Supporting Statement for Information Collection Request Non road Compression Ignition Engine and On road Heavy Duty Engine Application for Emission Certification, and Participation in the Averaging, Banking, and Trading Program 42 USC 7521 § 206 42 USC 7521 § 213( d) 40 CFR Part 86 40 CFR Part 89 February 2001 Certification and Compliance Division Office of Transportation and Air Quality Office of Air and Radiation U. S. Environmental Protection Agency  2 Part A SUBMISSION 1. Identification of the Information Collection 1 ( a) Title and Number of the Information Collection Non road Compression ignition Engine and On road Heavy Duty Engine Application for Emission Certification, and Participation in the Averaging, Banking, and Trading Program.

1( b) Short Characterization This supporting statement consolidates two previously existing ICRs ( EPA No. 1684.04, OMB 2060 0287 and 1851.01, OMB 2060 0404) into ICR number 1684.05. A comparison of the burden hours and cost between the individual ICRs and the consolidation into ICR 1684.05 is shown in section 6( f). The purpose of this consolidation is to eliminate duplication by incorporating all certification and averaging, banking and trading ( AB& T) collection activities in the non road and on highway sectors into one ICR. Because ICR 1684.04 has an earlier expiration date than ICR 1851.01, ICR 1851.01 is being incorporated into ICR 1684.05.

ICR 1851.01 covered all nonroad compression ignition engines at or above 50 horsepower ( 37 kilowatts) and on highway heavy duty engine applications for emission certification and participation in the AB& T program. ICR 1684.04 covered certification requirements for all nonroad compression ignition engines, including those at or above 50 horsepower ( engines rated under 50 Hp became regulated as recently as 1999). Thus, there was a degree of overlap between the two ICRs because both accounted for the burden associated with the certification requirements for nonroad engines at or above 50 horsepower. This accounting overlap is removed in the consolidated ICR 1684.05; the associated burden is reduced accordingly. Additionally, the burden associated with both certification programs has decreased dramatically because CCD has developed an electronic database for industry submission that greatly simplifies the application process.

Under Title II of the Clean Air Act ( 42 U. S. C. 7521 et seq.; CAA), EPA is charged with issuing certificates of conformity for those engines that comply with applicable emission standards. Such a certificate must be issued before engines may be legally introduced into commerce. To apply for a certificate of conformity, manufacturers are required to submit descriptions of their planned production engines, including detailed descriptions of emission control systems and test data. This information is organized by " engine family" groups expected to have similar  3 emission characteristics. There are also recordkeeping requirements.

Those manufacturers electing to participate in the AB& T Program are also required to submit information regarding the calculation, actual generation and usage of credits in an initial report, end of the year report and final report. These reports are used for certification and enforcement purposes. Manufacturers will also maintain records for eight years on the engine families included in the program.

This information is collected by the Engine Programs Group ( EPG), Certification and Compliance Division ( CCD), Office of Transportation and Air Quality ( OTAQ), Office of Air and Radiation ( OAR), U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). Besides CCD, this information could be used by the Office of Enforcement and Compliance ( OECA) and the Department of Justice for enforcement purposes. Confidential Business Information( CBI) is also disclosed in a public database and over the Internet. It is used by trade associations, environmental groups, and the public. The information is usually submitted in an electronic format, and it is stored in EPG's certification database.

It has been estimated that a total of 84 manufacturers will respond to this collection with an approximate cost of $ 10,536,479.60.

2. Need for and Use of the Collection 2( a) Need/ Authority for the Collection Vehicle and engine manufacturers may not legally introduce their product into US commerce unless EPA has certified that their vehicles and engines comply with applicable emission standards. To ensure compliance with these statutes, EPA reviews product information and manufacturers' test results. EPA also tests some vehicles and engines to confirm manufacturers' results.

EPA's emission certification programs are statutorily mandated; the agency does not have discretion to cease these functions. Under Section 206( a) of the CAA ( 42 USC 7521):

" The Administrator shall test, or require to be tested in such manner as he deems appropriate, any new motor vehicle or new motor vehicle engine submitted by a manufacturer to determine whether such vehicle or engine conforms with the regulations prescribed under § 202 of this Act. If such vehicle or engine conforms to such regulations, the Administrator shall issue a certificate of conformity upon such terms, and for such period ( not in excess of one year) as he may prescribe."  4 This provision also applies to nonroad engines, pursuant to § 213( d) of the CAA. Also, under the authority of the CAA § 217, on highway engine manufacturers are required to pay a fee when applying for a certificate of conformity.

EPA also conducts, under 40 CFR 86.094 15 and 40 CFR 89.111 96, an Averaging, Banking, and Trading ( AB& T) Program. This program is one of many regulatory features designed to enhance the compliance flexibility for and reduce the burden on the affected engine manufacturers, without compromising the expected emissions benefit derived from these emissions standards.

2( b) Practical Utility/ Users of the Data EPA uses certification information to verify that the proper vehicles have been selected and that the necessary testing has been performed to assure that each engine complies with emission standards. Once the engines have been produced, EPA uses the information to support various enforcement actions including assembly line audits and in use compliance testing.

The AB& T program allows manufacturers to generate emission credits. Under averaging, a manufacturer could certify one or more engine families within its product line at levels above the emission standard, provided the increased emissions are offset by emission reductions from one or more families certified below the standard. The average emissions ( weighted by horsepower and production) from all the manufacturer's engine families involved in the program in a given model year must be at or below the emission standard. The banking program would allow a manufacturer to bank credits generated in one model year for use in averaging or trading in subsequent model years. The trading program would allow credit transactions between manufacturers.

The information will be received and used by EPG, CCD, OTAQ, OAR. Non confidential portions of the information submitted to EPG is available to and used by importers, engine users, environmental groups, members of the public and state and local government organizations.

