, Section 40103. Under that section, the
FAA is charged with prescribing regulations to assign the use of
airspace necessary to ensure the safety of aircraft and the efficient
use of airspace. This regulation is within the scope of that authority
as it amends controlled airspace at MBS International Airport, Saginaw,
MI.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71

    Airspace, Incorporation by reference, Navigation (air).

Adoption of the Amendment

    In consideration of the foregoing, the Federal Aviation
Administration amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows:

PART 71--DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR
TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND REPORTING POINTS

0
1. The authority citation for 14 CFR part 71 continues to read as
follows:

    Authority:  49 U.S.C. 106(g), 40103, 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854,
24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, 1959-1963 Comp., p. 389.

Sec.  71.1  [Amended]

0
2. The incorporation by reference in 14 CFR 71.1 of the Federal
Aviation Administration Order 7400.9V, Airspace Designations and
Reporting Points, dated August 9, 2011, and effective September 15,
2011, is amended as follows:

Paragraph 5000 Class D Airspace.

* * * * *

AGL MI D Saginaw, MI [Amended]

MBS International Airport, MI
    (Lat. 43[deg]31'59'' N., long. 84[deg]04'47'' W.)

    That airspace extending upward from the surface to and including
3,200 feet MSL within a 4.8-mile radius of MBS International
Airport. This Class D airspace area is effective during the specific
dates and times established in advance by a Notice to Airmen. The
effective date and time will thereafter be continuously published in
the Airport/Facility Directory.

    Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 13, 2012.
Walter L. Tweedy,
Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, ATO Central Service Center.
[FR Doc. 2012-1794 Filed 2-1-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P


[Federal Register: February 17, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 30)]
[Notices]
[Page 7420-7421]
[DOCID:fr17fe09-52]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

Combined Notice of Filings

February 11, 2009.
    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:
    Docket Numbers: RP03-36-042
    Applicants: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners
    Description: Dauphin Island Gathering Partners submits Seventh
Revised Sheet 10A to its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume 1.

    Filed Date: 02/04/2009
    Accession Number: 20090205-0491
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 17, 2009

    Docket Numbers: RP05-157-015
    Applicants: Saltville Gas Storage Company L.L.C.
    Description: Saltville Gas Storage Company LLC submits Original
Sheet 25 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1, to be effective
4/1/09.
    Filed Date: 02/05/2009
    Accession Number: 20090206-0228
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 17, 2009

    Docket Numbers: RP07-513-003
    Applicants: Sea Robin Pipeline Company, LLC
    Description: Sea Robin Pipeline Co, LLC submits its Refund Report.
    Filed Date: 02/09/2009
    Accession Number: 20090210-0265
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 23, 2009

    Docket Numbers: RP08-25-001
    Applicants: Southern LNG, Inc.
    Description: Supplemental Information of Southern LNG, Inc.
    Filed Date: 01/21/2009
    Accession Number: 20090121-5243
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 17, 2009

    Docket Numbers: RP09-185-001
    Applicants: MoGas Pipeline LLC
    Description: MoGas Pipeline LLC submits Second Revised Sheet 58 et
al. to FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume 1, to be effective 1/26/
09.
    Filed Date: 02/06/2009
    Accession Number: 20090209-0175
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 18, 2009

    Docket Numbers: RP09-351-000
    Applicants: Egan Hub Storage, LLC
    Description: Egan Hub Storage, LLC submits Fourth Revised Sheet 160
et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised Volume 1, to be effective 3/
11/09.
    Filed Date: 02/05/2009
    Accession Number: 20090206-0237
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday, February 17, 2009

    Docket Numbers: RP09-352-000
    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company
    Description: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company submits Sixth
Revised Sheet 1 et al. to FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume 1, to
be effective 3/6/09.
    Filed Date: 02/06/2009
    Accession Number: 20090209-0174
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 18, 2009

    Docket Numbers: RP09-353-000
    Applicants: Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline, L.P.
    Description: Cheniere Creole Trail Pipeline, LP submits First
Revised Sheet 14 et al. FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume 1 in
compliance with FERC Order 712.
    Filed Date: 02/06/2009
    Accession Number: 20090209-0173
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Wednesday, February 18, 2009

