Information Collection Request for National Pretreatment Program DRAFT March 21, 2003 Prepared by:

The Cadmus Group, Inc. 1901 North Fort Myer Drive Suite 900 Arlington, Virginia 22209 Prepared for:

Mr. Ronald Coleman, Project Officer Ms. Lisa Hammond, Work Assignment Manager U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Wastewater Management EPA East, 7th Floor 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20460 US EPA CONTRACT 68 C 99 250 Work Assignment 3 08 National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 i TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title and Number of the Information Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1( b) Short Characterization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2( b) Use/ Users of the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3 NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) Non duplication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3( c) Consultations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3( e) General Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3( f) Confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3( g) Sensitive Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 4 RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) Respondents/ NAICS Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 4( b) Information Requested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4( b)( i) Data Items . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 4( b)( ii) Respondent Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 5 INFORMATION COLLECTED  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5( b) Collection Methodology and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5( c) Small Entity Flexibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 5( d) Collection Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 6 ESTIMATING BURDEN AND COST OF COLLECTION 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours And Cost Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 6( f) Reasons For Change In Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 6( g) Burden Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 i LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit 1: Authority Under the Pretreatment Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Exhibit 2: Responsibilities for Each Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Exhibit 3a: Uses of Data Collected for Program Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Exhibit 3b: Uses of Data Collected for Program Implementation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Exhibit 3c: Uses of Data Collected for Program/ Categorical Determination . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Exhibit 4: Affected Industries and Industrial Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Exhibit 5: Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for the Pretreatment Program . . 22 Exhibit 6: Summary of Total Annual Average Respondent Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Exhibit 7: Average Annual Respondent Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 Exhibit 8: Total Average Annual Respondent Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 APPENDICES APPENDIX A 2000 Information Collection Request for the National Pretreatment Program APPENDIX B Federal Register Notices Associated with the Pretreatment Program ICR APPENDIX C Assumptions for Developing Burden and Cost Estimates APPENDIX D Burden and Cost Spreadsheets i ACRONYMS AA Approval Authority AMSA Association of Metropolitan Sewerage Agencies ANPR Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking BMR Baseline Monitoring Report CA Control Authority CFR Code of Federal Regulations CWA Clean Water Act CWT Centralized Waste Treatment DSS Domestic Sewage Study ELG Effluent Limitation Guideline EPA Environmental Protection Agency FDF Fundamentally Different Factors FR Federal Register ICR Information Collection Request IU Industrial User IWS Industrial Waste Survey MGD Million Gallons per Day MP& M Metal Products and Machinery NAICS North American Industry Classification System NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRDC Natural Resources Defense Council O& M Operations and Maintenance OA Oversight Authority OH Overhead OMB Office of Management and Budget OST EPA's Office of Science and Technology OW Office of Water OWM Office of Wastewater Management P2 Pollution Prevention PFPR Pesticide Formulating, Packaging, and Repackaging PIPES Point Source Information Provision Exchange System PIRT Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works QNCR Quarterly Noncompliance Report RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act SCP Slug Control Plan SIC Standard Industrial Classification SIU Significant Industrial User SNC Significant Noncompliance TEC Transportation Equipment Cleaning WEF Water Environment Federation National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 1 1 IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION 1( a) Title and Number of the Information Collection Title: Information Collection Request for the National Pretreatment Program OMB Control Number: 2040 0009 EPA Tracking Number: 0002.11 1( b) Short Characterization This Information Collection Request ( ICR) calculates the burden and costs associated with managing the National Pretreatment Program mandated by Sections 402( a) and ( b) and 307( b) of the Clean Water Act ( CWA or the Act). This ICR is a renewal of the Revision of the Information Collection Request for the National Pretreatment Program ( OMB Control No. 2040 0009, ICR No. 0002.09), previously submitted to the Office of Management and Budget on September 27, 2000.

Management of the National Pretreatment Program is the responsibility of the Office of Wastewater Management ( OWM) in the Office of Water ( OW), Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). The CWA requires EPA to develop national pretreatment standards to control discharges from Industrial Users ( IUs) into sewage systems or publicly owned treatment works ( POTWs). These standards restrict the levels of certain pollutants in IU discharges. EPA administers the pretreatment program through the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES) permit program. Under the NPDES Permit Program, EPA can delegate authority for monitoring and enforcement of the pretreatment standards to approved States or individual POTWs. OWM uses the data collected under the pretreatment program to monitor and enforce compliance with the regulations, as well as to authorize program administration at the State or local ( POTW) level. The data collected from IUs include the mass, frequency, and content of their discharges, their schedules for installing pretreatment equipment, and actual or anticipated discharges of wastes that violate pretreatment standards, have the potential to cause problems at the POTW, or are considered hazardous under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ( RCRA). States and POTWs applying for approval of a pretreatment program submit data concerning their legal, procedural, and administrative bases for establishing such a program. For example, data from POTWs applying for approval of their pretreatment programs are surveys of IUs, local limits for pollutant concentration, and proposed schedules for completing major project requirements. IUs and POTWs submit written reports, and either States with approved pretreatment programs or EPA Regions enter data into the NPDES database.

This Information Collection Request ( ICR) was prepared in accordance with the February 1999 version of EPA's Guide to Writing Information Collection Requests Under the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA) of 1995 ( or " ICR Handbook") prepared by EPA's Office of Environmental Information, Office of Information Collection, Collection Strategies Division. The ICR Handbook provides the most current instructions for ICR preparation to ensure National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 2 compliance with the 1995 PRA amendments and Office of Management and Budget's ( OMB's) implementing guidelines.

This ICR updates the burden and cost estimates provided in the ICR for the National Pretreatment Program, dated September 27, 2000, which expires on September 30, 2003 ( see Appendix A). Section 6( f) summarizes the change in burden between the previous ICR and this ICR. Section 2( a) details the recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with the National Pretreatment Program. This ICR estimates program burden and costs for October 1, 2003 through September 30, 2006.

The total annual respondent burden associated with this ICR is estimated to be approximately 2.47 million hours per year. The total annual respondent costs associated with this ICR are estimated to be approximately $ 99.0 million. The estimated annual costs and burden are distributed as follows: 0.12 million hours and $ 3.8 million for States, 1.20 million hours and $ 29.7 million for POTWs, and 1.16 million hours and $ 65.6 million for industrial users ( IUs).

The Agency burden for this ICR totals 11,262 hours annually or approximately $ 0.36 million.

The total number of respondents for this ICR is 32,675; 34 of these respondents are States, 1,469 are POTWs, and 31,172 are IUs. The total annual number of responses for these respondents is 248,539. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 3 2 NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION 2( a) Need/ Authority For The Collection Section 402( b) of CWA requires EPA to develop national pretreatment standards to control industrial discharges into sewage systems. The purpose of these standards is to prevent contaminant pass through or interference with treatment plant operations that may result in either damage to the environment or a threat to public health. As detailed below, several serious problems can occur when industrial wastes are discharged into sewage systems.

° Pass through of toxic pollutants into receiving waters. Industrial pollutants that pass through treatment systems into receiving waters can cause fish kills, destroy aquatic habitat, increase the risk of cancer in humans, and render receiving waters unsuitable for drinking or recreation.

° Interference with treatment plant operations. Municipal wastewater treatment systems are designed to handle typical household wastes and biodegradable commercial and industrial wastes. Toxic industrial compounds that do not pass directly through the system may interfere with plant operations.

° Contamination of sewage sludge. Toxic compounds remaining in sewage sludge may render it unsuitable for certain disposal methods, such as land application, placement on a surface disposal site, or incineration.

° Corrosion of pipes and equipment. Industrial discharges with extremely high or low pH values can cause corrosion in the sewage collection system or the treatment plant, resulting in the need for premature repair or replacement of pipes and equipment.

° Explosion of highly volatile wastes. Industrial wastes can explode during treatment operations as a result of inadvertent mixing of highly volatile compounds, causing widespread damage to treatment facilities and posing a serious risk to plant operators.

° Interaction of wastes to produce toxic gases. Industrial discharges such as highly acidic wastes can interact with other wastes in the collection system, resulting in the release of toxic gases.

EPA has developed national pretreatment program standards for circumstances common to all sewage systems, as well as those served by specific industries. National standards apply regardless of whether the source is subject to other Federal, State, or local pretreatment standards. The regulations establish general and specific discharge standards ( 40 CFR 403.5( a) and ( b)) that apply to all IUs. The general prohibitions forbid the addition of untreated or National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 4 inadequately treated wastes and forbid the discharge of pollutants that may interfere with or pass through the treatment works, thereby causing upset of treatment capability. The specific prohibitions forbid the discharge of pollutants that:

° Create a fire or explosion hazard. ° Are highly corrosive. ° Obstruct the treatment processes or system flows. ° Cause interference or pass through. ° Increase the temperature of wastewater entering the plant to above 104 ° F. ° Cause worker health or safety problems. ° Are trucked or hauled to the POTW ( except as allowed by the POTW).

In addition to the national pretreatment standards, standards have been developed for specific industrial categories and are called categorical pretreatment standards. These categorical standards specify quantities or concentrations of certain pollutants or pollutant properties that IUs in certain industrial categories may discharge to a POTW, or the categorical standards specify other steps that these IUs must take to protect POTWs. EPA develops these categorical standards to restrict the discharge of certain toxic pollutants that EPA has identified as posing the greatest threat to human health or the environment. Facilities subject to categorical pretreatment standards must also comply with national pretreatment standards.

Lastly, EPA requires the Control Authority ( CA), which is usually the POTW, to develop and enforce limits according to local, site specific situations to ensure that IUs meet general and specific prohibitions detailed in 40 CFR 403.5( c). These local limits are federally enforceable pretreatment standards, as defined in Section 307( d) of CWA. If local limits are more stringent than categorical standards, the more stringent limit applies and is enforceable as a Federal standard. The monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements for these three types of pretreatment standards are summarized in Exhibit 5 and are explained in more detail in Section 4.

EPA, together with the various Approval and Control Authorities, implements these standards through the National Pretreatment Program. The information collected under this program is needed to:

° Authorize State and local programs. ° Monitor and enforce compliance with the national standards. ° Determine applicability of the categorical standards. ° Develop and enforce local limits. ° Administer the awards program.

The information collection requirements discussed in this ICR are authorized by Section 402( b) of the CWA. This section provides for State administration of the NPDES Program, which controls point source discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States. According to the Act, States must also develop a program to ensure POTW compliance with the requirements of the General Pretreatment Regulations. Under the same authority, certain POTWs must identify all IUs that discharge pollutants subject to categorical standards under Section 307( b) of the Act, and to develop a pretreatment program to ensure compliance with these standards. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 5 The administration of the National Pretreatment Program involves three levels of authority, as described below.

° Oversight Authority ( OA). EPA Regional Offices oversee State pretreatment programs. They can also assume the responsibilities of the Approval Authority ( AA) or CA if States or POTWs do not have authorized pretreatment programs.

° Approval Authority. A State with an approved NPDES program must obtain Approval Authority for its pretreatment program. The Approval Authority grants pretreatment program approval to POTWs, oversees POTW program implementation, and assumes the responsibility of the Control Authority for those POTWs that do not have a pretreatment program.

° Control Authority. The Control Authority is responsible for implementing the pretreatment program, including establishment of control mechanisms for compliance assessment and enforcement of the national standards, categorical standards, and local limits. A POTW with a pretreatment program that is approved by the Approval Authority becomes the Control Authority. If the POTW does not obtain such approval, either the State or the EPA Region becomes the Control Authority.

Exhibit 1 indicates the possible combinations of authority. Exhibit 2 outlines the responsibilities of each authority.

Exhibit 1 Authority Under the Pretreatment Program POTW with Approved Pretreatment Program State with Approved Pretreatment Program Control Authority Approval Authority Oversight Authority Yes Yes POTW State EPA Yes No POTW EPA EPA No Yes State State EPA No No EPA EPA EPA National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 6 Exhibit 2 Responsibilities for Each Authority Oversight Authority ( EPA) ° Evaluates pretreatment program on a national basis and oversees State programs to ensure that they meet Federal requirements. ° Approves State Program requests. ° Acts as Approval or Control Authority in cases where States or POTWs do not have pretreatment programs.

