[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 127 (Tuesday, July 2, 2019)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 31487-31490]
[FR Doc No: 2019-13948]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket No. USCG-2019-0467]
RIN 1625-AA00

Safety Zone; Redwood City Independence Day Fireworks Display;
Port of Redwood City, Redwood City, CA

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Temporary final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is establishing a temporary safety zone in the
navigable waters of the Port of Redwood City near the Redwood City
Turning Basin in support of the Redwood City Independence Day Fireworks
Display on July 4, 2019. This safety zone is necessary to protect
personnel, vessels, and the marine environment from the dangers
associated with pyrotechnics. Unauthorized persons or vessels are
prohibited from entering into, transiting through, or remaining in the
safety zone without permission of the Captain of the Port or a
designated representative.

DATES: This rule is effective from 9 a.m. to 10:20 p.m. on July 4,
2019.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being
available in the docket, go to https://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2019-0467 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click

``SEARCH.'' Click on Open Docket Folder on the line associated with
this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions on this rule,
call or email Lieutenant Junior Grade Jennae Cotton, Waterways
Management, U.S. Coast Guard; telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, email
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Table of Abbreviations

COTP Captain of the Port San Francisco
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
DHS Department of Homeland Security
Sec.  Section
U.S.C. United States Code

II. Background Information and Regulatory History

    The Coast Guard is issuing this temporary rule without prior notice
and opportunity to comment pursuant to authority under section 4(a) of
the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) (5 U.S.C. 553(b)). This
provision authorizes an agency to issue a rule without prior notice and
opportunity to comment when the agency for good cause finds that those
procedures are ``impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest.'' Under 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(B), the Coast Guard finds that good
cause exists for not publishing a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM)
with respect to this rule. Since the Coast Guard received notice of
this event on April 30, 2019, notice and comment procedures would be
impracticable in this instance.
    Under 5 U.S.C. 553(d)(3), the Coast Guard finds that good cause
exists for making this rule effective less than 30 days after
publication in the Federal Register. For similar reasons as stated
above, notice and comment procedures would be impractical in this
instance due to the short notice provided for this event.

III. Legal Authority and Need for Rule

    The Coast Guard is issuing this rule under authority 46 U.S.C.
70034 (previously 33 U.S.C. 1231). The Captain of the Port San
Francisco (COTP) has determined that potential hazards associated with
the Redwood City Independence Day Fireworks Display on July 4, 2019,
will be a safety concern for anyone within a 100-foot radius of the
fireworks barge during loading, staging, and transit, and anyone within
a 560-foot radius of the fireworks barge starting 30 minutes before the
fireworks display is scheduled to commence and ending 30 minutes after
the conclusion of the fireworks display. For this reason, a safety zone
is needed to protect personnel, vessels, and the marine environment in
the navigable waters around the fireworks barge during the fireworks
display.

IV. Discussion of the Rule

    This rule establishes a safety zone from 9 a.m. until 10:20 p.m. on
July 4, 2019 during the loading, staging, and transit of the fireworks
barge, until approximately 30 minutes after completion of the fireworks
display. From 9 a.m. to 9 p.m. on July 4, 2019, during the loading,
staging, and transit of the fireworks barge until 30 minutes prior to
the start of the fireworks display, the safety zone will encompass the
navigable waters around and under the fireworks barge, from surface to
bottom, within a circle formed by connecting all points 100 feet out
from the fireworks barge. Loading the pyrotechnics onto the fireworks
barge is scheduled from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. on July 4, 2019, at Pier 50 in
San Francisco, CA. From 3 p.m. until 6 p.m. on July 4, 2019, the barge
will remain at Pier 50. From 6 p.m. to 8:30 p.m. on July 4, 2019, the
fireworks barge will be towed from Pier 50 to the display location,
where it will remain until the conclusion of the fireworks display.
    At 9 p.m. on July 4, 2019, 30 minutes prior to the commencement of
the 20-minute Redwood City Independence Day Fireworks Display, the
safety zone will increase in size and encompass the navigable waters
around and under the fireworks barge, from surface to bottom, within a
circle formed by connecting all points 560 feet from the circle center
at approximate position 37[deg]30'28.5'' N, 122[deg]12'51.5'' W (NAD
83). The safety zone will terminate at 10:20 p.m. on July 4, 2019.
    The effect of the safety zone is to restrict navigation in the
vicinity of the fireworks loading, staging, transit, and firing site.
Except for persons or vessels authorized by the COTP or the COTP's
designated representative, no person or vessel may enter or remain in
the restricted areas. These regulations are needed to keep spectators
and vessels away from the immediate vicinity of the fireworks firing
site to ensure the safety of participants, spectators, and transiting
vessels.

V. Regulatory Analyses

    We developed this rule after considering numerous statutes and
Executive orders related to rulemaking. Below we summarize our analyses
based on a number of these statutes and Executive orders, and we
discuss First Amendment rights of protestors.

A. Regulatory Planning and Review

    Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess the
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits. Executive Order 13771 directs agencies to control
regulatory costs through a budgeting process. This rule has not been
designated a ``significant regulatory action,'' under Executive Order
12866. Accordingly, this rule has not been reviewed by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB), and pursuant to OMB guidance it is exempt
from the requirements of Executive Order 13771.
    This regulatory action determination is based on the limited
duration and narrowly tailored geographic area of the safety zone.
Although this rule restricts access to the waters encompassed by the
safety zone, the effect of this rule will not be significant because
the local waterway users will be notified via public Notice to Mariners
to ensure the safety zone will result in minimum impact. The entities
most likely to be affected are waterfront facilities, commercial
vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational activities.

B. Impact on Small Entities

    The Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980, 5 U.S.C. 601-612, as
amended, requires Federal agencies to consider the potential impact of
regulations on small entities during rulemaking. The term ``small
entities'' comprises small businesses, not-for-profit organizations
that are independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their
fields, and governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. The Coast Guard certifies under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this rule
will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of
small entities.
    This rule may affect the following entities, some of which may be
small entities: Owners and operators of waterfront facilities,
commercial vessels, and pleasure craft engaged in recreational
activities and sightseeing, if these facilities or vessels are in the
vicinity of the safety zone at times when this zone is being enforced.
This rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial
number of small entities for the following reasons: (i) This rule will
encompass only a small portion of the waterway for a limited period of
time, and (ii) the maritime public will be advised in advance of these
safety zones via Notice to Mariners.

    Under section 213(a) of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (Pub. L. 104-121), we want to assist small
entities in understanding this rule. If the rule would affect your
small business, organization, or governmental jurisdiction and you have
questions concerning its provisions or options for compliance, please
contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section.
    Small businesses may send comments on the actions of Federal
employees who enforce, or otherwise determine compliance with, Federal
regulations to the Small Business and Agriculture Regulatory
Enforcement Ombudsman and the Regional Small Business Regulatory
Fairness Boards. The Ombudsman evaluates these actions annually and
rates each agency's responsiveness to small business. If you wish to
comment on actions by employees of the Coast Guard, call 1-888-REG-FAIR
(1-888-734-3247). The Coast Guard will not retaliate against small
entities that question or complain about this rule or any policy or
action of the Coast Guard.

C. Collection of Information

    This rule will not call for a new collection of information under
the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501-3520).

D. Federalism and Indian Tribal Governments

    A rule has implications for federalism under Executive Order 13132,
Federalism, if it has a substantial direct effect on the States, on the
relationship between the national government and the States, or on the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of
government. We have analyzed this rule under that Order and have
determined that it is consistent with the fundamental federalism
principles and preemption requirements described in Executive Order
13132.
    Also, this rule does not have tribal implications under Executive
Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal
Governments, because it does not have a substantial direct effect on
one or more Indian tribes, on the relationship between the Federal
Government and Indian tribes, or on the distribution of power and
responsibilities between the Federal Government and Indian tribes. If
you believe this rule has implications for federalism or Indian tribes,
please contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section above.