    Docket Numbers: RP09-354-000
    Applicants: Midwestern Gas Transmission Company
    Description: Midwestern Gas Transmission Co submits Seventeenth
Revised Sheet No. 237 et al. to FERC Gas, Tariff Third Revised Volume
No. 1.
    Filed Date: 02/09/2009
    Accession Number: 20090210-0264
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on Monday, February 23, 2009
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest in any of the above
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and
385.214) on or before 5 p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment
date. It is not necessary to separately intervene again in a subdocket
related to a compliance filing if you have previously intervened in the
same docket. 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. Anyone filing a motion to
intervene or protest must serve a copy of that document on the
Applicant. In reference to filings initiating a new proceeding,
interventions or protests submitted on or before the comment deadline
need not be served on persons other than the Applicant.
    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 should submit an original and
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above proceedings are accessible in the
Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in the
above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification
when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with
any FERC Online service, please e-mail<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or
call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-3350 Filed 2-13-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 114 (Thursday, June 13, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35619-35620]
[FR Doc No: 2013-14014]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 2775-009]

The City of Holyoke Gas & Electric Department; Notice of
Application Accepted for Filing, Soliciting Comments, Motions To
Intervene, and Protests

    Take notice that the following hydroelectric application has been
filed with the Commission and is available for public inspection:
    a. Type of Application: Surrender of License.
    b. Project No.: 2775-009.
    c. Date Filed: May 17, 2013.
    d. Applicant: The City of Holyoke Gas & Electric Department (HG&E).
    e. Name of Project: Gill Mill (D Wheel).
    f. Location: On the Holyoke Canal, in Hampden County,
Massachusetts.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 6.1.
    h. Applicant Contact: Mr. Paul S. Ducheney, Superintendent--
Electric Production, Holyoke Gas & Electric Department, 99 Suffolk
Street, Holyoke, MA 01040,<PHONE_NUMBER>, ducheney@hged@com; Nancy J.
Skancke, NJS Law PLC, 1025 Conn. Ave. NW., Suite 1000, Washington, DC
20036-5417.<PHONE_NUMBER><EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: Ms. Krista Sakallaris,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Deadline for filing comments, motions to intervene, and
protests, is 30 days from the issuance date of this notice. All
documents may be filed electronically via the Internet. See, 18 CFR
385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and the instructions on the Commission's Web site
at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling.asp. If unable to be filed
electronically, documents may be paper-filed. To paper-file, an
original and seven copies should be mailed to: Secretary, Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426. Commenters can submit brief comments up to 6,000 characters,
without prior registration, using the eComment system at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/ecomment.asp. You must include your name and
contact information at the end of your comments.

    Please include the project number (P-2775-009) on any comments,
motions, or protests filed.
    k. Description of Request: The applicant proposes to surrender the
license and decommission the generating facilities for the Gill Mill (D
Wheel) Project (P-2775). The applicant states that the project became
inoperable due to a fire in May 2012; after which the licensee
determined it is not economical to repair the facilities. The licensee
is proposing to decommission by disconnecting the generating equipment,
and securing all other project works.
    l. Locations of the Application: A copy of the application is
available for inspection and reproduction at the Commission's Public
Reference Room, located at 888 First Street NE., Room 2A, Washington,
DC 20426, or by calling<PHONE_NUMBER>. This filing may also be viewed
on the Commission's Web site at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/elibrary.asp. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits
in the docket number field to access the document. You may also
register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to
be notified via email of new filings and issuances related to this or
other pending projects. For assistance, call 1-866-208-3676 or email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>for TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>. A copy is
also available for inspection and reproduction at the address in item
(h) above.
    m. Individuals desiring to be included on the Commission's mailing
list should so indicate by writing to the Secretary of the Commission.
    n. Comments, Protests, or Motions to Intervene: Anyone may submit
comments, a protest, or a motion to intervene in accordance with the
requirements of Rules of Practice and Procedure, 18 CFR 385.210, .211,
.214. In determining the appropriate action to take, the Commission
will consider all protests or other comments filed, but only those who
file a motion to intervene in accordance with the Commission's Rules
may become a party to the proceeding. Any comments, protests, or
motions to intervene must be received on or before the specified
comment date for the particular application.
    o. Filing and Service of Responsive Documents: Any filing must (1)
bear in all capital letters the title ``COMMENTS'', ``PROTEST'', or
``MOTION TO INTERVENE'' as applicable; (2) set forth in the heading the
name of the applicant and the project number of the application to
which the filing responds; (3) furnish the name, address, and telephone
number of the person protesting or intervening; and (4) otherwise
comply with the requirements of 18 CFR 385.2001 through 385.2005. All
comments, motions to intervene, or protests must set forth their
evidentiary basis and otherwise comply with the requirements of 18 CFR
4.34(b). All comments, motions to intervene, or protests should relate
to project works which are the subject of the license surrender.
Agencies may obtain copies of the application directly from the
applicant. A copy of any protest or motion to intervene must be served
upon each representative of the applicant specified in the particular
application. If an intervener files comments or documents with the
Commission relating to the merits of an issue that may affect the
responsibilities of a particular resource agency, they must also serve
a copy of the document on that resource agency. A copy of all other
filings in reference to this application must be accompanied by proof
of service on all persons listed in the service list prepared by the
Commission in this proceeding, in accordance with 18 CFR 4.34(b) and
385.2010.