Approval Authority ( States or EPA Regions) ° Reviews POTW program to determine adequacy. ° Assists POTWs in ensuring compliance with pretreatment requirements. ° Audits/ inspects approved POTWs to assess compliance ( may also inspect IUs). ° Takes appropriate action against POTWs that fail to implement or enforce pretreatment standards at IUs not in compliance ( where POTW does not take action). ° Acts as Control Authority in cases where the POTW does not have a pretreatment program.

Control Authority ( Approved POTWs, States, or EPA Regions) ° Has primary responsibility for implementing the pretreatment program. ° Ensures that IUs comply with discharge limitations and reporting requirements. ° Inspects or reviews self monitoring reports from IUs. ° Enforces against non complying IUs.

The pretreatment program procedures and requirements are established in 40 CFR Part 403 as follows:

403.1 Purpose and Applicability 403.2 Objectives of General Pretreatment Regulations 403.3 Definitions 403.4 State or Local Law 403.5 National Pretreatment Standards: Prohibited Discharges 403.6 National Pretreatment Standards: Categorical Standards 403.7 Removal Credits 403.8 Pretreatment Program Requirements: Development and Implementation by POTW 403.9 POTW Pretreatment Programs and/ or Authorization to Revise Pretreatment Standards: Submission for Approval 403.10 Development and Submission of NPDES State Pretreatment Programs 403.11 Approval Procedures for POTW Pretreatment Programs and POTW Revision of Categorical Pretreatment Standards 403.12 Reporting Requirements for POTWs and Industrial Users 403.13 Variances from Categorical Pretreatment Standards for Fundamentally Different Factors National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 1 Project XL is covered by a separate ICR, the " Regulatory Reinvention Pilot Projects under Project XL: Pretreatment Program," OMB Control Number 2010 0026, EPA ICR Number 1755.05.

7 403.14 Confidentiality 403.15 Net/ Gross Calculation 403.16 Upset Provision 403.17 Bypass 403.18 Modification of POTW Pretreatment Programs 403.19 Provisions of Specific Applicability to the Owatanna Waste Water Treatment Facility 403.20 Pretreatment Program Reinvention Pilot Projects Under Project XL1 2( b) Practical Utility/ Users Of The Data In general, the information collected for the pretreatment program is used for program development, program implementation, or program or categorical determination. Exhibits 3A, 3B, and 3C summarize the information collected for program development, program implementation, and program/ categorical determination and the uses of this information. Users of the information include Oversight Authorities, Approval Authorities, Control Authorities, POTWs, IUs, and the public.

Oversight Authorities evaluate State pretreatment programs based on information about the programs' legal authority, procedural requirements, and staff and funding appropriateness. In addition, Oversight Authorities use information about an IU to determine whether a particular categorical standard or subcategory applies to the IU.

Approval Authorities use information collected for the pretreatment program to identify and locate IUs that may be subject to national pretreatment standards. Approval Authorities also use information about IUs to protect the POTW and its workers by prohibiting ignitable, obstructive, or reactive discharges from IUs. These authorities also use the data to determine whether a POTW's pretreatment program development is on schedule and adequate. In addition, the information is needed as the Approval Authority oversees a POTW's pretreatment program, monitors POTW's compliance with their pretreatment program requirements, and considers the advisability of proposed changes in this program.

Control Authorities use data from IUs to establish and verify the type and amount of pollutants contributed to the POTW, to inform the POTW about these substances, and to track compliance with installation schedules for pretreatment equipment. Control Authorities also monitor compliance with the pretreatment standards, enforce these standards, inform POTWs of changes in the volume or nature of pollutants, and evaluate the effects of an anticipated bypass. In addition, Control Authorities use information about IUs to determine whether they need to reduce the risk of slug, spill, and batch discharges.

POTWs use information received from Control and Approval Authorities to understand their obligations toward complying with the pretreatment program, including maintenance, monitoring, reporting, and planning and carrying out protective action following any change in the volume or contents of the discharge. Such changes may include the discharge of hazardous substances subject to control under RCRA. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 8 IUs use information received from Control Authorities to understand substances that cannot be discharged and to understand their additional obligations under the pretreatment program.

When informed ( through public notification) of instances of significant noncompliance, the public are also users of information related to this program. Such information allows the public to participate in program approval decisions. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 9 Exhibit 3A Uses of Data Collected for Program Development Type of Data Collected From To Authority/

Citation ( 40 CFR) Use of the Data State Pretreatment Program Approval Request State OA 403.10 To evaluate the adequacy of the State's pretreatment program, in terms of legal authority, procedural requirements, and appropriate staff and funding.

POTW Pretreatment Compliance Schedule Progress Report POTW AA 403.8, 403.9,

403.12( k) To determine if the POTW is on schedule in developing its program so that the Approval Authority can either provide assistance or take enforcement action, if necessary.

POTW Pretreatment Program Approval Request POTW AA 403.8( b)

403.9 To evaluate the adequacy of the POTW's pretreatment program, in terms of legal authority, justification of local limits, compliance monitoring, administrative procedures, and appropriate staff and funding.

Maintenance of Pretreatment Program Information* Administr ator/ POTW Stored on site 403.11( f),

403.14 To provide public access to information characterizing the Pretreatment Program ( e. g., information about POTW program approval submissions).

* This is a recordkeeping requirement, not a reporting requirement. Exhibit 3a: Uses of the Data Collected for Program Development National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 10 Exhibit 3B Uses of Data Collected for Program Implementation ( Page 1 of 2)

Type of Data Collected From To Authority/

Citation ( 40 CFR) Use of the Data Baseline Monitoring Report IU CA 403.12( b) To ensure compliance with the standards by each source, to determine whether schedules for compliance are reasonable, and to establish,

verify, or expand records on the type and extent of industrial contributions to POTWs.

IU Compliance Schedule Progress Report IU CA 403.12( c) To determine adherence to scheduled deadlines for installation of pretreatment technology to ensure compliance with the categorical standard before the deadline.

IU Compliance Attainment Report IU CA 403.12( d) To determine if the IU is in compliance with final applicable pretreatment standards, and whether additional O& M or pretreatment is needed to attain the standard.

IU Compliance Reports ( Resampling Requirements) IU CA 403.12( g) To allow CA to detect patterns of continuing IU noncompliance ( as opposed to single events).

IU/ Significant Industrial User ( SIU)

Self Monitoring Report IU CA 403.12( e),

403.12( h) To assure continued IU compliance with the standards, and to determine whether enforcement action is needed.

Pollution Prevention Alternative IU CA 455.41 To ensure that IUs covered by the pesticides formulating, packaging,

and repackaging effluent guidelines have prepared a pollution prevention plan as an alterative to zero discharge.

CWT Multiple Waste Subcategories IU CA 437.41 To ensure that CWTs seeking to accept waste in multiple subcategories comply with certification requirements similar to the PFPR P2 requirements.

POTW Maintenance of Monitoring Records* POTW Stored on site 403.12( o),

403.14( c) To allow AA to verify POTW compliance with the national standards.

IU Maintenance of Monitoring Records* IU Stored on site 403.12( o) To allow AA to verify IU compliance with the national standards.

Annual POTW Reports POTW AA 403.12( i) To adequately oversee POTW pretreatment programs and resulting national implementation status. Also, to ensure compliance with pretreatment standards.

* This is a recordkeeping requirement, not a reporting requirement. Exhibit 3b: Uses of the Data Collected for Program Implementation National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 11 Exhibit 3B Uses of Data Collected for Program Implementation ( Page 2 of 2)

Type of Data Collected From To Authority/

Citation ( 40 CFR) Use of the Data POTW Program Modifications POTW AA 403.18 To modify pretreatment programs based on local conditions, and to provide AAs with opportunities to accept or deny such requests.

IU Slug Load Notification IU CA 403.12( f) To enable the POTW to plan and carry out protective actions immediately after a change in volume or character of pollutants.

Notification of Changed Discharge IU CA 403.12( j) To ensure that the CA has the necessary information to adequately notify the NPDES permitting authority of substantial changes in discharge.

Bypass Notification IU CA 403.17 To inform the CA of the intentional diversion of wastestreams from any portion of an IU's treatment facility.

Notification of Changed Monitoring Location IU CA 403.6( e) To inform the CA of any change in location of an IU's monitoring point( s) in order to carry out its compliance monitoring and enforcement responsibilities.

Issuance of Discharge Permits or Other Control Mechanisms for SIUs CA SIU 403.8( f) To give SIUs notice of all pretreatment requirements and to improve enforcement.

Inspection and Sampling of IU and SIU Effluent CA AA 403.8( f) To monitor industrial discharges into POTW treatment facilities.

Public Notification of Significant Noncompliance CA Public 403.8( f) To inform the public of instances of significant noncompliance.

Prevention and Control Plan for Spills and Batch Discharges CA SIU 403.8( f) To notify SIUs that they need to plan to minimize the risk of slug, spill,

and batch discharges.

Evaluation of the Need to Revise Local Limits CA AA 403.5( c) To evaluate whether CAs have developed appropriate local limits to control toxic and hazardous pollutants.

POTW Enforcement Response Plan POTW AA 403.8( f) To help decide whether CAs have effective enforcement programs.

SIU Notification CA SIU 403.8( f) To notify certain IUs of their status as SIUs and of the regulations concerning SIUs. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 12 Exhibit 3C Uses of Data Collected for Program/ Categorical Determination Type of Data Collected From To Authority/

Citation ( 40 CFR) Use of the Data Notification of RCRA Discharge IU POTW,

EPA, State 403.12( p) To inform POTWs of RCRA hazardous wastes discharges and to carry out protective action if needed.

Excellence Award Program Information POTW,

AA AA/ OA 105 To recognize CAs with outstanding pretreatment programs.

Categorical Determination Request IU, CA AA/ OA 403.6( a) To determine the applicability of a particular categorical standard or subcategory to an IU.

Alternative Limits Modification IU CA 403.6( e) To notify the CA of any material or significant change in the values used to calculate an alternative limit.

Fundamentally Different Factors Variance Request IU, CA OA 403.13 To provide plant specific data needed to determine whether an IU's production process or technologies are fundamentally different from the representative facilities used to determine the limits specified in a categorical standard. This helps support evaluation of national standards using empirical data.

Net/ Gross Adjustment Request IU CA 403.15 To determine whether an applicable pretreatment standard should be revised so that an IU is not required to remove a greater amount of pollutants than are already present in its intake water.

Removal Credit Approval Request CA AA 403.7 To authorize a POTW to calculate a revised categorical standard( s)

reflecting pollutant removal already resulting from specific POTW design capabilities.

Removal Credit Self Monitoring Report CA AA 403.7 To monitor ongoing POTW pollutant removal that is the basis for revised categorical standards for that POTW's users.

* This is a recordkeeping, not a reporting, requirement. Exhibit 3d: Uses of the Data Collected for Program/ Categorical Determination National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 13 3 NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 3( a) Nonduplication EPA has examined all other reporting requirements contained in the CWA and 40 CFR 403. In addition, the following sources of information have been examined or consulted to determine whether similar or duplicative information is available elsewhere:

° Permit Compliance System, ° Management Information and Data Systems Division Inventory of Automated Systems, ° Environmental Information Clearinghouse, ° Inventory of Information Collection Requests.

No similar or duplicative reporting requirements were found. No other mechanism for obtaining information on continued compliance with pretreatment standards is available.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB To comply with the 1995 Amendments to the PRA, EPA will solicit public comment on this ICR for a 60 day period before it is submitted to OMB. Specifically, EPA will publish a notice in the Federal Register requesting comment on the estimated respondent burden and other aspects of this ICR ( to be included as Appendix B). EPA will review and prepare responses to any public comment received during the 60 day comment period. The comments and responses will be included as an Appendix. An additional Federal Register notice will be published prior to submission of this ICR to OMB. The public comment period for this additional notice is 30 days.

3( c) Consultations On June 26, 1978, EPA promulgated the General Pretreatment Regulations ( 43 FR 27736). Between February 1977 and June 1978, four public hearings and 16 public meetings were held concerning the proposed regulations; in addition, more than 400 individual comments were received by EPA. As a result of the comments received, EPA modified reporting requirements in the final General Pretreatment Regulations to minimize the burden to POTWs.

On October 29, 1979, EPA proposed amendments to the General Pretreatment Regulations ( 44 FR 62260). After considering numerous comments submitted on the proposed amendments, EPA developed and published the amended General Pretreatment Regulations on January 28, 1981 ( 46 FR 9404). These amendments were originally scheduled to take effect on March 13, 1981. Their effective date was temporarily deferred until March 30, 1981, by a Presidential memorandum ( 46 FR 11972). On March 27, 1981, EPA indefinitely postponed the amendments' effective date.

