  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1

*** DRAFT ***

Information Collection Request:

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System

Modification and Variance Requests

October 2006

Prepared for

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Wastewater Management

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, DC 20460

Prepared by

Tetra Tech, Inc.

10306 Eaton Place, Suite 340

Fairfax, VA 22030

EPA Contract Number EP-C-05-046

EPA Work Assignment Number 0-24

CONTENTS

  TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862402"  1.
IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc144862402 \h
1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862403"  1(a). Title of the Information
Collection	  PAGEREF _Toc144862403 \h  1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862404"  1(b). Short Characterization/Abstract
PAGEREF _Toc144862404 \h  1

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862405"  2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION
PAGEREF _Toc144862405 \h  3

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862406"  2(a). Need/Authority of the Collection
PAGEREF _Toc144862406 \h  3

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862407"  2(b). Practical Utility/Users of the
Data	  PAGEREF _Toc144862407 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862408"  3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND
OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA	  PAGEREF _Toc144862408 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862409"  3(a). Nonduplication	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862409 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862410"  3(b). Public Notice Required Prior to
ICR Submission to OMB	  PAGEREF _Toc144862410 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862411"  3(c). Consultations	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862411 \h  5

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862412"  3(d). Effects of Less Frequent
Collection	  PAGEREF _Toc144862412 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862413"  3(e). General Guidelines	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862413 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862414"  3(f). Confidentiality	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862414 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862415"  3(g). Sensitive Questions	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862415 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862416"  4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION
REQUESTED	  PAGEREF _Toc144862416 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862417"  4(a). Respondents/SIC Codes	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862417 \h  6

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862418"  4(b). Information Requested	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862418 \h  7

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862419"  5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED—AGENCY
ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862419 \h  10

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862420"  5(a). Agency Activities	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862420 \h  10

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862421"  5(b). Collection Methodology and
Management	  PAGEREF _Toc144862421 \h  11

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862422"  5(c). Small Entity Flexibility	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862422 \h  11

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862423"  5(d). Collection Schedule	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862423 \h  11

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862424"  6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE
COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc144862424 \h  12

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862425"  6(a). Estimating Respondent Burden
PAGEREF _Toc144862425 \h  12

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862426"  6(a)(i). 	Estimating Applicant
Respondent Burden	  PAGEREF _Toc144862426 \h  12

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862427"  6(a)(ii). 	Estimating State Respondent
Burden	  PAGEREF _Toc144862427 \h  18

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862428"  6(a)(iii). 	Total Respondent Burden
PAGEREF _Toc144862428 \h  18

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862429"  6(b). Estimating Respondent Costs
PAGEREF _Toc144862429 \h  18

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862430"  6(c). Estimating Agency Burden and Cost
 PAGEREF _Toc144862430 \h  19

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862431"  6(d). Estimating the Respondent Universe
and Total Burden and Costs	  PAGEREF _Toc144862431 \h  22

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862432"  6(e). Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost
Tables	  PAGEREF _Toc144862432 \h  23

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862433"  6(f). Reasons for Change in Burden
PAGEREF _Toc144862433 \h  23

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862434"  6(g). Burden Statement	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862434 \h  26

EXHIBITS

  TOC \h \z \t "Table Title,1"    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862356"  Exhibit
1.1. Summary of burden and costs, ICR for permittees and state
government for NPDES modification and variance requests	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862356 \h  2

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862357"  Exhibit 2.1. Authority for information
collection items regarding requests for NPDES modifications and
variances	  PAGEREF _Toc144862357 \h  3

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862358"  Exhibit 4.1. Number of permittees in the
NPDES and sludge programs	  PAGEREF _Toc144862358 \h  7

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862359"  Exhibit 6.1. Global information and
assumptions	  PAGEREF _Toc144862359 \h  12

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862360"  Exhibit 6.2. Annual number of
respondents	  PAGEREF _Toc144862360 \h  13

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862361"  Exhibit 6.3. Annual respondent burden
and costs (not including state or federal burden)	  PAGEREF
_Toc144862361 \h  14

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862362"  Exhibit 6.4. Annual respondent burden
and costs (including state burden)	  PAGEREF _Toc144862362 \h  18

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862363"  Exhibit 6.5. Annual government burden
and costs	  PAGEREF _Toc144862363 \h  20

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862364"  Exhibit 6.6. Bottom line tallies
PAGEREF _Toc144862364 \h  23

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc144862365"  Exhibit 6.7. Burden comparison: 2003 vs.
2006 ICR for modification and variance requests	  PAGEREF _Toc144862365
\h  25

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a). Title of the Information Collection

Title: National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
Modification and Variance Requests

EPA ICR Number: 0029.09

OMB Control Number: 2040-0068

1(b). Short Characterization/Abstract

This Information Collection Request (ICR) revises the 2003 ICR for
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Modification and
Variance Requests, OMB No. 2040-0068. This ICR renews burden and costs
associated with modifications and variances made to NPDES permits and to
National Sewage Sludge management program permit requirements. It was
prepared according to the guidance contained in the Office of
Environmental Information(s (OEI(s) 2005 ICR Handbook. The handbook is
the Agency’s most recent guidance document for preparing an ICR, and
it follows the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 and the
OMB guidelines. The total respondent burden for the activities covered
in this ICR is estimated as 280,224 hours, at a labor cost of
$10,423,930.

The Clean Water Act (CWA) authorizes EPA to issue permits for the
discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States. EPA regulates
point source discharges of pollutants to waters of the United States
under its NPDES program. CWA section 402(b) allows states (defined to
include Indian tribes and U.S. territories) to acquire authority for the
NPDES program. This authority enables them to issue and administer NPDES
permits. Municipal and nonmunicipal facilities that wish to discharge
domestic wastewater, industrial wastewater, and other pollutants into
waters of the United States must apply for permits under the NPDES
program. Such permits contain limits on the amount of pollutants that
these facilities may discharge and also impose other conditions on
dischargers. The Sewage Sludge Management program regulates public and
private treatment works that treat domestic sewage. These regulations
are implemented through sludge conditions incorporated into treatment
works( NPDES permits. At present, 45 states and the Virgin Islands have
NPDES permit program authority, and 7 states have sewage sludge
management program authority. As of the date this ICR was issued, no
Indian tribes have been authorized to administer the NPDES program. In
states that do not have authority for these programs, EPA issues and
administers NPDES permits. Because some permit applications are
processed by states and some by EPA, this ICR calculates government
burden and costs for both states and EPA.

 ADVANCE \d3 Modifications

Once an NPDES permit is issued, a facility is subject to the permit
limits and conditions for the life of the permit (usually 5 years).
However, events could occur during this period that would render the
permit limits or conditions inappropriate. Some of these events are
beyond the permittee(s control; others might be directly related to the
permittee(s actions. For example, state water quality standards may be
revised and affect the effluent limitations established in the permit.
Alternatively, a permittee could expand its operation procedures or
change its raw materials, altering the character of its discharge or the
quality of the sewage sludge it generates. Responding to such events
might require a modification of the NPDES or sewage sludge management
permit conditions.

The causes that can lead to permit modifications are established in 40
CFR 122.62 and 122.63. In addition, the regulations specify information
that a facility must report for EPA to determine whether a permit
modification is warranted. Each provision requires similar information;
only the triggering requirement(s) are different.

 ADVANCE \d3 Variances

The CWA provides that, before permit issuance, an NPDES permit applicant
may request a variance from the conditions that would normally be
imposed on the applicant(s discharge. Although any interested party may
request a variance, the applicant usually makes such requests. An
applicant must submit information so the permitting authority can assess
whether the facility is eligible for a variance and what deviation from
CWA provisions is necessary. Permit limitations established in response
to a variance request may be more or less stringent than those set by
the CWA. The variances that an applicant may seek are discussed in
section 4.b of this ICR.

The permitting authority collects modification and variance requests
submitted by NPDES permittees and uses the information from these
requests to determine whether the conditions or requirements exist that
would warrant a modification or variance. Other uses of modification and
variance request information are discussed further in section 2.b. The
information required of NPDES and sewage sludge facilities represents
the minimum information necessary to achieve the Agency(s goals and
satisfy regulatory standards.

Exhibit 1.1 presents a summary of the time and financial resources
(burden) for NPDES facilities for submitting modification and variance
requests. These resources will be expended by NPDES (and sludge)
facilities for preparing modification and variance requests under the
terms and conditions of their discharge permits and existing NPDES
regulations. Exhibit 1.1 also presents a summary of the time that states
will spend in reviewing, analyzing, and processing the data submitted by
NPDES permittees requesting modifications or variances.