3. Nonduplication, Consultations and Other Collection Criteria 3( a) Nonduplication The information requested under this ICR is required by statute. Because of its specialized ( and sometimes confidential) nature, and the fact that it must be submitted to EPA prior to the start of production, the information collected is not available from any other source. Furthermore, some of the information requested under the AB& T Bsuch as actual sales volumes is  5 confidential in nature; therefore EPA can only obtain it if the manufacturers submit it. Participation in the program is voluntary.

3( b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB An announcement of the public comment period for this ICR renewal was published in the Federal Register on December 11, 2000. ( 65 FR 77373). No comments were received. A copy of the FR notice is attached.

3( c) Consultations EPA consulted less than ten past respondents regarding this information collection burden.

Contact: Mr. David Polivka Company: Navistar Phone: 708 865 3565 Contact: Richard Bishop Company: Deere Power Systems Phone: 319 292 8157 Contact: Saul Boast Company: Caterpillar Phone: 309 675 5217 3( d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection The CAA states that emission certification must be done on a yearly basis ( CAA 206( a)( 1)), coinciding with the industry's ` model year'. Major product changes typically occur at the start of a model year. For these reasons, a collection frequency of less than a model year is not possible. However, when an engine design is " carried over" to a subsequent model year, the amount of new information required is substantially reduced.

3( e) General Guidelines According to 40 CFR 86.098 7( onroad/ on highway) and 89.210 96( nonroad), certification, AB& T, and end of the year report related records must be maintained for eight years. However, " records may be retained as hard copy or reduced to microfilm, ADP film, etc., depending on the manufacturer's record retention procedure, provided that in every case all the information contained in the hard copy is retained." These recordkeeping requirements stem, in large part, from the statutory requirement to warrant some items for long periods of time. In addition, the manufacturers must comply with requirements to recall vehicles and engines failing to meet emission standards during their useful  6 lives.

Manufacturers are required to submit confidential business information such as sales projections and certain sensitive technical descriptions ( Please see section 4( b)( i) for reference). This information is kept confidential in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act, EPA regulations at 40 CFR Part 2, and class determinations issued by EPA's Office of General Counsel. Also, non proprietary information submitted by manufacturers is held as confidential until the specific vehicle or engine to which it pertains is available for purchase.

No other general guideline is exceeded by this information collection.

3( f) Confidentiality Manufacturers are allowed to assert a claim of confidentiality over information provided to EPA. Confidentiality is provided in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act and EPA regulations at 40 CFR Part 2. For further detail, refer to section 3( e).

3( g) Sensitive Questions No sensitive questions are asked in this information collection.

4. Respondents and Information Requested 4( a) Respondents/ SIC Codes The respondents are manufacturers or importers of large nonroad and on highway, heavy duty engines. The following Standard Industrial Classification codes are associated with this information collection:

3519 Internal Combustion Engines, Not Elsewhere Classified 3523 Farm Machinery and Equipment 3531 Construction Machinery and Equipment 3537 Industrial Trucks, Tractors, Trailers, and Stackers 3711 Motor Vehicle and Passenger Car Bodies 3714 Motor Vehicle Parts and Accessories 4( b) Information Requested All manufacturers must describe their products and supply test data to verify compliance. This information is organized by " engine family" groups expected to have similar emission characteristics. Manufacturers must also retain records.  7 The burden for a given engine family is reduced after the model's first production year, because data and information from previous years can be " carried over" when no significant changes have occurred. For instance, an engine family certified in model year 2000 can be certified in the 2001 model year by " carry over" of data and paperwork from the 2000 model year if no significant changes have occurred to the engine family between model years. EPA may also allow manufacturers to " carry across" data and paperwork from on highway certification of an engine family which they produce for both the on highway and nonroad markets if there are no significant differences between the on highway and nonroad versions of the engine family. Allowing manufacturers to " carry over" and " carry across" data and paperwork saves manufacturers the burden of duplication of data and paperwork which would occur in the absence of such provisions.

On highway engine manufacturers are also required to pay a fee as promulgated by the CAA Section 217. The amount of the fee is determined under 40 CFR 86 Subpart J. This fee is collected by the Motor Vehicle and Engine Compliance Program in St. Louis, MO. The purpose of the fee is to " recover those compliance, investigation and review costs which EPA incurs in providing vehicle and engine manufacturers or importers with certificates of conformity, fuel economy labels", and others, as stated in 40 CFR 86.905 93.

( i) Data Items The data items in the Tables A to F are requested under these information collections. Different items are requested depending on the type and specific characteristics of the engine family to be certified. Although most of them must be included in the certification application, some of them are only required to be kept in records and submitted upon request, as provided by 89.115 96( f)( 1).

EPA encourages manufacturers to apply electronically and has developed a simple electronic application format. A copy of the application template is attached. The Large Engine Application Form is designed to be used by both nonroad and on highway engine manufacturers, and questions are answered as applicable to each engine category. A complete application consists of ( 1) a Statement of Compliance, ( 2) a Family Information Form ( FIF), ( 3) a Test Information Form ( TIF), ( 4) a Technical Description Form ( TDF), ( 5) an Engine Model Summary ( EMS), and ( 6) an Engine Part Summary ( EPS). However, manufacturers requesting a certificate of conformity for evaporative engine families are only required to submit the Statement of Compliance and an Evaporative Engine Form ( EEF).  8 A. Certification:

Table A Information Items Requested Under The Certification Program Item # in electronic application Information Item Non Road Engines On Highway Letter Statement of compliance 89.115 96( d)( 10) 86.001 21( b)( i) ( C)

1 8 10, 12 Identification and description of the basic engine design including, but not limited to, the engine family specifications ( fuel, cooling medium, etc.) 89.115( d)( 1) 86.09 21( b)( 1) ( i)

9 An explanation of how the emission control system operates 89.115 96( d)( 2) 86.094 21( b)( 1) ( i)

11 Fuel System type and components 89.115 96( d)( 2) 86.094 21( b)( 1) ( i)

13 Useful life Period 89.104 96 86.094 21( b)( 5)( i)( B )

FIF 14 TIF 16 Deterioration factors 89.118 86.094 21( b)( 4)( ii)