After EPA's indefinite deferral of the effective date of the general pretreatment amendments in 1981, a suit was brought by the Natural Resources Defense Council ( NRDC) challenging EPA's deferral of these amendments without notice and comment. Additionally, two groups that are directly and substantially affected by the National Pretreatment Program recommended that portions of the amended regulation go into effect. After considering all public comments received in response to the postponement, EPA put most of the amendments into effect. On July 8, 1982, a decision was reached on NRDC's suit ( NRDC v. EPA, No. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 2 For a detailed summary of PIRT's recommendations, see the January 30, 1985, EPA publication Pretreatment Review Task Force: Final Report to the Administrator.

14 81 2068). The court held that EPA's suspension violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and ordered EPA to reinstate all pretreatment amendments retroactive to March 30, 1981.

On February 3, 1984, EPA established the Pretreatment Implementation Review Task Force ( PIRT), to provide the Agency with recommendations on the day to day problems faced by POTWs, States and industry in implementing the Agency's pretreatment program. PIRT was composed of 17 representatives of POTWs, States, industry, environmental groups and EPA Regions. Out of this effort came a set of recommendations to the Agency summarized in a final report to the Administrator2. The General Pretreatment and NPDES regulations ( 40 CFR Parts 122 and 403) were revised on October 17, 1988 ( 53 FR 40610) in response to PIRT's recommendations.

The 1984 Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments to RCRA required EPA to prepare a report for Congress on wastes passing through POTWs which fall under the domestic sewage exclusion ( Section 1004( 27) of RCRA). EPA also had to promulgate new regulations or modifications to existing regulations to ensure that such discharges did not present a threat to human health or the environment. Under the domestic sewage exclusion, solid or dissolved materials within domestic sewage are not regulated under RCRA as solid or hazardous waste and are not required to meet RCRA standards for hazardous waste treatment, storage, or disposal.

To comply with the 1984 RCRA Amendments, EPA submitted the Domestic Sewage Study ( DSS) to Congress on February 7, 1986. The report contained information on 160,000 waste dischargers from 47 industrial categories and the residential sector. The report also provided information on the effectiveness of existing government controls for wastewater discharges, especially federal and local pretreatment programs and categorical pretreatment standards. The DSS concluded that the domestic sewage exclusion should be retained, but that CWA authorities should be more broadly and effectively applied to regulate hazardous waste discharges. Several initiatives were proposed in the report for increased effectiveness of controls.

As a result, EPA published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking ( ANPR) on August 22, 1986 ( 51 FR 30166) for modifications to the General Pretreatment and NPDES regulations ( 40 CFR Parts 122 and 403). To solicit comments on the ANPR, three public meetings were held in the District of Columbia, Chicago, and San Francisco. Comments on the ANPR were summarized and published in the Federal Register on June 22, 1987. Most comments on the DSS and the ANPR, which primarily addressed methods of improving pretreatment programs to more effectively control hazardous waste discharges to POTWs, were incorporated into the proposed regulatory changes published in the Federal Register on November 23, 1988 ( 53 FR 47632). The final rule to implement the proposed revisions to the Pretreatment and NPDES regulations and to ensure the control of hazardous wastes passing through POTWs was issued on July 24, 1990 ( 55 FR 30082).

On November 25, 1992, pursuant to Section 405 of the CWA, EPA promulgated a regulation ( 40 CFR Part 503) to protect public health and the environment from reasonably National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 15 anticipated adverse effects of certain pollutants in sewage sludge ( 58 FR 9248, February 19, 1993). This regulation established requirements for the following final uses or disposal of sewage sludge:

° Land application either to condition the soil or to fertilize crops grown in the soil. ° Final disposal on the land. ° Incineration.

Also on November 25, 1992, EPA amended the Part 403 General Pretreatment Regulations to add a new Appendix G that includes two tables of pollutants that would be eligible for a removal credit if the other procedural and substantive requirements of 40 CFR part 503 and 40 CFR 403.7 are met. The first table ( Appendix G   Section I) lists, by use or disposal practice, the pollutants regulated in Part 503 and eligible for removal credit authorization. The second table ( Appendix G   Section II) lists, by use or disposal practice, additional pollutants that are eligible for a removal credit if the concentration of the pollutant in sewage sludge does not exceed a prescribed concentration. The pollutants in Appendix G   Section II are the pollutants that EPA evaluated and decided not to regulate during development of the Part 503 regulation. ( 58 FR 9381   5).

On March 5, 1993, the Leather Industries of America, Inc. filed a petition with the U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit seeking review of the pollutant limits for chromium found in Tables 1   4 of 40 CFR 503.13( b). On June 17, 1993, the City of Pueblo, Colorado, filed a petition for review with the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit challenging the selenium pollutant limits in Tables 1   3 of 40 CFR 503.13( b). This case was subsequently transferred to the D. C. Circuit. On November 15, 1994, the D. C. Circuit remanded the cumulative pollutant loading rate for chromium in Table 2 and the pollutant concentration limit for chromium and selenium in Table 3 to the Agency for modification or additional justification ( Leather Industries of America, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency, 40 F. 3d 392, D. C. Cir., 1994).

Effective October 25, 1995, and as a result of EPA's reconsideration of certain issues remanded by the U. S. Court of Appeals for additional justification or modification, the Agency amended 40 CFR 503 to delete the land application pollutant limits for chromium and to change the land application pollutant concentration limit for selenium. Accordingly, EPA also amended the list of pollutants ( in Appendix G of 40 CFR 403) for which a removal credit may be available ( 60 FR 54764 70).

The President's Report on " Reinventing Environmental Regulations" ( March 1995) pledged to provide " more common sense and fairness in our regulations." The goal of this initiative was to provide greater flexibility, reduce burdens, and achieve greater environmental results at less cost. To this end, EPA committed to streamlining the National Pretreatment Program to reduce the burden of technical and administrative requirements that affect industrial users and POTW and State Control Authorities. In 1995, EPA's Office of Wastewater Management initiated an evaluation of all of the General Pretreatment Regulations in 40 CFR Part 403 in order to identify streamlining opportunities. Ultimately, the regulation " streamlining" process was conducted in two phases.

The first phase simplified the process for modifying the pretreatment program requirements included in POTW NPDES permits. EPA solicited preliminary input on a `` straw proposal'' from various stakeholders, including States, POTWs, trade associations and environmental groups, which shaped the proposal published in the Federal Register on July 30, National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 16 1996 ( 61 FR 39804 10). The proposal solicited additional information and comment on several issues, and the final regulation was adopted July 17, 1997 ( 62 FR 38406 15).

The second phase of streamlining was inspired by issue papers in which EPA summarized 11 areas in which the Pretreatment Regulations might be streamlined. In May 1996, the issue papers were distributed to a broad base of external stakeholders ( States, cities, trade associations, professional organizations, and environmental interest groups), and were also publicly available on an EPA electronic bulletin board ( Point Source Information Provision Exchange System, or " PIPES") that was accessible through the Agency's Internet website at " http:// www. epa. gov/ owm." Synopses of the outreach effort were published in several trade association newsletters. Thirty five outside stakeholders provided written comments on the proposed issues. The Agency also considered the recommendations of the joint Water Environment Federation and Association of Metropolitan Sewage Agencies Workshop ( the WEF/ AMSA Workshop). The Agency next prepared a draft proposal and preamble, which discussed 13 issues or changes to the regulations. This draft was circulated to outside stakeholders in May 1997. After reviewing comments received from 70 outside stakeholders, the Agency proposed to revise the regulations on July 22, 1999 ( 64 FR 39563). These provisions address restrictions on and oversight of industrial users who introduce pollutants into POTWs, make changes to certain program requirements to be consistent with NPDES requirements, and correct some typographical errors. The proposals would reduce the regulatory burden on both industrial users and State and POTW Control Authorities without affecting environmental protection. The comment period for these proposed revisions ended on November 19, 1999 ( 64 FR 47755). Since that time, EPA continues to work closely with stakeholders to develop a final Streamlining Rule.

3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection EPA considers the reporting requirements associated with the pretreatment program ( both the one time and ongoing monitoring and reporting requirements) to be the absolute minimum necessary for effective administration of the program. EPA also considers the reporting requirements to be the absolute minimum necessary for effective control of hazardous wastes to implement RCRA section 3018( b). Any alternative to the present set of minimal requirements would entail an increase in reporting burden to respondents. The Agency has thus endeavored to minimize respondent burden for the program.

In addition, EPA considers the specific requirements for SIUs and for reporting the discharge of RCRA hazardous substances preferable to repealing the domestic sewage exclusion. Such an action would help ensure that hazardous wastes are disposed of safely without necessitating regulating POTWs and IUs under RCRA.

3( e) General Guidelines This ICR was prepared in accordance with the February 1999 version of EPA's Guide to Writing Information Collection Requests Under the Paperwork Reduction Act ( PRA) of 1995 ( or " ICR Handbook") prepared by EPA's Office of Environmental Information, Office of Information Collection, Collection Strategies Division. The ICR Handbook provides the most current instructions for ICR preparation to ensure compliance with the 1995 PRA amendments and OMB's implementing guidelines.

Only one provision of the pretreatment program requirements exceeds the OMB guidelines contained in 5 CFR 1320.5( d)( 2). According to 40 CFR 403.12( f), IUs must notify the POTW immediately of any slug loading by the IU. The report is typically made by National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 17 telephone. This is an emergency provision that enables the POTW to take timely and appropriate protective action.

3( f) Confidentiality The following reporting requirements may contain confidential business information, proprietary information, or information containing compromising trade secrets:

° Pretreatment Baseline Monitoring Report ° IU Compliance Schedule Report ° POTW and IU Maintenance of Monitoring Records ( though not a required submission, burden is incurred) ° Pretreatment Categorical Determination Request ° Pretreatment Fundamentally Different Factors Variance Request.

In such cases, the respondent has the right to request that the information be treated as confidential business information. All data so designated will be handled pursuant to 40 CFR 403.14( a), which provides the following guidelines regarding such information:

In accordance with 40 CFR Part 2, any information submitted to EPA pursuant to these regulations may be claimed as confidential by the submitter. Any such claim must be asserted at the time of submission in the manner prescribed on the application form or instructions, or, in the case of other submissions, by the words " confidential business information" on each page containing such information. If no claim is made at the time of submission, EPA may make the information available to the public without further notice. If a claim is asserted, the information will be treated in accordance with the procedures in 40 CFR Part 2 ( Public Information).

Industrial effluent data, however, " shall be made available to the public without restriction" [ 40 CFR 403.14( b)].

3( g) Sensitive Questions Reporting requirements for the pretreatment program do not contain questions of a sensitive nature. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 18 4 THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4( a) Respondents/ NAICS Codes Data associated with this ICR are collected and maintained at the IU, POTW, State, and Federal levels. Respondents include POTWs, certain classifications of IUs, and States submitting requests for program approval.

The Standard Industrial Classification ( SIC) code for sewerage systems ( i. e., POTWs) is 4952. The SIC code for State agencies is 9511 ( Air and Water Resources and Solid Waste Management). The North American Industry Classification System ( NAICS) code for State agencies that include pretreatment programs is 92411 ( Administration of Air and Water Resources and Solid Waste Management Programs). POTWSs are classified as NAICS code 22132 ( Sewage Treatment Facilities).

