INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR THE NATIONAL LISTING OF ADVISORIES OMB CONTROL NO. 2040 new EPA ICR no. 1959.01 September 2000 U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY OFFICE OF WATER OFFICE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY STANDARDS AND APPLIED SCIENCE DIVISION 401 M. STREET, S. W. WASHINGTON D. C. 20460 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1. Identification of the Information Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1( a) Title of the Information Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2. Need for and Use of the Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3. Non Duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3( a) Non duplication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3( c) Consultations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3( e) General Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3( f) Confidentiality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 3( g) Sensitive Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4. The Respondents and the Information Requested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4( a) Respondents/ SIC Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4( b) Information Requested . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 5. The Information Collected  Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5( a) Agency Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5( b) Collection Methodology and Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 5( c) Small Entity Flexibility. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 5( d) Collection Schedule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 6( d) Estimating Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 6( g) Burden Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 7. Response to OMB'S " Terms of Clearance" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 TABLE OF CONTENTS ( continued) Page APPENDIX A Relevant Sections of Statues, Regulations, or Judicial/ Administrative Decrees Enabling the Collection of Information for the National Listing of Advisories . . . . . . . A 1 APPENDIX B 1999 Fish Advisory Fact Sheet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B 1 APPENDIX C Federal Register Notice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C 1 APPENDIX D Survey Instrument for 1999 NLFWA Reporting Cycle ( 2000) and the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D 1 4 1. Identification of the Information Collection 1( a) Title of the Information Collection Information Collection Request for the National Listing of Advisories 1( b) Short Characterization/ Abstract The National Listing of Advisories is an integral component of several key environmental assessment activities. In February 1998, President Clinton announced the Clean Water Action Plan to protect public health and restore the Nation's waterways by providing states, tribes, and communities with appropriate tools and resources. Under the Clean Water Action Plan, EPA began to implement a series of key actions to ensure effective public notice of fish and shellfish consumption risks and reduce chemical contamination to levels which assure that locally caught fish and shellfish are safe to eat on a regular basis. This survey is one of the key actions under the Clean Water Action Plan. In April 1999, the Agency sent letters concerning fish consumption advisories to the heads of all state public health, environmental, and natural resource management agencies as well as to tribes that operate the national water program. This letter emphasized the importance of a risk based fish advisory program to protect the health of women of child bearing age, children, and people who for economic or cultural reasons eat large amounts of locallycaught fish.

Water quality in our Nation's waters is a critical concern to EPA. Release of chemical contaminants from industrial production, increasing urbanization, and the introduction of new pesticides in agriculture pose potentially serious human health problems for the Nation's recreational waters. These adverse effects have been one of EPA's long standing concerns. They are also directly related to such Clean Water Act responsibilities as water quality standards and surface water quality, and to the Agency's effort to ensure that the waters of the United States are " fishable" and " swimmable". In addition, recent studies have confirmed that adverse health effects can result from consumption of fish from chemically contaminated waters. Based on results from the 1998 National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories ( NLFWA) database, there are currently 2,506 advisories in effects in 47 of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U. S. Territory of American Samoa, advising consumers to limit consumption of certain species of contaminated fish.

EPA believes there is a continuing need to maintain the overall quality and availability of public information concerning fish advisoriesPrimary responsibility for these activities lies with each state; however, several state agencies often share responsibilities for these activities and the advisory results have not always been consistently reported. In 1993, EPA began compiling information on fish advisories provided by the states in their biannual 305( b) Water Quality Inventory Reports; however, the Agency soon determined that some states did not report up todate information about fish advisories in their 305 ( b) reports. In many states, the water quality or environmental agencies were responsible for preparing the 305 ( b) report, while the state health department generally had primary responsibility for issuing the advisories. In order to obtain the most updated information, EPA's Office of Water began conducting a voluntary annual fish 5 advisory survey in 1994 as part of the data collection activities of the National Water Quality Inventory Reports ( Clean Water Act Sections 305 ( b), 303 ( d), 314 ( a), and 106 ( e)) ( EPA ICR Number 1560.04; OMB Control No. 2040 007) to obtain the most up to date information on fish advisories. The Agency began surveying the state health departments or other state agencies specifically responsible for the issuance of fish advisories. This information has been archived over the last 5 years in the EPA's National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisories ( NLFWA) database.

A new collection instrument for the current survey, is being requested because there is ( 1) a material change in the proposed collection instrument that requires the inclusion of additional questions on fish advisory program areas of concern ( State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire) and ( 2) the number of respondents from which the information will be collected has been increased to include additional tribal groups that have issued advisories, tribal groups with delegated power with respect to water quality standards, and tribal groups with delegated power pending.

This NLFWA survey collects quantitative advisory information on the number of new advisories issued by each state, territory, and tribal organization annually, including the:

Waterbody under advisory including the geographic location and extent of the advisory,

Fish or shellfish species ( and size ranges) included in each advisory,

Chemical contaminant( s) identified in the advisory and the chemical residue levels detected in various fish species sampled,

Waterbody type encompassed by advisory ( e. g., lake, river, estuary, coastal waters) and

Target populations to which the advisory refers ( i. e., pregnant women, nursing mothers, and young children).

As in previous years, this information will be used to update the 1999 NLFWA narrative advisory information, compile and update the geographic information system ( GIS) database for all advisories, and enhance and update the electronic fish tissue contaminant residue datafile.

In addition, the new State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire part of the survey will request information on the;

Differences in monitoring procedures used to collect fish and shellfish samples,

Types of advisories issued by the state

Sample preparation and chemical analysis procedures used to assess chemical residues

State advisory program funding sources 6

Other uses of state fish advisory data

Risk assessment methodologies used to evaluate chemical residue data and issue fish consumption advisories and bans, and

State efforts at targeting fish consumers ( e. g., recreational and subsistence fishers)

Risk management practices and authority for issuing fish advisories within the state

Risk communication procedures used to communicate the human health risks associated with the consumption of chemically contaminated fish and shellfish species.

From this information, EPA can determine what steps to take, if any, to provide assistance to state, territorial, and tribal fish advisory programs to improve consistency in fish advisory programs among entities through the use of consistent sampling and analysis procedures, and risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication procedures.

EPA assembled the information into an electronic database and graphic formats that can be readily analyzed and shared with responsible parties ( e. g., EPA program and Regional offices and other federal, state, territorial, and tribal agencies), as well as with the general public. Survey results were distributed in Fish Advisory Fact Sheets, and are available on the Internet at EPA's " National Listing of Fish and Wildlife Advisory" web site ( http:// www. epa. gov/ OST/ fishadvice). Information from this survey has stimulated nationwide dialogue on fish consumption advisories involving agencies and the public and is being used to identify and clarify issues that will lead to the continued development of national guidance for states on sampling and analysis, risk assessment procedures, risk management practices, and risk communication procedures that will further protect human health.

The nationwide collection of fish advisory information began with a survey of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U. S. Territories ( Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rice, and the U. S. Virgin Islands) and the Great Lakes Indian Fish and Wildlife Commission involving 56 potential respondents. The proposed fish advisory survey will add 36 additional tribal agencies during the first year and continue to survey these same tribal agencies as well as the original 56 respondents over the 3 year period of this ICR ( 2000 2002). EPA estimates that a total of 92 questionnaires will be sent out the first year and in the two succeeding years. The actual cost for a respondent to complete the questionnaire is anticipated to decrease each year, since each respondent will be requested to provide only information that has changed during the preceding year. When the survey is implemented, the total annual respondent cost under this ICR is estimated to be $ 92,307.70 ( 38.76 hours per year at an average labor rate of $ 25.74 per hour per respondent). 7 2. Need for and Use of the Collection 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection EPA needs this information to determine whether recreational and subsistence fishers are at additional risk of exposure to chemical contaminants through their consumption of locally caught fish and shellfish. The survey will provide data on the types of contaminants that trigger the issuance of advisories, the monitoring designs the states used with respect to the numbers of samples collected and number of stations surveyed, the number of chemical contaminants being analyzed in the fish tissue, the risk assessment methodology currently being used to evaluate the potential health risk to fish consumers, and how advisory information is being communicated to the target fish consuming population.

This survey is one of the key actions under the Clean Water Action Plan. In February 1998, President Clinton announced the Clean Water Action Plan to protect public health and restore the Nation's waters by providing states, territories, and tribes with appropriate tools and resources. Under the Clean Water Action Plan, EPA is implementing a series of key actions to ensure that recreational and subsistence caught fish are safe for human consumption. The national survey is central to EPA's efforts to assess and improve existing fish advisory programs nationwide, and to provide important public health information.

EPA is collecting this information under the authority of Clean Water Act ( CWA) 104, which provides for the collection of information to be used to protect human health and the environment. Copies of the relevant section of the CWA are provided in Appendix A.