    Dated: June 6, 2013.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-14014 Filed 6-12-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 20, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 16217]
[FR Doc No: 2012-6644]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project No. 13740-001]

Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund XXXIX, LLC; Notice of Intent To File
License Application, Filing of Pre-Application Document, and Approving
Use of the Traditional Licensing Process

    a. Type of Filing: Notice of Intent to File License Application and
Request to Use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    b. Project No.: 13740-001.
    c. Date Filed: February 7, 2012.
    d. Submitted by: Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund XXXIX, LLC.
    e. Name of Project: C.W. Bill Young Lock and Dam Hydroelectric
Project.
    f. Location: At the existing C.W. Bill Young Lock and Dam on the
Allegheny River, in Allegheny County, Pennsylvania. The project would
occupy United States lands administered by the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers.
    g. Filed Pursuant to: 18 CFR 5.3 of the Commission's regulations.
    h. Potential Applicant Contact: Mr. Mark R. Stover, Lock+\TM\ Hydro
Friends Fund XXXIX, c/o Hydro Green Energy, LLC, 900 Oakmont Lane,
Suite 310, Westmont, IL 60559;<PHONE_NUMBER> ext. 711; email_
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    i. FERC Contact: John Mudre at<PHONE_NUMBER>; or email at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>    j. Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund XXXIX, LLC filed its request to use the
Traditional Licensing Process on February 7, 2012. Lock+ Hydro Friends
Fund XXXIX, LLC provided public notice of its request on February 3,
2012. In a letter dated March 14, 2012, the Director of the Division of
Hydropower Licensing approved Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund XXXIX, LLC's
request to use the Traditional Licensing Process.
    k. With this notice, we are initiating informal consultation with:
(a) the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service under section 7 of the
Endangered Species Act and the joint agency regulations thereunder at
50 CFR, part 402; and (b) the Pennsylvania State Historic Preservation
Officer, as required by section 106, National Historic Preservation
Act, and the implementing regulations of the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation at 36 CFR 800.2.
    l. With this notice, we are designating Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund
XXXIX, LLC as the Commission's non-federal representative for carrying
out informal consultation, pursuant to section 7 of the Endangered
Species Act, and section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act.
    m. Lock+ Hydro Friends Fund XXXIX, LLC filed a Pre-Application
Document (PAD; including a proposed process plan and schedule) with the
Commission, pursuant to 18 CFR 5.6 of the Commission's regulations.
    n. A copy of the PAD is available for review at the Commission in
the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site
(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. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or toll free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY,
(202) 502-8659. A copy is also available for inspection and
reproduction at the address in paragraph h.
    o. Register online at http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/esubscription.asp to be notified via email of new filing and issuances
related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC
Online Support.

    Dated: March 14, 2012.
Kimberly D. Bose,
 Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2012-6644 Filed 3-19-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P