Ancillary systems ( i. e., those that supplement the function of other establishments like factories, power plants, mobile home parks, etc.) cannot be categorized in a single NAICS or SIC code. For ancillary systems, the NAICS or SIC code is that of the primary establishment or industry. IUs potentially affected by the pretreatment regulations include the following categories of industries:

Exhibit 4 Affected Industries and Industrial Classifications Affected Industry SIC Code( s)* NAICS Codes**

Adhesive/ sealant 2891 32552 Aluminum Forming 33 331315, 331316, 331319 Asbestos Manufacturing 3292 33634, 327999 Battery Manufacturing 369 335911, 335912 Builder's Paper and Board Mills 267 322222, 322299 Carbon Black Manufacturing 2895 325182 Cement Manufacturing 327 327331, 327332, 327999 Coal Mining 12 212111, 212112, 212113 Coil Coating 367 334416 Copper Forming 3351 331421 National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 Affected Industry SIC Code( s)* NAICS Codes**

19 Dairy Products Processing 202 311511, 311512, 311513, 311514, 31152 Electrical and Electronic Components 36 335311, 335312, 335313, 335314, 335999 Electroplating 3471 332813 Explosives Manufacturing 2892 32592 Feedlots 0211 112112 Ferroalloy Manufacturing 106 212234, 212299 Fertilizer Manufacturing 147 212391, 212392, 212393 Foundries 332, 3365, 3366 331511, 331512, 331513, 331524, 331525 Fruits and Vegetables Processing Manufacturing 203 311411, 311412, 311421, 311422, 311423, 311999 Glass Manufacturing 32 327211, 327212, 327213, 327215 Grain Mills Manufacturing 204 311211, 311212 Gum and Wood Chemicals 2861 325191 Ink Formulating 2893 32591 Inorganic Chemicals 281 325188 Iron and Steel Manufacturing 332 331111, 331511, 331512, 331513 Leather Tanning and Finishing 3111 31611 Meat Processing 201 311611, 311612, 311613, 311615 National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 Affected Industry SIC Code( s)* NAICS Codes**

20 Metal Finishing 346, 3449, 347 332111, 332112, 332114, 332115, 332116, 332312, 332321, 339911 Metal Molding and Casting 34 332439, 332212, 332213, 332999, 332913, 332312, 332313, 332311 Non Ferrous Metals Forming and Metal Powders 33 331419, 331492, 331491, 331522, 331528, 331492 Ore Mining and Dressing 1081 213114 Organic Chemicals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers 286 325132, 325211, 325192, 32511, 32512, 325193, 325212, 325199 Paint and Ink Formulation 286, 289 32591, 32551 Paving and Roofing ( Tars and Asphalt) 295 324121, 324122 Pesticides Formulating, Packaging, and Repackaging 287 325314 Pesticides Manufacturing 287 325311, 325312, 32532 Petroleum Refining 2911 32411 Pharmaceuticals Manufacturing 2834 325412 Phosphate Manufacturing 1475 212392 Photographic Supplies 3861 333315, 325992 Plastics and Synthetics 308 326113, 326119, 32613, 326121, 32615, 32616 Porcelain Enameling 3479 332812 Printing and Publishing 2731 51223, 51113, 323117 National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 Affected Industry SIC Code( s)* NAICS Codes**

21 Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard 26 32211, 322121, 322122, 32213 Rubber Processing 30 315999, 326211, 32622, 339991, 326291, 31332 Seafood Processing 2091, 2092 311711, 311712 Soaps and Detergents Manufacturing 284 325611, 325312, 325613 Steam Electric Power Generation 4911 22119 Textile Mills 22 31321, 313311, 313221, 315111, 313249, 313113, 31411, 314999 Timber Products and Processing 24 321912, 321113, 11331, 321918, 321999 Transportation Equipment Cleaning 4491, 4741, 7699 81131, 48821, 48831, 48832 * Note that some industry sectors are categorized by only two or three digit SICs. ** Note that this table may not include all applicable NAICS codes for certain industries with many applicable codes.

Among the IUs that are respondents, some are considered to be SIUs based on certain criteria. SIUs are defined in 40 CFR 403.3( t) as any of the following types of facilities:

° All IUs subject to categorical pretreatment standards.

° All IUs not subject to categorical pretreatment standards that:

  discharge an average of 25,000 gallons per day or more of process wastewater.

  contribute a process wastestream equal to or greater than 5 percent of the receiving treatment plant's average dry weather hydraulic or organic capacity, or   have a reasonable potential to adversely affect the POTW's operation or violate any pretreatment standard or requirement as determined by the Control Authority. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 22 4( b) Information Requested 4( b)( i) Data Items This section describes the information required for the pretreatment program and the frequency of the collections. Exhibit 5 summarizes these reporting requirements. In conjunction with describing respondent activities, Section 4( b)( ii) provides additional details about the information requested.

Most of the information requirements, particularly those associated with program development and program/ categorical determination, are one time requirements that have already been met by most States, POTWs, and IUs. Approximately 27.2 percent of NPDES States have not obtained Approval Authority. Approximately 3.1 percent of affected POTWs are currently required to develop pretreatment programs. Over time, the latter estimate will fluctuate as additional POTWs are identified as needing pretreatment programs, and as such programs are approved.

Exhibit 5 Reporting and Recodkeeping Requirements for the Pretreatment Program Information Type Requirement Regulatory Citation ( 40 CFR) From To Frequency/ Retention Program Development POTW Pretreatment Program Approval Request 403.8( b) POTW AA One time POTW Pretreatment Compliance Schedule Progress Report 403.8, 403.9, 403.12( k) POTW AA One time State Pretreatment Program Approval Request 403.10 State OA One time Maintain Pretreatment Program Information 403.11( f), 403.14( c) AA Stored on site For minimum of 3 years Program Implementation Evaluation of the Need to Revise Local Limits 403.5( c) CA AA Once every 5 years Notification of Changed Monitoring Location 403.6( e) IU CA Once per occurrence Issuance of Discharge Permits of Other Control Mechanisms for SIUs 403.8( f) CA IU Once every 5 years Inspection and Sampling of IU Effluent:

403.8( f) CA AA Random Sampling and Analysis of IUs, Surveillance Intermittent Inspection and Sampling of SIUs Annually Evaluation of SIUs Every 2 years Public Notification of SNC 403.8( f) CA Public Annually Prevention and Control Plan for Spills and Batch Discharges 403.8( f) IU CA One time, as required National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 Information Type Requirement Regulatory Citation ( 40 CFR) From To Frequency/ Retention 23 POTW Enforcement Response Plan 403.8( f) CA AA One time SIU Notification 403.8( f) CA IU As needed Baseline Monitoring Report 403.12( b) IU CA One time IU Compliance Schedule Progress Report 403.12( c) IU CA One time IU Compliance Attainment Report 403.12( d) IU CA One time IU Self Monitoring Report 403.12( e), 403.12( h) IU CA Every 6 months or as requested by CA IU Slug Load Notification 403.12( f) IU CA As needed Program Implementation ( continued) IU Compliance Report ( Resampling Requirements) 403.12( g) IU CA Once per effluent violation Annual POTW Reports 403.12( i) POTW AA Annually Notification of Changed Discharge 403.12( j) IU CA Once per occurrence Maintain POTW and IU Monitoring Records 403.12( o), 403.14( c) POTW, IU Stored on site For minimum of 3 years Notification of RCRA Discharge 403.12( p) IU CA, EPA, State One time Bypass Notification 403.17 IU CA Once per occurrence POTW Program Modifications 403.18 POTW AA Once per occurrence CWT Multiple Waste Subcategories 437.41 IU CA One time; annually*

Pollution Prevention Alternative 455.41 IU CA One time;

semiannually

Excellence Award Program Information 105 POTW OA Annually ( voluntary)

Program/ Categorical Determination Categorical Determination Request 403.6( a) IU, POTW OA One time ( voluntary)

Alternative Limits Request 403.6( e) IU CA One time per occurrence Removal Credit Approval Request 403.7 POTW AA Intermittent National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 Information Type Requirement Regulatory Citation ( 40 CFR) From To Frequency/ Retention 24 Removal Credit Self Monitoring Report 403.7 POTW AA Annually or as specified by AA Fundamentally Different Factors Variance Request 403.13 IU, POTW OA One time ( voluntary)

Net/ Gross Request 403.15 IU OA Intermittent * The IU submits the P2 Alternative Certification once, then submits semi annual certifications or requests for modifications to the P2 alternative. ** The IU submits the initial certification statement once, then submits annual certification statements thereafter.

Program Development The reporting requirements for program development apply to States and POTWs, and include the State Pretreatment Program Approval Request, the POTW Compliance Schedule Progress Report, and the POTW Pretreatment Program Approval Request.

The regulations at 40 CFR 403.10 require States to develop a State pretreatment program if they were granted NPDES authority before the National Pretreatment Program was established. All other States are required to apply for pretreatment approval at the time they apply for NPDES program approval. A request for State pretreatment program approval must demonstrate that the State has developed the legal, procedural, and administrative bases for the program and that it has obtained the necessary funding and staff to operate the program. Once a State has met these requirements and received program approval from EPA, the State becomes the Approval Authority for its pretreatment program. In cases where a State has not obtained approval authority, the EPA Regional Office administers the State pretreatment program. Currently, 34 States have approved pretreatment programs.

All POTWs with design flows of more than 5 million gallons per day must develop pretreatment programs that will reduce, eliminate, or alter harmful industrial pollutants prior to discharge to the POTW sewage system. This requirement also applies to smaller POTWs that receive discharges from SIUs. POTWs located in States that act as the Control Authority for all POTWs in the State ( the 403.10( e) States) are exempt from this requirement. Currently, 97 percent ( 1,497) of the approximately 1,515 POTWs required to develop programs have done so. ( In cases where POTWs do not have a pretreatment program, approved pretreatment States or EPA Regional Offices assume the responsibility of the Control Authority.)

To obtain an approved pretreatment program, a POTW is required by 40 CFR 403.8 to conduct an extensive survey of its IUs, establish the legal authority and procedures for compliance monitoring and enforcement, develop local limits for pollutant concentrations, and secure the necessary staff and funding for the program. As part of its program development, the POTW must submit a schedule with the expected date of completion for each major program requirement. Before obtaining final approval, the POTW must certify that all of the above requirements have been met. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 25 The Approval Authority must retain all pretreatment program submissions and removal credit request submissions, as well as any comments related to these submissions. This information must be available to the public upon request.

Program Implementation Once it receives program approval, the POTW or the agency responsible for administering the pretreatment program is required under Section 402( b) of the CWA to ensure IU compliance with the National Pretreatment Standards. This includes the following POTW requirements:

° Annual POTW Reports including updated SIU inventories and the results of inspection and sampling of SIU effluent. ° POTW Program Modifications. ° Issuance of Discharge Permits for SIUs. ° Public Notification of Significant Violation/ Noncompliance. ° Prevention and Control Plan for Spills and Batch Discharges. ° POTW Enforcement Response Plan. ° SIU Notification. ° Evaluation of the Need to Revise Local Limits. ° Excellence Awards Program.

Many of the other reporting requirements for this phase of the program apply to IUs and include the following:

° Baseline Monitoring Report. ° Industrial User Compliance Schedule Progress Report. ° Industrial User Compliance Attainment Report. ° Industrial User Compliance Reports ( Resampling Requirements). ° Industrial User and Significant Industrial User Self Monitoring Reports ( and associated recordkeeping requirements). ° Pollution Prevention Alternative. ° CWT Multiple Waste Categories. ° Industrial User Slug Load Notification ( includes 40 CFR 403.5( b) and 40 CFR 403.8( f)( 2)( v)( C)). ° Notification of Changed Discharge. ° Bypass Notification. ° Notification of Changed Monitoring Location. ° Notification of RCRA Discharge.

Within 180 days after the effective date of a categorical standard, affected industries must submit a Baseline Monitoring Report ( BMR), giving the pollutant concentrations of their wastestreams. If the IU is not in compliance with the standards, it has up to three years to finance, construct, and operate any pollution control equipment or facilities needed to bring the IU into compliance. The BMR includes a schedule indicating when they will be in compliance with the standards.

Additionally, IUs must submit Compliance Schedule Progress Reports for each deadline contained in the schedule indicating if it has achieved that milestone. The IU must provide a reason if it did not achieve a milestone. The Compliance Attainment Report is the final report on National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 26 the status of pretreatment construction; it indicates that the system is operating and that the IU is in compliance with the appropriate standard.

Once an IU has achieved compliance, it must monitor and report the results of its analysis to the Control Authority at least once every six months. ( This is the IU or SIU Self Monitoring Report.) The Control Authority has the discretion to require more frequent monitoring or reporting if necessary. In addition, both the IU and the POTW must maintain records of these analyses for a minimum of three years. The IU must notify the Control Authority of any pollutant released at a flow rate and/ or pollutant concentration that will cause interference with the POTW or will violate a general or specific prohibition of the permit. Such an occurrence, known as slug loading, must be reported " immediately" to enable the POTW to take appropriate protective actions ( 40 CFR 403.12( f)). The IU must also notify the POTW, the State, and EPA of the discharge of a substance defined as hazardous under RCRA.