Exhibit 1.1. Summary of burden and costs, ICR for permittees and state
government for NPDES modification and variance requests

Information item	Permittee burden (hours)	State burden (hours)	Permittee
cost ($)	State Cost ($)

Request for water quality related effluent limitations modification	0	0
$0 	$0

Permittee report of planned facility changes	5,392	26,097	$191,872
$943,930

Permittee report of anticipated noncompliance	8,365	16,195	$335,910
$585,773

Facility and permit transfer report	3,081	3,976	$133,962 	$143,812

Permittee report of inaccurate previous information	2,132	4,127	$82,166
$149,273

Excessive discharge report	4,380	4,240	$190,442 	$153,360

Permittee notice of regulated discharge cessation	1,317	5,099	$57,263
$184,431

Request for modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination
21,000	162,624	$913,080 	$5,882,110

Variance report for fundamentally different factors	0	0	$0 	$0

Variance request for nonconventional pollutants	1,350	4,530	$58,698
$163,850

Variance request for innovative pollution control technology	120	400
$5,218 	$14,468

Variance request regarding thermal discharges (new)	3,200	2,400	$139,136
	$86,808

Variance request regarding thermal discharges (renewal)	160	39	$6,957
$1,411

Variance request regarding discharge into waters	0	0	$0 	$0

Total	50,497	229,727	$2,114,704	$8,309,226

In summary, this ICR estimates a burden of 50,497 hours annually for
NPDES facilities at a cost of $2,114,704. Burden for state governments
is 229,727 hours annually at a cost of $8,309,226. Burden for the
federal government is 9,063 hours annually at a cost of $327,808. Total
respondent burden is 280,224 hours and total cost is $10,423,930.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2(a). Need/Authority of the Collection

Section 301 of the CWA authorizes EPA and states with NPDES authority to
establish and modify NPDES permit conditions or to vary the effluent
limitations established in NPDES permits. Section 405 of the act allows
states with sludge management authority to issue and modify permits that
regulate the use and disposal of sewage sludge. This ICR covers the data
requirements necessary for a permitting authority to determine (1)
whether NPDES or sewage sludge management permit conditions should be
modified or (2) whether a request for a variance from certain NPDES
permit conditions should be granted.

Modifications change the limits and conditions of existing permits
without affecting the permit(s term. Information supporting modification
requests is collected during the effective term of the permit. On the
other hand, as provided for in the CWA, variances allow the effluent
limitation requirements or time deadlines be modified or waived. During
the permit development process, the permitting authority collects
information from facilities to evaluate variance requests. In each case,
the information collected is used to update or supplement permit
application data.

Exhibit 2.1 displays the citations in the CWA and the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) that correspond to conditions that may warrant a
permit modification or variance.

Exhibit 2.1. Authority for information collection items regarding
requests for NPDES modifications and variances

Information item	CWA citation	CFR citation

Request for water quality related effluent limitations modification
Section 302(b)	40 CFR 122.21(m)(5), 122.21(n)(3)

Permittee report of planned facility changes	 	40 CFR 122.41(l)(1),
501.15(b)(12)

Permittee report of anticipated noncompliance	 	40 CFR 122.24(l)(2)

Facility and permit transfer report	 	40 CFR 122.41(l)(3)

Permittee report of inaccurate previous information	 	40 CFR
122.41(l)(8)

Excessive discharge report	 	40 CFR 122.42

Permittee notice of regulated discharge cessation	 	40 CFR 122.47(b)(4)

Request for modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination
40 CFR 122.41(h), 122.62, 122.64, 122.63, 124.5, 501.15(b)(8),
501.15(c)(2)

Variance report for fundamentally different factors	Section 301(n)	40
CFR 122.21(m)(1), 125.30

Variance request for nonconventional pollutants	Section 301(c) and (g)
40 CFR 122.21(m)(2)

Variance request for innovative pollution control technology	Section
301(k)	40 CFR 122.21(m)(4)

Variance request regarding thermal discharges (new)	Section 316(a)	40
CFR 122.21(m)(6)

Variance request regarding thermal discharges (renewal)	 	40 CFR
122.21(m)(6)

Variance request regarding discharge into marine waters	Section 301(h)
40 CFR 122.21(n)(1)

Congress intended the CWA “to restore and maintain the chemical,
physical and biological integrity of the nation(s waters.”  To reach
this goal, Congress established the NPDES program under section 402 of
the act. In addition, Congress established the Sewage Sludge Management
Program under section 405 of the act.

The modification and variance requests discussed in this ICR provide
some latitude in how permittees meet the CWA goals by taking into
account individual financial and technical capabilities. For example,
the request for water quality-related, effluent limitation modifications
and the variance request for nonconventional pollutants are attempts to
balance the economic and social costs of pollution abatement with its
social benefits. However, progress toward meeting the CWA goals must be
maintained even if such modifications or variances are granted.

Similarly, technically advanced permittees may seek variances that
enable them to (1) develop innovative technologies to reduce pollutant
concentrations beyond the current Best Available Technology Economically
Achievable (BAT) limits or (2) experiment with changes to their physical
plant that reduce the cost of attaining BAT limits. These variances
promote the goals of the CWA by helping facilities develop more
cost-effective pollution abatement techniques that other permittees can
adopt in the future.

The modification and variance provisions of the CWA and 40 CFR sections
122.21, 122.62, 122.63, 124.5, and 501.5 also give authorized states
with NPDES or sewage sludge management program authority and EPA the
flexibility to respond quickly and efficiently to

Advances in pollution control technology

Legislative demands for more pollution control

Changes in the operations of permitted facilities

Corrections of inaccurate information provided in applications or
routine reports

For example, the wastewater permittee report of planned facility changes
gives the permitting authority advance notice of scheduled plant
alterations so that permit conditions can be rewritten to take into
account the effect(s) of those changes. Modification provisions also
enable the permitting authority to rewrite permit effluent limitations
to incorporate changes in state water quality standards.

Most modification requests pertain to day-to-day changes at a permitted
facility. The permitting authority uses the information provided in
these requests to determine whether the applicant meets the statutory
and regulatory requirements for a permit modification. Decisions on
permit modifications are typically made at the EPA Region or authorized
state level.

On the other hand, variance requests relate to exceptional or major
changes to permit requirements. Therefore, they are scrutinized closely
by the permitting authority. Often, they are reviewed at EPA
Headquarters, as well as at the EPA Regions. Even if variances are
approved by the Regions or states, EPA Headquarters must usually concur
before necessary before a variance may be granted.

2(b). Practical Utility/Users of the Data

Use of the data provided in each type of modification or variance
request varies greatly because the information requirements of these
items are so diverse. In general, EPA and authorized states use the
information to determine whether

The conditions or requirements that would warrant a modification or
variance exist

The progress toward achieving the goals of the CWA will continue if the
modification or variance is granted

Other uses for the information provided in these reporting items include

Updating records on permitted facilities

Supporting enforcement actions

Overall program management, including policy and budget development and
responding to congressional inquiries

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

3(a). Nonduplication

EPA has examined all other reporting requirements contained in the CWA
and 40 CFR Parts 122, 123, 124, 125, 403, 501, and 503. During the first
cost analysis for modifications and variance requests, the Agency
consulted the following sources of information to determine if similar
or duplicate information is available elsewhere

EPA Information Systems Inventory

EPA Inventory of Information Collection Requests

Federal Information Locator System

Previous examination of these databases revealed no duplicate
requirements. EPA concluded that it has no other way to obtain the
information addressed in this ICR.

3(b). Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

The ICR was published in the Federal Register on March 7, 2006. The
notice included a request for comments on the content and the impact on
the regulated community. EPA received no comments.

3(c). Consultations

EPA finalized the requirements addressed in this ICR after receiving
comments from the public and the regulated community. No formal
consultations with persons outside EPA have occurred since the original
consolidated modifications/variances ICR was written in 1985. However,
the Agency does consider, and act on, the comments it receives in its
daily dealings with the public and with the regulated community. EPA
Headquarters staff responsible for program oversight in the applicable
program areas were contacted to provide revised information and data for
this ICR.

3(d). Effects of Less Frequent Collection

The information required is specific to the modifications and variances
which permittees request and would not be supplied in any other report
or application. The information collection and reporting requirements
associated with NPDES permit modifications and variances are submitted
as needed. In most cases, the decision to submit information is made by
the NPDES permittee or permit applicant. The exceptions are (1) when
outside events trigger the need for a permit modification, and (2) when
the Administrator decides to invoke a reporting requirement, such as a
request for permit revocation and reissuance. Because information is
submitted only when needed, less frequent data collection would not
provide the permitting authority and EPA Headquarters with sufficient
information to meet their responsibilities under the CWA.

3(e). General Guidelines

This information collection complies with Paperwork Reduction Act
guidelines [5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2)]. Requests for supplemental information
for the purposes of emergency response or enforcement activities are
exempt from the Paperwork Reduction Act requirements.