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data EPA uses information collected in the National Listing of Advisories to address issues in three specific areas for state fish advisory programs:

Enhancing the public's right to know about the safety of fish, shellfish, and other wildlife harvested from local waters by making this information available on a National Fish and Wildlife Advisory database ( NLFWA)

Improving the scientific and policy foundation in support of state, territorial, tribal, and local actions

Providing up to date sampling and analysis methods, risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication procedures for the states to use to better protect the health of recreational and subsistence fishers in a more timely and comprehensive manner.

The information collected in this survey will be used to update the existing NLFWA database. This information will be compiled to determine the status and nature of chemical contamination in the Nation's waters, the level of effort directed by jurisdictions to monitor and evaluate fish tissue residue data at their monitoring sites, and the location and geographic extent of the fish advisories 8 and bans issued each year. EPA will use the analysis to plan more effective research and policies to reduce risks to consumers of locally caught, chemically contaminated fish.

The Office of Water is and will continue to use the information, especially the state and national summary data, to examine the success of current advisory programs. The Office of Water will share this information with other program offices, such as the Office of Research and Development and the Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation, to evaluate scientific research needs and policy implications. EPA Regions will use the information to address concerns regarding fish advisories and monitoring programs. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other federal agencies will also be able to use this information. The information compiled in this survey will permit state, tribal, and local agencies, such as public health agencies, environmental protection agencies, and fish and wildlife departments, to easily review cumulative information on monitoring programs and fish advisories for the purpose of developing public information materials ( e. g. state fish advisory web sites and/ or fishing regulation brochures) and prioritizing resources to address water quality concerns directly related to chemical contamination in fish.

Summary and individual state data will also be made available to non governmental organizations and to the public. By accessing the data through the Internet, the fishing public will be able to readily determine whether the waterbody they want to fish has been monitored to assess the level of chemical contamination in the fish and whether an advisory or ban has been issued. This will give the consumers information that they can use to make informed decisions concerning the waterbodies they fish and the amount and type of fish they consume.

The information to be collected from all respondents includes the name, address, and other contact information for the agency responsible for issuing the fish advisories and answering public or technical inquires. These references provide a means for obtaining current fish advisory information, as well as professional networking resources and referrals for improving water quality at our nation's fishable waterbodies. A copy of the most recent fish advisory fact sheet distributed to the public via the Internet is provided in Appendix B.

3. Non duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria 3( a) Non duplication The fish advisory program information requested from respondents under this ICR has been collected in some form since 1994 and is not currently available from any other sources. The survey of fish advisories has been performed since 1994 under a previously approved ICR for the 305 ( b) Water Quality Collection Effort ( OMB Control No. 2040 007; EPA ICR No. 1560.04); however, tribal organizations have not been targeted in a comprehensive way by these surveys. Only one tribal agency is currently providing fish advisory information. In 1999, the Office of Water surveyed 50 states, the District of Columbia, four U. S. Territories, and one tribal organization about the advisories issued during calendar year 1998. 9 EPA has examined the information collected from each of these surveys ( 1994 1998) and has determined that none of them addresses all of the Agency's needs to inventory the locations of the nation's waterbodies currently under advisories as well as to compile nationwide information on state, territory, and tribal fish advisory programs.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB The notice was published in the Federal Register: April 21, 2000 ( Volume 65, Number 78, pages 21415  21416. A copy of the notice is provided in Appendix C.

3( c) Consultations 1. Initial Federal Register Notice The initial F. R. notice was published on April 21, 2000 as noted above. There were no comments received during the 60 day public comment period which ended June 20, 2000.

2. Questionnaire Preparation and Consultation:

To prepare the questionnaire for the collection effort covered under this ICR, EPA reviewed all questionnaires that had been previous used to collect information for the 1994  1998 NLFWA database. EPA reviewed in great detail, the 1998 State Fish Adviosry Program Questionnaire that was additionally reviewed by representatives from nine states. The final questionnaire is based on this review, consultation with these parties, internal EPA discussions and other considerations.

Contacts:

Richard Greene Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control Watershed Assessment Section 820 Silver Lake Boulevard, Suite 220 Dover, DE 19904 Randall Manning Georgia Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Division Floyd Tower East, Suite 1152 205 Butler Street Atlanta, GA 30334 3. National Conferences:

On October 17 19, 1999, EPA and the American Fisheries Society co sponsored the National Fish Forum, a national conference on fish advisory issues. A group of experts including the fish advisory contacts from each state were assembled to discuss key fish advisory issues, review results of the 1998 fish advisory survey, and assist in the development of a long term 10 federal/ state/ local action plan. The representation included experts from state health departments, environmental agencies, tribal organizations, the American Fisheries Society, and the EPA. Representative from all parts of the country attended. Conference attendees discussed a variety of topics including the continuing need for developing a more consistent approach for monitoring programs, risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication issues dealing with fish consumption advisories nationwide. During the conference information about EPA's national survey was presented. No objections were raised to our survey.

3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection The survey will be sent to respondents once per year, in the early spring. The information is needed on an annual basis to provide up to date information on monitoring and fish advisories that occurred during the previous 12 month ( calendar year) fishing season. Pollution sources and other circumstances change regularly, so it is important to document the changes in fish advisories as soon as possible after the states' issue their yearly fishing regulations including advisories, typically during the spring. Jurisdictions that are responsible for fish monitoring generally collect fish each year during the summer and fall and then send the fish tissue samples for analysis during the fall and winter months. Risk assessment are conducted when residue analysis of the fish tissue samples has been completed typically in the late winter.

Regular annual collections of this information over a period of several years has shown that the number of fish advisories continues to increase nationwide. In addition, this information has helped to characterize the pollutants that triggered these advisories. For example, as of 1998, mercury was the chemical contaminant responsible for 68% of all advisories issued nationwide and five pollutants ( mercury, dioxins/ furans, PCBs, chlordane, and DDT) accounted for 98% of the advisories issued. Regular annual collection of this information has also permitted the identification of advisory trends within various waterbodies so that trends can be identified and resources allocated to deal with the most pressing problems. Less frequent or irregularlyscheduled reporting of advisory information is not sufficient to obtain information for the purposes of this survey since longer periods between reports, or unequal periods of reporting would decrease the value of the information obtained and respondents might have more difficulty in completing the questionnaire if past yearly records have been archived. In addition, regular annual collection of this information over several years will permit the evaluation of water quality standards compliance and pollution problems occurring in waterbodies under advisory, so that trends can be identified and resources allocated to deal with the problems of greatest concern.

3( e) General Guidelines This survey adheres to OMB's general guidelines for information collection.

3( f) Confidentiality Information sought is maintained for public record by the state public health agency or other state agencies and no sensitive material is involved.

3( g) Sensitive Questions 11 No questions concerning sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, or other matters usually considered private are included in this information collection.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested 4( a) Respondents/ SIC Codes The following categories of respondents will be surveyed:

State ( or other entity) Health Departments 9431 Administration of Public Health programs ( Administration of Public Health Programs: categorical health program administration government, communicable disease program administration government, environmental health programs government, public health agencies nonoperating)

State ( or other entity) Environmental Protection Agencies 9511 Air and Water Resource and Solid Waste Management ( Administration of Environmental Quality: water control and quality agencies government, environmental protection agencies government 4( b) Information Requested ( i) Data items, including record keeping ( 1) Specific Information on Each Advisory or Ban Within the Jurisdiction ( records to be maintained by the jurisdiction for the public record at least two years following completion of the survey each year that the survey is conducted)

° Waterbody name, location and narrative description of geographic extent of advisory ° Waterbody type ( lake, river, estuary, coastal marine waters, Great Lakes waters, multi class, bayou, canal)

° Chemical pollutant( s) detected in fish tissue samples that resulted in issuance of the advisory ° Species of fish and size ranges sampled for which advisory was issued ° Type of advisory issued and population which is targeted ( no consumption for the general population, no consumption for sensitive subpopulations such as pregnant or nursing women and children, restricted consumption for the general population, restricted consumption for sensitive subpopulation, or commercial fishing ban)

( 2) General Information on State Fish Advisory Programs Within the Jurisdiction 12 ° Name, address, phone number, FAX number, and e mail address of respondent ( State fish advisory contact)

° Agency or Agencies with overall responsibility for fish advisories or bans in jurisdiction ° Establishment of risk assessment procedures for issuing advisories ° Monitoring and chemical analysis program implementation and costs ° Advisory program implementation and costs ° Agency responsibility for risk management and for issuing advisories or bans ° Public notification procedures for communicating information on advisories and bans ( 3) Mapping the Location of Each Fish Consumption Advisory or Ban ( latitude/ longitude coordinates for advisory, or hard copy of marked map showing location and extent of advisory or electronic shapefile/ coverage of advisory locations)

A copy of the proposed survey instrument for the 1999 NLFWA reporting cycle ( 2000) and the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire is included as Appendix D.