Program/ Categorical Determination These reporting requirements are used to determine the applicability of or to revise specific requirements imposed on IUs. They include the following:

° Categorical Determination Request. ° Alternative Limits Request. ° Fundamentally Different Factors Variance Request. ° Net/ Gross Adjustment Request. ° Removal Credit Approval Request. ° Removal Credit Self Monitoring Report.

Although the information is required once a request is made, the decision to make such a request is voluntarily made by the IU, the POTW, or an interested third party during the implementation phase of a particular categorical standard.

An IU or POTW may request that the Oversight Authority determine whether it is subject to a particular categorical standard. If the IU can demonstrate that its process effluent is mixed with other wastewater prior to treatment, it may request alternative discharge limits. If the IU ( or the interested party) can demonstrate that circumstances exist that were not considered when that standard was developed, it may request a Fundamentally Different Factors Variance. If an IU can certify that its intake waters are already contaminated with a restricted pollutant, it may request a Net/ Gross Adjustment to obtain credit for the amount of pollutant in its intake waters. ( This request is restricted to those cases where the intake and the discharge from the POTW are in the same body of water.)

Lastly, a POTW may apply to the Approval Authority at any time for authorization to grant removal credits. To qualify, the POTW must certify that the pollutant( s) being controlled by the categorical standard is ( are) being treated and removed at the POTW, thereby rendering additional treatment by the IU unnecessary. In such cases, the Approval Authority may revise the applicable numerical standard( s) for IUs discharging to that facility. If a POTW is granted removal credits, it must monitor and report the results of its analysis to certify that pollutant removal is ongoing. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 27 4( b)( ii) Respondent Activities This section describes the activities undertaken by respondents to obtain the necessary information to fulfill their obligations to the pretreatment program. As in the previous section, respondent activities are described with respect to program development, program implementation, and program/ categorical determination.

Program Development State Pretreatment Program Approval Request States seeking approval for their pretreatment program must demonstrate that they have established the necessary legal, administrative and procedural bases for effective monitoring and oversight of POTW programs. Requests are submitted to the Regional Administrator, who determines whether they meet the requirements of 40 CFR 403.10 and Section 402( b) of the CWA. State requests must include three copies of the following components:

° A statement by the Attorney General ( or the Attorney for those State Agencies that have independent counsel) that the laws of the State provide adequate authority to implement the program, together with copies of all relevant State statutes and regulations.

° A description of the funding levels and full time and part time personnel available to implement the program.

° Any modifications or additions to the Memorandum of Agreement ( required by 40 CFR 123.24) that may be necessary for EPA and the State to implement the program.

The EPA Regional Administrator will notify the State that the submission has been received and is under review, according to the process set out in 40 CFR 123.62. If the State submission is approved, the State will base its pretreatment program on information in that submission.

POTW Pretreatment Compliance Schedule Progress Report Certain POTWs must establish a pretreatment program, as stated in 40 CFR 403.8( a). These are POTWs with one or more of the following characteristics:

° A total design flow greater than 5 million gallons per day ( mgd), and ° Receive industrial pollutants that pass through or interfere with POTW operations, or ° Are otherwise subject to pretreatment standards.

The Administrator may require other POTWs develop a Program if circumstances warrant such action. POTWs located in States that act as the Control Authority for all POTWs in the State ( 403.10( e) States) are exempt from the requirement to develop a Program. The compliance schedule contains suggested dates to begin and complete major program components leading to the development and implementation of a POTW pretreatment program. Items such as legal authority, technical information, program procedures, and organizational and funding mechanisms should be included. The number of activities specified in the compliance schedule National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 28 varies among the States and Regions. The time increment between each major event specified in the compliance schedule may be no more than nine months.

Within 14 days of the deadline for each major event in the compliance schedule, and within 14 days of the final compliance date for completing the program, the POTW must submit a progress report to the appropriate Approval Authority stating whether the deadline has been met. If the deadline was not met, the report must include the date compliance is expected, the reason for the delay, and the steps taken by the POTW to return to the established schedule.

POTW Pretreatment Program Approval Request POTWs applying for program approval must include documentation of the following seven general program elements in their final submission:

( 1) Industrial Waste Survey ( IWS). The POTW must identify and evaluate the nondomestic dischargers to its treatment system. To conduct the IWS, the POTW must:

° Compile a master list of potential IUs in the service area,

° Identify and locate each IU and collect information relating to the type of industry and the quality and quantity of discharge,

° Summarize the data collected for use in developing the program.

( 2) Legal Authority. The POTW must have adequate legal authority to apply and enforce the requirements of the general pretreatment regulations and any other State or local rules needed to control nondomestic discharges.

( 3) Technical Elements/ Local Limits. The POTW must analyze discharges to its treatment system and establish local effluent limits to protect the operation of its treatment plant, the quality of its receiving water, and the quality of its sewage sludge.

( 4) Compliance Monitoring. The POTW must develop procedures for monitoring its IUs to determine compliance and noncompliance.

( 5) Procedures. The POTW must develop administrative procedures to implement its pretreatment program.

( 6) Resources. The POTW must have sufficient resources ( funds, equipment, and personnel) to operate an effective and ongoing program.

( 7) Enforcement Response Plan. The POTW must develop a plan that contains detailed procedures indicating how it will investigate and respond to instances of IU noncompliance.

The Approval Authority reviews the submission and determines its adequacy, according to the requirements of 40 CFR 403.8( f). If the Approval Authority determines that the submission is inadequate, it notifies the POTW of any defects and provides information on how the POTW can comply with the requirements. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 29 Record Maintenance of Submission and Comments for Program Approval and Removal Credits The Approval Authority must retain and make available to the public for inspection and copying the submissions by POTWs of their pretreatment programs ( for program approval) and of any requests for removal credits. The Approval Authority must also keep with these submissions any comments received pursuant to the submissions.

Program Implementation Baseline Monitoring Report According to 40 CFR 403.12( b), all IUs subject to categorical standards must submit a Baseline Monitoring Report ( BMR) to the Control Authority within 180 days after the effective date of the applicable standard, or, in the case of new sources, at least 90 days prior to commencement of discharge. The BMR must include:

° Identifying information, ° Environmental control permits, ° Description of operations, ° Flow measurement data, ° Pollutant measurement for regulated pollutants, ° Certification ( or non certification) of compliance with the standard, and ° Compliance schedule.

This information is submitted only once, after promulgation of a categorical standard. If an IU has already submitted this information during the Industrial Waste Survey or in a permit application, it is not required to resubmit new information to the Director or Regional Administrator in the BMR. The Control Authority may also require noncategorical IUs to submit a similar report if it deems necessary.

Industrial User Compliance Schedule Progress Report As part of its BMR, an IU that cannot currently meet all effluent standards must submit a compliance schedule indicating the shortest time by which any additional pretreatment technology or operation and maintenance processes can be implemented. The schedule contains progress dates for commencement and completion of major events leading to the construction and operation of additional pretreatment required for the IU to meet the categorical pretreatment standard. The completion date in the schedule can be no later than the compliance date established for that pretreatment standard.

In addition to the compliance schedule ( submitted with the BMR), periodic reporting is required within 14 days after each date in the schedule. This ensures progress toward categorical standard compliance. The report must indicate whether the IU complied with the scheduled increment of progress for that particular deadline and, if not, the date on which it expects to comply, the reason for the delay, and the steps being taken to return the construction to the National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 30 established schedule. The frequency of these reports is determined by the planned stages of installation. In no case, however, may more than nine months elapse between submission of progress reports to the Control Authority.

Industrial User Compliance Attainment Report IUs subject to categorical standards must submit a report to the Control Authority within 90 days following the date for final compliance with the standard. The report must state whether compliance has been attained. New sources ( defined at 40 CFR 403.3( k)( 1)) must also submit this report after they begin to discharge wastewater into the POTW. The BMR must include:

° Sampling data indicating the nature and concentration of all pollutants from regulated processes limited by categorical pretreatment standards;

° Average and maximum daily flow measurements for regulated wastewater; and ° A statement signed by an authorized company representative that declares whether pretreatment standards are being met on a consistent basis and, if not, what additional operation and maintenance or pretreatment is necessary to obtain compliance.

If the Control Authority determines that the IU must perform additional operation and maintenance or pretreatment to attain the standard, it can then assist the IU to obtain compliance or take an enforcement action against the IU.

Industrial User Compliance Report ( Resampling Requirements)

All IUs are required to:

° Include sampling results in compliance reports,

° Perform repeat monitoring, when necessary, and ° Notify the Control Authority immediately of all discharges that could cause problems to the POTW.

All monitoring performed by the IU must be reported to the Control Authority to prevent IUs from selecting the most favorable sampling results to include in the report. If the sampling indicates a violation, the IU must notify the Control Authority within 24 hours of becoming aware of the violation and perform repeat sampling for the parameter for which the violation is found and submit results within 30 days. Finally, the IU must notify the Control Authority immediately of all discharges that could cause problems to the POTW, including any slug loadings.

In addition, the POTW may perform discharge monitoring in lieu of self monitoring by the industrial users. POTWs choosing to perform their own sampling and analysis must perform at least the same amount of sampling as is required of industrial users.

Industrial User and Significant Industrial User Self Monitoring Report National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 31 Section 403.12 of the General Pretreatment Regulations requires that categorical and non categorical SIUs report to the Control Authority at least semiannually on their continuing compliance with the standard. The reports must be submitted in June and December of each year, unless otherwise specified in a Pretreatment Standard or agreed upon by the Control Authority. New sources must also submit these reports after they begin to introduce wastewater into the POTW.

The Control Authority must have authority to require " appropriate" reporting from non categorical IUs in order to assess and assure compliance with applicable pretreatment standards and requirements. The regulations specify that the following information be included in the report:

° Wastewater pollutant sampling and analysis data, including all regulated pollutants, concentrations, and sampling dates;

° A record of measured or estimated average and maximum daily flow for the reporting period;

In addition, the Control Authority may request other information relating to noncompliance, violations and corrective actions, sampling and analytical methods, and other topics.

The regulations do not specify how the data for these reports are to be developed. Monitoring can be performed by the Control Authority, the IU, or a combination of both. However, most Control Authorities require the IU to self monitor ( in addition to Control Authority monitoring).

Pollution Prevention Alternative The Pesticides Formulating, Packaging, and Repackaging regulations ( 40 CFR § 455.41) contain a provision that allows facilities to submit a pollution prevention alternative certification in lieu of complying with the zero discharge requirement. The paperwork required for compliance with the P2 Alternative includes the following:

° One time initial certification statement with required descriptions of products/ processes, P2 practices and treatment systems,

° Periodic ( semi annual) certification statement with description of any changes since last report,

° Requests for approval of non listed modifications to the listed practices along with justifications for such changes, and ° On site Compliance Paperwork ( i. e., supporting documentation).

CWT Multiple Waste Subcategories In addition, Subcategory D of the CWT regulations ( 40 CFR § 437) sets requirements which are available to CWT facilities that accept waste in multiple subcategories. These facilities must certify as well as demonstrate that their treatment systems obtain equivalent removals to those which are the basis for the separate subcategory limits. According to the CWT preamble, National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 32 " The new information reporting requirements under this subcategory, described at Sec. 437.41, include submission of an initial certification statement, and annual certification statements thereafter, and maintenance of on site compliance paperwork. These requirements are the same as those previously approved by OMB for facilities in the pesticide formulating, packaging, and repackaging category that choose to comply with the pollution prevention alternative. OMB is in the process of approving the extension of these requirements to multiple wastestream facilities in the CWT category, as part of the revisions to the ICRs listed above."

POTW and Industrial User Maintenance of Monitoring Records POTWs and IUs must maintain records of any monitoring activity as required by 40 CFR 403.12( o). The records, which must be kept by POTWs and IUs, consist of the sampling and analysis methods used by the facility and the results of both activities. Specifically, the following information must be retained in the record:

° Date, place, method, and time of sampling, ° Names of persons taking samples, ° Dates of analysis, ° Analytical techniques used in analysis, and ° Results of analysis.

In addition, POTWs must retain copies of all BMRs, Compliance Attainment Reports, and periodic IU Self Monitoring Reports. These records must be kept for a minimum of 3 years, and must be available to the State Director, the Regional Administrator, or the POTW, as appropriate, for inspection.