15 Intended Service Class N/ A 86.094 21( b)( 5)( ii)

16 Projected Sales 89.115 96( e) 86.0001 21( b)( 2)

17 Estimated Production Period 89.115 96( e) 86.1006 84( c)( 1)

18 Sales Area 89.115 96( e) 86.090 21( b)( 2)

19 20 Plant Contact and Location 89.503 96( d) 86.091 7( c)( 1)( vi)

21 Program information 89.209 96( a)( 1) 86.115 91  9 22 Family emission limits 89.209 96( a)( 3) 86.094 21( b)( 6)( i)

23 Nonroad engine equipment types 89.115 96.( d)( 1) N/ A 24 Detailed description and justification of each auxiliary emission control devices ( AECD), and how they affects emissions 89.115 96( d)( 2) 86.094 21( b)( 1)( i) AB 25 A description of all adjustable parameters, their adjustable ranges and methods employed to prevent tampering, etc 89.115 96( d)( 6) 86.094 21( b)( 1)( ii) A B TDF Detail drawings and descriptions of the of the various emission related components 89.115 96.( d)( 1) 86.094 21( b)( 1)( ii) ( C)

TIF 14 A description of the test equipment and fuel to be used 89.115 96( d)( 8) 86.0001 21( b)( 3)

A description of the test procedures to be used to establish the durability data or the exhaust emission deterioration factors N/ A 86.094 21( b)( 5)( i) ( A)

TIF 15,17 EET 8 All test data obtained by the manufacturer on each test engine 89.115 96( d)( 9) CAA Section 206 A statement of the useful life 89.104 96( d) 86.094 21( b)( 5)( i)( B )

If applicable, a statement of the alternative useful life period and a brief synopsis of the justification 89.104 96( d) 86.094 21( b)( 5)( i)( C )

Maintenance information 89.128 96( d) 86.094 21( b)( 5)( iii) ( A)  10 EEFComments For evaporative families: a description of any unique procedures required to perform evaporative and/ or refueling test, and of the method used to develop those unique procedures N/ A 86.001 21( b)( 9)

For evaporative families: Canister working capacity, canister bed volume, and fuel temperature profile for the running loss test N/ A 86.001 21( b)( 10)

For evaporative families: Maximum nominal fuel tank capacity N/ A 86.094 21( e)

EEF 6 For evaporative families: Certification standard N/ A 86.096 10( b)( 5)( i)

EEF 7 For evaporative families: Weight category N/ A 86.094 21( b)( 7)

TIF 11 The manufacturer shall identify those families which will not comply with cold temperature CO standards N/ A 86.094 21( g)

TDF For families incorporating an emission control diagnostic system: a full and detailed description of its functional characteristics, the method of detecting malfunctions, and provisions taken to prevent tampering N/ A 86.094 21( h)

TDF Description of the provisions taken to prevent tampering with emission control computer instructions 89.108 96( b) 86.094 21( i)

For methanol fueled vehicles: wether the vehicle is flexible or dedicated, and the fuel for which the vehicle was design N/ A 86.094 21( j)

Proposed test fleet selection and the rationale for the test fleet selection 89.115 96( d)( 3) 86.096 24( b)( 2)( B)  11 TIF 13,14 Special or alternate test procedures, if applicable 89.115 96( d)( 4) 86.090 27 The period of operation necessary to accumulate service hours on test engines and stabilize emission levels 89.115 96( d)( 5) 86.094 26( c)( 3)

Fee Filing Form Fee Filing Form N/ A 86.909 93( b)

Request for waiver, if applicable N/ A 86.908 93( a)

Request for refund, if applicable N/ A 86.908 93( b)  12 Table B Recordkeeping requirements  Certification Program Manufacturers must keep records for eight years ( 86.094 7( a)( 3) and 89.124 96( b)) except routine emission records. Manufacturers must keep routine emission records for only one year.

General records:

Identification and description of all engines for which testing is required 89.124 96( a)( 2)( i) 86.091 7( a)( 1) ( A)

Description of emission control systems 89.124 96( a)( 2)( i) 86.091 7( a)( 1) ( B)

Description of test procedures 89.124 96( a)( 2)( i) 86.091 7( a)( 1) ( C)

Individual Records:

Copies of all the applications submitted 89.124 96( a)( 1) 86.091 7( a)( 1) ( C)( ii)

A brief history of all test engines and running changes 89.124 96( a)( 2)( i) 86.091 7( a)( 2)

A complete record of all emission tests performed 89.124 96( a)( 2)( iv) 86.091 7( a)( 2) ( B)

The date of each mileage accumulation run and the mileage accumulated 89.124 96( a)( 2)( ii) 86.091 7( a)( 2) ( C)

Record and description of all maintenance and other servicing performed 89.124 96( a)( 2)( iii ) 86.091 7( a)( 2) ( E)

Record and description of each test performed to diagnose engine or emission control system performance 89.124 96( a)( 2)( v) 86.091 7( a)( 2) ( F)

A brief description of any significant events affecting the vehicle 89.124 96( a)( 2)( vi) 86.091 7( a)( 2) ( G)  13 Actual U. S. sales volume 89.210 96( b)( 5) 86.094 7( h)( 2)

For Heavy Duty engines model 1996 98: Shipment date, purchaser, purchaser contract, and EPA evaporative/ refueling family N/ A 86.096 8( h)( 7)

Routine emission test data 89.124 96( b) 86.094 7( a)( 3)

When a manufacturer needs to make changes to a certified engine, or to add an engine model to an already certified engine family, the following information must be submitted. Running changes are submitted using the same electronic format used to apply for a certificate of conformity.  14 Table C For Running Changes Notification of changes made to the application and request to amend the application 89.123 96( a) 86.079 32( a) and  33( a)

A full description of the change to be made 89.123 96( b) ( 1) 86.079 32( a) and  33( a)