( ii) Respondent Activities The following activities are required for a respondent to assemble and submit the above data items:

Review instructions for entering updated advisory data into the EPA NLFWA database ° Gather advisory data to update NLFWA database ( including waterbody name and geographic extent, fish species/ size class, pollutant, and type of advisory), and fish tissue residue data files.

° Gather geographic data by creating shapefiles/ GIS coverages, providing latitude/ longitude coordinates, and/ or by marking locations of current fish advisories on hard copy maps.

° Update fish advisory data on the electronic NLFWA state contacts data entry screen. ( The NLFWA database is a password protected electronic/ Internet users data entry screen developed in 1999)

° Review instructions and questions in the 1999 State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire ( approximately 100 questions) 13 ° Gather information needed to complete all questions on the questionnaire ° Complete answers to questionnaire electronically by typing in information on an electronic/ Internet screen questionnaire ( currently under development).

° Return marked maps, shapefiles/ GIS coverages showing advisory locations, or listing of latitude/ longitude coordinates, and diskette containing fish tissue residue data for new advisories by mail to EPA.

5. The Information Collected   Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management 5( a) Agency Activities Agency activities associated with the collection of information by this survey consist of the following:

° Update current mailing list of all state, territory, and tribal organizations, add new tribal organizations, and develop survey tracking database to track responses.

° Develop the transmittal letter, State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire, instructions for completing updates to the NLFWA database, procedures for providing mapping/ locational information, and recommend fish tissue data format ° Set up a database for storing and analyzing fish advisory information collected via the Internet ( this was completed for Internet users during 1999).

° Load the electronic questionnaire onto the Internet on the EPA NLFWA web page ( currently under development)

° Record receipt of completed State Fish Advisory Program questionnaires, advisory revisions, marked map( s) or shapefiles / GIS coverages or latitude/ longitude files, and fish tissue residue data; submit reminders to non respondents via e mail and telephone calls, review State Fish Advisory Program questionnaires for completeness and correctness of responses, review/ verify advisory boundary markings on map( s), review and reformat fish tissue residue data files as appropriate ° Enter appropriate geographic information on location of updated or new advisories into GIS database, review/ verify data entries ° Perform data analysis summaries of national and state advisory information ° Prepare annual update of the Fish Advisory Fact Sheet 14 ° Prepare annual update of the State Fish Advisory Program Summary Report of information obtained from the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire ° Distribute results of both the advisory updates in the Fish Advisory Fact Sheet and of the Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire in the State Fish Advisory Program Summary Report electronically on the Internet and in hard copy reports to the 92 state and tribal participants and other interested members of the general public ( total of 200 copies).

° Archive the State Fish Advisory Questionnaire responses, fish advisory locational data ( maps, shapefile/ GIS coverages, or electronic latitude/ longitude files), and fish tissue residue data for a period of at least 2 years 5( b) Collection Methodology and Management To collect and analyze the information associated with this ICR, EPA will primarily use an electronic questionnaire, paper maps, personal computers, and applicable database and digitizing software.

All potential state, territorial, or tribal respondents in the mailing list database will be sent a uniquely coded password for access into the existing EPA NLFWA database reporting system and an electronic questionnaire will be developed and made available on the Internet. The transmittal letter will explain the purpose of the NLFWA update survey and the State Fish Advisory Program questionnaire and provide a password to permit the respondents to access the Internet fish advisory data entry screen and in a separate database, to complete the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire electronically. It is anticipated that use of the Internet version should decrease respondent burden, since paper copies will not have to be prepared for each fish advisory and the questionnaire will not have to be mailed back to the Agency. At a minimum however, each respondent is requested to return the marked map or a shapefile/ GIS coverage or latitude/ longitude coordinates of advisory locations and a diskette containing tissue residue data supporting the issued advisories to EPA by mail. An e mail reminder will be sent to respondents who have not returned their advisory map( s) or electronic shapefile/ GIS coverage or electonic file of tissue residue data, have not entered updated fish advisory data into the NLFWA database, or have not completed the electronic State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire on the Internet within 30 days.

EPA will ensure the accuracy and completeness of collected information by reviewing each submission. Fish advisory data will be entered into the data entry screen, but data will not be added to the existing database until approved by EPA. The Internet version will be linked to a database so that data entry is automatic. In the event that a state, territory or tribal agency cannot access the Internet, entry of the fish advisory data and completion of the questionnaire will be performed manually through the Internet version so that all data will be incorporated into the same database. Manual data entries will be double checked to ensure the accuracy and completeness of data entry. Data entries of questionnaire responses made by respondents through the Internet version will also be reviewed to ensure that all questions were completed. Tissue residue data will be reviewed and reformatted into an ACCESS file as necessary to make it 15 compatible in structure with other state fish tissue residue data in the NLFWA tissue residue data repository.

Data analyses will be performed through queries and simple compilations of summary statistics ( e. g., number of fish advisories reported, number of advisories issued for a specific chemical contaminant such as mercury, number of advisories issued for the general population as opposed to number of advisories issued to protect pregnant women, nursing mothers and children, or number of rivers, lakes, estuaries, or coastal marine waters under advisory). Marked maps received from respondents will be checked to determine whether instructions were followed and the maps marked so that the information can be entered into a GIS database system. Backup copies of the data will be made regularly during the survey and maintained in a separate location for at a period of at least 2 years.

Summary results of the annual surveys will be posted on EPA's NLFWA web page. Individual state reports will be accessible by the public through querying the EPA's Internet web page. Annual Fish Advisory Fact Sheets summarizing the most current information on fish advisories also will be available on the same Internet site. Summary results of the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire will be summarized in an annual State Fish Advisory Program Summary Report and will be posted on EPA' web page and distributed in hard copy to the state fish advisory contacts and interested members of the general public ( 200 hard copies total).

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility No alternatives have been found to be more cost effective than direct solicitation of the state health departments or other state, territorial, or tribal entities responsible for issuing fish advisories and which generate this information as a matter of public information for distribution to their state, territorial, or tribal residents. No additional gathering of information is required by the state health departments or other entities responsible for each fish advisory since advisories and records are their public health responsibilities. " Small Governmental Jurisdictions" ( defined for the purpose of this information collection as a government or territories or tribes having a population of less than 50,000) may be included in this survey.

The completion of the survey ( including addition of updated advisory information, marking maps, providing fish tissue residue data, and completing the State Fish Advisory Program questionnaire) is voluntary. Thus, smaller entities that cannot provide the staff and resources to complete the survey are not required to do so. Identification of such smaller entities that do not initially respond will permit the development of options to assist the smaller entities in completing the survey, such as permitting more time for responding, or simplifying the response procedures, or providing contractor assistance in completing the survey. The option of completing the fish advisory survey and State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire electronically using the Internet will be encouraged, which should provide an easier and more effective means of transmitting and receiving the information, provided the entities are connected to the World Wide Web. Based on past experience with state health departments and other state, territorial, and tribal entities involved in issuing fish advisories, the vast majority have Internet access.

5( d) Collection Schedule 16 The survey materials will be available to the respondents in early spring to obtain information on the previous year's fish advisories, sampling and analysis programs, risk assessment, risk management, and risk communications procedures. If the completed survey materials have not been returned within 30 days, then an e mail reminder will be sent to all nonrespondents In addition, a follow up telephone will be made to the non respondents to determine what if any assistance they require to complete the survey and questionnaire. If the completed survey materials have not been returned within 60 days, the survey will be considered to be unobtainable. Data will be analyzed and summary advisory information will be made available to the public by September each year.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection 6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden EPA reviewed burden estimates generate by an e mailed inquiry of 9 state health departments and made the following assumptions in determining respondent burden based on responses from 4 states. The burden table presented reflects the estimated average annual labor hours and costs, calculated to occur during the 3 year OMB approved period of this ICR.

Labor hours are based on initial assumptions that 92 potentially respondents will be asked to participate in the survey annually. Thus, the total number of surveys that might be processed during this ICR is 276 ( 3 year approval period).