Annual POTW Reports The POTW is required to submit an annual report to the Approval Authority. The report must contain an updated list of the IUs discharging to the POTW, specifically identifying SIUs. The updated list must show the categorical pretreatment standards and/ or local limits applicable to each IU. The Annual POTW Report should include a summary of the compliance status of each IU over the period covered by the report, a summary of compliance monitoring and enforcement activities ( including inspections conducted by the POTW), and any other information requested by the Approval Authority, as appropriate.

POTW Program Modifications The POTW may request program modifications at any time. All such requests must be submitted to the Approval Authority for review. The Approval Authority determines whether the POTW request is a substantial modification. The definition of a substantial modification is specified in the requirements and includes:

° Changes to POTW legal authority ( except for modifications that directly reflect a revision to 40 CFR Part 403 or 40 CFR Chapter I, subchapter N), ° Changes that relax POTW's local limits, except for the modifications to local limits for pH and reallocations of the Maximum Allowable Industrial Loading of a pollutant that do not increase the total industrial loadings for the pollutant, which are reported pursuant to paragraph ( d) of 403.18. Maximum Allowable Industrial Loading means the total mass of a pollutant that all IUs of a POTW ( or a subgroup of IUs identified by the POTW) may discharge pursuant to limits developed under § 403.5( c), National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 33 ° Changes to POTW control mechanisms, ° Changes to POTW methods for implementing categorical pretreatment standards, ° Decreases in the frequency of self monitoring or reporting required of IUs, ° Decreases in the frequency of POTW inspection and sampling of IUs, ° Changes to POTW confidentiality procedures If the Approval Authority approves the substantial modification, the change is written into the POTW's NPDES permit. In addition, notice of approval must be published in the same newspaper as was the original request for modification. The POTW is also required to notify the Approval Authority of any nonsubstantial modifications 30 days prior to implementation of the modification.

Industrial User Slug Load Notification Under 40 CFR 403.8( f)( 2)( v)( C), IUs are required to notify the POTW of any slug discharges, including any discharge that would violate one of the specific prohibitions listed at 403.5( b). This provision is intended to protect a POTW's operations and physical integrity. The prohibitions listed at 40 CFR 403.5( b) include the following:

° Pollutants that create a fire or explosion hazard in the POTW, including wastestreams with a closed cup flashpoint of less than 140 ° F ( 40 CFR 403.5( b)( 1)), ° Discharges with a pH lower than 5.0, unless the POTW is specially designed to accommodate such discharges, and pollutants that will cause corrosive, structural damage to the POTW ( 40 CFR 403.5( b)( 2)),

° Solid or viscous pollutants in amounts that will cause obstruction to the flow in the POTW resulting in interference ( 40 CFR 403.5( b)( 3)),

° Any pollutant, including oxygen demanding pollutants ( BOD, etc.), released in a discharge at a flow rate and/ or pollutant concentration that will cause interference ( 40 CFR 403.5( b)( 4)),

° Heat in amounts that will inhibit biological activity in the POTW, resulting in interference, heat in such quantities that the temperature at the POTW exceeds 40 ° C ( 104 ° F) unless the Approval Authority, upon request of the POTW, approves alternate temperature limits ( 40 CFR 403.5( b)( 5)),

° Petroleum oil, nonbiodegradable cutting oil, or products of mineral oil origin in amounts that will cause interference or pass through ( 40 CFR 403.5( b)( 6)),

° Pollutants which result in the presence of toxic gases, vapors, or fumes within the POTW in a quality that may cause acute worker health and safety problems ( 40 CFR 403.5( b)( 7)), or ° Any trucked or hauled pollutants, except at discharge points designated by the POTW ( 40 CFR 403.5( b)( 8)). National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 34 The regulations define " interference" as a discharge that inhibits or disrupts the POTW, its treatment process or operations; or its sludge processes, use, or disposal, and is therefore a cause of a violation of the POTW's NPDES permit or prevents sewage sludge use or disposal.

All IUs are required to notify the POTW immediately of any slug loading so that the POTW can take protective actions. This notification is typically a telephone call from the IU to the POTW, with a written notification often required by the POTW to verify the date and time of the event, the approximate volume of the concentration of the slug load, the cause of the event, and corrective actions taken to avoid future events.

Notification of Changed Discharge The regulations require all IUs to notify receiving POTWs promptly of any substantial change in the volume and character of pollutants in the user's discharge. This notification enables POTWs to meet their obligations under 40 CFR 122.42( b)( 2) to notify the permitting authority of resulting changes in the POTW discharge.

Bypass Notification The regulations require notification of bypass, which is defined as the intentional diversion of wastestreams from any portion of a discharger's treatment facility ( 40 CFR 403.17( a)). The regulation requires all IUs to give prior notice of an anticipated bypass to the Control Authority 10 days before the bypass is to occur. For an unanticipated bypass, IUs must notify the Control Authority orally within 24 hours and, if required by the Control Authority, follow up in writing within five days.

Notification of Changed Monitoring Location This requirement affects IUs that treat wastes from multiple processes. It enables the IU to change monitoring locations from segregated wastestreams to the combined wastestream. All categorical IUs are required to inform the Control Authority in advance of any change in the monitoring location.

Issuance of Discharge Permits for SIUs The regulations require the Control Authority to issue discharge permits or equivalent individual control mechanisms to SIUs. These discharge permits must include, at a minimum, the following:

° A statement of duration of the permit ( in no case more than five years), ° A statement of non transferability without prior POTW approval, ° Effluent limits based on applicable categorical standards and local limits, ° Applicable monitoring, sampling, and reporting requirements, and ° Statements of applicable civil and criminal penalties.

Inspection and Sampling of IU and SIU Effluent Control Authorities must randomly sample and analyze the effluent from IUs and conduct surveillance activities to identify noncompliance with pretreatment standards. Control Authorities must also inspect and sample the effluent from all SIUs annually. This requirement establishes a clear minimum standard for how often Control Authorities must inspect and sample National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 35 the effluent of SIUs and enables POTWs to keep track of toxic and hazardous pollutants entering their systems.

Public Notification of Significant Noncompliance The regulations require Control Authorities to publish in a daily newspaper a list of IUs that were in " significant noncompliance" ( violations of high frequency or magnitude, as defined in 40 CFR 403.8( f)( 2)) during the previous 12 months. This allows the public to be aware of such violations.

Prevention and Control Plan for Slug ( Spills and Non Routine Batch) Discharges Through inspection and sampling of IU and SIU effluent ( see above), Control Authorities must evaluate SIUs to determine whether they should have prevention and control plans for slug ( spill and non routine batch) discharges. If selected, the SIU must submit a plan which includes, at a minimum:

° A description of discharge practices, including non routine batch discharges,

° A description of stored chemicals,

° Procedures for immediately notifying the Control Authority of slug discharges, including any discharge that would violate a prohibition under 40 CFR 403.5( b), with procedures for follow up written notification within five days,

° If necessary, procedures to prevent impact from accidental spills, including inspection and maintenance of storage areas, handling and transfer of materials, loading and unloading operations, control of plant site run off, and worker training,

° If necessary, procedures for building any necessary containment structures or equipment,

° If necessary, measures for controlling toxic organics ( including solvents), and ° If necessary, measures and equipment for emergency response.

The purpose of this requirement is to help prevent the accidental or sudden discharge of toxic or hazardous pollutants.

Evaluation of the Need to Revise Local Limits POTWs must report to the Approval Authority every five years on the need to revise local limits. This information is necessary for the Approval Authority to evaluate whether POTWs have developed appropriate local limits to control toxic and hazardous pollutants.

POTW Enforcement Response Plan The regulations require all approved POTWs to develop and implement Enforcement Response Plans describing how they will investigate and respond to IU noncompliance. This provision enables EPA to determine the adequacy of POTW response to IU noncompliance. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 36 SIU Notification Within 30 days of preparing or updating the inventory of SIUs, the Control Authority must inform its SIUs in writing of their status and of all applicable requirements. This gives SIUs notice of all requirements pertaining to them.

Notification of RCRA Discharge All IUs must notify POTWs and Federal and State hazardous waste permitting authorities of any discharge into the POTW of a substance that is a listed or characteristic waste under Section 3001 of RCRA. In addition, the IU must estimate the volume of hazardous waste expected to be discharged during the following 12 months. This reporting requirement applies to all IUs including small quantity generators ( less than 100 kg RCRA waste per calendar month). This requirement implements Section 3018( d) of RCRA.

Excellence Award Program Information The National Pretreatment Program Excellence Awards is sponsored by EPA Headquarters. The program allows exemplary POTWs to be publicly and locally recognized. The program is intended to heighten overall public awareness of industrial wastewater control measures and to encourage public support of programs aimed at protecting the operations of treatment facilities, the health and safety of municipal employees, the quality of receiving waters and the reuse and recycling of effluents and sludges.

States and Regions nominate POTWs that demonstrate their commitment to protecting and improving the quality of the nation's waters through outstanding implementation and enforcement of local pretreatment programs. Each nomination is screened using Quarterly Noncompliance Reports ( QNCRs) and other sources such as the Permit Compliance System ( PCS). Nominated POTWs should exhibit the following criteria:

° The POTW should be operating an exemplary pretreatment program.

° The POTW should be in compliance with all pretreatment requirements of 40 CFR Part 403, its approved program, and its NPDES permit.

° The POTW must not be operating under any enforcement order issued for any pretreatment violation.

° The POTW must not have been listed on any QNCRs during the previous four quarters for violations of its approved pretreatment program or its NPDES permit.

States and EPA Regions typically nominate up to four POTWs each year for an award. EPA requests an award application from each nominated POTW that passes a screening test. Based on a review of the award applications received, EPA determines and names award winners. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 37 Program/ Categorical Determination Categorical Determination Request When promulgating a pretreatment standard under Section 307( b) of the CWA, the Administrator designates a category or categories of sources to which the standards apply. IUs may be designated under more than one code or categorical standard subcategory. If an IU or POTW is uncertain about the applicability of a particular categorical standard or subcategory designation, they may request that the EPA Administrator ( or corollary State officer in approved Pretreatment States) provide written certification that the IU falls within that category or subcategory.

The request must be submitted within 60 days after the effective date of a categorical pretreatment standard. A new source must request this certification before it begins to discharge into the POTW. Where the POTW submits a request, it must notify the affected IU of the submission.

The application for program/ categorical determination must contain a list of subcategories that may be appropriate for the facility, and must cite evidence to support the respondent's contention of the applicability of a particular subcategory/ category designation. In addition, all statements contained in the application must be certified, as described in 40 CFR 403.6( a)( 2)( ii).

Either the State Director or the EPA Director may make a categorical determination. However, the latter retains the right to a final decision. If the submission is found to be incomplete, an extension of 30 days is given to the requester to correct the deficiency. The request is denied if the deficiency is not corrected within this time period. If the State Director makes the determination, the EPA Administrator is notified of the decision and may modify the decision within 60 days after receipt of it. The decision is sent to the requester, who may request a hearing to contest the decision to the EPA Administrator ( or designee) within 30 days after receipt of the decision.

Alternative Limits Modification When a facility's process effluent is mixed prior to treatment with wastewater that is not from the regulated process, the Control Authority may establish fixed alternative discharge limits. The Control Authority may also approve such an alternative limit developed by the IU. If there is any material or significant change in the values used in the calculation to fix the alternatives limits, the IU must immediately report such a change to the Control Authority.

Fundamentally Different Factors Variance Request Section 40 CFR 403.13 provides for a variance from the limits specified in a categorical pretreatment standard due to " fundamentally different factors" ( FDF). In certain cases, an individual discharger's production processes or technologies may be fundamentally different from the representative facilities used to determine those limits. A specific program/ categorical pretreatment standard variance request may be submitted by an IU when the user believes that factors relating to its discharge are fundamentally different from those considered by the Agency in establishing that standard. An FDF variance request may also be submitted by a POTW or other interested party. The IU or POTW submits the variance request and supporting information to the State Director or EPA Administrator ( or designee). National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 38 Factors considered fundamentally different are outlined in 40 CFR 403.13( d) and include:

° The nature or quality of pollutants contained in the raw waste load of the User's process wastewater,

° The volume of the User's process wastewater and effluent discharged,

° Non water quality environmental impact of control and treatment of the User's raw waste load,

° Energy requirements of the application of control and treatment technology,

° Age, size, land availability, and configuration as they relate to the User's equipment or facilities, processes employed, process changes, and engineering aspects of the application of control technology, and ° Cost of compliance with the required control technology.

