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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Focus Groups or Interviews

Listening to group instructions

Participating in discussions;

Completing any forms or materials provided at the group session.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

by regulatory agencies to survey regulated entities2;

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

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

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

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

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

Internal EPA review and approval of questionnaire;

Disseminating questionnaire to respondents;

Gathering information from respondents;

Answering respondent questions, follow up;

Reviewing data;

Recording submissions and analyzing results;

Preparing findings;

Storing and maintaining results

Making results public via annual reports and Internet.

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

5( b) Collection Methodology and Information Management.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5 ( d) Collection Schedule.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

IV Annualizing Capital Costs Not applicable.

6 ( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

138.0 ( 9 for development and approval)

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

$ 5,349.10 ( all else x 28)

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

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

4,368 ( 28 x 156)

2,111.4 117.70 ** ( 88.5 x 1.33)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Focus Groups & Interviews 4 ( 2 new)

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

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

28 x $ 5,349.10)

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

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

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

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

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

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

$ 48, 453.00 ( 15 x 3,230.20)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

$ 45,222.80 ( 14 x 3,230.20)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Yes

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

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

Yes

No MAIL CODE What would have been reasonable?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Academic / Teacher

Student

Non profit / non governmental organization

State / local government 37

Consumer / concerned citizen

Federal government

Manufacturing

Media

Trade Association

Consultant

Librarian

Lawyer

Other _____________________________

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

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

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

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

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

Find information about a specific regulation

Find information about a policy or guidance

Find general information on federal auto regulations

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

Find information re how I can help control air pollution

Find information on test procedures or modeling emissions

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

Find EPA press releases

Find information on voluntary programs like diesel retrofit, commuter choice

Find educational materials

Research an issue in the news

Find data on automotive emissions

Just browse

Other ________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________

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

More than 4 times per week

Three to 4 times a week

Once or twice a week

One to three times a month

Less than once a month / regularly, but only occasionally

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

_______________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________________

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

Extremely dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied

Extremely satisfied

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

_________________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

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

Extremely dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied

Extremely satisfied

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

______________________________________________________________________

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

Extremely dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied

Extremely satisfied

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

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

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

Extremely dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied

Extremely satisfied

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

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

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

Extremely dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied

Extremely satisfied

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

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

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

Extremely dissatisfied

Very dissatisfied

Dissatisfied

Satisfied

Very satisfied

Extremely satisfied

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

Broken links

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

Lengthy download time

Other:

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Name of Report, Product or Service:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Additional Space For Comments:

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

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

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

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

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

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

1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

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

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

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

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

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

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

b) Expertise of the presenter:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Your Name:

Your Organization:

Your E mail Address:

Your Comment:


[Federal Register: August 21, 2006 (Volume 71, Number 161)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 48496-48497]
[DOCID:fr21au06-25]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

18 CFR Part 35

[Docket No. RM04-7-000]

Market-Based Rates for Wholesale Sales of Electric Energy,
Capacity and Ancillary Services by Public Utilities

August 14, 2006.
AGENCY: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.

ACTION: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking: Extension of reply comment
deadline.

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

SUMMARY: On May 19, 2006, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) proposing to amend its
regulations to revise Subpart H to Part 35 of the Code of Federal
Regulations governing market-based rates for public utilities pursuant
to the Federal Power Act. 71 FR 33101 (2006). The date for filing

reply comments on the proposed rule is extended at the request of the
Edison Electric Institute.

DATES: Reply comments should be filed on or before September 20, 2006.

ADDRESSES: You may submit reply comments, identified by Docket No.
RM04-7-000, by one of the following methods:
     Agency Web Site: http://www.ferc.gov. Follow the

instructions for submitting comments via the eFiling link found in the
Comment Procedures Section of the preamble of the NOPR.
     Mail: Commenters unable to file comments electronically
must mail or hand deliver an original and 14 copies of their comments
to: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Secretary of the Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC, 20426. Please refer to the
Comment Procedures Section of the preamble of the NOPR for additional
information on how to file paper comments.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Arnold (Legal Information),
Office of the General Counsel, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission,
888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

Market-Based Rates for Public Utilities; Notice of Extension of Time

    On August 10, 2006, Edison Electric Institute (EEI) filed a motion
for an extension of time to file reply comments in response to the
Commission's Notice of Proposed Rulemaking issued May 19, 2006, in the
above-docketed proceeding. Market-Based Rates for Public Utilities, 119
FERC ] 61,210 (2006). EEI states that because of the large number of
substantive issues that are addressed in the NOPR and the voluminious
nature of the initial comments that were filed in this docket,
additional time is needed to prepare and file responsive comments.
    Upon consideration, notice is hereby given that an extension of
time for filing reply comments is granted to and including September
20, 2006, as requested by EEI.

Magalie R. Salas,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. E6-13703 Filed 8-18-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P