Engineering evaluations or data showing that engines as modified or added will comply with all applicable emission standards 89.123 96( b) ( 2) 86.079 32 86.079 33 86.082 34 A determination wether the original test fleet selection is still appropriate, and proposed new test fleet selections, if applicable 89.123 96( b) ( 3) 86.079 33( b)

Upon request, test data on the engine changed or added 89.123 96( c) 86.079 32( b)

Supporting documentation, test data and engineering evaluations as appropriate to demonstrate that all affected engines will still meet applicable emission standards 89.123 96( e) ( 1) 86.082( a)  15 Each manufacturer is also required to submit the following information:

Table D Annual Production Report and Hearings An annual production report identifying the number of engines produced by engine family, by gross power, by displacement, by fuel system, or by other categories as the Administrator may require. 89.125 96 86.094 24( e)( 2)

If the manufacturer requests a hearing on the Administrator's denial or revocation of a certificate of conformity, the request shall be filed within 30 days of the Administrator's decision, shall be in writing, and shall set forth the manufacturer's objections to the Administrator's decision and data to support the objections. 89.127 96 86.094 23( g)

The Engine Model Summary ( EMS) is requested to evaluate whether engine families were developed correctly. The information contained in this form allows EPA engineers to know if the engine models were grouped correctly, and, most important, if the test data submitted corresponds to the worst case within that family. The calculation of the engine's rated power, torque, etc., is customary business practice.

The Part Summary Form ( PSF) allows EPA to make sure that the engine is actually built in its certified configuration. This information is used when conducting Selective Enforcement Audits. The Selective Enforcement Program is covered by a separate ICR. 1Applicable production volume includes only those engines that have been tracked to a location defined as a point of first retail sale within the U. S., excluding ineligible states.

 16 B. Average, Banking and Trading:

Table E Information Items Required Under the Average, Banking and Trading Program Intent to include this specific engine family in the ABT program 89.209 96( a)( 1) 86.091 15( b)( 1)( i)

Declaration that participation in this program will not cause the applicable emission standard to be exceeded ( have negative credit balance) 89.209 96( a)( 2) 86.094 23( h)( 1)

Family emission limit 89.209 96( a)( 3) 86.094 21( b)( 6)

Projected applicable1 production volumes for the model year 89.209 96( a)( 4) 86.094 21( b)( 6)

Values required to calculate credits 89.209 96( a)( 4) 86.091 15( b)( 1)( iv) ( A)

Projected number of credits generated/ used 89.209 96( a)( 4) 86.091 15( b)( 2)( ii)

If credits are generated, the designated use of the credits involved or if credits are used, the source of those credits 89.209 96( a)( 6) 86.091 15( b)( 2)( ii)  17 Table F Recordkeeping Requirements Average, Banking and Trading Program Records are to be kept for eight years ( 86.094 7( c)( 3) and 89.210 96( d)).

EPA engine family 89.210 96( a)( 1) 86.091 7( c)( 1)( i)

Engine identification number 89.210 96( a)( 2) 86.091 7( c)( 1)( ii)

Engine build date and model year 89.210 96( a)( 3) 86.091 7( c)( 1)( iii )

Power rating 89.210 96( a)( 4) 86.091 7( c)( 1)( iv)

Purchaser and destination 89.210 96( a)( 5) 86.091 7( c)( 1)( v)

Assembly plant 89.210 96( a)( 6) 86.091 7( c)( 1)( vi)

Family emission Limit 89.210 96( b)( 1) 86.091 7( c)( 2)( ii)

Useful life 89.210 96( b)( 1) 86.091 7( c)( 2)( iv)

Projected and actual production model 89.210 96( b)( 1) 86.091 7( c)( 2)( v) and ( vi)

For families participating in trading, the following records must be kept quarterly:

Actual quarterly and cumulative applicable production/ sales volume 89.210 96( c)( 2) 86.091 7( c)( 8) ( iii)

Value required to calculate credits 89.210 96( c)( 3) 86.091 7( c)( 8) ( iv)

Resulting type and number of credits generated/ required 89.210 96( c)( 4) 86.091 7( c)( 8) ( v)  18 How and where credit surpluses are dispersed 89.210 96( c)( 5) 86.091 7( c)( 8) ( vi)

How and through what means credit deficits are met 89.210 96( c)( 6) 86.091 7( c)( 8) ( vii)

( ii) Respondent Activities The type of activities a manufacturer would do to certify an engine family are as follows:

$ Review the regulations and the guidance document $ Develop engine family groups $ Test engines for compliance with emission standards $ Develop deterioration factors ( on highway and some categories of nonroad engines, see section 6( a) for details).

$ Gather emissions data $ Submit the fee filing form ( On Highway only)

$ Pay the corresponding fee ( On Highway only)

$ Submit the Application for Certification $ Retain and maintain records, and submit them upon Administrator's request $ Submit an annual production report Manufacturers electing to participate in the AB& T program will carry out the following activities:

$ Pre certification Activities:

$ Familiarization with the AB& T program provisions $ Determine which engine families will participate in ABT.

$ Project applicable production volumes for the model year for all engine families.

$ Submit AB& T information with the certification application $ Gather information regarding point of first retail sale $ Monitor production volumes and engine sales ( customary business practice)

$ Develop and submit end of year reports $ Develop and submit final reports $ Store, file, and maintain information as required  19 5. The Information Collected Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management 5( a) Agency Activities A significant portion of EPA's emission certification activity is spent reviewing applications, verifying that the correct engines have been selected and tested, answering manufacturers' questions, issuing appropriate certificates of conformity, and storing the data. A part of the certification process involves determining if " carry over" of data from a previous model year is appropriate or if new testing will be required. The agency also analyzes requests for confidentiality and provides appropriate protection.

5( b) Collection Methodology and Management EPA currently makes extensive use of computers in evaluating information from vehicle and engine manufacturers. Most manufacturers use the electronic format provided by EPA to submit their applications. Once the diskette containing the application is received, the application is entered into the Certification Database and reviewed for completeness. If the manufacturer chooses to submit the application in hard copy, then EPA enters the information in the database. The certification reviewer analyses the application to ensure compliance with the CAA and applicable regulations. Non confidential parts of the application can be accessed by the public by contacting the EPG or through the Engine Certification Information Center at http:// www. epa. gov/ otaq/ certdata. htm . Currently, the Center contains information on 1998 and later model years.