3(f). Confidentiality

Permit modification and variance requests may contain confidential
business information. If this is the case, the respondent may request
that such information be treated as confidential. All confidential data
will be handled in accordance with 40 CFR 122.7, 40 CFR Part 2. Any
claim of confidentiality must be asserted at the time of submission.
However, CWA 308(b) specifically states that effluent data may not be
treated as confidential.

3(g). Sensitive Questions

Reporting requirements addressed in this ICR do not include sensitive
questions.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4(a). Respondents/SIC Codes

NPDES permits are required any time there is a discharge of pollutants
from a point source to the waters of the United States, regardless of a
discharger(s industrial category. Consequently, industries of almost any
category may apply for NPDES permits. A relatively large portion of
permitted facilities, including municipal dischargers, are classified in
the sewerage systems industrial category. (Standard Industrial Code
[SIC] 4952). Other industrial categories covered by NPDES permits
include facilities in more than 800 industrial classifications. If
needed, EPA may request supplemental information from any permittee. The
Agency may also request supplemental information from nonmunicipal
facilities that discharge wastewater to publicly owned treatment works
(POTWs).

Permit conditions related to sewage sludge use or disposal practices are
required for any treatment works treating domestic sewage. These include
POTWs, privately owned treatment works, and any other facility that
treats or disposes of domestic sewage, as defined at 40 CFR Parts 501
and 503. Many treatment works covered by the sewage sludge regulations
are classified in the sanitary service (SIC 495) industrial category.

Forty-five states and the Virgin Islands have received authorization
from EPA to act as the NPDES permitting authority. Seven states have
approved sludge management programs. Because they incur burden in
administering the program, permitting authorities are considered
respondents for the purposes of this ICR.

Exhibit 4.1 summarizes the number of permittees in the NPDES program.
This information was obtained from EPA’s Permit Compliance System
(PCS) database, the NOI Center, the previous ICR, and consultations with
EPA staff and contractors. These estimates are valid as of August 2006.

Exhibit 4.1. Number of permittees in the NPDES and sludge1 programs

Facility Type	Number of Permittees

Major dischargers

Municipal

Nonmunicipal

4,240

2,251

Minor dischargers

Municipal

Nonmunicipal

10,772

32,734

General permittees	101,007

Sludge facilities

Municipal1

Nonmunicipal1

Permittee reports of inaccurate previous information2

153

10

30

1The number of sludge facilities does not represent the entire universe
of sludge facilities. The numbers of municipal and nonmunicipal
facilities represent the number of facilities required under their
sewage sludge permit conditions to submit Permittee Reports of Planned
Facility Changes and Anticipated Noncompliance.

2This number represents the number of sludge facilities required to
submit Permittee Reports of Inaccurate Previous Information under sewage
sludge use or disposal conditions.

4(b). Information Requested

The estimated number of respondents and associated burden estimates for
each of the modification and variances options available are discussed
below. The number of respondents and burden estimates were based on
discussions with EPA staff and information from EPA databases.

Request for Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations Modification [40
CFR 122.21(m)(5) and 122.21(n)(3)]

Under CWA section 302(b), POTWs with NPDES permits may seek modification
of the effluent limitations required by CWA section 302(a) for
pollutants other than toxic pollutants. To do that, a POTW must show
that there is no reasonable relationship between the economic and social
costs of the limitation and the benefits obtained from achieving it.
POTWs may also seek this type of modification by showing that the
modified effluent limitations for toxic pollutants represent further
progress toward achieving the goals of the CWA section 302(a). However,
EPA notes that it has never received a request for this type of
modification, and does not anticipate receiving such a request.
Consequently, it is noted here only to ensure completeness.

Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes [40 CFR 122.41(l)(1)]

Any planned alteration or addition to a permitted facility must be
reported to the permitting authority when

The change may meet one of the criteria at 40 CFR 122.29(b) for
determining whether a facility is a new source

The alteration or addition to the facility may significantly change the
nature or quantity of discharged pollutants that are not subject to
effluent limitations in the existing permit

The alteration significantly changes the sewage sludge use or disposal
practices

A Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes applies to a change in
the discharge of pollutants that are not already subject to the
facility’s permit requirements. When reporting planned facility
changes, a permittee must provide a description of the planned
alterations or additions and a statement outlining the anticipated
effects of the changes on the facility’s discharge. The permitting
authority may use the information submitted by the discharger to modify
the NPDES permit before the planned facility changes are made.

Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance [40 CFR 122.24(l)(2)]

The Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance applies to a change in
the discharge of pollutants that may result in noncompliance with
existing permit limits. Changes in production or process are examples of
activities that permittees must report. Permittees typically make this
sort of report by a letter that explains the reasons for the anticipated
noncompliance. The advance notice provided by this reporting requirement
enables the permitting authority to modify a permit or help a permittee
mitigate the effects of anticipated noncompliance on the receiving
waters, or on the site or facility on which the sewage sludge is used or
disposed.

Facility and Permit Transfer Report [40 CFR 122.41(l)(3)]

When a facility’s ownership changes, it must notify the permitting
authority in a letter stating the date of the transfer and the name of
the new permit holder. If the new owner agrees to abide by the
conditions of the old permit, the notice of transfer must include a
written and signed agreement containing a specific date for transferring
responsibility, coverage, and liability between the new and former
owners. The permitting authority uses this information to update permit
records, evaluate the new discharge situation, and determine whether
public notification and opportunity for comment are necessary.

Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information [40 CFR
122.41(l)(8)]

Permittees must correct inaccurate information that has been submitted
in a permit application or permit report as soon as the permittee learns
of the error(s). Usually, permittees notify the permitting authority by
letter. The permitting authority uses this information to set or modify
permit conditions or to execute appropriate enforcement actions. The
information is also used to update permit records.

Excessive Discharge Report [40 CFR 122.42 (a)(1) and (2)]

The Excessive Discharge Report requires that all manufacturing,
commercial, mining, and silvicultural dischargers must notify EPA when
they know or have reason to believe (1) that any activity has occurred
or will occur that would result in discharge on a routine or frequent
basis of any toxic pollutant that is not limited in the permit, if the
discharge exceeds certain defined notification levels for pollutants; or
(2) that any activity has occurred or will occur that would result in
any discharge on a nonroutine or infrequent basis of a toxic pollutant
that is not limited in the permit if that discharge will exceed
notification levels. This report provides up-to-date, plant-specific
information to the permitting authority, which uses it to decide whether
permit modification or revocation and reissuance are necessary. Because
NPDES permits are usually in effect for 5 years, reports of new toxic
discharges enable the permitting authority to decide whether permit
modification or revocation and reissuance is necessary in the interim.

Permittee Notice of Regulated Discharge Cessation [40 CFR 122.47(b)(4)]

A permittee’s decision to cease its regulated discharge must be
reported in writing to the permitting authority. The notification must
be accompanied by evidence of a firm public commitment, such as a
resolution passed by a corporation(s board of directors. The permitting
authority will establish and enforce a compliance schedule to
accommodate the discharge termination using information received in the
notice.

Permit Modification Revocation, and Reissuance, or Termination [40 CFR
124.5, 122.41(h), 122.62 and 122.64]

Permitting authorities may require permit modification, revocation and
reissuance, or termination for several reasons. For example, national
effluent standards may change, state water quality standards may change,
or a facility may begin discharging significant amounts of a pollutant
that is not limited by the permit. When permitting authorities consider
making modifications, they request dischargers to submit information.

Variance Request Due to Fundamentally Different Factors [40 CFR
122.21(m)(1) and 125.30]

This item gives dischargers the opportunity to seek a variance from
otherwise applicable effluent limits if they can show that their plants
contain factors fundamentally different from those EPA considered when
establishing national effluent limits. Applicants must request this type
of variance in writing on or before the close of the public comment
period on the draft permit for Best Practicable Control Technology
Currently Available (BPT) standards, or within 180 days of the
establishment of the effluent limitation or pretreatment standards for
BAT, Best Conventional Pollutant Control Technology (BCT), New Source
Performance Standard (NSPS), Pretreatment Standards for Existing Sources
(PSES), and Pretreatment Standards for New Sources (PSNS). This request
may take any number of forms, but is usually a letter. EPA has final
approval authority for Fundamentally Different Factors (FDF) variances,
although FDF variance requests denied at the state level in NPDES states
are not forwarded to EPA for review.

Variance Request for Nonconventional Pollutants [40 CFR 122.21(m)(2)]

Dischargers may request variances from effluent limits for
nonconventional pollutants (section 301(c) of the CWA). They must prove
that discharging nonconventional pollutants at levels less stringent
than BAT limits represents the maximum control that the facility owner
or operator can afford. A request for such a variance must include
documents, such as a financial statement, that show an easing of
requirements will represent the best use of technology within the
economic capability of the facility owner or operator.