Senior level managers ( e. g., director, chief) are most likely to receive the survey materials and review instructions for entering new advisories or updating existing advisory data ; however, it is anticipated that a lower level technical staff member would actually enter the new advisory data into the NLFWA database, copy fish residue data onto a diskette for mailing to EPA, fill out the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire electronically, and mark the fish advisory locations on the maps, provide shapefiles/ GIS coverages, or latitude/ longitude coordinates. Thus, it is estimated that both the manager and the technical person could spend 1.25 hours each year reviewing the instructions for entering new advisory data into the NLFWA database. Therefore, the average annualized respondent hour burden to review instructions to enter data into the NLFWA is 1.25 hours, as shown below: ( 0.25 hr manager/ year + 1.0 hr technician/ year) = 1.25 hrs

The amount of time needed to gather advisory data to update the NLFWA varies considerably, depending on how many new fish advisories have been issued within the jurisdiction during the past year and/ or how many revisions there are to previously issued advisories . For example, during the 1998 cycle, 40 states reported no new advisories for the year while the remaining states reported from 1 to 59 new advisories. However, approximately 20 states made revisions to existing advisory files. Similar differences among the states in the number of new and revised advisories reported have been observed over the past several years. Because the amount of time needed to complete the new advisory information or update existing information will vary depending on the number of advisories within the respondent's 17 jurisdiction, a respondent with one fish advisory might require 0.25 hours while a respondent with 20 advisories might require 5 hours. The number of respondents with " low" and " high" fish advisory reporting burdens is unknown at this time. For the purposes of this ICR, EPA estimates ( based on the responses from 4 states), on the average, that it will require 9.25 hours to complete the new advisory information and revise existing data. Information requested is compiled by each jurisdiction for the public record, hence little, if any, additional time will be needed to gather the information We estimate that 9.25 hours will be needed each year to gather the advisory information as shown below:

( 1.0 hr manager/ year + 6.25 hr technician/ year + 2.0 hr clerical/ year) = 9.25 hrs

The amount of time needed to gather geographic data develop shapefiles/ GIS coverages, determine latitude/ longitude coordinates, or hand mark locations of the advisories on a map also varies considerably, depending on how many new fish advisories have been issued within the jurisdiction during the past year. For example, during the 1998 cycle, 40 states reported no new advisories for the year while the remaining states reported from 1 to 59 new advisories. Similar differences among the states in the number of new advisories reported have been observed over the past several years. Information requested is compiled by each jurisdiction for the public record, hence little, if any, additional time will be needed to gather the information We estimate ( based on the responses from 4 states) that 7 hours will be needed each year to gather the geographic data, create a shapefile/ GIS coverage, determine latitude/ longitude coordinates, or mark advisory locations on a map as shown below:

( 0.5 hr manager/ year + 4.5 hr technician/ year + 2.0 hr clerical/ year) = 7.0 hrs

Respondents using the Internet data entry to log in their fish advisory data on the electronic NLFWA state contacts data entry screen will require less clerical time than in the past for preparing and copying advisory information. EPA knows from results of the 1998 survey that 90% of the potential respondents have access to the Internet and can complete the advisory information electronically ( during the 3 year OMB approval period). Thus, only 10% of the potential respondents will need to make copies of their advisory information. Respondents completing the Internet data entry to log in their advisory information will not require as much clerical time as in the past for preparing and copying advisory information. We estimate that 4.25 hours will be needed each year to update advisory data as shown below:

( 0.5 hr manager/ year + 2.75 hr technician/ year + 1.0 hr clerical/ year) = 4.25 hrs

Senior level managers ( e. g., director, chief) are most likely to receive the survey materials relating to the State Fish Advisory Program Questionairre; however, it is anticipated that a lower level technical staff member would actually fill out the questionnaire electronically. Thus, it is estimated that both the manager and the technical person could spend 3.13 hours each year reviewing the instructions and questions on the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire. Therefore, the 18 average annualized respondent hour burden to review instructions and answer questions is 3.13 hours, as shown below:

( 0.5 hr manager/ year + 2.63 hr technician/ year) = 3.13 hours

The amount of time needed to gather all information to update the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire should be relatively comparable across jurisdictions depending on how many state agencies are involved in the fish advisory activities. All states are requested to complete every question to their best knowledge. Information requested is compiled by each jurisdiction for the public record, hence little, if any, additional time will be needed to gather the information We estimate that 7.25 hours will be needed each year to gather the advisory information needed to complete the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire as shown below:

( 1.5 hr manager/ year + 5.75 hr technician/ year) = 7.25 hrs

For the 1999 cycle survey, each state fish contact will receive an electronic copy of the questionnaire with the previous year's answers filled in. In this way, respondents will only need to report information that has changed during the previous reporting period, based on a review of their questionnaire responses submitted for the 1998 cycle. We estimate that 5.0 hours will be needed each year to complete the answers to the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire electronically as shown below:

( 4.25 hr technician/ year + 0.75 hr clerical/ year) = 5.0 hrs Respondents completing the Internet data entry to complete their questionnaires will not require as much clerical time as in the past for preparing and copying paper questionnaires. EPA knows from results of the 1998 cycle survey that 90% of the potential respondents have access to the Internet and can complete the questionnaire electronically ( during the 3 year OMB approval period). Thus, only 10% of the potential respondents ( 9 respondents) will need to make copies of their questionnaires.

All respondents will likely have to mail back some types of information to EPA each year even if they report the fish advisory data and complete the State Fish Advisory Program questionnaire electronically. Products that may need to be mailed back to EPA include; hard copies of new advisory information ( if respondent cannot enter data electronically), hard copy of maps with advisories marked, or electronic shapefiles/ GIS coverages, or hard copy listings or electronic listings of latitude/ longitude coordinates ( all respondents with new advisories), a diskette containing fish tissue residue data that supports new advisories ( all respondents with new advisories), and/ or the hard copy of the State Fish Advisory Program questionnaire ( if the respondent cannot enter data electronically). Based on the responses from 4 states, we estimate 1.63 hours will be needed to complete this activity as shown below: 19 ( 1.38 hr technician/ year + 0.25 hr clerical/ year) = 1.63 hrs 6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs The following resources and assumptions were made to estimate respondent costs for this information collection:

( i) Estimating Labor Costs ° Labor rates were obtained from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Cost Trends ( http:// stats. bls. gov/ news. release/ ecec. t04. htm) and the following categories were used:

Manager ( white collar: executive, administrative, and managerial) $ 24.58/ hr Technical ( white collar) $ 15.70/ hr Clerical ( administrative support, including clerical) $ 11.91/ hr A benefits/ overhead multiplication factor of 1.6 was used to obtain the total cost of employment for state ( or other entity) respondents.

( iii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs ° No capital/ startup costs are anticipated for the jurisdictions participating in the survey, since they already collect the information requested for the public record. Ninety percent ( 90 %) of all respondents that were surveyed in 1999 ( during the 1998 reporting cycle) have Internet access, however, Internet access is not required for participating in the survey.

° The only operations and maintenance ( O& M) cost required for this information collection by the respondent is the purchase of a state map on which to mark the advisories, estimated to cost $ 5.00 and a high density diskette on which to download their latitude/ longitude coordinate data, shapefiles/ GIS coverages, or fish tissue residue data ($ 0.50). Jurisdictions already maintain the information requested in this collection for the public record. Return postage for the map, tissue residue data diskette, fish advisory information ( as applicable), and State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire ( as applicable) will be provided by EPA.

° EPA estimates that 90 percent of the potential respondents have access to the Internet and would complete the questionnaire electronically. Thus, fewer respondents would need to return a hard copy of the fish advisory survey and the State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire by mail, although it is anticipated that all states, at a minimum, will be returning the marked up state map showing advisory locations and 1 diskette containing shapefile/ GIS coverage, latitude/ longitude coordinates or tissue residue data. We assume an average of five ( 5) fish advisories per jurisdiction and a 20 page questionnaire at $ 0.10 per page copying charge ($ 2.50). This is based on the average number of new advisories issued nationwide 20 during the 1998 reporting years. For the purpose of estimating O & M costs for those states that do not have Internet access, the total respondent number was multiplied by 10% and then multiplied by $ 2.50 per year for photocopy charges.

( iii) Capital/ Start up vs. Operating and Maintenance ( O& M) Costs ° It is believed that the capital/ start up and O& M costs have been appropriately derived for this information collection.

( iv) Annualizing Capital Costs ° No capital costs are anticipated for this information collection. The Internet version of the NLFWA survey and the State Fish Advisory Program questionnaire is offered as an option, not a requirement. Completion of either the Internet version or a paper version is voluntary. 21 Annual Respondent Burden and Cost Information Collection Activity Hours and Costs Per Respondent ( Years 1 3) Total Hours and Costs ( Year 1) Total Hours and Costs ( Year 2) Total Hours and Costs ( Year 3)

Mgr.

Hours at $ 24.58/

Hour Tech.

Hours at $ 15.70/

Hour Cler.

Hours at $ 11.91/

Hour Resp.

Hours Labor Cost1 Capital Start up Cost O& M Cost No. of Resp. Total Resp. Hours Total Resp.

Cost No. of Resp. Total Resp.

Hours Total Resp.