E. Unfunded Mandates Reform Act

    The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1531-1538)
requires Federal agencies to assess the effects of their discretionary
regulatory actions. In particular, the Act addresses actions that may
result in the expenditure by a State, local, or tribal government, in
the aggregate, or by the private sector of $100,000,000 (adjusted for
inflation) or more in any one year. Though this rule will not result in
such an expenditure, we do discuss the effects of this rule elsewhere
in this preamble.

F. Environment

    We have analyzed this rule under Department of Homeland Security
Directive 023-01 and Environmental Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series),
which guide the Coast Guard in complying with the National
Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321-4370f), and have
determined that this action is one of a category of actions that do not
individually or cumulatively have a significant effect on the human
environment. This rule involves a safety zone of limited size and
duration. It is categorically excluded from further review under
paragraph L60(a) in Table 3-1 of U.S. Coast Guard Environmental
Planning Implementing Procedures 5090.1. A Record of Environmental
Consideration supporting this determination is available in the docket
where indicated under ADDRESSES.

G. Protest Activities

    The Coast Guard respects the First Amendment rights of protesters.
Protesters are asked to contact the person listed in the FOR FURTHER
INFORMATION CONTACT section to coordinate protest activities so that
your message can be received without jeopardizing the safety or
security of people, places or vessels.

List of Subjects in 33 CFR Part 165

    Harbors, Marine safety, Navigation (water), Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Security measures, Waterways.

    For the reasons discussed in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends
33 CFR part 165 as follows:

PART 165--REGULATED NAVIGATION AREAS AND LIMITED ACCESS AREAS

0
1. The authority citation for part 165 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 46 U.S.C 70034, 70051; 33 CFR 1.05-1, 6.04-1, 6.04-6,
and 160.5; Department of Homeland Security Delegation No. 0170.1.

0
2. Add Sec.  165.T11-980 to read as follows:

Sec.  165.T11-980  Safety Zone; Redwood City Independence Day Fireworks
Display, Port of Redwood City, Redwood City, CA.

    (a) Location. The following area is a safety zone: from 9 a.m. on
July 4, 2019 until 9 p.m. on July 4, 2019 the safety zone will
encompass all navigable waters of the Port of Redwood City, from
surface to bottom, within a circle formed by connecting all points 100
feet out from the fireworks barge during the loading and staging at
Pier 50 in San Francisco, CA as well as during transit to and arrival
at the display location in Redwood City, CA. Between 9 p.m. on July 4,
2019 and 10:20 p.m. on July 4, 2019, the safety zone will expand to all
navigable waters, from surface to bottom, within a circle formed by
connecting all points 560 feet out from the fireworks barge in
approximate position 37[deg]30'28.5'' N, 122[deg]12'51.5'' W (NAD 83).
    (b) Definitions. As used in this section, ``designated
representative'' means a Coast Guard Patrol Commander, including a
Coast Guard coxswain, petty officer, or other officer operating a Coast
Guard vessel or a Federal, State, or local officer designated by or
assisting the COTP in the enforcement of the safety zone.
    (c) Regulations. (1) Under the general safety zone regulations in
subpart (b) of this part, you may not enter the safety zone described
in paragraph (a) of this section unless authorized by the COTP or the
COTP's designated representative.
    (2) The safety zone is closed to all vessel traffic, except as may
be permitted by the COTP or the COTP's designated representative.
    (3) Vessel operators desiring to enter or operate within the safety
zone must contact the COTP or the COTP's designated representative to
obtain permission to do so. Vessel operators given permission to enter
or operate in the safety zone must comply with all lawful orders or
directions given to them by the COTP or the COTP's designated
representative. Persons and vessels may request permission to enter the
safety zones on VHF-23A or through the 24-hour Command Center at
telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    (d) Enforcement period. The zone described in paragraph (a) of this
section will be enforced from 9 a.m. on July 4, 2019 until 10:20 p.m.
on July 4, 2019. The Captain of the Port San Francisco will notify the
maritime community of periods during which these zones will be enforced
via Notice to Mariners in accordance with 33 CFR 165.7.

    Dated: June 18, 2019.
Marie B. Byrd,
Captain, U.S. Coast Guard, Captain of the Port, San Francisco.
[FR Doc. 2019-13948 Filed 7-1-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


Chesapeake Bay Program Citizen Stewardship Index, Diversity Profile, and Local Leadership Surveys

July 20, 2021

                      This page intentionally left blank.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents	2
List of Appendices	4
List of Tables	5
PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT	6
A.1	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION	6
A.1.a	Title of the Information Collection Request	6
A.1.b	Short Characterization	6
A.2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION	7
A.2.a	Authority and Need for the Collection	7
2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data	7
A.3	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA	7
A.3.a	Non-duplication	8
A.3.b	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB	8
A.3.c	Consultations	8
A.3.d 	Effects of Less Frequent Collection	9
A.3.e	General Guidelines	9
A.3.f	Confidentiality Questions	9
A.3.g	Sensitive Questions	10
A.4	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED	10
A.4.a	Respondents/NAICS Codes	10
A.4.b	Information Requested	10
A.5	INFORMATION COLLECTED: AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT	12
A.5.a	Agency Activities	12
A.5.b	Collection Methodology and Management	12
A.5.c	Small Entity Flexibility	14
A.5.d	Collection Schedule	14
A.6.a	Respondent Burden	15
A.6.b	Respondent Costs	15
A.6.c	Agency Burden and Cost	18
A.6.d	Estimating Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs	20
A.6.e	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs	20
A.6.f	Reasons for Change in Burden	21
A.6.g	Burden Statement 	21
PART B OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT (FOR STATISTICAL SURVEYS)	24
B.1	SURVEY OBJECTIVES, KEY VARIABLES AND OTHER PRELIMINARIES	26
B.1.a	Survey Objectives	26
B.1.b	Key Variables	26
B.1.c	Statistical Approach	27
B.1.d	Feasibility	27
B.2	SURVEY DESIGN	28
B.2.a	Target Population and Coverage	28
B.2.b	Sample Design	28
B.2.c	Precision Requirements	30
B.2.d	Data Collection Instrument Design	30
B.3	PRE-TESTS AND PILOT TEST	32
B.3.a	Pre-tests	32
B.3.b	Pilot Test	32
B.4	COLLECTION METHODS AND FOLLOW-UP	33
B.4.a	Collection Method	33
B.4.b	Survey Response and Follow-up	33
B.5	ANALYZING AND REPORTING SURVEY RESULTS	34
B.5.a	Data Preparation	34
B.5.b	Analysis	34
B.5.c	Reporting Results	34
Appendix A  -  Data Collection Instruments	35