Facility owners or operators may apply for a CWA section 301(g) variance
if they can show that discharging nonconventional pollutants at limits
less stringent than BAT limits will not interfere with the attainment or
maintenance of water quality. This request must include such information
as the permit number, the number of outfalls, applicable effluent(s),
and water quality data that shows the modification will not impede
improvements in, or hinder maintenance of, water quality.

EPA must approve all section 301(c) and (g) variances. However, these
variance requests may be denied by the states with authority for the
NPDES program.

Variance Request for Innovative Pollution Control Technology [40 CFR
122.21(m)(4)]

Nonmunicipal dischargers apply for this variance, which extends the
compliance schedule for BAT up to 2 years. The variance gives
dischargers an opportunity (1) to develop innovative technologies that
will reduce pollutant concentrations beyond BAT levels, or (2) to
experiment with in-plant changes to reduce the costs associated with
attaining BAT limits. Requests for this variance must be filed in
conjunction with NPDES permit applications. To qualify for this type of
variance, the innovative pollution control system to be tested must have
the potential for industry-wide application. The permitting authority,
after consultation with EPA, decides whether to grant this variance
request.

Variance Request Regarding Thermal Discharges [40 CFR 122.21 (m)(6)]

Dischargers seeking this variance must demonstrate that the existing
limitations on the thermal component of their discharges are more
stringent than necessary to ensure the protection and propagation of
indigenous fish, shellfish, and wildlife in the receiving water. The
application of this variance includes a description of the studies
performed and the results of biological, hydrological, and physical data
gathered in support of the request. The permitting authority uses this
information to evaluate alternative limits.

Application for Variance Regarding Discharge into Marine Waters [40 CFR
122.21(n)(1)]

POTWs may request a variance under CWA section 301(h) from the
requirements of CWA section 301(b)1(B) for discharges into marine
waters. This variance is administered by the Office of Wetlands, Oceans
and Watersheds (OWOW), and is the subject of a separate ICR. Therefore,
no respondent burden or cost associated with this requirement is
reported in this ICR. This information collection and reporting
requirement is noted here only in the interest of completeness.

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED—AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5(a). Agency Activities

When permitting authorities receive modification and variance requests,
they must review them for completeness. If a request is incomplete, the
authorities must notify the applicant and request the missing
information. Completed requests must be assigned to permit writers, who
review the information in more detail as they develop permit conditions.
Permitting authorities must also enter permit data into the Agency’s
database—PCS and ICIS.

EPA directly reviews and processes modification and variance requests in
nonauthorized states. In addition, the Agency assists authorized states
with some requests. In some cases, EPA also reviews state-approved
variances. The Agency estimates that federal assistance or approval will
be required as follows:

NPDES-authorized states will request assistance from EPA on 5 percent of
reports submitted to them for each of the following items:

Requests for Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination of
Permits

Wastewater Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes

Wastewater Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance

Facility and Permit Transfer Report

Wastewater Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information

Excessive Discharge Report

Permittee Notice of Regulated Discharge Cessation

NPDES states review and recommend denial or approval of variance
requests for FDF and Nonconventional Pollutants. EPA is required to
review each of these requests. Where the state is the permitting
authority, the state may perform a voluntary initial review and make
recommendations to EPA regarding the issuance of a variance. If an NPDES
state recommends approval of either type of request, EPA will then
review it and issue a final decision.

EPA oversees and provides assistance to authorized states who receive
variance requests for Innovative Pollution Controls or Thermal
Discharges.

5(b). Collection Methodology and Management

Improved information technology does not appear to provide opportunities
to minimize respondent burden because of the unique nature of the
information that respondents must submit as needed.

5(c). Small Entity Flexibility

The NPDES regulations do not specify different modification and variance
requirements for small entities. All permittees, regardless of the size
of their facilities, must submit modifications or variances if they are
required for their industrial activity and facility operations.

The burden incurred as a result of variance requests is voluntary. A
small business that decides to request a variance from effluent
limitations does so on the basis of its assessment that the benefits of
receiving such a variance outweigh the burdens associated with preparing
the request. In addition, small businesses interested in submitting
variance requests may be less complex than for larger facilities.
Consequently, the time and effort required to prepare a small
facility’s variance request may be less than that required to prepare
a similar request for a more complex facility.

5(d). Collection Schedule

The data items covered by this ICR must be provided only when a
permittee decides to seek a modification or variance or when an event
beyond the permittee’s control triggers a need for the information. In
any event, the data items are submitted only when needed. Therefore,
frequency of information collection is not an issue for the data items
covered by this ICR.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

6(a). Estimating Respondent Burden

6(a)(i). Estimating Applicant Respondent Burden

The burden on respondents for the preparation of modification and
variance requests is generally the sum of the time required to read and
understand the regulation, the time to plan the modification or variance
request, and the time to write the modification or variance request.
Some types of requests require additional information, such as the
compilation of data, documentation, model analysis, legal briefs, and
other requirements. Each of these requirements is described in this
section. All assumptions of the percentages of permittees responding to
each type of modification or variance request and time required to
respond to each request are based on the assumptions of the previous
ICR. Exhibit 6.1 lists the global information and assumptions used in
this analysis including 2006 labor rates, numbers of facilities, and
information sources.

Exhibit 6.1. Global information and assumptions

Labor rates	Information sources

Average federal and state employee salary:	$36.17	2006 labor rates
according to OPM (GS 9 Step 10)1

Average private sector salary:	$43.48	Updated rates are derived from
U.S. Department of Labor.2

Average municipal sector salary:	$25.13	Updated rates are derived from
U.S. Department of Labor.3

Facility numbers	Information Sources:

Major dischargers

Municipal	4,240	EPA’s Permit Compliance System (PCS)

Nonmunicipal	2,251	EPA’s PCS

Minor dischargers

Municipal	10,772	EPA’s PCS

Nonmunicipal	32,734	EPA’s PCS

General permittees	101,007	EPA’s PCS

Municipal sludge facilities	153	2000 ICR estimate

Nonmunicipal sludge facilities	10	2000 ICR estimate

Use or disposal conditions (PRIPI)	30	2000 ICR estimate

1U.S. Office of Personnel Management, 2006 General Schedule (2006-GS).

2U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employer Costs
for Employee Compensation, Table 5—Employer costs per hour worked for
employee compensation and costs as a percent of total compensation:
state and local government workers, by occupational and industry group,
December 2005.

3U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. May 2005 National
Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates.

Exhibit 6.2 summarizes the annual number of permittees estimated to
respond to each type of modification or variance request. A summary of
the respondent burden (hours and costs), not including state government
burden, for each type of modification or variance request is presented
in Exhibit 6.3.

Exhibit 6.2. Annual number of respondents

Item/Type of respondent	Existing number of permittees	Percentage of
permittees responding per year	Total number of respondents

Request for Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations Modification

n/a	0

Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes

Major municipals	4,240	5.0%	212

Minor municipals	10,772	2.0%	215

Major nonmunicipals	2,251	5.0%	113

Minor nonmunicipals	32,734	2.0%	655

Municipals sludge facilities1	153	100.0%	153

Subtotal

	1,348

Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance

Major municipals	4,240	1.0%	42

Minor municipals	10,772	1.0%	108

Major nonmunicipals	2,251	1.0%	23

Minor nonmunicipals	32,734	1.0%	327

Municipals sludge facilities1	153	100.0%	153

Nonmunicipals sludge facilities1	10	100.0%	10

General permittees	101,007	1.0%	1,010

Subtotal

	1,673

Facility and Permit Transfer Report

Major nonmunicipals	2,251	2.0%	45

Minor nonmunicipals	32,734	3.0%	982

Subtotal

	1,027

Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information

Major municipals	4,240	1.0%	42

Minor municipals	10,772	2.0%	215

Major nonmunicipals	2,251	1.0%	23

Minor nonmunicipals	32,734	2.0%	655

Required by sludge use or disposal permit conditions2	30	100.0%	30

General permittees	101,007	0.1%	101

Subtotal

	1,066

Excessive discharge report

Major nonmunicipals	2,251	5.0%	113

Minor nonmunicipals	32,734	3.0%	982

Subtotal

	1,095

Permittee Notice of Regulated Discharge Cessation

Major nonmunicipals	2,251	2.0%	45

Minor nonmunicipals	32,734	0.8%	262

General permittees	101,007	1.0%	1,010

Subtotal

	1,317

Request for Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination

n/a	4,200

Variance Request for Fundamentally Different Factors

n/a	0

Variance Request for Nonconventional Pollutants

n/a	9

Variance Request for Innovative Pollution Control Technology

Requests in Nonauthorized states	 	n/a	1

Requests in Authorized states	 	n/a	1

Variance requests regarding thermal discharges (new)

Requests in Nonauthorized states	 	n/a	2

Requests in Authorized states	 	n/a	6

Variance requests regarding thermal discharges (renewal)	 	n/a	40

Variance Requests Regarding Discharges into Marine Waters	 	n/a	n/a

Total number of nonstate respondents

11,785

Total number of state respondents

46

Total number of respondents

11,831

1The number of sludge facilities does not represent the entire universe
of sludge facilities. The numbers of municipal and nonmunicipal
facilities represent the number of facilities required under their
sewage sludge permit conditions to submit Permittee Reports of Planned
Facility Changes and Anticipated Noncompliance.