Cost No. of Resp. Total Resp. Hours Total Respond. Cost Review instructions for new advisories 0.25 1.00 0.00 1.25 $ 34.95 0.00 0.00 92 115.00 $ 3,215.40 92 115.00 $ 3,215.40 92 115.00 $ 3,215.40 Gather advisory data including fish tissue data 1.00 6.25 2.00 9.25 $ 234.43 0.00 0.50 92 851.00 $ 21,613.56 92 851.00 $ 21,613.56 92 851.00 $ 21,613.56 Gather geographic information and mark maps 0.50 4.50 2.00 7.00 $ 170.81 0.00 5.00 92 644.00 $ 16,174.52 92 644.00 $ 16,174.52 92 644.00 $ 16,174.52 Enter advisory data via Internet screen or paper copy2 0.50 2.75 1.00 4.25 $ 107.79 0.00 0.50 92 9 391.00 $ 9,921.18 92 9 391.00 $ 9,921.18 92 9 391.00 $ 9,921.18 Review instructions and questionnaire questions 0.50 2.63 0.00 3.13 $ 85.72 0.00 0.00 92 287.96 $ 7,886.24 92 287.96 $ 7,886.24 92 287.96 $ 7,886.24 Gather information for questionnaire 1.50 5.75 0.00 7.25 $ 203.43 0.00 0.00 92 667.00 $ 18,715.56 92 667.00 $ 18,715.56 92 667.00 $ 18,715.56 Enter answers to questionnaire electronically or on paper2 0.00 4.25 0.75 5.00 $ 121.05 0.00 0.00 2.00 92 9 460.00 $ 11,154.60 92 9 460.00 $ 11,154.60 92 9 460.00 $ 11,154.60 Return maps, residue data diskette, advisory information and questionnaire by mail 0.00 1.38 0.25 1.63 $ 39.42 0.00 0.00 92 149.96 $ 3,626.64 92 149.96 $ 3,626.64 92 149.96 $ 3,626.64 Subtotals 4.25 28.51 6.00 38.76 997.60 0.00 8.00 varies 3,565.92 $ 92,307.70 varies 3,565.92 $ 92,307.70 varies 3,565.92 $ 92,307.70 1 Labor cost includes a benefits/ overhead multiplication factor of 1.6.

2 EPA estimates that 90 percent of the respondents will use the Internet version of the NLFWA survey and the State Fish Advisory Program Questionairre and will not have to perform this step. 22 6( c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost Agency burden is estimated based on the assumption that 10 percent of the labor hours per year for each activity will be work done by EPA and 90 percent of the labor hours per year will be work done by a contractor. In addition, management oversight of work performed by technical and clerical staff is estimated to require 20 percent of the labor hours for each activity.

° Federal employee rates were obtained from the 1999 OPM General Schedule Salary Table for the Washington, D. C. area ( Internet address http:// www. opm. gov/ oca/ 2000tables/ GShrly/ html/ 00SALHR. TXT and the following categories were used:

Manager ( GS 15) $ 40.55 / hour Technical ( GS 13) $ 29.18 / hour Clerical ( GS 7) $ 13.83 / hour A benefits/ overhead multiplication factor of 1.6 was used to obtain the total labor cost for EPA.

° No capital/ startup costs are anticipated for the Agency.

° Operations and maintenance ( O& M) costs include costs of contractor services ( including printing survey materials and computer time) and outgoing and return postage for each survey to return map( s) and/ or survey and/ or State Fish Advisory Program questionnaires each year.

One table is presented in this section( representing estimated costs for each year of the ICR period) and the following resources and assumptions were used to prepare the burden estimate for each activity:

° Preparation of the mailing list and survey tracking database is estimated based on initial assumptions that 92 potential respondents nationwide will be sent the questionnaire each year. Agency labor includes identifying potential respondents and sources for contact information ( name, agency, address, phone number, fax number, and e mail address) and is estimated to take 0.04 hours per respondent. O& M costs include contractor services to revise the mailing list and develop the survey and questionnaire tracking database and enter and verify contact information, based on approximately 0.2 hours) per respondent, with an estimated rate of $ 70.00/ hour ( labor, overhead, and other direct costs). Agency labor and contractor service estimates are based on an estimated 100 edits to the respondent contact names and addresses annually. It is not likely that the number of respondents will change significantly after the first year as all state, territorial, and tribal organizations will be identified and contacted for the first mailing Since the contact information will likely only need to be entered once, the Agency labor and contractor services are divided by 3 to provide an annualized estimate for the ICR. 23 ° To revise the existing 1998 survey package including the transmittal letter, questionnaire, instructions, and mapping procedures requires an estimated number of Agency hours of 0.11 hours per respondent. Fixed O& M costs include 40 contractor hours per year to modify survey materials.

° Setting up a database for storing and analyzing the fish advisory information collected and preparing the Internet option for collection of this information is already in place as part of the NLFWA database. Setting up a database for storing and analyzing the questionnaire responses and preparing the Internet option for collection of state fish advisory program data are anticipated and go hand in hand. Agency labor for this activity is estimated at 0.02 hours per respondent. Fixed O& M costs include 80 contractor hours per year to modify the questionnaire database and Internet options.

° Each year, the Agency will submit the survey materials to respondents. ( The materials to be submitted will include; a request for information on advisories that have been issued, revised, or revised during the preceding 12 months, map( s) and fish tissue residue data only need to be submitted for the new advisories issued during the previous year, and the previous year's State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire with the request that responses be updated to reflect information that has changed during the preceding calendar year. EPA oversight of this activity is estimated to be 0.02 hours per respondent. Contractor services required to conduct this activity include 0.25 hours per respondent per year to prepare the materials and answer respondents' questions about the survey. O& M costs here also include outgoing and return postage paid by the Agency ($ 2.00 per survey x 2 = $ 4.00 per year).

° Survey operations including recording receipt of completed questionnaires and marked map( s), electronic shapefiles/ GIS coverages, and electronic fish tissue residue files; sending e mail reminders to non respondents and making telephone contacts with non respondents and respondents in situations where additional information is required for clarification, if needed, e mailing acknowledgment of materials that are received, and reviewing survey materials for completeness and accuracy of responses. EPA estimates that the Agency will not be involved in these operations except for minor oversight ( 0.02 hours per respondent per year). Contractor services to perform these operations are based on 1 hour per respondent per year.

° EPA estimates that 10 percent of the respondents ( 9 respondents) may not have Internet access and therefore that information from the fish advisory survey, State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaires, and maps may need to be entered into the database manually ( this activity is not needed for Internet submissions as data entry is automatic). In addition, fish tissue residue files from all states will have to be reviewed and reformatted for uploading to the fish tissue database, and all data entries ( fish advisory, mapping, fish tissue residue data, and State Fish Advisory Program Questionnaire responses) will have to be reviewed and verified ( including 24 Internet submissions). EPA estimates that the Agency will not be involved in these operations except for minor oversight ( 0.03 hours per respondent per year). Contractor services to enter data for those respondent without Internet access ( fish advisory data and mapping information and completion of State Fish Advisory Questionnaire), are expected to be 3 hours per respondent per year . Information for respondents that use the Internet option does not need to be manually entered into the database and therefore Internet submissions are not reflected in the data entry costs for this task. Contractor services to reformat fish tissue data files for all respondents are expected to be 6 hours per respondent per year and contractor services for reviewing/ revising all fish advisory data, mapping data, State Advisory Program Questionnaires, and fish tissue data are estimated to be 2 hours per respondent.

° Data analysis of new and updated advisory information and state fish advisory program information will be performed to obtain summary statistics for inclusion in the Fish Advisory Fact Sheet and the annual State Fish Advisory Program Summary Report, respectively. The Agency will provide technical direction to a contractor to perform the analyses and discuss and review the results, estimated at 0.06 hours per respondent per year. Contractor services will require 0.5 hours per respondent per year for analysis.

° EPA will prepare a summary report of fish advisory information ( Fish Advisory Fact Sheet) and a summary report of information obtained from the questionnaire ( State Fish Advisory Program Summary Report). The Agency will provide technical direction to a contractor to prepare both the fact sheet and the summary report including reviewing drafts and the final fact sheet and report, estimated at 0.55 hours per respondent per year. It is anticipated that the contractor will require 2 hours per respondent per year to produce the fact sheet and summary report, including a hard copy and an electronic version of each suitable for posting on the NLFWA web page.

° EPA will distribute the summary results of the NLFWA database ( Fish Advisory Fact Sheet) in an electronic version that will be posted on the NLFWA Web sit. EPA will distribute the summary results of the questionnaire ( State Fish Advisory Program Summary Report) in a paper version ( 200 copies) and an electronic version posted on the NLFWA Web site. The Agency also will provide technical oversight of the publication process, estimated at 0.05 hours per respondent per year. Fixed O& M costs here include estimated Government Printing Office costs of $ 50 per paper report ( approximately 500 pages) x 200 copies plus postage of $ 4.30 per copy x 200 copies ( total =$ 10,860 ). The Internet version of the NLFWA database containing both the Fish Fact Sheet and the State Fish Advisory Summary Report as well as the updated fish advisory data will be designed so that the states, territories, tribes, and general public can automatically view the fish advisory information 25 Agency Burden and Cost ( Year 1)

Information Collection Activity Hours and Costs Per Respondent Total Hours and Costs Mgr.

