Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Proposed Information Collection Request for the National Study of Nutrient Removal and Secondary Technologies: Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) Screener Questionnaire, 64151-64153 [2016-22498]
Download as PDF
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Notices
Requests
to make oral comments or to provide
written comments to NACEPT should be
sent to Eugene Green at green.eugene@
epa.gov by October 10, 2016. The
teleconference is open to the public,
with limited seating available on a firstcome, first-served basis. Members of the
public wishing to participate in the
teleconference should contact Eugene
Green via email or calling (202) 564–
2432 no later than October 10, 2016.
Meeting Access: Information regarding
accessibility and/or accommodations for
individuals with disabilities should be
directed to Eugene Green at the email
address or phone number listed above.
To ensure adequate time for processing,
please make requests for
accommodations at least 10 days prior
to the meeting.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Dated: September 7, 2016.
Eugene Green,
Designated Federal Officer.
[FR Doc. 2016–22479 Filed 9–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
AGENCY
[EPA–HQ–OW–2016–0404; FRL–9952–57–
OW]
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request; Proposed Information
Collection Request for the National
Study of Nutrient Removal and
Secondary Technologies: Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (POTW)
Screener Questionnaire
Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
The Environmental Protection
Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR) for
a mandatory survey, ‘‘Proposed
Information Collection Request for the
National Study of Nutrient Removal and
Secondary Technologies: Publicly
Owned Treatment Works (POTW)
Screener Questionnaire’’ (EPA ICR No.
2553.01, OMB Control No. 2040–NEW).
Before submitting the ICR to the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB) for
review and approval in accordance with
the Paperwork Reduction Act, EPA is
soliciting public comments on specific
aspects of the proposed information
collection as described below. 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.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:47 Sep 16, 2016
Jkt 238001
64151
DATES:
Comments must be submitted on
or before November 18, 2016.
How can I access the docket and/or
submit comments?
Submit your comments,
referencing Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OW–2016–0404 online using
www.regulations.gov (our preferred
method), by email to OW-Docket@
epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. EPA–
HQ–OW–2016–0404, or by mail to: EPA
Docket Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Mail Code 28221T,
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW.,
Washington, DC 20460.
Instructions: Direct your comments to
Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–OW–2016–
0404. EPA’s policy is that all comments
received will be included in the public
docket without change and may be
made available online at https://
www.regulations.gov, including any
personal information provided, unless
the comment includes information
claimed to be Confidential Business
Information (CBI) or other information
whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise
protected through https://
www.regulations.gov or email. The
https://www.regulations.gov Web site is
an ‘‘anonymous access’’ system, which
means EPA will not know your identity
or contact information unless you
provide it in the body of your comment.
If you send an email comment directly
to EPA without going through https://
www.regulations.gov, your email
address will be automatically captured
and included as part of the comment
that is placed in the public docket and
made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA
recommends that you include your
name and other contact information in
the body of your comment along with
any disk you submit. If EPA cannot read
your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for
clarification, EPA may not be able to
consider your comment. Electronic files
should avoid the use of special
characters, any form of encryption, and
be free of any defects or viruses. For
additional information about EPA’s
public docket, visit the EPA Docket
Center homepage at https://
www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
EPA has established a public docket
for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA—
EPA–HQ–OW–2016–0404, which is
available at https://
www.regulations.gov, or for in person
viewing at the Water Docket in the EPA
Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West,
Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave.
NW., Washington, DC. The 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 Public Reading Room is
(202) 566–1744, and the telephone
number for the Water Docket is (202)
566–2426.
Use https://www.regulations.gov to
obtain a copy of the draft collection of
information supporting statement,
obtain a draft of the screener, review the
draft mailing list of screener
respondents, submit or view public
comments, view the index listing of the
contents of the docket, and access those
documents in the public docket that are
available electronically. Once in the
system, select ‘‘search,’’ then key in the
docket ID number identified in this
document.
ADDRESSES:
Dr.
Paul Shriner, Engineering and Analysis
Division (4303T), Environmental
Protection Agency, 1200 Pennsylvania
Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460;
telephone number: 202–566–1076;
email address: nutrient-removal-study@
epa.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
What information is EPA particularly
interested in?
Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of
the PRA, EPA specifically solicits
comments and information to enable it
to:
(i) Evaluate whether the proposed
collection of information is necessary
for the proper performance of the
functions of the Agency, including
whether the information will have
practical utility;
(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the
Agency’s estimate of the burden of the
proposed collection of information,
including the validity of the
methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) Enhance the accuracy, quality,
utility, and clarity of the information to
be collected; and
(iv) Minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who
are to respond, including the use of
appropriate automated electronic,
mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology (e.g., permitting
electronic submission of responses). In
particular, EPA is requesting comments
from small POTWs (those that service a
population of less than 50,000) on
examples of specific additional ways
EPA can reduce the paperwork burden
on small facilities.
E:\FR\FM\19SEN1.SGM
19SEN1
64152
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Notices
What should I consider when I prepare
my comments for EPA?
You may find the following
suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as
possible and provide specific examples.
2. Describe any assumptions that you
used.
3. Provide copies of any technical
information and/or data you used that
support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or
costs, explain how you arrived at the
estimate that you provide.
5. Offer alternative ways to improve
the collection activity.
6. Make sure to submit your
comments by the deadline identified
under DATES above.
7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA,
be sure to identify the docket ID number
assigned to this action in the subject
line on the first page of your response.
You may also provide the name, date,
and Federal Register citation.
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
What information collection activity or
ICR does this apply to?
Affected entities: Entities potentially
affected by this action are
approximately 16,000 (but no more than
20,000) POTWs that meet the definition
under 40 CFR 403.3(q), as well as up to
100 state and/or small municipal
association contacts.
Title: National Study of Nutrient
Removal and Secondary Technologies:
Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTW) Screener Questionnaire
Information Collection Request.
ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2553.01,
OMB Control No. 2040—NEW.
ICR status: This ICR is for a new
information collection activity. 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 information collections are
displayed either by publication in the
Federal Register or by other appropriate
means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable.
Abstract: Nutrient pollution remains
the single greatest challenge to our
Nation’s water quality, and presents a
growing threat to public health and
local economies—contributing to toxic
harmful algal blooms, contamination of
drinking water sources, and costly
impacts on recreation, tourism and
fisheries. The multi-phase study
described here, when completed, will
provide a rich database of nutrient
removal performance at secondary
treatment POTWs nationwide, and will
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:47 Sep 16, 2016
Jkt 238001
help POTWs understand the range of
nutrient removal performance and
opportunities to optimize nutrient
removals based on data from their peers.
It will also serve as a major new
resource for POTWs, states and
stakeholders to evaluate the most cost
effective approaches to nutrient
reduction at the watershed scale. The
EPA is collaborating with states to make
greater progress in reducing nutrient
loadings discharged into the Nation’s
waters from all sources. With this goal
in mind, EPA’s Office of Water is
planning to collect data to evaluate the
nutrient removals and related
technology performance of POTWs with
conventional secondary treatment. For
the purposes of this study
‘‘conventional secondary treatment’’ are
those processes used by industry to
meet the regulatory requirements for
secondary treatment. The goals of this
study would be to establish a baseline
of nutrient performance nationally for
secondary treatment facilities and to
document the capability of POTWs to
reduce nutrient discharges by
implementing changes to operations and
maintenance, without making extensive
capital investments.
The full study would be conducted in
multiple phases over the course of four
to five years, allowing for interactions
with stakeholders and experts in each
phase. The first phase of the study is a
screener questionnaire which is the
focus of this ICR.
To initiate this study, EPA first needs
to update existing information on the
universe of POTWs in the U.S.,
including tribally owned facilities, and
collect basic information on the
characteristics of these POTWs. There
are no currently available datasets
which identify all the POTWs in the
country, or that identify which POTWs
are conventional secondary treatment
plants. These conventional secondary
plants would then be the focus of study
over the next four years to determine
how efficiently these plants remove
nutrients and how enhancements to
operation and maintenance have
improved that performance. EPA
envisions conducting future surveys of
a statistically representative sample of
the population of secondary treatment
plants but will not know the exact
format of the collection until it receives
data from this screener. Regardless of
the method, EPA’s objective is to create
a database of the full population of
POTWs in the U.S. and use that
database for further statistical study of
nutrient removal performance. EPA
plans to make this database publically
available—subject to confidentiality
concerns that may arise. Currently only
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
a small number of case studies are
available documenting how secondary
treatment plants can reduce nutrient
discharges through enhanced operation
and maintenance procedures. The study
EPA is planning would provide
statistically representative data on
improved nutrient removal by
secondary treatment plants resulting
from changes in operation and
maintenance. This study would help
States and POTWs agree to and set wellinformed and realistic nutrient load
reduction targets for wastewater
treatment facilities where appropriate,
and provide information on the time
and costs needed to make enhancements
in operation and maintenance
procedures.