List of Appendices

Appendix A  -  Data Collection Instrument

List of Tables

Table 1. List of names and contact information for three individuals who provided consultations	9
Table 2. Estimated Burden	15
Table 3. Average Hourly Wages for General and Operations Managers and Natural Sciences Managers	16
Table 4. Calculation of Weighted Average Hourly Wage for Stewardship Survey	17
Table 5. Estimated Cost Per Response	17
Table 6. Agency Burden and Cost	19
Table 7. Total Respondents Burden and Cost for Survey Respondents	20
Table 8. Bottom-Line Annual Burden and Cost for Respondents	20
Table 9. Bottom-Line Annual Agency Burden and Cost	21
Table 10. Target and Sampled Populations for Each Survey	28
Table 11. Sample by State for Stewardship Survey	29
Table 12. Statistical Precision Estimates for Stewardship Survey	30
PART A OF THE SUPPORTING STATEMENT
A.1	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION
A.1.a	Title of the Information Collection Request
Chesapeake Bay Program Citizen Stewardship Index, Diversity Profile, and Local Leadership Surveys (New)
EPA ICR Number 2679.01, OMB Control No. 2003-NEW
A.1.b	Short Characterization
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Chesapeake Bay Program (the Program) is interested in tracking its progress at attaining its goals under the 2014 Chesapeake Bay Watershed Agreement (the Agreement). To do this, the Program plans to implement three surveys: the Citizen Stewardship Survey, the Diversity Profile Survey, and the Local Leadership Survey.
EPA has specified the target audience and the implementation approach for each to maximize the data that can be obtained. The Citizen Stewardship Survey will be implemented as a multi-mode survey that includes phone, web, and mail components and will target approximately 5,200 residents living in the Chesapeake Bay area, stratified by jurisdiction (states and the District of Columbia). The Diversity Profile Survey will be implemented among people who work on partnership efforts within the Bay area as a web-based survey. The Local Leadership Survey will be implemented among state and local elected officials involved in policy making in the Bay area also as a web-based survey. The Diversity Profile Survey and the Local Leadership Survey will be implemented by having the survey link distributed via email by partner organizations and through list-servs. The Diversity Profile Survey will be distributed to approximately 900 people while the Local Leadership Survey will be distributed to approximately 15,000 people.
The Program will be using the data from these three surveys to track it progress under the Stewardship goal of the 2014 Agreement. The Stewardship goal includes three outcomes: (1) Citizen Stewardship, (2) Local Leadership, and (3) Diversity. The three surveys under this ICR each address one of the outcomes and contribute to EPA's Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) goals (EPA Goal 1, A Cleaner, Healthier Environment; Objective 1.2: Provide for Clean and Safe Water).
Both the Stewardship and Diversity Profile surveys were funded and implemented by other partners in the Chesapeake Bay area in prior years; the Local Leaders survey is new to the Program. The Program determined that the best approach for continued implementation of these surveys would be for the EPA to assume the responsibility for implementing these surveys; thus, EPA is seeking approval for implementing these surveys under this ICR.
Collecting these data and publishing them for public review will allow the public to track how well the Agreement is working to preserve and protect the Chesapeake Bay region from the standpoint of the Stewardship goal outlined in the Agreement. Overall, the Agreement contains 10 goals and their associated outcomes; data for the other nine goals are collected through other means. Combining the data for Stewardship goal outcomes from these surveys with the data for the other nine goals will provide the public with a comprehensive picture of the progress being made to preserve and protect the Chesapeake Bay.
A.2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION
A.2.a	Authority and Need for the Collection
The Section 117(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), amended in 2002, calls for the continuation of the Chesapeake Bay Program. Furthermore, Section 117(b)(2)(B)(iii) of the Act calls for "...implementing specific action plans to carry out the responsibilities of the signatories to the Chesapeake Bay Agreement" and Section 117(b)(2)(B)(i) calls for "...implementing and coordinating science, research, modeling, support services, monitoring, data collection, and other activities that support the Chesapeake Bay Program" (underlining added for emphasis). The three surveys being requested under this ICR are being implemented as data collection efforts to support the Program's Goals and Outcomes (an action plan) within the Agreement.
The data are needed to track performance under the Stewardship goal under the Agreement. The Stewardship goal is stated as:
      Increase the number and the diversity of local citizen stewards and local governments that actively support and carry out the conservation and restoration activities that achieve healthy local streams, rivers and a vibrant Chesapeake Bay.
To track progress in attaining this goal, the Agreement specifies three outcomes:
 Citizen Stewardship Outcome: Increase the number and diversity of trained and mobilized citizen volunteers with the knowledge and skills needed to enhance the health of their local watersheds.
 Local Leadership Outcome: Continually increase the knowledge and capacity of local officials on issues related to water resources and in the implementation of economic and policy incentives that will support local conservation actions.
 Diversity Outcome: Identify stakeholder groups that are not currently represented in the leadership, decision-making and implementation of conservation and restoration activities and create meaningful opportunities and programs to recruit and engage these groups in the Partnership's efforts.
The three surveys are aligned with the three outcomes stated above.
2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data
The data will allow the EPA and the Program itself to track its progress at attaining the Stewardship goal under the Agreement. The data, when made public, will also allow the public to track the extent to which the Program is attaining its outcomes under the Stewardship goal.
A.3	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA
The following sections verify that this information collection satisfies the OMB's non-duplication and consultation guidelines and does not duplicate another collection.
A.3.a	Non-duplication
To the best of EPA's knowledge, no other entity is collecting data that can be used to track the outcomes under the Agreement's Stewardship goal. As noted above, some of EPA's partners in the Chesapeake Bay area were implementing two of these surveys previously but will not do so in the future. Thus, EPA has agreed to assume the responsibility for these data collection efforts to ensure the data are available in the future to track outcomes.
Using non-survey approaches is not considered feasible to collect these data. A key consideration in this regard is the ability of EPA to compare this collection with prior years' data to allow for identifying trends in the metrics. Using an alternative approach would not be feasible for allowing comparison over time.
A.3.b	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB
To comply with the 1995 Amendments to the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), EPA solicited public comment on this ICR for a 60-day period on May 3, 2021. Specifically, EPA published a notice in the Federal Register (86 FR 23362) requesting comment on the estimated respondent burden and other aspects of this ICR (2679.01). This notice is included in Appendix A. EPA received no comments on the surveys. An additional Federal Register notice will be published when this ICR is submitted to OMB. The public comment period for this additional notice will be 30 days.
A.3.c	Consultations
In the preparation of this ICR, the EPA contacted a set of potential respondents for each survey. Those respondents are listed in Table 1 below. The names for the Local Leaders survey and the Diversity Profile survey were provided by the survey leads. For the Stewardship survey, ERG, EPA's contractor for developing this ICR, asked five of its employees who live in the Chesapeake Bay area to provide feedback. ERG conducted the consultations and asked the individuals in Table 1 to (1) complete a paper version of the survey, (2) provide feedback on the question wording or other aspects that may be confusing, and (3) provide an estimate of the time to complete the survey
Feedback for each survey was as follows:
 For the Local Leaders survey, the average time among the three consultations was 8.5 minutes. Two of the respondents provided a few suggestions on wording to specific questions, but for the most part each respondent indicated it was easy to understand.
 For the Diversity Profile survey, the average time to complete the survey was 3 minutes. In terms of content, respondents identified a few typos and made some suggestions for expanding response options for some questions. EPA implemented most of the suggested changes into final versions of the instrument. To ensure comparability with prior versions, EPA made only necessary revisions.
 For the Stewardship Survey, the average time to complete the survey was 25.6 minutes with a high of 30 and a low of 13 minutes. Overall, the respondents found the survey understandable. Suggestions from the consultations indicated some confusion over relevancy of some questions to the respondent's situation; these comments, however, were due to the consulting respondents using a paper copy and not the phone- or web-based version that would also be administered. Based on these comments, EPA ensured that the skip patterns in the draft version were correct to ensure respondent were only asked relevant questions.

Table 1. List of names and contact information for three individuals who provided consultations
Name
Email Address
Local Leaders Survey
Richard Baugh
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Donna Iannone
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Ann Simonetti
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Diversity Profile Survey
Gregory Barranco
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Laura Cattell Noll
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Amy Handen
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Stewardship Survey
Raquel Drummond
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sumayal Shrestha
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Mindy Mitchell
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Lori Rhoades
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>Sarah Biscardi
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
A.3.d 	Effects of Less Frequent Collection
Each of these surveys will be implemented once every two to three years. This will allow EPA to conduct at least one each year of the ICR approval and ensure respondents are not overly burdened in responding to these surveys. Additionally, EPA expects that once every two to three years is a reasonable frequency to identify changes in the data to discern trends.
EPA will use these data to track progress in attaining its Stewardship goal under the Agreement. Less frequent collection of these data would mean EPA would have reduced knowledge of trends in the data and lead to a reduced ability to react to those trends.
A.3.e	General Guidelines
These reporting or recordkeeping requirements do not violate any of the regulations promulgated by OMB under 5 CFR Part 1320, Section 1320.5.
A.3.f	Confidentiality Questions
None the information being collected in the three surveys is confidential.
A.3.g	Sensitive Questions
The Diversity Profile Survey asks respondents about their sexual orientation and whether or not they are disabled. In both cases, respondents can choose to provide no response or select a "prefer not to say" option.