Hours at $ 40.55/

Hour Tech.

Hours at 29.18/

Hour Clerical Hours at $ 13.83/

Hour Agency Hours/

Resp. Labor Cost/ Resp. Capital/

Start up Cost Fixed O& M Cost Non Fixed O& M Cost1 Number of Resp. Total O& M ( Fixed and Non Fixed) Total Agency Hours Total Agency Cost Prepare mailing list and survey tracking database 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.04 $ 1.80 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 14.00 92 $ 1,288.00 5.52 $ 1,453.60 Revise survey materials 0.01 0.10 0.00 0.11 $ 5.32 $ 0.00 $ 2,800.00 $ 0.00 92 $ 2,800.00 10.12 $ 3,289.44 Set up database for storing and tracking questionnaire responses and Internet options for answering the questionnaire 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 $ 1.30 $ 0.00 $ 5,600.00 $ 0.00 92 $ 5,600.00 1.84 $ 5,719.60 Submit survey materials to respondents; answer respondents'

questions 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 $ 1.12 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 21.50 92 $ 1,978.00 1.84 $ 2,081.04 Record receipt of completed survey materials; perform followup and quality control activities 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 $ 1.12 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 70.00 92 $ 6,440.00 1.84 $ 6,543.04 Enter information from survey materials into database, if needed2;,

reformat tissue data and review/ verify data entries 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.03 $ 1.40 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 210.00 $ 420.00 $ 140.00 9 92 92 $ 1,890.00 $ 38,640.00 $ 12,880.00 2.76 $ 53,538.80 Perform data analysis 0.01 0.05 0.00 0.06 $ 2.98 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 35.00 92 $ 3,220.00 5.52 $ 3,494.16 Prepare fact sheet and summary report of information obtained from the survey 0.05 0.50 0.00 0.55 $ 26.59 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 140.00 92 $ 12,880.00 50.60 $ 15,326.28 Distribute results of the survey 0.00 0.05 0.00 0.05 $ 2.33 $ 0.00 $ 15,860.00 $ 0.00 92 $ 15,860.00 4.60 $ 16,074.36 Store the advisory data,

questionnaire responses and advisory location data 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.06 $ 2.06 $ 0.00 $ 1,000.00 $ 0.00 92 $ 1,000.00 5.52 $ 1,189.52 Subtotals 0.12 0.80 0.04 0.96 $ 46.02 $ 0.00 $ 25,260.00 $ 1,050.50 varies $ 104,476.00 90.16 $ 108,709.84 1 Includes costs of contractor services and postage.

2 EPA estimates that 90 percent of respondents will use the Internet version of the questionnaire. The number of respondents was therefore reduced by 90 percent for this step. Data entry may involve entering narrative advisory and geographic information, reformatting fish tissue data, and entering questionnaire responses. 26 pertaining to the waterbody of interest. O& M costs also include funds for contractor services to maintain the database and perform troubleshooting, if needed, estimated at $ 5000 per year.

° Data obtained from the NLFWA survey including mapping and fish tissue residue data, and State Fish Advisory Program questionnaire, will be stored in appropriate media. The Agency will provide technical oversight to ensure that data storage meets EPA requirements and program objectives. Labor is estimated at 0.06 hours per respondent per year. Fixed O& M costs include an estimate for computer equipment maintenance for this program of $ 1,000 per year.

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs The respondent universe for this ICR is calculated based on a total number of 276 questionnaires to be completed during the 3 year ICR period for an average of 92 respondents ( representing fish advisory contacts from 50 states, District of Columbia, 5 U. S. Territories and 36 Native American tribes. The number of respondents involved in each activity varies because of the option of using the Internet to log in the advisory data and to complete the State Fish Advisory Program questionnaire, which will reduce respondent burden. It is anticipated that 90% of respondents will exercise that option.

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables ( i) Respondent Tally Only one respondent table was prepared for this ICR.

Total Estimated Respondent Burden and Cost Summary Technical and Financial Requirements Number of Respondents Number of Activities Total Hours Total Labor Cost Total Capital Costs Total O& M Costs Total Costs Year 1 92 8 3,565.92 $ 91,779.20 $ 0.00 $ 528.50 $ 92,307.70 Year 2 92 8 3,565.92 $ 91,779.20 $ 0.00 $ 528.50 $ 92,307.70 Year 3 92 8 3,565.92 $ 91,779.20 $ 0.00 $ 528.50 $ 92,307.70 TOTAL 276 8 10,697.76 $ 275,337.60 $ 0.00 $ 1,585.50 $ 276,923.10 AVERAGE 92 8 3,565.92 $ 91,779.20 $ 0.00 $ 528.50 $ 92,307.70 ( ii) The Agency Tally The Agency and contractor tables are summarized in the following table. 27 Total Estimated Agency Burden and Cost Summary Technical and Financial Requirements Number of Respondents Number of Activities Total Agency Hours Total Labor Cost Total Capital Costs Total O& M Costs Total Costs Year 1 92 10 90.16 $ 4,233.84 $ 0.00 $ 104,476.00 $ 108,709.84 Year 2 92 10 90.16 $ 4,233.84 $ 0.00 $ 104,476.00 $ 108,709.84 Year 3 92 10 90.16 $ 4,233.84 $ 0.00 $ 104,476.00 $ 108,709.84 TOTAL 276 10 270.48 $ 12,701.52 $ 0.00 $ 313,428.00 $ 326,129.52 AVERAGE 92 10 90.16 $ 4,233.84 $ 0.00 $ 104,476.00 $ 108,709.84 ( iii) Variations In The Annual Bottom Line No change in collection activities or burden and costs per respondent is anticipated during the course of this ICR.

6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden The new calculated burden estimate ( Section 6) or 38.76 hours ( 36.5 hours in the initial ICR) reflects addition of a burden estimate received from one state after the first ICR notice was submitted for review, but before the ICR notice was published in the Federal Register. The two burden estimates are extremely close. This information was added to provide a more comprehensive burden estimate for the respondents. EPA anticipates that the actual respondent burden will decrease each of the reporting cycle years as more respondents use the electronic format for providing fish advisory information to the Agency.

6( g) Burden Statement The public reporting and record keeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 38.76 hours per response annually. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources, complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. For this survey, the burden includes the time needed to review instructions, gather information on new advisories, fill in the information on the electronic data entry screen, mark advisory locations on maps, provide a diskette containing information on fish tissue residues, gather information needed to complete the questionnaire, fill in the survey responses electronically or on paper, and mail back the responses, fish tissue residue data and/ or maps to EPA. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of 28 information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 2822), 401 M Street, S. W., Washington, DC 20460, and to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Include the EPA ICR number and OMB control number in any correspondence.

7. Response to OMB'S " Terms of Clearance"

This is an initial ICR, therefore no responses to OMB's " Terms of Clearance" have as yet been received.


[Federal Register Volume 85, Number 193 (Monday, October 5, 2020)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 62580-62583]
[FR Doc No: 2020-21854]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 97

[Docket No. 31333; Amdt. No. 3924]

Standard Instrument Approach Procedures, and Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures; Miscellaneous Amendments

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This rule amends, suspends, or removes Standard Instrument
Approach Procedures (SIAPs) and associated Takeoff Minimums and
Obstacle Departure Procedures for operations at certain airports. These
regulatory actions are needed because of the adoption of new or revised
criteria, or because of changes occurring in the National Airspace
System, such as the commissioning of new navigational facilities,
adding new obstacles, or changing air traffic requirements. These
changes are designed to provide for the safe and efficient use of the
navigable airspace and to promote safe flight operations under
instrument flight rules at the affected airports.

DATES: This rule is effective October 5, 2020. The compliance date for
each SIAP, associated Takeoff Minimums, and ODP is specified in the
amendatory provisions.
    The incorporation by reference of certain publications listed in
the regulations is approved by the Director

of the Federal Register as of October 5, 2020.

ADDRESSES: Availability of matter incorporated by reference in the
amendment is as follows:

For Examination

    1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Docket Ops-M30, 1200 New
Jersey Avenue SE, West Bldg., Ground Floor, Washington, DC, 20590-0001;
    2. The FAA Air Traffic Organization Service Area in which the
affected airport is located;
    3. The office of Aeronautical Navigation Products, 6500 South
MacArthur Blvd., Oklahoma City, OK 73169 or,
    4. The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA). For
information on the availability of this material at NARA, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or go to: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/cfr/ibr-locations.html.