2This number represents the number of sludge facilities required to
submit Permittee Reports of Inaccurate Previous Information under sewage
sludge use or disposal conditions.

Exhibit 6.3. Annual respondent burden and costs (not including state or
federal burden)

Item/Type of respondent	Number of respondents per year	Burden hours per
respondent	Total hours	Respondent per hour labor cost	Total respondent
costs

Request for Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations Modification	0
n/a	0	n/a	$0

Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes

Major municipals	212	4.0	848	$25.13	$21,310

Minor municipals	215	4.0	860	$25.13	$21,612

Major nonmunicipals	113	4.0	452	$43.48	$19,653

Minor nonmunicipals	655	4.0	2,620	$43.48	$113,918

Municipal sludge facilities	153	4.0	612	$25.13	$15,380

Subtotal	1,348

5,392

$191,872

Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance

Major municipals	42	5.0	210	$25.13	$5,277

Minor municipals	108	5.0	540	$25.13	$13,570

Major nonmunicipals	23	5.0	115	$43.48	$5,000

Minor nonmunicipals	327	5.0	1,635	$43.48	$71,090

Municipal sludge facilities	153	5.0	765	$25.13	$19,224

Nonmunicipal sludge facilities	10	5.0	50	$43.48	$2,174

General permittees	1,010	5.0	5,050	$43.48	$219,574

Subtotal	1,673

8,365

$335,910

Facility and Permit Transfer Report

Major nonmunicipals	45	3.0	135	$43.48	$5,870

Minor nonmunicipals	982	3.0	2,946	$43.48	$128,092

Subtotal	1,027

3,081

$133,962

Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information

Major municipals	42	2.0	84	$25.13	$2,111

Minor municipals	215	2.0	430	$25.13	$10,806

Major nonmunicipals	23	2.0	46	$43.48	$2,000

Minor nonmunicipals	655	2.0	1,310	$43.48	$56,959

Required by sludge use or disposal permit conditions	30	2.0	60	$25.13
$1,508

General permittee	101	2.0	202	$43.48	$8,783

Subtotal	1,066

2,132

$82,166

Excessive discharge report

Major nonmunicipals	113	4.0	452	$43.48	$19,653

Minor nonmunicipals	982	4.0	3,928	$43.48	$170,789

Subtotal	1,095

4,380

$190,442

Permittee Notice of Regulated Discharge Cessation

Major nonmunicipals	45	1.0	45	$43.48	$1,957

Minor nonmunicipals	262	1.0	262	$43.48	$11,392

General permittees	1,010	1.0	1,010	$43.48	$43,915

Subtotal	1,317

1,317

$57,263

Request for Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination
4,200	5.0	21,000	$43.48	$913,080

Variance Request for Fundamentally Different Factors	0	160.0	0	$43.48	$0

Variance Requests for nonconventional Pollutants	9	150.0	1,350	$43.48
$58,698

Variance Request for Innovative Pollution Control Technology

Requests in Nonauthorized states	1	60.0	60	$43.48	$2,609

Requests in Authorized states	1	60.0	60	$43.48	$2,609

Variance Request Regarding Thermal Discharges (new)

Requests in Nonauthorized states	2	400.0	800	$43.48	$34,784

Requests in Authorized states	6	400.0	2,400	$43.48	$104,352

Variance Request Regarding Thermal Discharges (renewal)	40	4.0	160
$43.48	$6,957

Variance Request Regarding Discharge into Marine Waters	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
n/a

Total

	50,497	 	$2,114,704

Request for Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations Modification [40
CFR 122.21(m)(5) and 122.21(n)(3)]

EPA has never received a request for this type of modification, and
these requests are not anticipated in the future. Therefore, there is no
burden associated with this type of modification. It is noted only to
ensure completeness.

Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes [40 CFR 122.41(l)(1)]

Respondents will use an estimated average of 4 hours to complete their
notification of planned alterations and additions. This burden estimate
includes 1 hour to read and understand the regulation, 1 hour to plan
the report, and 2 hours to write the report. On the basis of recent
discussion with EPA Headquarters and Regional staff, the annual number
of respondents includes 5 percent of all major permittees and 2 percent
of all minor permittees for a total of 1,195 annual NPDES respondents.
An additional 153 treatment works will be required to respond to this
information collection item because of their sewage sludge permit
requirements. Thus, the total number of respondents to this information
item equals 1,348.

Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance [40 CFR 122.41(l)(2)]

Respondents will use an estimated average of 5 hours of labor for each
report of anticipated noncompliance. This burden is divided as follows:
1 hour to read and understand the regulation, 1 hour of planning, 1 hour
of information collection, and 2 hours for writing and submitting the
report. The annual number of NPDES respondents is estimated to include 1
percent of all major permittees, 1 percent of all minor permittees, and
1 percent of all general permittees for a total of 1,510 annual NPDES
respondents. An additional 153 municipal treatment works and 10
nonmunicipal permit works would be required to respond to this item
because of their sewage sludge permit conditions. Thus, the total number
of respondents equals 1,673.

Facility and Permit Transfer Report [40 CFR 122.41(l)(3)]

EPA estimates that the average respondent burden of this requirement
would be 3 hours for each report. Necessary reporting activities include
writing, typing, and mailing the cover letter and official notice. The
annual number of respondents includes approximately 2 percent of all
major nonmunicipals and 3 percent of all minor nonmunicipals for a total
of 1,027 respondents.

Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information [40 CFR
122.41(l)(8)]

The respondent’s burden associated with this reporting requirement
includes the time needed to verify the reporting error or omission, to
prepare the revised form that details the reporting corrections, and to
mail the information to the permitting authority. The time required
under this regulation will vary depending on the size of the facility
and the extent of the error or omission. EPA estimates a typical report
requires 2 hours to prepare. The annual number of respondents is
estimated to be 1 percent of all major municipal and nonmunicipals, 2
percent of all minor municipal and nonmunicipals, and 0.1 percent of all
general permittees for a total of 1,036 respondents annually. An
additional 30 facilities would be required to submit this information
because of their sewage sludge use or disposal permit conditions. Thus,
the total number of respondents to this information item equals 1,066.

Excessive Discharge Report [40 CFR 122.42 (a)(1) and (2)]

The respondent burden associated with this requirement would be 4 hours,
including 1 hour to read and understand the regulation, 1 hour to plan
and gather information for the report, and 2 hours to write and prepare
the report. No quantitative sampling and analysis is required to
complete the Excessive Discharge Report. The annual number of 1,095
respondents would be composed of 5 percent of all major nonmunicipals
plus 3 percent of all minor nonmunicipals.

Permittee Notice of Regulated Discharge Cessation [40 CFR 122.47(b)(4)]

When notifying the permitting authority of a facility’s decision to
cease regulated discharges, the respondent incurs 1 hour of burden to
prepare, type, and mail a letter of intent. The annual number of
respondents includes 2 percent of all major nonmunicipals, 0.8 percent
of all minor nonmunicipals, and 1 percent of all general permittees for
a total of 1,317 respondents.

Permit Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination [40 CFR
124.5, 122.41(h), 122.62 and 122.64]

The total annual number of permittees expected to request a modification
of their effluent limitations is 8,316 or 5.5 percent of NPDES
permittees. However, many of these are counted in other sections of this
ICR. The total annual number of NPDES permittees expected to request a
modification due to planned facility changes (1,348), excessive
discharge reports (1,095), and reports of anticipated noncompliance
(1,673) is 4,116. The total number of annual respondents reporting under
40 CFR 124.5 (those requesting modifications for permit modification,
revocation and reissuance) is estimated as 4,200 (8,316 minus 4,116).
The burden associated with permit modification, revocation and
reissuance applies only to the 4,200 facilities.

An estimated 5 hours of respondent time would be necessary to provide
the information requested by the permitting authority.

Variance Request Due to Fundamentally Different Factors [40 CFR
122.21(m)(1) and 125.30]

The burden for this type of variance request is high because of the
level of detail required for this variance. Facilities that submit this
request are often very complex, and writing and reviewing of this
variance requires a detailed examination of the facility’s operations.