A.4	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED
A.4.a	Respondents/NAICS Codes
The Local Leaders survey targets individuals in leadership positions in local governments in the Chesapeake Bay area. Thus, for the Local Leaders survey, the relevant NAICS codes are:
 921110 - Public Administration - Executive Offices
 924110 - Public Administration - Administration of Air and Water Resource and Solid Waste Management Programs
 924120 - Public Administration - Administration of Conservation Programs
The Diversity Profile Survey targets individuals working in roles to help preserve the Chesapeake Bay environment. Thus, the relevant NAICS codes are:
 541330 - Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services - Environmental engineering service
 813312 - Other Services (except Public Administration) - Environmental advocacy organizations
 924110 - Public Administration - Environmental protection program administration
Finally, since the Stewardship survey primarily targets the general public, the most relevant NAICS code is 814110, Other Services (except Public Administration) - Private Households

A.4.b	Information Requested
A.4.b.i 	Data Items
The Local Leaders survey asks about the following data items:
 The respondent's role in the community (title, in decision-making, functionally)
 The size and location of the community
 Several questions on the extent to which their community takes into account upstream and downstream communities when making decisions, both overall and in specific policies
 Priorities for conservation and restoration activities and policies
 The impact that protecting the Chesapeake Bay has on the various aspects (e.g., economic, water quality) of the community
 Tools that the community considers in protecting Chesapeake Bay
 Their level of understanding of rules and regulations at various levels of government
 Which federal rules the community is subject to
 Access to knowledgeable people to provide assistance in implementing environmental policy
 Resources (e.g., trainings, individuals, guidance documents) the respondent would use to learn more about environmental policy or water resources
 Activities the community has undertaken in the last three years related to water quality
 An assessment of the respondent's understanding of watersheds
 A set of demographics (age, gender, years in current position)
The Diversity Profile survey asks about the following data items:
 The respondent's role in protecting Chesapeake Bay, including the type of organization they work for, their role at that organization, whether they are in leadership role in the Chesapeake Bay Program, and their tenure in the Chesapeake Bay Program
 Gender identity
 Age
 Racial identity
 Identification as a member of the LGBTQIA+ community
 Disability status
 Where they live in terms of geographic location and characteristics (e.g., urban)
 A list of groups they engage with as part of the Program
 Whether they completed the survey in prior years
Finally, the Stewardship Survey asks several questions that can be grouped into eight broad categories:
 Information on the respondent's location within the Chesapeake Bay watershed
 Information on activities the respondent performs related to lawn and/or yard care
 Stewardship behaviors (e.g., use of rain barrels, use of fertilizer) that the respondent performs currently and an assessment of the likelihood the respondent would perform them in the future
 The respondent's volunteer-related activities and attitudes toward volunteer activities
 The respondent's civic engagement and attitudes toward civic engagement
 The respondent's perceptions and attitudes towards environmental and/or water quality
 A set of demographics

A.4.b.ii	Respondent Activities
Each of the three surveys only asks respondents to complete the survey. No activities beyond completing the survey are needed. Some respondents to the Local Leaders survey may feel the need to ask others in their office for information that can be used to complete the survey, but that is not required nor does EPA expect this to be commonplace.

A.5	INFORMATION COLLECTED: AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
A.5.a	Agency Activities
EPA's activities related to this survey include the following:
 EPA worked with partners at the Chesapeake Bay Program to review the existing survey instrument deployed in prior years and to update those instruments as needed.
 EPA worked with its subcontractor, ERG, to develop this ICR.
 EPA has collected and updated lists of individuals who will receive the survey.
 EPA will set up a database to store the resulting data.
 EPA will tabulate and analyze the resulting data.
A.5.b	Collection Methodology and Management
Survey
For the three surveys being requested under this ICR, EPA plans to use phone, web-based, and mail data collection efforts. The Local Leaders survey and the Diversity Profile surveys will be web-based survey instrument and the Stewardship Survey will be a include phone-, web-, and mail-based data collection efforts.
Data from each survey will be stored in an electronic database such as an MS Excel or Access database.
Pre-Testing
During the consultation process for this ICR, ERG contacted several potential respondents and asked them to provide feedback on the survey instruments and EPA used some of that information to make minor revisions to the instruments. These modes correspond to how the data were collected previously and EPA is seeking to maximize comparability with previous version of the survey.
Additionally, as noted above, since these surveys were implemented by EPA's partners in previous years, the instruments have undergone pre-testing and revisions at that time. To ensure consistency between this collection and those prior collection efforts, EPA has limited the amount of revision to the current instruments.
Data Quality
For the web-based surveys (all three), EPA will perform the following data quality checks:
 Prior to implementation, the web-based survey instruments will undergo review to ensure all skip patterns work properly and to ensure all codes are correctly entered into the data.
 EPA will review the collected data to ensure responses are complete.
 EPA will not use any response where the respondent did not explicitly "submit" the response in the computer software.
 EPA will review the data to identify whether some respondents provided the same type of answer to each question (e.g., selecting the top, bottom, or middle choice from all scaled questions).
 EPA will review all open-ended responses to assess whether some respondents were providing facetious or non-serious responses based on the comment provided for open-ended responses.
 Prior to deleting any response, EPA staff will review those data points to determine if deletion is warranted.
 EPA will ensure that the data dictionary and the collected data match.
For the phone version of the Stewardship Survey:
 Prior to implementation, EPA will ensure the CATI-coded instrument working properly and the skip patterns are working properly.
 EPA will not include any response where the respondent did not reach the end of the survey instrument with the interviewer.
 EPA will review the data to identify whether some respondents provided the same type of answer to each question (e.g., selecting the top, bottom, or middle choice from all scaled questions).
 EPA will flag any response where it appeared the respondent was providing a facetious or non-serious response.
 Prior to deleting any response, EPA staff will review those data points to determine if deletion is warranted.
 EPA will ensure that the data dictionary and the collected data match.
For the mail version of the Stewardship Survey:
 EPA will perform a detailed review to ensure the printed questionnaire matches the web- and phone-based versions and that the skip patterns are all correct.
 EPA will not include responses to any item where the respondent did not follow instructions (e.g., selected more than on option for a single option response question).
 For any question where the respondent "corrected" his or her response on the paper version, EPA will ensure at least two survey reviewers agree on the intent of the respondent; if agreement is not simple and straightforward, EPA will discard the item from the respondent's survey.
 EPA will not include any response where the respondent did not reach the end of the survey instrument with the interviewer.
 EPA will review the data to identify whether some respondents provided the same type of answer to each question (e.g., selecting the top, bottom, or middle choice from all scaled questions).
 EPA will flag any response where it appeared the respondent was providing a facetious or non-serious response.
 Prior to deleting any response, EPA staff will review those data points to determine if deletion is warranted.
 EPA will ensure that the data dictionary and the collected data match.
Public Access to Data
EPA does not envision providing the raw, unprocessed data to the public unless specifically requested under a FOIA request. EPA will provide data tabulations for the survey. EPA will make the quality-checked and summarized data available to the public via ChesapeakeProgress.com. The privacy of individual respondents will be protected.
A.5.c	Small Entity Flexibility
EPA expects that some small governments and some small organizations may be asked to take either the Local Leaders survey or the Diversity Profile Survey. EPA does not expect either survey represents an undue burden to those entities.
For the Local Leader survey, we estimate that the survey can be completed in less than 10 minutes. EPA does not expect this to represent an undue burden for small government entities. Additionally, the survey itself is voluntary and those asked to take the survey can choose to not incur the time to take the survey.
For the Diversity Profile survey, the target respondents are the individuals working at the organizations and not the entity itself. Nevertheless, we have estimated that the survey can be completed in less than 5 minutes. EPA does not expect this to represent an undue burden for small entities. Additionally, the survey itself is voluntary and those asked to take the survey can choose to not incur the time to take the survey.
A.5.d	Collection Schedule
Once EPA obtains approval for this ICR, it will begin the process of implementing the surveys using the following schedules:
For the Stewardship Survey, EPA will begin the survey effort and continue until the target of 5,200 respondents is reached. EPA expects this will take approximately 2-3 weeks.
For the Local Leaders and the Diversity Profile survey, EPA will use the following schedule:
 EPA will send each respondent an email inviting them to respond to the survey. EPA will target sending this on the Monday or Tuesday during the week implementation begins.
 EPA will send reminders email every 3-4 business days. EPA expects to send up to five reminders over the implementation time frame. The last reminder will indicate a date on which EPA plans to close the survey. To the extent feasible, EPA will send the reminders to those who have not responded; however, this may not be feasible in cases where EPA implements by sending the survey invitation through a list server.
 EPA will close the survey 3-5 days after the last reminder.
 In total, EPA expects to hold the survey open for approximately 4 weeks.
A.6.a	Respondent Burden
As discussed in Section A.4, the only activity that respondents are expected to perform is to provide a response to the survey questions. Thus, we provide an estimate of the burden of providing that response in Table 2. Overall, EPA expects 5,200 responses from the three surveys for a total burden estimate of 2,208 hours.
Table 2. Estimated Burden
Survey
Respondent Type
Response Activity
Time per Response (Minutes) [a]
Stewardship Survey
                                General public
                                Complete survey
                                      25
Local Leaders Survey
      People in local leadership positions (mayors, city managers, etc.)
                                Complete survey
                                      8.5
Diversity Profile Survey
             People working in Chesapeake Bay conservation efforts
                                Complete survey
                                       3
[a] Based on consultations performed for ICR.