The FDF variance request must contain the following data:

° The name and address of the person making the request.

° Identification of the interest of the requester affected by the categorical pretreatment standard for which the variance is requested.

° Identification of the POTW currently receiving the waste from the IU for which alternative discharge limits are requested.

° Identification of the categorical pretreatment standards that are applicable to the IU.

° A list of each pollutant or pollutant parameter for which an alternative discharge limit is sought.

° The alternative discharge limits proposed by the requester for each pollutant or pollutant parameter for which an alternative discharge limit is sought.

° A description of the IU's existing water pollution control facilities.

° A schematic flow representation of the IU's water system including water supply, process wastewater systems, and points of discharge.

° A statement of facts clearly establishing why the variance request should be approved, including detailed supporting data, documentation, and evidence ( e. g., technical and economic data collected by EPA and used in developing each pollutant discharge limit in the pretreatment standard).

As provided by 40 CFR 403.13( g)( 2), the variance must be submitted within 180 days after the date on which a categorical pretreatment standards is published in the Federal Register unless the IU has requested a program/ categorical determination as provided by 40 CFR National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 39 403.6( a), in which case the request must be submitted within 30 days after the categorical determination. The variance request is circulated to all interested parties for public review. Following this public comment period of not less than 30 days, the Director will deny or approve the variance.

Net/ Gross Adjustment Request Section 40 CFR 403.15 details the procedures whereby an industry discharging to a POTW may obtain an adjustment to an applicable categorical pretreatment standard based on the presence of pollutants in the IU's intake water. These adjustments are known as net/ gross credits. If the adjustment is granted, the applicable pretreatment standard is revised for those pollutants already present in the IU's intake water. However, if an industry has treatment technology in place, which will either partially or entirely remove a certain pollutant, the standard will be adjusted only to the extent that the pollutant is not removed by the IU's treatment technology.

To obtain net/ gross credit, the IU must submit a request to the POTW. In the request, the IU must demonstrate the following:

° The intake water is the same body of water into which the effluent from the POTW is discharged,

° The proposed control system ( or system in use) would, if properly installed and operated, meet the Standards in the absence of pollutants in the intake waters.

° The pollutants in the intake water do not vary chemically or biologically from the pollutants limited by the applicable standard, and ° The concentration of pollutants in the effluent is not significantly greater than the concentration in the intake water.

After the net/ gross credit is granted, the IU must notify the POTW of any changes in the quantity of pollutants in the intake water or the level of IU treatment. Additionally, the IU will be required to conduct special monitoring to determine continued eligibility for and compliance with the adjustments.

Removal Credit Approval Request The Removal Credit Approval Request provides specific POTW data necessary for the Approval Authority to review and approve a revised categorical pretreatment standard reflecting POTW pollutant removal. Revisions will be made only when the POTW demonstrates consistent removal of each pollutant for which the discharge limit in a categorical standard is to be revised, at a level which justifies the amount of revision. A removal credit benefits the POTW's IUs that are subject to the categorical standard that has been revised. These users may not have to install additional pretreatment or operation and maintenance technology in order to comply with the revised pretreatment standard. Application requirements and procedures for POTWs wishing to obtain removal allowances are contained in 40 CFR 403.7.

To obtain a removal credit, the POTW must have an approved pretreatment program or have such approval pending. It submits the removal credit request and supporting information to National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 40 the Approval Authority, either the EPA or the State with delegated pretreatment program authority. According to 40 CFR 403.7, the POTW's request must include:

° A list of pollutants for which discharge limit revisions are proposed.

° POTW influent and effluent data demonstrating consistent pollutant removal.

° A description of the POTW's analytical methods used in sampling.

° The calculations involved in determining the POTW's consistent pollutant removal.

° A list of the industrial subcategories for which discharge limits will be revised.

° The calculations used to determine revised categorical standards.

° A certification that the POTW has an approved pretreatment program or qualifies for the exemption to this requirement.

° A description of the POTW's current sludge management practices and a certification that the granting removal credits will not cause a violation of an applicable sludge requirement.

° A certification that granting removal credits will not cause a violation of the POTW's NPDES permit.

Within five days after determining that the request is complete, the Approval Authority issues a public notice that the request has been received. Notices of the request are mailed to the agencies responsible for developing plans under CWA Section 208, Federal and State fish and wildlife resource agencies, and to any other interested persons who have requested notification. The public notice period lasts at least 30 days, during which time all written comments are submitted to the Approval Authority. In addition, the Approval Authority publishes the request in the largest daily newspaper within the POTW's jurisdiction. To consider the POTW's removal allowance request, the Director must hold a public hearing if there is significant public interest in the issues involving the POTW's request for removal authority. After the 30 day notice, but within 180 days, the Director denies or approves the removal allowance request and notifies the POTW of this decision.

Removal Credit Self Monitoring Report The Removal Credit Self Monitoring Report provides EPA with up to date, POTW specific data necessary to ensure compliance with the categorical pretreatment standard. The reporting requirements are described in detail in 40 CFR 403.7.

A POTW that has obtained removal credit approval must submit to the Approval Authority an initial report demonstrating consistent pollutant removal and sludge quality maintenance. Thereafter, the POTW must continue to substantiate its removal credit with periodic reports to be submitted no less than once per year ( or as specified by the AA).

These reports are needed to establish the POTW's rate of consistent removal and, as specified in Section 307( b)( 1) of the Act, to demonstrate that the POTW's sludge use and National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 41 disposal practices will not be adversely affected. According to 40 CFR 403.7, each report must include POTW influent and effluent data demonstrating consistent pollutant removal. The Approval Authority evaluates each report to determine whether the POTW's pollutant removal and sewage sludge quality maintenance have continued to justify the approved removal credit. If the POTW has not justified the removal credit, the Approval Authority may rescind the removal credit after notifying the POTW. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 3 These definitions are taken from section 601 of the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

42 5 THE INFORMATION COLLECTED  AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5( a) Agency Activities EPA personnel complete many different tasks in order to implement the National Pretreatment Program. Burden and costs for these tasks are detailed in Section 6( c).

As Oversight Authority, EPA Regional Offices oversee State pretreatment programs. This activity includes reviewing certain requests, such as the Pretreatment Categorical Determination Request and the Fundamentally Different Factors Request. Oversight Authorities also receive requests from States seeking approval for their pretreatment programs. Oversight Authorities must then review these requests for completeness.

EPA Regional Offices act as Approval Authority in States that do not have approved pretreatment programs. As the Approval Authority, a Regional Office reviews POTW pretreatment programs for adequacy, audits and inspects approved POTWs, enforces against POTWs for failure to implement pretreatment regulations, and enforces pretreatment standards for IUs not in compliance ( where the POTW does not take action). An Approval Authority may also inspect IUs to assess compliance.

EPA Regional Offices also act as Control Authority in instances where neither the State nor the POTW has an approved pretreatment program. As Control Authority, a Regional Office has primary responsibility for implementing the pretreatment program. The Regional Office, acting as Control Authority, would notify SIUs of their status and obligations, review applications for discharge permits, and determine which IUs need to take action to reduce the risk of spills or batch discharges. The Control Authority also ensures that IUs comply with discharge limitations and reporting requirements, inspects and/ or reviews self monitoring reports from IUs, enforces against non complying IUs, and notifies the public of significant violations and violators.

5( b) Collection Methodology And Management Reports and requests from IUs and POTWs are written. EPA makes use of the PCS database to store, track, and access information.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility In developing this ICR, EPA considered the requirement of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act ( SBREFA) to minimize the burden of information collections on small entities. Small entities include " small businesses," " small organizations," and " small government jurisdictions." These terms are defined below. 3 ° A small business is any business that is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field, as defined by the Small Business Administration ( SBA) regulations under Section 3 of the Small Business Act. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 43 ° A small organization is any non profit enterprise that is independently owned and operated and not dominant in its field.

° A small governmental jurisdiction is the government of a city, county, town, township, village, school district or special district that has a population of fewer than 50,000. This definition may also include Indian tribes.

The major requirement under SBREFA is a regulatory flexibility analysis of all rules that have a " significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities." Since EPA is not promulgating a rule, this ICR is not subject to SBREFA.

The reporting requirements for pretreatment program development affect only State and municipal governments ( POTWs). Requirements for both pretreatment program implementation and program/ categorical determination involve some small businesses. This information is not available from any other source and is essential for implementation of the pretreatment program. In most cases, the reporting burden for small businesses cannot be specifically reduced. However, the burden for small industries may be inherently smaller because their facilities are likely to be less complex. Also, such businesses are less likely to be classified as SIUs.

The Agency's guidance for setting frequencies for periodic self monitoring is based in part on flow volume. Those IUs with lower flow volumes are likely to be required by the Control Authority to monitor less frequently than larger IUs.

5( d) Collection Schedule Many reporting requirements associated with this program are one time only requirements. Therefore, frequency of data collection is relevant only to the following requirements:

° IU and SIU Self Monitoring Reports. ° Annual POTW Reports, including updating the SIU List. ° Issuance of Discharge Permits for SIUs. ° Inspection and Sampling the Effluent of IUs and SIUs. ° Public Notification of Significant Noncompliance. ° Evaluation of the Need to Revise Local Limits. ° Prevention and Control Plan for Spills and Batch Discharges. ° Excellence Award Program Information. ° Removal Credit Self Monitoring Reports.

Exhibit 5 summarizes reporting requirements for the Pretreatment Program. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 44 6 ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION This section estimates the burden and cost to POTWs, States, and IUs for complying with the National Pretreatment Program requirements detailed in Section 4. This section also discusses the assumptions used to estimate costs and burden in addition to describing the change in burden, as compared with the 2000 National Pretreatment Program ICR.

6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden Respondents for the pretreatment program include States, POTWs, and IUs. As shown in Exhibit 6, the number of respondents to this information collection is 32,675. The total burden attributed to States, POTWs and IUs responding to reporting and recordkeeping requirements for the pretreatment program is 2,329,802 hours per year, as summarized in Exhibit 6 below. The burden for each type of respondent is detailed in Appendix D, Tables 2, 3, and 4. Table 6 in Appendix D shows the average annual number of responses per respondent for each reporting requirement. In addition, a discussion of data sources and assumptions is provided in Appendix C.

In addition to reporting requirements, the pretreatment regulations require IUs, POTWs, and State Approval Authorities to maintain records for a minimum of three ( 3) of years. IUs must also maintain records for any monitoring that they conduct. POTWs must also maintain any monitoring records that they receive. Lastly, Approval Authorities must maintain records of any pretreatment program information that they receive from POTWs. The burden associated with these recordkeeping requirements is 222,217 hours ( see Table 5 in Appendix D).

Exhibit 6 Summary of Total Annual Average Respondent Burden Respondent Number of Respondents Burden ( hours/ year) Average Burden per Respondent Reporting and Analysis Burden:

States 34 59,128 1,739.06 POTWs 1,469 955,279 650.29 IUs 31,172 1,093,178 35.07 Subtotal 32,675 2,107,586 64.50 Recordkeeping:

States 34 12,973 381.56 POTWs 1,469 146,900 100.00 IUs 31,172 62,344 2.00 Subtotal 32,675 222,217 6.80 TOTAL 32,675 2,329,802 71.30 National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 45 6( a)( i) Burden to States As respondents, States submit the State Pretreatment Program Approval Requests. After States have obtained approval authority, they may incur burden for nominating POTWs for excellence awards. In addition, States with approved programs must act as Control Authority if the POTWs do not have an approved program. As Control Authority, States must notify SIUs of their status and all consequent requirements and must issue discharge permits to SIUs. The Agency estimates a State reporting burden of 59,128 hours ( see Table 2 in Appendix D) and a State recordkeeping burden of 12,973 hours ( see Table 5 in Appendix D).

Approved Pretreatment States ( or EPA Regions in non approved States), in their role as Approval Authority, are users of the following types of information:

° POTW Compliance Schedule Progress Reports, ° POTW Program Approval Requests, ° Annual POTW Reports, including update of SIU List and inspection and sampling of IU and SIU effluents, ° POTW Program Modifications, ° POTW Enforcement Response Plans, ° Removal Credit Approval Requests, and ° Removal Credit Self Monitoring Reports.