Currently, manufacturers have to submit signed statements of compliance in hard copy. EPA is working to enable e signature, so that we can receive the complete application by electronic transmission directly from the manufacturer, further reducing costs and burden for both the industry and the agency.

5( c) Small Entity Flexibility Small on highway engine manufacturers may use optional procedures outlined in 86.098 14 to demonstrate compliance with the general standards and specific emission requirements. These procedures apply to manufacturers with US sales, including all imported engines, of fewer than 10,000 units. The alternate procedures reduce small manufacturers' burden associated with durability data requirements, testing, determination of deterioration factors and certification test data. Small volume manufacturers are also exempt from some reporting and recordkeeping requirements associated to the certification of evaporative families ( 86.098 22( m)).  20 EPA can also waive the on highway certification application fee upon request by the manufacturer. A fee waiver is granted if: ( 1) the certificate is to be used to sell engines within the United States; and ( 2) the full fee exceeds 1% of the aggregate projected retail sales price of all vehicles covered by the certificate of conformity ( 40 CFR 86.908 93). Although this is a provision available to all manufacturers, it is beneficial to some small manufacturers.

Under the other programs included in this ICR, the information being requested is considered to be the minimum needed to effectively conduct and maintain integrity of the required certification and enforcement programs. Further measures to simplify reporting for small businesses do not appear prudent or necessary.

5( d) Collection Schedule Collection frequency is largely determined by the manufacturer's marketing and product plans. Information must be submitted for each ` model year' that a manufacturer intends to build ( or import) an engine model. A certificate of conformity must be obtained before the start of production ( or importation). Taking these two considerations into account, manufacturers normally submit information on an annual basis and submit their applications at their earliest convenience.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection Refer to Tables 1 to 4 for details.

6( a) Estimating Respondent Burden Burden estimates were taken from the previous ICRs and adjusted to reflect comments from fewer than 10 respondents consulted by EPA.

6( b) Estimating Respondent Costs ( i) Estimating Burden Hours The estimated cost for labor is $ 75 per hour for engineers/ technicians and $ 38 per hour for clerical support. In deriving these costs, EPA used cost estimates provided in consultations with the industry. The labor cost rate provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics ($ 35.75/ hour and $ 17.15/ hour, respectively) was not used. This is an average for all manufacturing industries that do not reflect the actual cost for the engine manufacturing industry, which is much higher.

During the next three years, Tier 2 standards will become  21 effective in four power categories of nonroad engines ( NR4, NR5, NR6 and NR8). As part of Tier 2 requirements, manufacturers must submit, for the first time, deterioration factors for engine families in these categories. This burden is reflected in Table 1.

In estimating respondent burden for the Nonroad AB& T Program, a considerable amount of time was allocated for regulation review and presented as a separated item in the burden table. The Nonroad AB& T Program is relatively new and EPA estimates that nonroad engine manufacturers still spend much time reviewing regulations. This is especially true for manufacturers of nonroad engines rated below 50 Hp, as these engines became regulated recently. EPA wanted to make this distinction by listing " review of regulations" as a separate item in the nonroad burden table. However, this item is not listed in the on highway AB& T burden table. The on highway AB& T Program has been in place for a long time and manufacturers are well aware of the provisions of the program. In this case, burden associated with the occasional review of the regulations was included in pre certification activities.

( ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance Costs Operation and Maintenance costs associated with all programs covered by this information collection include diskettes, photocopying, postage expenses, maintenance of emission laboratories, testing costs, and the on highway certification fee. Diskettes are used by manufacturers to submit their electronic applications.

Some engine manufacturers have in house testing facilities for certification testing and research. The cost of maintaining these laboratories have been estimated at $ 60,000 per year. This estimate include the cost of test fuels, calibration gases and equipment.

Other manufacturers, usually smaller manufacturers, prefer to hire a contractor to conduct the necessary certification emission testing in the contractor's facilities. EPA has estimated that testing at a private facility costs, on average, $ 20,000. This is a one time cost per engine family since manufacturers can carry over emissions data from one model year to the next. This cost has been annualized over the approval period requested for this ICR ( 3 years): $ 20,000/ 3 years = $ 6,667.00 per year.

On highway engine manufacturers are requested to pay a fee when submitting an application for a certificate of conformity. This fee is requested under the authority of the CAA Section 217, and established by 40 CFR 86.907 93 as follows:

Heavy Duty Engines: $ 12,584.00 per application All Evaporative only: $ 2,145.00 per application  22 Manufacturers can request a fee waiver under the provisions of 40 CFR 93( a). Refer to section 4( b) of this ICR for further detail.

Capital costs were covered by the previous ICR and incurred by engine manufacturers at the beginning of the certification programs. Therefore, those costs are excluded from this ICR. EPA does not expect any new nonroad CI or on highway engine manufacturers to build emission testing laboratories in the near future. Their emission testing expenses are covered under O& M costs as explained above.

( iii) Capital/ Start Up Costs There are no capital or start up costs associated with the renewal of this ICR. ( See 6( b)( ii) for details.)

( iv) Annualizing capital costs There are no capital costs associated with the renewal of this ICR. ( See 6( b)( ii) for details.)

6( c) Estimating Agency Burden Government cost is based on GS 13 salary for professional engineers ($ 30.29/ hr) and on GS 7 salary for clerical support ($ 14.36). The hourly rates were obtained from the Office of Personal Management. ( Refer to Tables 5 and 6.)

6( d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs EPA receives about 772 certification applications from 84 different engine manufacturers each year.

From the on highway sector, EPA receives about 159 ( 21%) applications annually. Twenty two ( 22) manufacturers submit 117 on highway heavy duty engine certification applications, 59 of which are carry overs.