A.6.b	Respondent Costs
Each survey has a different target population and requires a separate set of estimates to arrive at an average hourly rate. For each survey, we relied on data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) data for wages. EPA identified the relevant occupations from those data based on expert judgment and then accessed data local to the Chesapeake Bay region for those occupations.
For the Local Leaders survey we assumed that most respondents would be classified under the OES Standard Occupation Code (SOC) `General and Operations Managers' (SOC 11-1021). EPA assumed that most respondents would be in Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, or Virginia. Table 3 provide the average hourly rates for `General and Operations Managers' for those five states. EPA took the average across the five states to get an average of $68.18 for May 2019. Using the BLS Employment Cost Index (ECI) for "Management, Professional, and Related" occupations, EPA updated this value to third quarter 2020 dollars to be $70.11.
For the Diversity Profile survey, ERG assumed that respondents would be either in the `General and Operations Managers' or the `Natural Sciences Managers' categories. Table 3 provides data for both and calculates an average across both categories in all five states. This resulted in an average of $68.83 in May 2019 dollars, updated to $70.78 in third quarter 2020 dollars.

Table 3. Average Hourly Wages for General and Operations Managers and Natural Sciences Managers
State
May 2019 Avg. Hourly Wage Rate for `General and Operations Managers' (SOC 11-1021)
May 2019 Avg. Hourly Wage Rate for `Natural Sciences Managers'
(SOC 11-9121)
Delaware
                                    $72.72
                                    $69.93
District of Columbia
                                    $73.56
                                    $65.05
Maryland
                                    $64.90
                                    $71.00
Pennsylvania
                                    $63.51
                                    $71.53
Virginia
                                    $66.22
                                    $69.92
Average (May 2019)
                                    $68.18
                                    $69.49
Overall Average (May 2019)
                                    $68.83
Average Values Updated to Third Quarter 2020 [a]
                                    $70.11
                                    $71.45
Overall Average Value Updated to Third Quarter 2020 [a]
                                    $70.78
        Source: Wage data: BLS. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcst.htm.
        [a] Updated based on Employment Cost Index (ECI) for "Management, Professional, and Related" occupations. The ECI for compensation for second quarter 2019 (May 2019) was 134.5 and the ECI for third quarter 2020 is 138.3. Based on extraction of BLS Series CIU1020000100000I from BLS databases

For the Stewardship survey, we used data from Opinion Works who performed the last version of the survey for EPA's partners. Their Method and Profile of Respondents report provided a distribution of respondents across the states listed in Table 4. EPA used the May 2019 OES average wage or `All Occupations' (SOC 00-0000) for each state and calculated a weighted average across the states of $28.99. EPA updated this to $30.00 using the ECI for all civilian workers.
Table 4. Calculation of Weighted Average Hourly Wage for Stewardship Survey
State
                    Sample Percentage from Previous Survey
                May 2019 Avg. Hourly Rate for All Occupations
                                 (SOC 00-0000)
Delaware
                                     7.7%
                                    $26.14
District of Columbia
                                     15.4%
                                    $43.17
Maryland
                                     19.3%
                                    $28.95
New York
                                     7.7%
                                    $30.76
Pennsylvania
                                     19.2%
                                    $24.68
Virginia
                                     19.2%
                                    $27.28
West Virginia
                                     11.5%
                                    $20.88
Weighted Average, May 2019 Dollars
                                       -
                                    $28.99
Weighted Average Updated to Third Quarter 2020 Dollars [a]
                                       -
                                    $30.00
           Source: Wage data: BLS. https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcst.htm; Sample percentages: Opinion Works, 2017.
           [a] Updated based on Employment Cost Index (ECI) for "All Civilian Workers". The ECI for compensation for second quarter 2019 (May 2019) was 135.7 and the ECI for third quarter 2020 is 140.4. Based on extraction of BLS Series CIU1020000000000I from BLS databases.

Table 5 provides EPA's estimate of the cost per response for the three surveys. First, the hourly wages estimated above were adjusted for benefits paid to employees. BLS provides data to indicate that average total compensation in the United States in June 2020 (most recent estimate) was $38.20 per hour and that wages and salaries comprised $26.17 per hour of that total; the ratio, 1.36, was used to adjust each wage rate for benefits. Applying these adjusted hourly wages to the time per response resulted in an estimated cost of response for each survey identified in the table.
Table 5. Estimated Cost Per Response
Survey
Time Per Response (Minutes)
Time per Response (Hours)
Avg. Hourly Wage (2020)
Avg. Hourly Wage Adjusted for Benefits (2020) [a]
Cost Per Response
Stewardship Survey
                                      25
                                     0.417
                                    $30.00
                                    $40.80
                                    $17.01
Local Leaders Survey
                                      8.5
                                     0.142
                                    $70.11
                                    $95.35
                                    $13.54
Diversity Profile Survey
                                       3
                                     0.050
                                    $70.78
                                    $96.26
                                     $4.81
[a] Wages were increased by a factor of 1.36 reflecting the ratio of total compensation in June 2020 ($38.20 per hour; most recent estimate) to wages and salaries for that month ($26.17 per hour). https://www.bls.gov/web/ecec/ececqrtn.pdf.