In cases where the POTW does not have an approved pretreatment program ( e. g., SIUs in 403.10( e) States and SIUs in non pretreatment cities), the Approval Authority acts as the Control Authority. Based on Agency data, this occurs primarily where States are the Approval Authority. States, therefore, incur a burden as users of the following types of information:

° Baseline Monitoring Reports ° IU Compliance Schedule Progress Reports ° IU Compliance Attainment Reports ° IU Compliance Reports ( Resampling Requirements) ° IU and SIU Self Monitoring Reports ° Pollution Prevention Alternative ° Slug Load Notification ° Notifications of Changed Discharge ° Prevention and Control Plans for Spills and Batch Discharges ° Notifications of RCRA Discharge ° Alternative Limits Requests.

Based on information provided by EPA Regions, approximately 6.17 percent of all IU reports are submitted directly to Approved States acting as the Control Authority. Data also indicate that States act as Approval Authorities for 72.84 percent of all POTW programs. Appendix D, Table 8 outlines the hours per response, number of responses per year, and total number of hours per year expended by Approved States for review of reports generated by both POTWs and SIUs. ( These estimates are based on the Agency's past administration of the Pretreatment Program, together with assumptions for administration of the Pretreatment Program over the three year ICR period.) The total number of hours expended annually by Approved Pretreatment States as users of the data is estimated to be 48,622. Based on an average of $ 31.20 per hour for a State employee, the total cost to Approved States for administration of the program is $ 1,517,006. 46 6( a)( ii) Burden to POTWs POTWs submit the following types of information as respondents:

° POTW Compliance Schedule Progress Reports ° POTW Program Approval Requests ° POTW Pretreatment Program Modification Requests ° POTW Maintenance of Monitoring Requirements ( not an actual submission, though burden is incurred) ° Removal Credit Requests, ° Removal Credit Self Monitoring Reports ° Annual POTW Reports ° Issuance of Discharge Permits ° Updating Index of IUs ° Inspection and Sampling Effluent of IUs and SIUs ° Public Notification of Significant Noncompliance ° SIU Notification ° Excellence Award Program.

As shown in Appendix D, Table 3, the Agency estimates that the total number of hours expended by POTWs as respondents to these reporting requirements is 955,279. The annual POTW recordkeeping burden is estimated at 146,900 hours ( see Appendix D, Table 5).

Approved POTWs, when they function as Control Authority, are users of the following types of information:

° Baseline Monitoring Reports ° IU Compliance Schedule Progress Reports ° IU Compliance Attainment Reports ° IU Compliance Reports ( Resampling Requirements) ° IU and SIU Self Monitoring Reports ° Pollution Prevention Alternative ° IU Slug Load Notification Reports ° Notifications of Changed Discharge ° Prevention and Control Plans for Spills and Batch Discharges ° Notifications of RCRA Discharge ° Alternative Limits Requests Based on information provided by EPA Regions, approximately 93.83 percent of all IU submissions go to POTWs with approved pretreatment programs, with the remainder submitted to EPA Regions or Approved States. Appendix D, Table 9 outlines the hours per response, number of responses per year, and total number of hours per year expended by POTWs for review of each of these reports. ( These are Agency estimates based on past administration of the pretreatment program, together with assumptions for administration of the pretreatment program over the three year ICR period.) The total number of hours expended annually by POTWs as users of the data is estimated to be 96,084. Based on an average of $ 24.76 per hour, the total annual average cost to POTWs acting as users of the data for administration of the pretreatment program is $ 2,379,040. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 47 6( a)( iii) Industrial Users IUs submit the following types of information as respondents:

° Baseline Monitoring Reports ° IU Compliance Schedule Progress Reports ° IU Compliance Attainment Reports ° IU Compliance Reports ( Resampling Requirements) ° IU Self Monitoring Reports ° Pollution Prevention Alternatives ° IU Maintenance of Monitoring Records ° IU Slug Load Notifications ° Notifications of Changed Discharge ° Bypass Notifications ° Notifications of Changed Monitoring Location ° Prevention and Control Plan for Slug ( spills and non routine batch) Discharges ° Notification of RCRA Discharges ° Categorical Determination Requests ° Alternative Limits Requests ° FDF Variance Requests ° Net/ Gross Adjustment Requests.

Estimates of the numbers of indirect dischargers in each of the ELG categories that are scheduled to be finalized during the three year ICR period were obtained directly from EPA Office of Science and Technology contacts for the respective categories. Since the previous ICR, the BMRs and compliance attainment reports have been completed for Pesticide Formulating, Packaging, and Repackaging, Pharmaceutical Manufacturing, and Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard Facilities. Therefore, for this ICR, no burden is associated with these two ELG categories. Several other rulemakings have been abandoned ( e. g., Industrial Laundries). This ICR estimates burden for new source CIUs and the compliance attainment reports for Centralized Waste Treatment facilities.

Baseline Monitoring Reports are required of IUs subject to new categorical standards at the time of promulgation and " new source" CIUs covered by existing categorical standards. For the three year ICR period, no new effluent guidelines are expected to require BMRs. However, the ICR assumes that there will be approximately 299 new source CIUs ( 2 percent of current CIUs) that will complete BMRs each year.

IU Compliance Schedule reports are required of existing facilities for which a new categorical standard has been established, which project that they will be unable to meet the pretreatment compliance date for that new categorical standard. For the burden estimate, this ICR assumes that 25 percent of the facilities required to complete BMRs will require a compliance schedule.

All IUs submitting BMRs must submit Compliance Attainment reports within 90 days following the date for final compliance with the standard. Therefore, the number of respondents for this requirement is the same as for BMRs.

The number of IUs performing Self Monitoring reports and the number of IUs submitting Certifications, Notifications, Categorical Determinations, Alternative Limits, FDF Variances, National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 48 and Net/ Gross Requests is based on current agency estimates. See Appendix C for a discussion of data sources and assumptions.

As shown in Appendix E, Table 4, the total number of respondent reporting hours for IUs is 1,093,178. The annual IU recordkeeping burden is estimated at 62,344 hours ( see Appendix D, Table 5).

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs Exhibit 7 summarizes the costs to respondents. The following sections describe in greater detail how these costs were determined for States, POTWs, and IUs Exhibit 7 Average Annual Respondent Costs Respondent Burden Hours per Year Labor Rate Cost State POTWs IUs 72,101 1,102,179 1,155,522 $ 31.20 $ 24.76 $ 56.76 $ 2,249,550 $ 27,289,953 $ 65,587,450 TOTAL 2,329,802 $ 95,126,953 The following assumptions are used to calculate the total cost to States, POTWs, and IUs acting as respondents:

° This ICR uses a labor rate of $ 31.20 per hour for all State activities, which is consistent with other recent OWM ICR submittals. This rate is based on the average hourly wage for State employees, as determined by the U. S. Department of Labor, and includes benefits. It is derived from the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics information found at http:// stats. bls. gov, specifically the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Table 3 Employer costs per hour worked for employee compensation and costs as a percent of total compensation: State and local government, by selected characteristics, June 2002. As in previous ICRs, 50 percent overhead costs were added to the average State rate.

° This ICR uses a labor rate of $ 24.76 per hour for all POTW activities, which is consistent with other recent OWM ICR submittals. This rate is based on the average hourly wage for municipal public sector employess, as determined by the U. S. Department of Labor, and includes benefits. It is derived from the U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics information found at http:// stats. bls. gov, specifically the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Table 3 Employer costs per hour worked for employee compensation and costs as a percent of total compensation: State and local government, by selected characteristics, June 2002. As in previous ICRs, 50 percent overhead costs were added to the average State rate. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 49 ° This ICR uses a labor rate of $ 56.76 per hour for all IU activities. The is the rate used for private sector employees in other recent OWM ICR submittals.

No capital or O& M costs are associated with the National Pretreatment Program ICR.

6( c) Estimating Agency Burden And Cost Appendix D, Tables 8 and 10 provide detailed information about the burden to the Agency as users of the information. Total burden to the Agency is 11,262 hours per year.

Cost to EPA includes costs incurred by EPA Regions and Headquarters to process, analyze, and maintain the information collected. EPA Regions, in their role as Oversight Authority, are users of the following types of information:

° State Program Approval Request, ° Categorical Determination Request, ° FDF Variance Request, and ° Net/ Gross Adjustment Request.

EPA is the Federal Oversight Authority for States that act as Approval Authorities. In addition, where States are not approved to administer the Pretreatment Program, EPA Regions act as the Approval Authority for POTWs. Data indicate that 27.16 percent of the 1,469 programs have EPA as the Approval Authority. Appendix D, Table 10 outlines the hours per response, number of responses per year, and the total number of hours per year expended by the Federal Government ( EPA) for review of State and POTW reports. The annual average number of hours expended by EPA as user of the data is 11,262. Based on an average salary of $ 32.39 per hour for a Federal employee, the estimated annual cost to EPA $ 364,776.

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs Respondents for this ICR include IUs, POTWs, and States, for a total of 32,675 respondents. This ICR estimates the number of IUs at 31,172. In addition to the IU respondents, this ICR assumes 34 States ( 29 States with approved pretreatment programs and five 40 CFR 403.10( e) States), and 1,469 POTWs with approved pretreatment programs.

The total costs and burden for these respondents are summarized in Exhibits 6, 7, and 8, as well as in Appendix D. Agency costs and burden are detailed in Section 6( c) and in Appendix D.

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours And Cost Tables The bottom line burden hours and costs appear in Exhibit 8. This exhibit summarizes the burden and cost calculations from Exhibits 6 and 7, as well as Appendix D. The total annual respondent burden associated with this ICR is estimated to be approximately 2.47 million burden hours. The corresponding total annual respondent costs are estimated to be $ 99.0 million. The total national burden, including respondent burden and Agency burden, is estimated to be 2.49 million hours annually. The total national cost, for respondents and EPA, is estimated to be $ 99.4 million annually. National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 50 Exhibit 8 Total Average Annual Respondent Burden and Costs Burden Type Annual Burden Hours Annual Costs Respondent Reporting Burden 2,107,586 $ 87,546,313 Respondent Recordkeeping Burden 222,217 $ 7,580,640 State and POTW Burden as Users of the Data 144,706 $ 3,896,046 Total 2,474,508 $ 99,022,998 Note: The Federal government ( the Agency) incurs a burden of 11,262 as a user of the data ( see Table 10 in Appendix D).

6( f) Reasons For Change In Burden Appendix D compares the estimated pretreatment program reporting and recordkeeping burden for this ICR and for the 2000 ICR. The total annual average respondent burden in the 2000 ICR is 2,847,167 hours. This ICR estimates a total annual average respondent burden of 2,474,508 hours. The decrease in burden from 2000 to 2003 is 372,659 hours.

Most of the burden decrease is attributable to the number of effluent guidelines for which the pretreatment program assumes reporting and recordkeeping burden. In particular, several effluent guidelines for which the 2000 ICR estimated burden either have not been promulgated or have been finalized with no requirements for indirect dischargers. Additionally, compliance requirements for other effluent guidelines have been completed. Consequently, no pretreatment burden or cost is assumed for these effluent guidelines, which include the following:

° Pesticide Formulating, Packaging, and Repackaging ° Metal Products and Machinery ° Industrial Laundries ° Pharmaceutical Manufacturers ° Transportation Equipment Cleaners For Centralized Waste Treatment Facilities, the burden increases slightly due to revised estimates of the number of indirect dischargers in this category. This increase in facilities is due to activities associated with the new Centralized Waste Treatment Rule. This ICR estimates burden for compliance attainment reports for Centralized Waste Treatment Facilities.

Other factors that have contributed to the change in burden include updated data for the number of SIUs ( including CIUs and non categorical SIUs), POTWs with approved pretreatment programs, and States with approved pretreatment programs. For this ICR, labor rates have been updated to correspond with the rates used in other recent OWM ICR submittals. These changes affect the estimated costs of reporting and recordkeeping requirements of the National Pretreatment Program. Table C 1 in Appendix C details the assumptions used in this ICR and the 2000 ICR, including the updated numbers used for calculating burden and cost estimates National Pretreatment Program ICR March 21, 2003 51 6( g) Burden Statement The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for collections included in this ICR is detailed in Exhibit 6 above. The annual respondent reporting burden is estimated to average 64.5 hours per respondent per year, and annual respondent recordkeeping burden is estimated to average 6.8 hours per respondent per year. This burden is attributed to POTWs, industrial users, and States.