Each variance request requires a total of 160 hours—20 hours to
prepare a letter requesting a variance, 60 hours to develop a legal
brief, and 80 hours to prepare attachments describing the processes,
technologies, and equipment of the plant. There have been cases where
many more FDF variance requests were submitted (e.g., in response to a
recently promulgated effluent guideline), however, the burden associated
with such a multitude of similar requests is much lower than 160 hours.
An association or other organized group of respondents usually prepares
a boilerplate document for member facilities to use in such cases. EPA
does not anticipate any requests in the 3 years covered by this ICR.

Variance Request for Nonconventional Pollutants [40 CFR 122.21(m)(2)]

Permittees seeking this type of variance incur a burden of 150 hours for
each variance request. For a CWA section 301(c) request, the permittee
must submit economic data that will demonstrate that the variance
represents the best use of technology available to the permittee. A
typical breakdown of the burden was determined for both the 301(c) and
(g) variance requests. The 150-hour burden includes 30 hours to prepare
a letter stating the request and providing the appropriate
documentation, 40 hours addressing a response to each of the statutory
factors, 40 hours analyzing a computer dilution model, and 40 hours
analyzing the requested variance’s impact on water quality criteria.
The annual number of 9 respondents is based on numbers of previously
received requests.

Variance Request for Innovative Pollution Control Technology [40 CFR
122.21(m)(4)]

Nonmunicipal dischargers seeking an extension under CWA section 301(k)
would have an estimated burden of 60 hours. Of the 60 hours, 15 hours
are required to write a letter of request, and 45 hours are necessary to
document the permittee’s claim. The annual number of respondents is
based on the number of previously received 301(k) requests. It is
estimated that 2 respondents will make this request per year, one in a
delegated state and one in a non-delegated state.

Variance Request Regarding Thermal Discharges [40 CFR 122.21 (m)(6)]

The respondent(s burden associated with the 316(a) request for variance
includes 20 hours planning the request, 160 hours collecting biological
data, 80 hours collecting hydrological data, 120 hours collecting
physical data, and 20 hours preparing the request for submission to EPA.
This burden estimate of 400 hours represents a typical request; however,
EPA recognizes that the burden will vary depending on the complexity of
the request. It is estimated that 8 thermal variance requests will be
received each year, 6 is delegated states and 2 in non-delegated states.
In addition, approximately 40 previously issued thermal discharge
variances are renewed each year. The respondent burden for a reissued
variance is estimated to be 4 hours.

Application for Variance Regarding Discharge into Marine Waters [40 CFR
122.21(n)(1)]

This variance is administered by the Office of Wetlands, Oceans, and
Watersheds and is the subject of a separate ICR. Therefore, no
respondent burden or cost associated with this requirement is reported
in this ICR. This information collection and reporting requirement is
noted here only in the interest of completeness.

6(a)(ii). Estimating State Respondent Burden

State government burden is also included under respondent burden for
this ICR. Exhibit 6.4 below shows the burden for respondents, including
state government, for each type of modification or variance request. EPA
estimates the total state respondent burden for the activities covered
in this ICR as 229,727 hours at a cost of $8,309,226. The state and
federal government burden for each type of modification or variance
request is shown in Exhibit 6.5.

6(a)(iii). Total Respondent Burden

As detailed in Exhibits 6.3 and 6.4, EPA estimates the total respondent
burden to be 271,188 hours.

6(b). Estimating Respondent Costs

The total cost for each respondent activity consists of the labor rate
required for each modification and variance multiplied by the average
hours necessary to prepare the modification or variance. Because EPA has
determined that there are no capital or operation and maintenance costs
associated with any of the respondent activities, this ICR includes only
labor costs in its estimates. Respondent costs for each type of
modification and variance request are presented in Exhibit 6.3.

Exhibit 6.4. Annual respondent burden and costs (including state burden)

Item/Type of respondent	Respondent burden	State burden	Respondent costs
State costs	Total burden hours	Total costs

Request for water quality related effluent limitations modifications	0	0
$0	$0	0	$0

Permittee report of planned facility changes	5,392	24,264	$191,872
$877,629	29,656	$1,069,501

Permittee report of anticipated noncompliance	8,365	15,057	$335,910
$544,610	23,422	$880,520

Facility and permit transfer report	3,081	3,697	$133,962	$133,721	6,778
$267,683

Permittee report of inaccurate previous	2,132	3,838	$82,166	$138,821
5,970	$220,987

Excessive discharge report	4,380	3,942	$190,442	$142,582	8,322	$333,024

Permittee notice of regulated discharge cessation	1,317	4,741	$57,263
$171,482	6,058	$228,745

Request for modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination
21,000	151,200	$913,080	$5,468,904	172,200	$6,381,984

Variance request for fundamentally different factors	0	0	$0	$0	0	$0

Variance request for nonconventional pollutants	1,350	4,212	$58,698
$152,348	5,562	$211,046

Variance request for innovative pollution control technology	120	400
$5,218	$14,468	520	$19,686

Variance request regarding thermal discharges (new)	3,200	2,400	$139,136
$86,808	5,600	$225,944

Variance request regarding thermal discharges (renewal)	160	36	$6,957
$1,302	196	$8,259

Variance request regarding discharge into marine waters	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a
n/a	n/a

Total burden and costs	50,497	229,727	$2,114,704	$8,309,226	280,224
$10,423,930

When estimating the labor costs to respondents and the Agency, the
following labor rates were used:

The hourly employment cost of federal employees was determined using
methodology established in previous ICRs. According to the U.S. Office
of Personnel Management, 2006 General Schedule (2006-GS), the average
annual salary of a government employee at the GS-9, Step 10 level is
$49,632. At 2,080 hours per year, the hourly wage would be $23.86.
Assuming overhead costs of 50 percent, or $11.93 per hour, the fully
loaded cost of employment for a federal employee would be $35.79.

State respondent costs are a function of labor costs. When calculating
state respondent costs, EPA assumed the average hourly rate for state
employees as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics as $36.55 (including benefits) in 2006 dollars.

The average of the federal employee and the state employee rates is
$36.17, which was used to estimate state and federal government costs.

EPA assumed the average hourly rate in the private sector is $43.48 as
determined by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
total compensation for management, professional, and related in 2006
dollars.

The average hourly rate for municipal employees as determined by the
U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics is $25.13
(including overhead). Updated rates are derived from U.S. Department of
Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics in a table titled May 2005 National
Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates and
adjusted to 2006 dollars using the March 2006 ECI.

6(c). Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

The government burden and cost was calculated by multiplying the
estimated burden hours required for each modification and variance
request by the estimated average federal and state hourly labor rate
($36.17). The state burden was assumed to be 96.8 percent of the total
government burden, and the federal burden was assumed to be 3.2 percent
of the total government burden, based on the number of permits in
authorized states. The time required for the handling and review of each
request was also based on the assumptions from the previous ICR. State
burden was included with Respondent burden and cost (see Exhibit 6.4). A
summary of the government cost and burden for each type of modification
and variance request is presented in Exhibit 6.5.

Request for Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations Modification [40
CFR 122.21(m)(5) and 122.21(n)(3)]

EPA has never received, and does not expect to receive, a request for
this type of modification. Therefore, there is no burden associated with
this type of modification. It is noted only to ensure completeness.

Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes [40 CFR 122.41(l)(1)]

An estimated 20 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes.

Exhibit 6.5. Annual government burden and costs

Item/Type of respondent	(A) Number of respondents per year	(B) Burden
hours per response	C=(A*B) Gov=t burden	D=(C*96.8%) State Burden
E=(C*3.2%) Federal Burden	(F) Gov’t per hour labor cost	G=(D*F) State
Cost	H=(E*F) Federal cost	I=(G+H) Total costs

Request for Water Quality Related Effluent Limitations Modification

 	0	n/a	0	0	0	$36.17	$0	$0	$0

Permittee Report of Planned Facility Changes

Major municipals	212	20.0	4,240	3,816	424	$36.17	$138,025	$15,336
$153,361

Minor municipals	215	20.0	4,300	3,870	430	$36.17	$139,978	$15,553
$155,531

Major nonmunicipals	113	20.0	2,260	2,034	226	$36.17	$73,570	$8,174
$81,744

Minor nonmunicipals	655	20.0	13,100	11,790	1,310	$36.17	$426,444	$47,383
$473,827

Municipal sludge facilities	153	20.0	3,060	2,754	306	$36.17	$99,612
$11,068	$110,680

Subtotal	1348

26,960	24,264	2,696

$877,629	$97,514	$975,143

Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance

Major municipals	42	10.0	420	378	42	$36.17	$13,672	$1,519	$15,191

Minor municipals	108	10.0	1,080	972	108	$36.17	$35,157	$3,906	$39,063

Major nonmunicipals	23	10.0	230	207	23	$36.17	$7,487	$832	$8,319

Minor nonmunicipals	327	10.0	3,270	2,943	327	$36.17	$106,448	$11,828
$118,276

Municipal sludge facilities	153	10.0	1,530	1,377	153	$36.17	$49,806
$5,534	$55,340