A.6.b.ii Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs
There are no capital or operations and maintenance costs.
A.6.b.iii Capital/Start-up Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs
There are no capital/startup operating and maintenance costs.
A.6.b.iv Annualizing Capital Costs
There are no capital costs.
A.6.c	Agency Burden and Cost
Table 6 provides a calculation of EPA's burden and cost for the data collection. Each survey requires four general activities: reviewing existing survey instruments, updating survey lists (as needed), setting up a database to store data, and tabulating and analyzing results. As noted, the Stewardship and the Diversity Profile surveys had been previously implemented by EPA's partners while the Local Leaders Survey is new. Thus, EPA's primary activities in taking over the implementation of these surveys is to update work that was done previously by EPA's partners. One activity (developing this ICR) covers all three surveys and is new to EPA's work on these surveys.
Overall, EPA has assumed that most of the work being performed by EPA staff will be done by GS-12 employees with GS-14, GS-11, and GS-9 level employees contributing as well. EPA used 2020 salary table for the "Washington-Baltimore-Arlington, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA" area from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). EPA used the "Step 5" value from each GS level and multiplied each by 1.6 to arrive at a loaded rate for each GS level.
A number of non-profit partner and contractor hours will also be needed to complete the tasks; for these, EPA has assumed that BLS Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) code 19-0000 (Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations) provides a reasonable approximation of the staff who would perform these duties. This BLS SOC code includes natural and social science workers, including survey researchers. Given that the non-profits and contractors in this field tend to employ these types of workers, EPA has assumed that the master code provides a sufficient wage rate value, rather than using rate for sub-codes. The average hourly rate for SOC code 19-0000 is $37.28 for May 2019. EPA updated this value to $38.03 (two percent increase) based on the change in the Consumer Price Index between May 2019 and December 2020. Finally, EPA multiplied by 1.6 to calculate a loaded wage rate of $60.84.
Overall, EPA has estimated a total effort of 6,528 hours to develop the survey materials, including updating lists used for the survey. Of note, EPA has estimated that 6,000 of those hours are incurred in updating the list for the Stewardship Survey.

Table 6. Agency Burden and Cost
Survey/Activity
                       GS-Level / BLS Occupational Code
                                  Total Time
                            Cost Per Hour (Loaded)
                                  Total Cost
Stewardship Survey
Review existing survey
                                     GS-12
                                      10
                                    $75.01
                                     $750

                                    19-0000
                                      10
                                    $60.84
                                     $608
Update list / Collect Data
                                     GS-12
                                      20
                                    $75.01
                                    $1,500

                                    19-0000
                                     6000
                                    $60.84
                                   $365,046
Set up database
                                     GS-12
                                      10
                                    $75.01
                                     $750

                                    19-0000
                                      40
                                    $60.84
                                    $2,434
Tabulate/Analyze Results
                                     GS-12
                                      40
                                    $75.01
                                    $3,000

                                    19-0000
                                      120
                                    $60.84
                                    $7,301
Local Leaders Survey
Review existing survey
                                    19-0000
                                       4
                                    $60.84
                                     $243

                                    19-0000
                                       4
                                    $60.84
                                     $243
Update list
                                    19-0000
                                      20
                                    $60.84
                                    $1,217

                                    19-0000
                                      20
                                    $60.84
                                    $1,217
Set up database
                                    19-0000
                                       4
                                    $60.84
                                     $243

                                    19-0000
                                       4
                                    $60.84
                                     $243
Tabulate/Analyze Results
                                    19-0000
                                       8
                                    $60.84
                                     $487

                                    19-0000
                                      40
                                    $60.84
                                    $2,434
Diversity Profile
Review existing survey
                                     GS-12
                                       1
                                    $75.01
                                      $75
Update list
                                     GS-12
                                       3
                                    $75.01
                                     $225

                                    19-0000
                                       3
                                    $60.84
                                     $183
Set up database
                                     GS-12
                                       1
                                    $75.01
                                      $75
Tabulate/Analyze Results
                                     GS-12
                                      20
                                    $75.01
                                    $1,500

                                    19-0000
                                      30
                                    $60.84
                                    $1,825
All Surveys
Develop ICR
                                     GS-14
                                      28
                                    $102.30
                                    $2,865

                                     GS-12
                                      13
                                    $75.01
                                     $975

                                     GS-11
                                      35
                                    $62.59
                                    $2,191

                                     GS-9
                                      40
                                    $51.73
                                    $2,069
Total
                                       -
                                     6,528
                                       -
                                   $399,699

A.6.d	Estimating Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs
Table 7 provides an estimate of the total respondent burden and the total cost of the burden for the survey respondents. Overall, EPA expects a total of 6,430 responses from the three surveys resulting in 2,298 burden hours. The total cost of those 2,298 hours is expected to be $100,931.
Table 7. Total Respondents Burden and Cost for Survey Respondents
Survey
Survey
Population
Sample Selected
Expected Response Rate
Expected Number of Responses
Total Burden (Hours)
Cost per Response
Total Cost of Burden
Stewardship Survey
                                 18.2 million
                                    50,200
                                    10% [b]
                                     5,200
                                     2,167
                                    $17.01
                                    $88,467
Local Leaders Survey
                                    15,000
                                    15,000
                                    5% [a]
                                      750
                                      107
                                    $13.54
                                    $10,154
Diversity Profile Survey
                                      900
                                      900
                                    53% [b]
                                      480
                                      24
                                     $4.81
                                    $2,310
Total
                                       -
                                       -
                                       -
                                     6,430
                                     2,298
                                       -
                                   $100,931
[a] Assumed response rate.
[b] Based on prior implementation of the survey in the area.

A.6.e	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs
A.6.e.i Respondent Tally
Table 8 provides the bottom-line estimate for respondent burden. Overall, EPA expects that the three surveys will result in 6,430 responses (one per respondent) for a total of 2,298 burden hours and $100,931 in costs.
Table 8. Bottom-Line Burden and Cost for Respondents
                                Survey Activity
                             Number of Respondents
                              Number of Responses
                              Total Burden Hours
                             Total Cost of Burden
Stewardship Survey
                                     5,200
                                     5,200
                                     2,167
                                    $88,467
Local Leaders Survey
                                      750
                                      750
                                      107
                                    $10,154
Diversity Profile Survey
                                      480
                                      480
                                      24
                                    $2,310
Grant Totals
                                     6,430
                                     6,430
                                     2,298
                                   $100,931

A.6.e.ii Agency Tally
Table 9 presents the agency bottom line estimate. EPA estimates that the 6,430 responses will result in an Agency burden of 6,528 hours and $399,699.

Table 9. Bottom-Line  Agency Burden and Cost
                                Survey Activity
                             Number of Respondents
                              Total Agency Hours
                               Total Agency Cost
Stewardship Survey
                                     5,200
                                     6,250
                                   $381,389
Local Leaders Survey
                                      750
                                      104
                                    $6,327
Diversity Profile Survey
                                      480
                                      58
                                    $3,883
Develop ICR
                                       -
                                      116
                                    $8,099
Grant totals
                                     6,430
                                     6,528
                                   $399,699

A.6.e.iii Variations in the Annual Bottom Line
This ICR is for a single collection and annual variations are not relevant.
A.6.f	Reasons for Change in Burden
This ICR does not modify an existing ICR.
A.6.g	Burden Statement
Stewardship Survey
The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 25 minutes per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjusting the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable applications and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit, or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket Number EPA - R03 - CBP - 2021 - 0235, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of Environmental Information Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m.  -  4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Office of Environmental Information Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Also, comments can be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17[th] Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA - R03 - CBP - 2021 - 0235, OMB Control No. 2003-NEW in any correspondence.
Local Leaders Survey
The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 8.5 minutes per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjusting the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable applications and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit, or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket Number EPA - R03 - CBP - 2021 - 0235, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of Environmental Information Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m.  -  4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Office of Environmental Information Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Also, comments can be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17[th] Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID EPA - R03 - CBP - 2021 - 0235, OMB Control No. 2003-NEW in any correspondence.
Diversity Profile Survey
The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 3 minutes per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjusting the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable applications and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit, or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.
To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket Number EPA - R03 - CBP - 2021 - 0235, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of Environmental Information Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA William Jefferson Clinton West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m.  -  4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the Office of Environmental Information Docket is<PHONE_NUMBER>. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. Also, comments can be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17[th] Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA - R03 - CBP - 2021 - 0235, OMB Control No. 2003-NEW in any correspondence.