Seven on highway engine manufacturers also submit applications for evaporative engine families. They submit around 42 applications each year: 36 carry overs and 6 " non carry overs". Usually, 2 manufacturers submit running changes ( about five). Five on highway engine manufacturers elect to participate in the AB& T Program each year with 12 engine families.

Applications from 62 nonroad engine manufacturers account for 79% ( 613). About 393 of those applications are " carry overs" . The remaining 220 applications are new applications for which new emissions data was collected. Nonroad engine manufacturers also submitted about 264 running changes, in aggregate. Only 2 manufacturers participate in the AB& T Program with 15 engine  23 families.

6( e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables ( i) Respondent Tally Table 7 Total Estimated Respondent Burden And Cost Summary Program Number of Respon Number of Activities Total Hours Per Year Total Labor Cost Per Year Total Annual Capital Costs Total Annual O& M Costs Total Costs On highway Certification 22 13 18,269 $ 1,217,136 0 $ 2,516,656 $ 3,733,791 On highway AB& T 5 6 3,996 $ 279,720 0 $ 0 $ 279,720 Nonroad Certification 62 8 62,222 $ 4,632,225 0 $ 1,572,165 $ 6,204,390 Nonroad AB& T 2 7 4,560 $ 318,579 0 $ 0 $ 318,579 Total 84 34 89,047 $ 6,447,660 0 $ 4,088,820 $ 10,536,480 ( ii) The Agency Tally Table 8 Total Estimated Agency Burden And Cost Summary Program Number of Respon Number of Activities Total Hours Per Year Total Labor Cost Per Year Total Annual Capital Costs Total Annual O& M Costs Certification 84 8 10,433 $ 316,010 0 $ 1,546 AB& T 7 4 448 $ 13,361 0 $ 0 Total 91 12 10,881 $ 329,370 0 $ 1,546 6( f) Reasons for change in burden  24 Table 9 Total OMB Inventory ( Total Burden of Consolidated ICRs)

Program ICR 1684.04 ICR 1851.01 Total Total Burden Hours 78,006 53,169 131,175 Total Cost $ 0 $ 1,606,000 $ 1,606,000 Table 10 Comparison between original ICRs ( 1684.04 and 1851.01) and the consolidation ( 1684.05)

Consolidation ICR Original ICRs combined Change Category Total Burden ( Hours) 89,047 131,175 ( 42,128) Adjustment Total Cost $ 10,536,480 $ 1,606,000 $ 8,930,480 Adjustment Total burden has decreased for various reasons. First, EPA has developed an electronic database that simplifies the application process. Second, EPA has done a better job in this consolidated ICR of accounting for carry over applications, which require significantly less time and expense to prepare since they contain exactly the same information than the original application. Although ICR 1851.01 accounted for these facts, ICR 1684.04 did not. Furthermore, ICR 1684.04 included burden estimates for the first model year ( model year 1999) on which nonroad CI engines rated at or below 50 Hp were regulated. It was estimated that the burden to respondents was higher during the first year due to one time preparations needed to apply for certification plus a learning curve. That segment of the industry has already been regulated for 3 years. Manufacturers participating in these programs have already incurred in those one time expenses and are well aware of emission regulations and procedures. Manufacturers are also increasingly carrying over their applications from one year to the next.  25 Further reductions in burden were offset by increased participation in both the on highway and nonroad AB& T programs. Participation increased from 7 to 12 on highway manufacturers, and from 5 to 15 nonroad manufacturers.

There was an increase in total costs, however, due to the accounting for O& M costs, such as laboratory maintenance costs and the cost of contracting out emission testing. EPA did not accounted for this expenses in the previous ICRs.

6( g) Burden Statement For on highway engine manufacturers, the burden associated with requesting certificates of conformity is estimated to average 327 hours per application. For those on highway engine manufacturers participating in the Average, Banking and Trading Program, the burden associated with this program averages 333 hours per year.

Nonroad manufacturers spend, in average, 284 hours per application annually. The average burden associated with participation in the nonroad Average, Banking and Trading Program is of 460 hours annually per respondent.

These estimates include time to review applicable regulations and guidance documents, generate and gather the necessary information, submit applications and reports, and maintain records.

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

Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Sandy Farmer, U. S.  26 Environmental Protection Agency, Collection Strategies Division ( Mail Code 2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N. W., Washington, DC 20460; and to Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget ( OMB), Attention: Desk Officer for EPA, 725 17th Street, N. W., Washington, DC 20503. Include the EPA ICR number 1684.05 and OMB control number 2060 0287 in any correspondence.

The following information will be included with the various forms:

Form Approved OMB Control No.

Approval expires / /

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

Send comments on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency ( 2822), 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D. C. 20460. Include the OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the completed [ form or survey] to this address.


[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 115 (Monday, June 16, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34314-34315]
[FR Doc No: 2014-13908]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2009-D-0011]

International Conference on Harmonisation; Guidance on Q4B
Evaluation and Recommendation of Pharmacopoeial Texts for Use in the
International Conference on Harmonisation Regions; Annex 6 on
Uniformity of Dosage Units General Chapter; Availability

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing the
availability of a guidance entitled ``Q4B Evaluation and Recommendation
of Pharmacopoeial Texts for Use in the International Conference on
Harmonisation Regions; Annex 6: Uniformity of Dosage Units General
Chapter.'' The guidance was prepared under the auspices of the
International Conference on Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for
Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use (ICH). The guidance
provides the results of the ICH Q4B evaluation of the Uniformity of
Dosage Units General Chapter harmonized text from each of the three
pharmacopoeias (United States, European, and Japanese) represented by
the Pharmacopoeial Discussion Group (PDG). The guidance conveys
recognition of the three pharmacopoeial methods by the three ICH
regulatory regions and provides specific information regarding the
recognition. The guidance is intended to recognize the
interchangeability between the local regional pharmacopoeias, thus
avoiding redundant testing in favor of a common testing strategy in
each regulatory region. The guidance is in the form of an annex to the
core guidance on the Q4B process entitled ``Q4B Evaluation and
Recommendation of Pharmacopoeial Texts for Use in the ICH Regions''
(core ICH Q4B guidance).