Availability

    All SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs are available online free
of charge. Visit the National Flight Data Center online at nfdc.faa.gov
to register. Additionally, individual SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP
copies may be obtained from the FAA Air Traffic Organization Service
Area in which the affected airport is located.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas J. Nichols, Flight Procedures
and Airspace Group, Flight Technologies and Procedures Division, Flight
Standards Service, Federal Aviation Administration. Mailing Address:
FAA Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center, Flight Procedures and Airspace
Group, 6500 South MacArthur Blvd., Registry Bldg. 29, Room 104,
Oklahoma City, OK 73169. Telephone:<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This rule amends Title 14, Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 97 (14 CFR part 97) by amending the referenced SIAPs.
The complete regulatory description of each SIAP is listed on the
appropriate FAA Form 8260, as modified by the National Flight Data
Center (NFDC)/Permanent Notice to Airmen (P-NOTAM), and is incorporated
by reference under 5 U.S.C. 552(a), 1 CFR part 51, and 14 CFR 97.20.
The large number of SIAPs, their complex nature, and the need for a
special format make their verbatim publication in the Federal Register
expensive and impractical. Further, airmen do not use the regulatory
text of the SIAPs, but refer to their graphic depiction on charts
printed by publishers of aeronautical materials. Thus, the advantages
of incorporation by reference are realized and publication of the
complete description of each SIAP contained on FAA form documents is
unnecessary.
    This amendment provides the affected CFR sections, and specifies
the SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs with their applicable effective
dates. This amendment also identifies the airport and its location, the
procedure and the amendment number.

Availability and Summary of Material Incorporated by Reference

    The material incorporated by reference is publicly available as
listed in the ADDRESSES section.
    The material incorporated by reference describes SIAPs, Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs as identified in the amendatory language for part 97
of this final rule.

The Rule

    This amendment to 14 CFR part 97 is effective upon publication of
each separate SIAP and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as amended in the
transmittal. For safety and timeliness of change considerations, this
amendment incorporates only specific changes contained for each SIAP
and Takeoff Minimums and ODP as modified by FDC permanent NOTAMs.
    The SIAPs and Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, as modified by FDC
permanent NOTAM, and contained in this amendment are based on the
criteria contained in the U.S. Standard for Terminal Instrument
Procedures (TERPS). In developing these changes to SIAPs and Takeoff
Minimums and ODPs, the TERPS criteria were applied only to specific
conditions existing at the affected airports. All SIAP amendments in
this rule have been previously issued by the FAA in a FDC NOTAM as an
emergency action of immediate flight safety relating directly to
published aeronautical charts.
    The circumstances that created the need for these SIAP and Takeoff
Minimums and ODP amendments require making them effective in less than
30 days.
    Because of the close and immediate relationship between these
SIAPs, Takeoff Minimums and ODPs, and safety in air commerce, I find
that notice and public procedure under 5 U.S.C. 553(b) are
impracticable and contrary to the public interest and, where
applicable, under 5 U.S.C. 553(d), good cause exists for making these
SIAPs effective in less than 30 days.
    The FAA has determined that this regulation only involves an
established body of technical regulations for which frequent and
routine amendments are necessary to keep them operationally current.
It, therefore--(1) is not a ``significant regulatory action'' under
Executive Order 12866; (2) is not a ``significant rule'' under DOT
regulatory Policies and Procedures (44 FR 11034; February 26, 1979) ;
and (3) does not warrant preparation of a regulatory evaluation as the
anticipated impact is so minimal. For the same reason, the FAA
certifies that this amendment will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities under the criteria of
the Regulatory Flexibility Act.

List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 97

    Air Traffic Control, Airports, Incorporation by reference,
Navigation (Air).

    Issued in Washington, DC, on September 18, 2020.
Wade Terrell,
Aviation Safety Manager, Flight Procedures & Airspace Group Flight
Technologies and Procedures Division.

Adoption of the Amendment

    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, Title 14,
Code of Federal regulations, Part 97, (14 CFR part 97), is amended by
amending Standard Instrument Approach Procedures and Takeoff Minimums
and ODPs, effective at 0901 UTC on the dates specified, as follows:

PART 97--STANDARD INSTRUMENT APPROACH PROCEDURES

0
1. The authority citation for part 97 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g), 40103, 40106, 40113, 40114,
40120, 44502, 44514, 44701, 44719, 44721-44722.

0
2. Part 97 is amended to read as follows:
    By amending: Sec.  97.23 VOR, VOR/DME, VOR or TACAN, and VOR/DME or
TACAN; Sec.  97.25 LOC, LOC/DME, LDA, LDA/DME, SDF, SDF/DME; Sec.
97.27 NDB, NDB/DME; Sec.  97.29 ILS, ILS/DME, MLS, MLS/DME, MLS/RNAV;
Sec.  97.31RADAR SIAPs; Sec.  97.33 RNAV SIAPs; and Sec.  97.35 COPTER
SIAPs, Identified as follows:

* * * Effective Upon Publication

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      AIRAC date           State              City                 Airport          FDC No.      FDC date                      Subject
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5-Nov-20.............  ME             Dexter..............  Dexter Rgnl.........       0/0280      9/11/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Orig-A.
5-Nov-20.............  ME             Augusta.............  Augusta State.......       0/0283      9/11/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Orig-B.
5-Nov-20.............  ME             Pittsfield..........  Pittsfield Muni.....       0/0287      9/11/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 1.
5-Nov-20.............  ME             Carrabassett........  Sugarloaf Rgnl......       0/0290      9/11/20  RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig.
5-Nov-20.............  ME             Waterville..........  Waterville Robert          0/0397      9/11/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 5, Amdt 1B.
                                                             Lafleur.
5-Nov-20.............  MN             Baudette............  Baudette Intl.......       0/1148      9/14/20  ILS OR LOC RWY 30, Amdt 1.
5-Nov-20.............  TN             Waverly.............  Humphreys County....       0/2076      8/27/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig-B.
5-Nov-20.............  SD             Gregory.............  Gregory Muni-Flynn         0/2088      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig-C.
                                                             Fld.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Wellington..........  Wellington Muni.....       0/2158      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Amdt 2.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Wellington..........  Wellington Muni.....       0/2159      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Amdt 2.
5-Nov-20.............  MD             College Park........  College Park........       0/3476      8/26/20  RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Grant...............  Grant Muni..........       0/3498      8/31/20  NDB RWY 33, Amdt 3B.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Grant...............  Grant Muni..........       0/3499      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Amdt 1.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Grant...............  Grant Muni..........       0/3500      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Amdt 1.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Grant...............  Grant Muni..........       0/3501      8/31/20  VOR/DME RWY 15, Amdt 2A.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Wichita.............  Wichita Dwight D           0/4060       9/4/20  NDB RWY 1R, Amdt 15C.
                                                             Eisenhower National.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Wichita.............  Wichita Dwight D           0/4061       9/4/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Amdt 1A.
                                                             Eisenhower National.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Wichita.............  Wichita Dwight D           0/4062       9/4/20  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 1L, Amdt 1C.
                                                             Eisenhower National.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Wichita.............  Wichita Dwight D           0/4063       9/4/20  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 14, Amdt 2A.
                                                             Eisenhower National.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Wichita.............  Wichita Dwight D           0/4066       9/4/20  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 19R, Amdt 1B.
                                                             Eisenhower National.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Wichita.............  Wichita Dwight D           0/4067       9/4/20  VOR RWY 14, Amdt 1F.
                                                             Eisenhower National.
5-Nov-20.............  CA             Willits.............  Ells Field-Willits         0/4086       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Amdt 1B.
                                                             Muni.
5-Nov-20.............  AZ             Marana..............  Marana Rgnl.........       0/4375       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS)-E, Orig-A.
5-Nov-20.............  AZ             Lake Havasu City....  Lake Havasu City....       0/4421       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig-A.
5-Nov-20.............  PA             Philipsburg.........  Mid-State...........       0/4425       9/8/20  VOR RWY 24, Amdt 16C.
5-Nov-20.............  AK             Minchumina..........  Minchumina..........       0/4473       9/4/20  NDB RWY 3, Amdt 3D.
5-Nov-20.............  AK             Minchumina..........  Minchumina..........       0/4474       9/4/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig-C.
5-Nov-20.............  IN             Griffith............  Griffith-                  0/4518       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Orig-A.
                                                             Merrillville.
5-Nov-20.............  IN             Griffith............  Griffith-                  0/4519       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 26, Orig-A.
                                                             Merrillville.
5-Nov-20.............  IN             Greensburg..........  Greensburg Municipal       0/4529       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-B.
5-Nov-20.............  IN             Greensburg..........  Greensburg Municipal       0/4530       9/8/20  VOR-A, Amdt 2D.
5-Nov-20.............  OH             Bowling Green.......  Wood County.........       0/4534       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-C.
5-Nov-20.............  OH             Bowling Green.......  Wood County.........       0/4535       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-C.
5-Nov-20.............  HI             Kailua/Kona.........  Ellison Onizuka Kona       0/4646      8/27/20  ILS OR LOC RWY 17, Amdt 2B.
                                                             Intl At Keahole.
5-Nov-20.............  HI             Kailua/Kona.........  Ellison Onizuka Kona       0/4647      8/27/20  LOC BC RWY 35, Amdt 10B.
                                                             Intl At Keahole.
5-Nov-20.............  HI             Kailua/Kona.........  Ellison Onizuka Kona       0/4648      8/27/20  RNAV (GPS) Y RWY 17, Amdt 1C.
                                                             Intl At Keahole.
5-Nov-20.............  HI             Kailua/Kona.........  Ellison Onizuka Kona       0/4649      8/27/20  VOR OR TACAN RWY 17, Orig-C.
                                                             Intl At Keahole.
5-Nov-20.............  HI             Kailua/Kona.........  Ellison Onizuka Kona       0/4650      8/27/20  VOR OR TACAN RWY 35, Orig-C.
                                                             Intl At Keahole.
5-Nov-20.............  PA             Towanda.............  Bradford County.....       0/5161       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 23, Orig-A.
5-Nov-20.............  PA             Towanda.............  Bradford County.....       0/5162       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig.
5-Nov-20.............  CA             Mariposa............  Mariposa-Yosemite...       0/5180      9/10/20  RNAV (GPS)-A, Orig-A.
5-Nov-20.............  CA             Mariposa............  Mariposa-Yosemite...       0/5181      9/10/20  RNAV (GPS)-B, Orig-A.
5-Nov-20.............  VA             Richlands...........  Tazewell County.....       0/5198       9/8/20  LOC/DME RWY 25, Amdt 1B.
5-Nov-20.............  VA             Richlands...........  Tazewell County.....       0/5199       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Orig-B.
5-Nov-20.............  VA             Richlands...........  Tazewell County.....       0/5200       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 1A.
5-Nov-20.............  CA             Camarillo...........  Camarillo...........       0/5201      8/28/20  VOR RWY 26, Amdt 5A.
5-Nov-20.............  LA             Minden..............  Minden..............       0/5206       9/1/20  VOR/DME-A, Amdt 5.
5-Nov-20.............  MN             Albert Lea..........  Albert Lea Muni.....       0/5604      8/31/20  VOR RWY 17, Amdt 1B.
5-Nov-20.............  MS             Grenada.............  Grenada Muni........       0/5634       9/1/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 4, Amdt 1C.
5-Nov-20.............  MS             Grenada.............  Grenada Muni........       0/5636       9/1/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Amdt 1B.
5-Nov-20.............  MS             Grenada.............  Grenada Muni........       0/5638       9/1/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 22, Amdt 1C.
5-Nov-20.............  MS             Grenada.............  Grenada Muni........       0/5643       9/1/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Amdt 1B.
5-Nov-20.............  FL             Orlando.............  Executive...........       0/5764      8/26/20  ILS OR LOC RWY 7, Amdt 24A.
5-Nov-20.............  FL             Orlando.............  Executive...........       0/5765      8/26/20  ILS OR LOC RWY 25, Amdt 1A.
5-Nov-20.............  FL             Orlando.............  Executive...........       0/5766      8/26/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 2B.
5-Nov-20.............  FL             Orlando.............  Executive...........       0/5767      8/26/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 3A.
5-Nov-20.............  DE             Dover/Cheswold......  Delaware Airpark....       0/5840      8/26/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 9, Orig A.
5-Nov-20.............  DE             Dover/Cheswold......  Delaware Airpark....       0/5841      8/26/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-A.
5-Nov-20.............  DE             Dover/Cheswold......  Delaware Airpark....       0/5842      8/26/20  VOR RWY 27, Orig-B.
5-Nov-20.............  CO             Alamosa.............  San Luis Valley Rgnl/      0/6391      8/28/20  Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 4B.
                                                             Bergman Field.
5-Nov-20.............  AK             St Mary's...........  St Mary's...........       0/6454      8/28/20  LOC/DME RWY 17, Amdt 5C.
5-Nov-20.............  AK             St Mary's...........  St Mary's...........       0/6455      8/28/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 3B.

5-Nov-20.............  AK             St Mary's...........  St Mary's...........       0/6456      8/28/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 2D.
5-Nov-20.............  MN             Princeton...........  Princeton Muni......       0/6742       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 33, Orig-B.
5-Nov-20.............  MN             Princeton...........  Princeton Muni......       0/6743       9/8/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 15, Orig-C.
5-Nov-20.............  AK             Willow..............  Willow..............       0/7081      8/26/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 13, Orig.
5-Nov-20.............  AK             Willow..............  Willow..............       0/7082      8/26/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Columbus............  Columbus Muni.......       0/7087      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 14, Orig-C.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Columbus............  Columbus Muni.......       0/7088      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 32, Orig-B.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Columbus............  Columbus Muni.......       0/7089      8/31/20  LOC/DME RWY 14, Amdt 8C.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Columbus............  Columbus Muni.......       0/7090      8/31/20  VOR RWY 14, Amdt 14D.
5-Nov-20.............  NE             Columbus............  Columbus Muni.......       0/7091      8/31/20  VOR RWY 32, Amdt 14C.
5-Nov-20.............  HI             Kapolei.............  Kalaeloa (John             0/7363      8/28/20  VOR/DME RWY 4R, Amdt 1.
                                                             Rodgers Field).
5-Nov-20.............  WI             Eau Claire..........  Chippewa Valley Rgnl       0/7631       9/1/20  ILS OR LOC RWY 22, Amdt 10.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Ottawa..............  Ottawa Muni.........       0/8061      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 17, Amdt 2.
5-Nov-20.............  KS             Ottawa..............  Ottawa Muni.........       0/8065      8/31/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 35, Amdt 2.
5-Nov-20.............  MA             Stow................  Minute Man Air Field       0/8772       9/1/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 21, Orig-B.
5-Nov-20.............  PR             San Juan............  Luis Munoz Marin           0/9029       9/9/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 8, Amdt 1.
                                                             Intl.
5-Nov-20.............  PR             San Juan............  Luis Munoz Marin           0/9030       9/9/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 10, Amdt 2A.
                                                             Intl.
5-Nov-20.............  HI             Kaunakakai..........  Molokai.............       0/9339      8/28/20  VOR OR TACAN-A, Amdt 17.
5-Nov-20.............  OH             Toledo..............  Eugene F Kranz             0/9591       9/9/20  ILS Z OR LOC Z RWY 25, Amdt 9.
                                                             Toledo Express.
5-Nov-20.............  OH             Toledo..............  Eugene F Kranz             0/9592       9/9/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 16, Orig-A.
                                                             Toledo Express.
5-Nov-20.............  OH             Toledo..............  Eugene F Kranz             0/9593       9/9/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 25, Amdt 2C.
                                                             Toledo Express.
5-Nov-20.............  OH             Toledo..............  Eugene F Kranz             0/9594       9/9/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 34, Orig-C.
                                                             Toledo Express.
5-Nov-20.............  OH             Toledo..............  Eugene F Kranz             0/9595       9/9/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 7, Amdt 1C.
                                                             Toledo Express.
5-Nov-20.............  OH             Toledo..............  Eugene F Kranz             0/9596       9/9/20  Takeoff Minimums and Obstacle DP, Amdt 3.
                                                             Toledo Express.
5-Nov-20.............  MN             Minneapolis.........  Anoka County-Blaine        0/9618      9/14/20  ILS OR LOC RWY 27, Orig-C.
                                                             (Janes Field).
5-Nov-20.............  MN             Minneapolis.........  Anoka County-Blaine        0/9631      9/14/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 27, Orig-D.
                                                             (Janes Field).
5-Nov-20.............  TX             Gilmer..............  Fox Stephens Field-        0/9669      9/14/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 36, Orig-A.
                                                             Gilmer Muni.
5-Nov-20.............  TX             Gilmer..............  Fox Stephens Field-        0/9673      9/14/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 18, Orig-A.
                                                             Gilmer Muni.
5-Nov-20.............  TN             Sparta..............  Upper Cumberland           0/9685       9/9/20  NDB RWY 4, Amdt 4B.
                                                             Rgnl.
5-Nov-20.............  MN             Little Falls........  Little Falls/              0/9906       9/1/20  NDB RWY 31, Amdt 6D.
                                                             Morrison County-
                                                             Lindbergh Fld.
5-Nov-20.............  MN             Little Falls........  Little Falls/              0/9907       9/1/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 31, Orig-B.
                                                             Morrison County-
                                                             Lindbergh Fld.
5-Nov-20.............  WI             Rice Lake...........  Rice Lake Rgnl-            0/9994      9/11/20  RNAV (GPS) RWY 19, Amdt 3.
                                                             Carl's Field.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2020-21854 Filed 10-2-20; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P