Nonmunicipal sludge facilities	10	10.0	100	90	10	$36.17	$3,255	$362
$3,617

General permittees	1,010	10.0	10,100	9,090	1,010	$36.17	$328,785	$36,532
$365,317

Subtotal	1,673

16,730	15,057	1,673

$544,610	$60,513	$605,123

Facility and Permit Transfer Report

Major nonmunicipals	45	4.0	180	162	18	$36.17	$5,860	$651	$6,511

Minor nonmunicipals	982	4.0	3,928	3,535	393	$36.17	$127,861	$14,215
$142,076

Subtotal	1,027

4,108	3,697	411

$133,721	$14,866	$148,587

Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information

Major municipals	42	4.0	168	151	17	$36.17	$5,462	$615	$6,077

Minor municipals	215	4.0	860	774	86	$36.17	$27,996	$3,111	$31,107

Major nonmunicipals	23	4.0	92	83	9	$36.17	$3,002	$326	$3,328

Minor nonmunicipals	655	4.0	2,620	2,358	262	$36.17	$85,289	$9,477
$94,766

Required by sludge use or disposal conditions	30	4.0	120	108	12	$36.17
$3,906	$434	$4,340

General permittees	101	4.0	404	364	40	$36.17	$13,166	$1,447	$14,613

Subtotal	1,066

4,264	3,838	426

$138,821	$15,410	$154,231

Excessive discharge report

Major nonmunicipals	113	4.0	452	407	45	$36.17	$14,721	$1,628	$16,349

Minor nonmunicipals	982	4.0	3,928	3,535	393	$36.17	$127,861	$14,215
$142,076

Subtotal	1,095

4,380	3,942	438

$142,582	$15,843	$158,425

Permittee Notice of Regulated Discharge Cessation

Major nonmunicipals	45	4.0	180	162	18	$36.17	$5,860	$651	$6,511

Minor nonmunicipals	262	4.0	1,048	943	105	$36.17	$34,108	$3,798	$37,906

General permittees	1010	4.0	4,040	3,636	404	$36.17	$131,514	$14,613
$146,127

Subtotal	1317	 	5,268	4,741	527	 	$171,482	$19,062	$190,544

Request for Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination

 	4,200	40.0	168,000	151,200	16,800	$36.17	$5,468,904	$607,656
$6,076,560

Variance Request for Fundamentally Different Factors

 	0	520.0	0	0	0	$36.17	$0	$0	$0

Variance Request for nonconventional Pollutants

 	9	520.0	4,680	4,212	468	$36.17	$152,348	$16,928	$169,276

Variance Request for Innovative Pollution Control

Technology requests in nonauthorized states	1	520.0	520	0	520	$36.17	$0
$18,808	$18,808

Requests in authorized states	1	400.0	400	400	0	$36.17	$14,468	$0
$14,468

Variance Request Regarding Thermal Discharges (new)

Requests in nonauthorized states	2	520.0	1,040	0	1,040	$36.17	$0	$37,617
$37,617

Request in authorized states	6	400.0	2,400	2,400	0	$36.17	$86,808	$0
$86,808

Variance Request Regarding Thermal Discharges (renewal)

 	40	1.0	40	36	4	$36.17	$1,302	$145	$1,447

Variance Request Regarding Discharge into Marine Waters

 	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a	n/a

Total government burden and cost	238,790	229,727	9,063	 	$8,309,226
$327,808	$8,637,034

Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance [40 CFR 122.41(l)(2)]

An estimated 10 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Permittee Report of Anticipated Noncompliance.

Facility and Permit Transfer Report [40 CFR 122.41(l)(3)]

An estimated 4 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Facility and Permit Transfer Report.

Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information [40 CFR
122.41(l)(8)]

An estimated 4 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information.

Excessive Discharge Report [40 CFR 122.42 (a)(1) and (2)]

An estimated 4 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Excessive Discharge Report.

Permittee Notice of Regulated Discharge Cessation [40 CFR 122.47(b)(4)]

An estimated 4 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Permittee Notice of Regulated Discharge Cessation.

Permit Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination
“Miscellaneous” [40 CFR 124.5, 122.41(h), 122.62 and 122.64]

An estimated 40 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Permit Modification, Revocation and Reissuance, or Termination
“Miscellaneous.”

Variance Request Due to Fundamentally Different Factors [40 CFR
122.21(m)(1) and 125.30]

An estimated 520 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Variance Request for Fundamentally Different Factors.

Variance Request for Nonconventional Pollutants [40 CFR 122.21(m)(2)]

An estimated 520 hours are necessary for handling and reviewing each
Variance Request for Nonconventional Pollutants.

Variance Request for Innovative Pollution Control Technology [40 CFR
122.21(m)(4)]

EPA oversees and provides assistance to authorized states who receive
Variance Requests for Innovative Pollution Controls. EPA estimates that
the government effort incurred in this capacity would be 400 hours (50
work days) as compared to 520 hours (65 work days) for evaluating a
request submitted directly to EPA in nonauthorized states.

Variance Request Regarding Thermal Discharges [40 CFR 122.21 (m)(6)]

EPA oversees and provides assistance to authorized states who receive
Variance Requests for Thermal Discharges. EPA estimates that the
government effort incurred in this capacity would be 400 hours (50 work
days) as compared to 520 hours (65 work days) for evaluating of a
request submitted directly to EPA in nonauthorized states. In addition,
an estimated 1 hour would be necessary for handling and review each
variance reissue.

Application for Variance Regarding Discharge into Marine Waters [40 CFR
122.21(n)(1)]

This variance is administered by the Office of Wetlands, Oceans and
Watersheds (OWOW) and is the subject of a separate ICR. Therefore, no
respondent burden or cost associated with this requirement is reported
in this ICR. This information collection and reporting requirement is
noted here only in the interest of completeness.

6(d). Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

The respondent universe for NPDES permittees was updated from the
current ICR by using EPA(s PCS database, the existing ICR, EPA(s NOI
Processing Center, and consultations with EPA staff and contractors.
Exhibit 6.2 represents the universe of NPDES and sludge facilities.
Total respondent burden and costs for each type of modification and
variance request are summarized in Exhibit 6.3 and combined with state
burden and cost in Exhibit 6.4.

6(e). Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The bottom line burden hours and cost tables for respondents are the
summaries of all the hours and costs incurred for all activities. These
are shown in Exhibit 6.6. The burden and cost estimates are not expected
to vary from year to year over the collection period for this ICR. That
is, the bottom line tallies presented in Exhibit 6.6 are not expected to
change over the course of the next 3 years.

Exhibit 6.6. Bottom line tallies

Respondent Burden and Cost (not including state Burden and Cost)

Total Annual Number of Respondents:	11,785

Total respondent burden hours:	50,497

Average Burden Hours per Respondent:	4.28

Total respondent costs:	$2,114,704

State Government Burden and Cost

Total state Burden Hours	229,727

Total state Costs	$8,309,226

Respondent Burden and Cost (including state Burden and Cost)

Total burden hours	280,224

Total costs	$10,423,930

Federal Government Burden and Cost

Total federal Government Burden Hours	9,063

Total federal Government Costs	$327,808

Total burden and cost

Total burden hours	289,287

Total costs	$10,751,738

6(f). Reasons for Change in Burden

The currently approved ICR for Modification and Variance Requests was
developed in 2003 and contains line-by-line estimates of burden hours
similar to the estimates presented in this document. Exhibit 6.7
presents the change in the respondent burden for each information item
covered by this ICR. (Note - Previous burden estimates are drawn from
the previous Modification and Variance Requests ICR OMB Control No.
2040-0086, ICR No. 0029.08, dated March 2003). As shown in Exhibit 6.7,
the 2003 ICR estimated a total respondent burden of 303,997 hours and a
total cost of $10,952,021. This ICR estimates a total respondent burden
of 280,224 hours and a total cost of $10,423,930, which represents a 7.8
percent decrease in respondent burden and a 4.8 percent decrease in
respondent cost. Exhibit 6.7 gives a line-by-line comparison of burden
between the 2003 and 2006 ICRs for NPDES Modification and Variance
Requests.  This change may be explained by:

Changes and adjustments in the number and types of permits administered
by the states and EPA under the NPDES program. Non-NPDES authorized
states continue to apply for NPDES program authorization.

EPA’s continuous effort to improve the quality of data in its PCS
database.  This change may reflect more accurate data rather than a
significant change in the number of permits actually administered.

EPA does not anticipate Variance Request for Fundamentally Different
Factors. See section 6(a)(i).

Labor rates have changed since the previous ICR. The 2003 ICR estimated
the average federal and state employee salary to be   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r
1 $31.80 per hour, the average private sector salary to be $56.76 per
hour, and the average municipal sector salary to be $24.76 per hour.
This ICR estimates the average federal and state employee salary to be
$36.17 per hour, the average private sector salary to be $43.48 per
hour, and the average municipal sector salary to be $25.13 per hour.
Section 6.b of this ICR describes the method by which average salaries
were estimated for this ICR.