DATES: Submit either electronic or written comments on Agency guidances
at any time.

ADDRESSES: Submit written requests for single copies of the guidance to
the Division of Drug Information, Center for Drug Evaluation and
Research (CDER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire
Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 2201, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002; or the Office
of Communication, Outreach and Development, Center for Biologics
Evaluation and Research (CBER), Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New
Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 3128, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002. Send
one self-addressed adhesive label to assist the office in processing
your requests. The guidance may also be obtained by mail by calling
CBER at 1-800-835-4709 or<PHONE_NUMBER>. See the SUPPLEMENTARY
INFORMATION section for electronic access to the guidance document.
    Submit electronic comments on the guidance to http://www.regulations.gov. Submit written comments to the Division of Dockets
Management (HFA-305), Food and Drug Administration, 5630 Fishers Lane,
Rm. 1061, Rockville, MD 20852.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Regarding the guidance: Robert H. King, CDER, Food and Drug
Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm. 4166, Silver
Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>; or Stephen Ripley, CBER, Food and
Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 71, Rm. 7301,
Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Regarding the ICH: Michelle Limoli, CDER, International Programs,
Food and Drug Administration, 10903 New Hampshire Ave., Bldg. 51, Rm.
3342, Silver Spring, MD 20993-0002,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. Background

    In recent years, many important initiatives have been undertaken by
regulatory authorities and industry associations to promote
international harmonization of regulatory requirements. FDA has
participated in many meetings designed to enhance harmonization and is
committed to seeking scientifically based harmonized technical
procedures for pharmaceutical development. One of the goals of
harmonization is to identify and then reduce differences in technical
requirements for drug development among regulatory agencies.
    ICH was organized to provide an opportunity for tripartite
harmonization initiatives to be developed with input

from both regulatory and industry representatives. FDA also seeks input
from consumer representatives and others. ICH is concerned with
harmonization of technical requirements for the registration of
pharmaceutical products among three regions: The European Union, Japan,
and the United States. The six ICH sponsors are the European
Commission; the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries
Associations; the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare; the
Japanese Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association; CDER, CBER, and FDA;
and the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. The ICH
Secretariat, which coordinates the preparation of documentation, is
provided by the International Federation of Pharmaceutical
Manufacturers Associations (IFPMA).
    The ICH Steering Committee includes representatives from each of
the ICH sponsors and the IFPMA, as well as observers from the World
Health Organization, Health Canada, and the European Free Trade Area.
    In the Federal Register of February 17, 2009 (74 FR 7449), FDA
published a notice announcing the availability of a draft guidance
entitled ``Q4B Evaluation and Recommendation of Pharmacopoeial Texts
for Use in the ICH Regions; Annex 6: Uniformity of Dosage Units General
Chapter.'' The notice gave interested persons an opportunity to submit
comments by April 20, 2009.
    After consideration of the comments received and revisions to the
guidance, a final draft of the guidance was submitted to the ICH
Steering Committee and endorsed by the three participating regulatory
agencies in November 2013.
    The guidance provides the specific evaluation results from the ICH
Q4B process for the Uniformity of Dosage Units General Chapter
harmonized text originating from the three-party PDG. This guidance is
in the form of an annex to the core ICH Q4B guidance (http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM073405.pdf) made available in the Federal Register of
February 21, 2008 (73 FR 9575). The annex will provide guidance to
assist industry and regulators in the implementation of the specific
topic evaluated by the ICH Q4B process.
    This guidance is being issued consistent with FDA's good guidance
practices regulation (21 CFR 10.115). The guidance represents the
Agency's current thinking on this topic. It does not create or confer
any rights for or on any person and does not operate to bind FDA or the
public. An alternative approach may be used if such approach satisfies
the requirements of the applicable statutes and regulations.

II. Comments

    Interested persons may submit either electronic comments regarding
this document to http://www.regulations.gov or written comments to the
Division of Dockets Management (see ADDRESSES). It is only necessary to
send one set of comments. Identify comments with the docket number
found in brackets in the heading of this document. Received comments
may be seen in the Division of Dockets Management between 9 a.m. and 4
p.m., Monday through Friday, and will be posted to the docket at http://www.regulations.gov.

III. Electronic Access

    Persons with access to the Internet may obtain the document at
either http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, http://www.fda.gov/BiologicsBloodVaccines/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/default.htm, or
http://www.regulations.gov.

    Dated: June 10, 2014.
Leslie Kux,
Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2014-13908 Filed 6-13-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 3042]
[FR Doc No: 2017-00216]

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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-79732; File No. SR-NYSEArca-2016-145]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; NYSE Arca, Inc.; Order Granting
Approval of a Proposed Rule Change To Conform to Proposed Amendment to
Rule 15c6-1(a) Under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 To Shorten the
Standard Settlement Cycle From Three Business Days After the Trade Date
(``T+3'') to Two Business Days After the Trade Date (``T+2'')

January 4, 2017.

I. Introduction

    On November 4, 2016, NYSE Arca, Inc. (``Exchange'' or ``NYSE
Arca'') filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(``Commission''), pursuant to Section 19(b)(1) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 thereunder,\2\ a
proposed rule change to conform its rules to an amendment proposed by
the Commission to Rule 15c6-1(a) under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 (``Act'') to shorten the standard settlement cycle for most
broker-dealer transactions from three business days after the trade
date (``T+3'') to two business days after the trade date (``T+2'').\3\
The proposed rule change was published for comment in the Federal
Register on November 23, 2016.\4\ The Commission received no comments
on the proposal. This order approves the proposed rule change.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 78962 (Sept. 28,
2016), 81 FR 69240 (Oct. 5, 2016) (File No. S7-22-16).
    \4\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 79337 (Nov. 17,
2016), 81 FR 84635 (Nov. 23, 2016).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. Description of the Proposal

    The Exchange proposes to adopt new NYSE Arca Equities Rule 7.4T
(Ex-Dividend or Ex-Right Dates), to conform to a proposed amendment to
Rule 15c6-1(a) under the Act that would shorten the standard settlement
cycle to T+2.