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 241 (Monday, December 18, 2017)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 59969-59971]
[FR Doc No: 2017-27214]

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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R01-OAR-2016-0626; A-1-FRL-9972-20-Region 1]

Air Plan Approval; Vermont; Regional Haze Five-Year Progress
Report

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is approving
Vermont's Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report (Progress Report),
submitted on February 29, 2016 as a revision to its State
Implementation Plan (SIP). Vermont's SIP revision addresses
requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA's rules that require
states to submit periodic reports describing the progress toward
reasonable progress goals (RPGs) established for regional haze and a
determination of adequacy of the State's existing regional haze SIP.
EPA is approving Vermont's Progress Report on the basis that it
addresses the progress report and adequacy determination requirements
for the first implementation period covering through 2018.

DATES: This rule is effective on January 17, 2018.

ADDRESSES: EPA has established a docket for this action under Docket
Identification No. EPA-R01-OAR-2016-0626. All documents in the docket
are listed on the http://www.regulations.gov website. Although listed
in the index, some information is not publicly available, i.e., CBI or
other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute. Certain
other material, such as copyrighted material, is not placed on the
internet and will be publicly available only in hard copy form.
Publicly available docket materials are available at http://www.regulations.gov or at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA
New England Regional Office, Office of Ecosystem Protection, Air
Quality Planning Unit, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, Boston, MA. EPA
requests that if at all possible, you contact the contact listed in the
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section to schedule your inspection.
The Regional Office's official hours of business are Monday through
Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., excluding legal holidays.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne K. McWilliams, Air Quality
Planning Unit, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, New England

Regional Office, 5 Post Office Square--Suite 100, (Mail code OEP05-2),
Boston, MA 02109-3912, telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, facsimile (617) 918-
0697, email [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Throughout this document whenever ``we,''
``us,'' or ``our'' is used, we mean EPA.

Table of Contents

I. Background and Purpose.
II. Response to Comment.
III. Final Action.
IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews.

I. Background and Purpose

    On August 16, 2017, EPA proposed to approve Vermont's Regional Haze
Five-Year Progress Report. See 82 FR 38864. The Progress Report was
submitted by Vermont as a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision on
February 29, 2016. In conjunction with the August 16, 2017 notice of
proposed rulemaking (NPR), EPA issued a direct final rule (DFR)
approving the Vermont Progress Report. See 82 FR 38834. In the DFR, EPA
stated that if an adverse comment were to be submitted to EPA by
September 15, 2017, the action would be withdrawn and not take effect,
and a final rule would be issued based on the NPR. EPA received one
adverse comment prior to the close of the comment period. Therefore,
EPA withdrew the DFR on October 13, 2017. See 82 FR 47630. Today's
action is a final rule based on the NPR.
    A detailed discussion of Vermont's February 29, 2016 SIP revision
and EPA's rationale for approving the SIP revision were provided in the
DFR and will not be restated here, except to the extent relevant to our
response to the public comment we received.

II. Response to Comment

    EPA received one adverse comment on its proposed approval of the
Vermont Progress Report.
    Comment: The commenter stated that Vermont should have considered
visibility effects on parks in Canada and ocean marine sanctuaries.
    Response: In section 169A(a)(1) of the 1977 Amendment to the Clean
Air Act (CAA), Congress created a program for protecting visibility in
certain of the nation's national parks and wilderness areas. This
section on the CAA establishes as a national goal the ``prevention of
any future, and remedying of any existing, impairment of visibility in
mandatory Class I Federal areas which impairment results from manmade
air pollution.'' Areas designated as mandatory Class I Federal areas
consist of national parks exceeding 6000 acres, wilderness areas and
national memorial parks exceeding 5000 acres, and all international
parks that were in existence on August 7, 1977 (42 U.S.C. 7472(a)). In
accordance with section 169A of the CAA, EPA, in consultation with the
Department of Interior, promulgated a list of 156 areas where
visibility is identified as an important value. See 44 FR 69122,
November 30, 1979. The requirements of the visibility program set forth
in section 169A of the CAA apply only to these ``mandatory Class I
Federal areas.'' When we use the term ``Class I area'' in this and
other regional haze actions, we mean a ``mandatory Class I Federal
area'' where visibility has been identified as an important value.
    The list of 156 areas includes Roosevelt/Campobello International
Park (RCIP) located in New Brunswick, Canada. The Vermont Regional Haze
Plan for the first planning period affirmed that emissions from Vermont
did not contribute to the visibility impairment at this Class I area.
See 77 FR 11914, February 28, 2012. The Vermont Progress Report
confirms, however, that not only has the state reduced visibility
impairing emissions consistent with its regional haze SIP, but that the
reasonable progress goals for RCIP for the first regional haze planning
period have already been met.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Visibility impairment is measured by monitors in the
Interagency Monitoring of Protected Visual Environments (IMPROVE)
program. Due to the proximity of the Moosehorn Wilderness Area
IMPROVE monitor to RCIP, the Moosehorn monitor is considered
representative of visibility at RCIP. More discussion of the
visibility status of RCIP can be found in EPA's proposed approval of
the Maine Regional Haze 5-Year Progress Report. See 82 FR 33471,
July 20, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Based on the requirements of section 169A of the CAA, EPA finds
that the Progress Report appropriately considered the visibility status
of nearby Class I areas, including that of the Roosevelt/Campobello
International Park in Canada. There are no nearby marine sanctuaries
identified as Class I areas.

III. Final Action

    EPA is approving Vermont's Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report
SIP revision, submitted by VT DEC on February 29, 2016, as meeting the
applicable regional haze requirements set forth in 40 Code of the
Federal Regulations (CFR) 51.308(g) and (h).

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the Clean Air Act, the Administrator is required to approve a
SIP submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and
applicable Federal regulations. 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a).
Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state
choices, provided that they meet the criteria of the Clean Air Act.
Accordingly, this action merely approves state law as meeting Federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     Does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     Is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     Does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     Does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     Is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     Is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the Clean Air Act; and
     Does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    In addition, the SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian
reservation land or in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has
demonstrated that a tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian
country, the rule does not have tribal implications and will not impose
substantial direct costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law as
specified by Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000).
    The Congressional Review Act, 5 U.S.C. 801 et seq., as added by the
Small

Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996, generally
provides that before a rule may take effect, the agency promulgating
the rule must submit a rule report, which includes a copy of the rule,
to each House of the Congress and to the Comptroller General of the
United States. Section 804, however, exempts from section 801 the
following types of rules: Rules of particular applicability; rules
relating to agency management or personnel; and rules of agency
organization, procedure, or practice that do not substantially affect
the rights or obligations of non-agency parties. 5 U.S.C. 804(3).
Because this is a rule of particular applicability, EPA is not required
to submit a rule report regarding this action under section 801.
    Under section 307(b)(1) of the Clean Air Act, petitions for
judicial review of this action must be filed in the United States Court
of Appeals for the appropriate circuit by February 16, 2018. Filing a
petition for reconsideration by the Administrator of this final rule
does not affect the finality of this action for the purposes of
judicial review nor does it extend the time within which a petition for
judicial review may be filed, and shall not postpone the effectiveness
of such rule or action. This action may not be challenged later in
proceedings to enforce its requirements. (See section 307(b)(2).)

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Regional haze, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: December 6, 2017.
Ken Moraff,
Acting Regional Administrator, EPA New England.