.Exhibit 6.7. Burden comparison: 2003 vs. 2006 ICR for modification and
variance requests

Item	2003 burden (hours)	2003 cost(s)	2006 burden (hours)	2006 cost(s)
Burden changea	% burden changea	Cost change	% cost change

Request for water quality related effluent limitations modification	0	$0
0	$0

n/a

n/a

Permittee report of planned facility changes	30,800	$1,046,255	31,489
$1,135,802	689	2%	$89,547	9%

Permittee report of anticipated noncompliance	25,900	$1,006,499	24,560
$921,683	(1,340)	-5%	($84,816)	-8%

Facility and permit transfer report	7,333	$316,381	7,057	$277,774	(276)
-4%	($38,607)	-12%

Permittee report of inaccurate previous information	6,334	$239,768	6,259
$231,439	(75)	-1%	($8,329)	-3%

Excessive discharge report	8,998	$404,347	8,620	$343,802	(378)	-4%
($60,545)	-15%

Permittee notice of regulated discharge cessation	6,877	$256,004	6,416
$241,694	(461)	-7%	($14,310)	-6%

Request for modification, revocation and reissuance, or termination
198,973	$6,932,995	183,624	$6,795,190	(15,349)	-8%	($137,805)	-2%

Variance request for fundamentally different factors	5,024	$191,711	0	$0
(5,024)	-100%	($191,711)	-100%

Variance request for nonconventional pollutants	5,562	$210,568	5,880
$222,548	318	6%	$11,980	6%

Variance request for innovative pollution control technology	1,056
$36,576	520	$19,686	(536)	-51%	($16,890)	-46%

Variance request regarding thermal discharges (new)	6,944	$300,691	5,600
$225,944	(1,344)	-19%	($74,747)	-25%

Variance request regarding thermal discharges (renewal)	196	$10,227	199
$8,368	3	2%	($1,859)	-18%

Variance request regarding discharge into marine waters	0	$0	0	$0	0	0%
$0	0%

Totals	303,997	$10,952,021	280,224	$10,423,930	(23,773)	-8%	($528,091)
-5%

a This change may reflect more accurate data rather than a significant
change in the number of permits actually administered

6(g). Burden Statement

EPA estimates that a total of 11,785 NPDES permittees will submit
Modification and Variance Requests each year. A breakdown of the number
of permittees for each type of request is shown in Exhibit 6.2.

Nationally, NPDES permittees will spend 50,497 hours collecting
information for and preparing these requests. Each permittee submitting
a request will spend an average of 4.28 hours preparing a request
(50,497 burden hours divided by 11,785 permittees). However, there is a
wide range in the actual time spent on preparing modification and
variance requests. Preparing these requests will cost permittees
$2,114,704 per year. There is no record-keeping burden associated with
modification and variance requests.

State government burden is included in respondent burden for this ICR.
Total state government burden hours are estimated to be 229,727 and
total state government costs are estimated to be $8,309,226. The total
respondent burden hours are 280,224 and total respondent costs are
$10,423,930. The federal government will spend a total of 9,063 hours
and $327,808 reviewing these requests.

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 use technology and
systems for 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 at 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR
Part 15.

To comment on EPA’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,
the Agency has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2002-0064, which is available for public viewing at the
Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is
202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Water Docket is
202-566-2426. An electronic version of the public docket is available
through the Federal Docket Management System (FDMS) at
http://www.regulations.gov/. Use FDMS to submit or view public comments,
to access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to
access documents in the public docket that are available electronically.
Once in the system, key in the docket ID number identified above. You
can also send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the
EPA Docket ID No. OW-2002-0064 and OMB control number 2040-0057 in any
correspondence. [to be completed by EPA]

 Two effluent guidelines are under development: Airport Deicing and
Drinking Water Treatment. For the Drinking Water Treatment Effluent
Guidelines EPA is collecting and analyzing data on drinking water
treatment technologies, direct and indirect discharges of residuals, and
environmental impacts from the discharge of residuals. Based on such
information, EPA will decide whether the promulgation of effluent
guidelines is necessary by September 2007. A rule is not expected to be
final before the expiration of the proposed ICR. For the Airport Deicing
Effluent Guidelines EPA planned to publish a proposed rule in December
2007 and take final action by September 2009. Nevertheless, the any
final decision has been postponed until December 2009 (Personal
communication: Eric Strassler, Engineering and Analysis Division, EPA,
October 2006) and any variance requests resulting from the rule are not
within the period covered by this ICR

 Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Table 4—Employer costs per
hour worked for employee compensation and costs as a percent of total
compensation: state and local government workers, by occupational and
industry group, December 2005.

 Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, Table 5—Employer costs per
hour worked for employee compensation and costs as a percent of total
compensation: state and local government workers, by occupational and
industry group, December 2005.

 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Employment Cost
Index–March 2006.

NPDES Modification and Variance Requests ICR	September 2006

  PAGE   2

NPDES Modification and Variance Requests ICR	September 2006

NPDES Modification and Variance Requests ICR	September 2006

NPDES Modification and Variance Requests ICR	September 2006

NPDES Modification and Variance Requests ICR	September 2006


[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 140 (Monday, July 22, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 43876-43877]
[FR Doc No: 2013-17484]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL13-76-000]

AmerenEnergy Resources Generating Company v. Midcontinent
Independent System Operator, Inc.; Notice of Complaint

    Take notice that on July 5, 2013, AmerenEnergy Resources Generating
Company (AERG or Complainants) filed a formal complaint against
Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO or Respondents),
pursuant to sections 206 of the Federal Power Act, 16 U.S.C. 824e and
18 CFR 385.206, regarding the compensation that a System Support
Resource unit should be provided under MISO's Tariff.
    AERG certifies that copies of the complaint were served on the
contacts for MISO as listed on the Commission's list of Corporate
Officials.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE., Washington, DC
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the
``eLibrary'' link and is available for

review in the Commission's Public Reference Room in Washington, DC.
There is an ``eSubscription'' link on the Web site that enables
subscribers to receive email notification when a document is added to a
subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any FERC Online service,
please email<EMAIL_ADDRESS>or call<PHONE_NUMBER> (toll
free). For TTY, call<PHONE_NUMBER>.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 31, 2013.

    Dated: July 12, 2013.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2013-17484 Filed 7-19-13; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 37734]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15238]

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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Technical Standard Order (TSO) C-122a, Equipment That Prevent
Blocked Channels Used in Two-Way Radio Communications Due to
Simultaneous Transmissions

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces the FAA's intent to cancel TSO-C122a,
Equipment That Prevent Blocked Channels Used in Two-Way Radio
Communications Due to Simultaneous Transmissions. The effect of the
cancelled TSO will not affect design or production according to an
existing TSO authorization (TSOA). Articles produced under an existing
TSOA can still be installed according to existing airworthiness
approvals and applications for new airworthiness installation approvals
will still be processed.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 23, 2012.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mrs. Veronica Gardner, AIR-130,
Federal Aviation Administration, 470 L'Enfant Plaza, Suite 4102,
Washington, DC 20024. Telephone<PHONE_NUMBER>, fax<PHONE_NUMBER>,
email to<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Comments Invited

    You are invited to comment on the proposed cancellation of the TSO
by submitting written data, views, or arguments to the above address.
Comments received may be examined, both before and after the closing
date at the above address, weekdays except federal holidays, between
8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. The Director, Aircraft Certification Service,
will consider all comments received on or before the closing date.

Background

    In 1984, the FAA was petitioned to enact rulemaking requiring two-
way radio communication systems employing anti-blocking and stuck
microphone protection circuitry. Our response to this rulemaking
petition was the issuance of TSO-C128, Devices that Prevent Blocked
Channels Used in Two-Way Radio Communications Due to Unintentional
Transmissions, for preventing blocked channels used in two-way radio
communication due to unintentional transmissions. TSO-C128, and the
subsequent revision, has proven effective and popular with VHF radio
manufacturers. Since 1994, there has been only one application for TSOA
for TSO-C122a. Therefore, we believe it is appropriate to cancel TSO-
C122a, given the eventual obsolescence of TSO-C122a equipment and the
lack of industry interest in new TSO-C122a product designs. We continue
to coordinate with industry's federal advisory committee through RTCA
Special Committee (SC) 226, Audio Systems and Equipment, for any new
developments on other means being used to address blocked channels
caused by simultaneous transmissions.

    Issued in Washington, DC, on June 18, 2012.
Susan J.M. Cabler,
Assistant Manager, Aircraft Engineering Division, Aircraft
Certification Service.
[FR Doc. 2012-15238 Filed 6-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P