A. Current T+3 Settlement Cycle

    Currently, Exchange Rule 7.4 provides that transactions in stocks
traded ``regular'' shall be ``ex-dividend'' or ``ex-rights,'' as the
case may be, on the second business day preceding the record date fixed
by the company or the date of the closing of transfer books, except
when the Board of Directors rules otherwise.\5\ Further, current
Exchange Rule 7.4 provides that, should the record date or closing of
transfer books occur on a day other than a business day, the rule shall
apply for the third preceding business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \5\ See Exchange Rule 7.4.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

B. Proposed T+2 Settlement Cycle

    Proposed new Exchange Rule 7.4T would provide that transactions in
stocks traded ``regular'' shall be ``ex-divided'' or ``ex-rights,'' as
the case may be, on the business day preceding the record date fixed by
the company or the date of the closing of transfer books, except when
the Board of Directors rules otherwise.\6\ Further, proposed Rule 7.4T
would provide that, should the record date or closing of transfer books
occur on a day other than a business day, the rule would apply for the
second preceding business day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \6\ See Proposed Exchange Rule 7.4T.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

C. Operative Date

    The Exchange proposes for the new rule to be adopted but not yet
operative. The current T+3 rule would remain in effect until the
Exchange files a separate proposed rule change, to delete the current
T+3 rule and make operative the proposed T+2 rule. The Exchange would
announce the operative date of the T+2 rule by issuing an Information
Memo.

III. Discussion and Commission's Findings

    After careful review of the proposed rule change, the Commission
finds that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of the Act
and the rules and regulations thereunder that are applicable to a
national securities exchange.\7\ Specifically, the Commission finds
that the rule change is consistent with Section 6(b)(5) of the Act,\8\
which requires that the rules of a national securities exchange be
designed, among other things, to prevent fraudulent and manipulative
acts and practices, to promote just and equitable principles of trade,
to foster cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in
regulating, clearing, settling, processing information with respect to,
and facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to
and perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national
market system, and to protect investors and the public interest.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \7\ In approving this rule change, the Commission has considered
the rule's impact on efficiency, competition, and capital formation.
See 15 U.S.C. 78c(f).
    \8\ 15 U.S.C. 78f(b)(5).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Commission notes that the proposal would conform Exchange Rule
7.4 to the amendment that the Commission has proposed to Rule 15c6-1(a)
under the Act. The Commission also notes that the proposed amendment to
Rule 15c6-1(a) under the Act has not yet been adopted by the
Commission, and that the Exchange has, accordingly, not proposed to
make its amended rule effective at present. Instead, the Exchange has
proposed to establish the operative date of the Exchange's proposal by
filing a separate proposed rule change. The Commission expects that any
proposed rule change to establish the operative date of the Exchange's
proposal would correspond with the compliance date of any amendment to
Rule 15c6-1(a) that is adopted by the Commission.
    For the reasons noted above, the Commission finds that the proposal
is consistent with the requirements of the Act and would foster
cooperation and coordination with persons engaged in regulating,
clearing, settling, processing information with respect to, and
facilitating transactions in securities, to remove impediments to and
perfect the mechanism of a free and open market and a national market
system, and to protect investors and the public interest.

IV. Conclusion

    It is therefore ordered that, pursuant to Section 19(b)(2) of the
Act,\9\ that the proposed rule change (SR-NYSEArca-2016-145), be and
hereby is, approved.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \9\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets,
pursuant to delegated authority.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \10\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Eduardo A. Aleman,
Assistant Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2017-00216 Filed 1-9-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 8011-01-P


Hanmer Wastewater Facilities Hanmer Wastewater Facilities Process Overview Process Overview ° All Process All Process Wastewater flows to Wastewater flows to the waste treatment the waste treatment pump house.

pump house. ° Wastewater is either Wastewater is either pumped to the pumped to the Primary Clarifier Primary Clarifier ° or flows into the or flows into the Emergency Pond for Emergency Pond for storage.

storage. ° Solids from the Primary +

Solids from the Primary +

Waste Activated Sludge Waste Activated Sludge solids are pumped to the solids are pumped to the Sludge Holding Tank Sludge Holding Tank ° The Sludge Holding Tank The Sludge Holding Tank supplies solids for the 2 supplies solids for the 2 filter presses that de filter presses that de

water the solids to 25%

water the solids to 25% Solids:

Solids:

° The solids are then The solids are then hauled daily by CDR hauled daily by CDR Synagro for land Synagro for land application application Solids:

Solids:

° Composting studies Composting studies have also been done have also been done for future beneficial for future beneficial use and as an use and as an economic alternative economic alternative to land application .

to land application . Composted Sludge Normal Soil Wastewater Wastewater ° Overflow from the Overflow from the Primary Clarifier plus Primary Clarifier plus Return Activated Sludge Return Activated Sludge from the Secondary from the Secondary Clarifier flow into the Clarifier flow into the activated sludge activated sludge Bardenpho process where Bardenpho process where Phosphorus and Ammonia Phosphorus and Ammonia are treated below VPDES are treated below VPDES Discharge Permit limits Discharge Permit limits Wastewater Wastewater ° Ferric chloride is Ferric chloride is added at the end of added at the end of the Bardenpho the Bardenpho process if necessary process if necessary to further reduce to further reduce phosphorus.

phosphorus.

° Then the wastewater Then the wastewater flows to the flows to the secondary clarifier.

secondary clarifier. Wastewater Wastewater ° Overflow at the Overflow at the secondary clarifier has secondary clarifier has a small amount of de a small amount of de

foamer added before foamer added before flowing to a Parshall flowing to a Parshall flume where the flow flume where the flow is measured prior to is measured prior to discharge back into discharge back into the James River the James River