    Part 52 of chapter I, title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations
is amended as follows:

PART 52--[AMENDED]

0
1. The authority citation for part 52 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

Subpart UU--Vermont

0
2. In Sec.  52.2370, the table in paragraph (e) is amended by adding an
entry for ``Vermont Regional Haze Five-Year Progress Report'' at the
end of the table to read as follows:

Sec.  52.2370   Identification of plan.

* * * * *
    (e) * * *

                                             Vermont Non-Regulatory
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                        Applicable
    Name of non-regulatory SIP        geographic or       State submittal     EPA approval date     Explanation
            provision               nonattainment area  date/effective date
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                                  * * * * * * *
Vermont Regional Haze Five-Year    Statewide..........  Submitted 2/29/2016  12/18/2017, [Insert
 Progress Report.                                                             Federal Register
                                                                              citation].
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2017-27214 Filed 12-15-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 54 (Monday, March 21, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16014-16015]
[FR Doc No: 2022-05919]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Docket ID FEMA-2022-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-2221]

Proposed Flood Hazard Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, Department of Homeland
Security.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Comments are requested on proposed flood hazard
determinations, which may include additions or modifications of any
Base Flood Elevation (BFE), base flood depth, Special Flood Hazard Area
(SFHA) boundary or zone designation, or regulatory floodway on the
Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), and where applicable, in the
supporting Flood Insurance Study (FIS) reports for the communities
listed in the table below. The purpose of this notice is to seek
general information and comment regarding the preliminary FIRM, and
where applicable, the FIS report that the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) has provided to the affected communities. The FIRM and
FIS report are the basis of the floodplain management measures that the
community is required either to adopt or to show evidence of having in
effect in order to qualify or remain qualified for participation in the
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP).

DATES: Comments are to be submitted on or before June 21, 2022.

ADDRESSES: The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, the FIS report
for each community are available for inspection at both the online
location https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the
respective Community Map Repository address listed in the tables below.
Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS report for each
community are accessible online through the FEMA Map Service Center at
https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.
    You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-2221, to
Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal Insurance
and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, Washington, DC
20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email) [email protected].

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA,
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>, or (email)
[email protected]; or visit the FEMA Mapping and Insurance
eXchange (FMIX) online at https://www.floodmaps.fema.gov/fhm/fmx_main.html.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: FEMA proposes to make flood hazard
determinations for each community listed below, in accordance with
section 110 of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, 42 U.S.C.
4104, and 44 CFR 67.4(a).
    These proposed flood hazard determinations, together with the
floodplain management criteria required by 44 CFR 60.3, are the minimum
that are required. They should not be construed to mean that the
community must change any existing ordinances that are more stringent
in their floodplain management requirements. The community may at any
time enact stricter requirements of its own or pursuant to policies
established by other Federal, State, or regional entities. These flood
hazard determinations are used to meet the floodplain management
requirements of the NFIP.
    The communities affected by the flood hazard determinations are
provided in the tables below. Any request for reconsideration of the
revised flood hazard information shown on the Preliminary FIRM and FIS
report that satisfies the data requirements outlined in 44 CFR 67.6(b)
is considered an appeal. Comments unrelated to the flood hazard
determinations also will be considered before the FIRM and FIS report
become effective.
    Use of a Scientific Resolution Panel (SRP) is available to
communities in support of the appeal resolution process. SRPs are
independent panels of experts in hydrology, hydraulics, and other
pertinent sciences established to review conflicting scientific and
technical data and provide recommendations for resolution. Use of the
SRP only may be exercised after FEMA and local communities have been
engaged in a collaborative consultation process for at least 60 days
without a mutually acceptable resolution of an appeal. Additional
information regarding the SRP process can be found online at https://www.floodsrp.org/pdfs/srp_overview.pdf.
    The watersheds and/or communities affected are listed in the tables
below. The Preliminary FIRM, and where applicable, FIS report for each
community are available for inspection at both the online location
https://hazards.fema.gov/femaportal/prelimdownload and the respective
Community Map Repository address listed in the tables. For communities
with multiple ongoing Preliminary studies, the studies can be
identified by the unique project number and Preliminary FIRM date
listed in the tables. Additionally, the current effective FIRM and FIS
report for each community are accessible online through the FEMA Map
Service Center at https://msc.fema.gov for comparison.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.022, ``Flood
Insurance.'')

Michael M. Grimm,
Assistant Administrator for Risk Management, Department of Homeland
Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             Community map repository
               Community                             address
------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Comal County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 20-06-0111S Preliminary Date: October 29, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of New Braunfels..................  City Hall, 550 Landa Street,
                                          New Braunfels, TX 78130.
Unincorporated Areas of Comal County...  Comal County Engineer's Office,
                                          195 David Jonas Drive, New
                                          Braunfels, TX 78132.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Gonzales County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 20-06-0112S Preliminary Date: October 29, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of Gonzales.......................  City Hall, 820 St. Joseph
                                          Street, Gonzales, TX 78629.

Unincorporated Areas of Gonzales County  Gonzales County Office of
                                          Emergency Management, 1811
                                          Water Street, Gonzales, TX
                                          78629.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Guadalupe County, Texas and Incorporated Areas
         Project: 21-06-0039S Preliminary Date: October 29, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
City of New Braunfels..................  City Hall, 550 Landa Street,
                                          New Braunfels, TX 78130.
City of Seguin.........................  Development Center, 108 East
                                          Mountain Street, Seguin, TX
                                          78155.
Unincorporated Areas of Guadalupe        Guadalupe County Environmental
 County.                                  Health Department, 2605 North
                                          Guadalupe Street, Seguin, TX
                                          78155.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

[FR Doc. 2022-05919 Filed 3-18-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 95 (Thursday, May 16, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Pages 22154-22155]
[FR Doc No: 2019-10198]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4426-DR: Docket ID FEMA-2019-0001]

Alabama; Major Disaster and Related Determinations

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of the Presidential declaration of a major
disaster for the State of Alabama (FEMA-4426-DR), dated April 17, 2019,
and related determinations.

DATES: The declaration was issued April 17, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that, in a letter
dated April 17, 2019, the President issued a major disaster declaration
under the authority of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq. (the ``Stafford
Act''), as follows:

    I have determined that the damage in certain areas of the State
of Alabama resulting from severe storms, straight-line winds,
tornadoes, and flooding during the period of February 19 to
    March 20, 2019, is of sufficient severity and magnitude to
warrant a major disaster declaration under the Robert T. Stafford
Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.
(the ``Stafford Act''). Therefore, I declare that such a major
disaster exists in the State of Alabama.
    In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby
authorized to allocate from funds available for these purposes such
amounts as you find necessary for Federal disaster assistance and
administrative expenses.
    You are authorized to provide Public Assistance in the
designated areas and Hazard Mitigation throughout the State.
Consistent with the requirement that Federal assistance be
supplemental, any Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Hazard Mitigation will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs. Federal funds provided under the Stafford Act for
Public Assistance also will be limited to 75 percent of the total
eligible costs, with the exception of projects that meet the
eligibility criteria for a higher Federal cost-sharing percentage
under the Public Assistance Alternative Procedures Pilot Program for
Debris Removal implemented pursuant to section 428 of the Stafford
Act.
    Further, you are authorized to make changes to this declaration
for the approved assistance to the extent allowable under the
Stafford Act.

    The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) hereby gives notice
that pursuant to the authority vested in the Administrator, under
Executive Order 12148, as amended, Gerard M. Stolar, of FEMA is
appointed to act as the Federal Coordinating Officer for this major
disaster.
    The following areas of the State of Alabama have been designated as
adversely affected by this major disaster:

    Cherokee, Colbert, DeKalb, Franklin, Jackson, Lamar, Madison,
Marion, Morgan, and Winston Counties for Public Assistance.
    All areas within the State of Alabama are eligible for
assistance under the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially

Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for Individuals and
Households; 97.050, Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance to
Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--
Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters); 97.039,
Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2019-10198 Filed 5-15-19; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P