EPA’s Office of Water plans to
administer the initial survey as a
mandatory census of POTWs in the U.S.
Clean Water Act Section 308 authority
constitutes a broad authority 1 to request
information to carry out any objective
under the Clean Water Act. 33 U.S.C.
1318(a). Any use of 308 authority is
never taken lightly by EPA, and much
deliberation went into this decision.
Key to our decision are the goals of the
overall study and the concern that
voluntary submission or self-selection
could result in a low or
unrepresentative survey response rate.
This census, the first phase of the study,
is essential to the future phases of the
study. Requiring facilities to participate
is necessary to identify all of the
secondary treatment or equivalent
facilities in the U.S. EPA’s Office of
Water intends to use this information
for research and statistical purposes
only. Information is not being collected
for purposes of enforcement or to
compel facilities to submit information
regarding activities that might be
potential violations of their National
Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits. This census will
solicit basic facility identification,
characterization, and technical
information necessary to develop the
future detailed questionnaire, to select
the sample of secondary treatment
plants planned for subsequent phases of
the study, and to select POTWs where
future influent and effluent sampling
could be conducted to document
performance. EPA would prepare a
second ICR for the subsequent phases of
the study after the first phase census is
completed and the sample frame for the
1 See Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v.
U.S. EPA, 822 F.2d 104, 119 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (‘‘[i]n
our view, the statute’s sweep is sufficient to justify
broad information disclosure requirements relating
to the Administrator’s duties, as long as the
disclosure demands which he imposes are
‘reasonable.’ ’’)
E:\FR\FM\19SEN1.SGM
19SEN1
mstockstill on DSK3G9T082PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 81, No. 181 / Monday, September 19, 2016 / Notices
subsequent phases developed. EPA is
considering utilizing pre-tests, pilots, or
other techniques to obtain stakeholder
input in the development of the
subsequent phases of this study which
may not need to be conducted using 308
authority.
The rationale for conducting this
effort as a mandatory census is two-fold.
Currently there exist multiple, disparate
databases containing information
concerning various subsets of treatment
facilities; however, each of these
databases is incomplete with respect to
identifying all facilities. In addition,
each database has missing or incomplete
data fields. Second, historic precedent
indicates that voluntary survey designs
have extremely low response rates and
issues with bias. Both of these facts
make getting an accurate, national
profile of POTWs infeasible without
making it mandatory to respond. EPA
also intends to conduct up to 40 POTW
site visits and up to 100 state and small
municipality association phone contacts
to solicit information on industry
terminology, typical treatment trains
and modes of operation, and nutrient
removal technologies and operating
practices, and this ICR addresses these
activities as well.
EPA is limiting the information
requested by the census to that which is
necessary to create a complete
population of POTWs and to identify
basic information about that population.
Questions include those necessary to
identify and stratify the universe of
POTWs and, within that population, the
secondary treatment POTWs not
designed specifically to remove nitrogen
and phosphorus. A draft of the screener
is available at Docket ID No. EPA–HQ–
OW–2016–0404 as part of today’s
request for comments (see Instructions
section of this notice for further
information).
The draft screener makes use of
multiple choice and yes/no questions,
with the intention to use drop down
menus and checkboxes from which
respondents will choose the best
answer. EPA is not including openended questions in the screener
questionnaire which would likely be
unwieldy due to the number and
expected variation of responses and the
extensive follow-up needed when
entering the responses into a database.
EPA intends to design the screener
questionnaire as a web-based survey
that POTWs can fill out and submit
online. EPA intends to require the
submittal of a signed certification form
that will either be uploaded with the
screener, or may be mailed directly to
the Agency. EPA will provide a
mechanism for POTWs to respond with
VerDate Sep<11>2014
21:47 Sep 16, 2016
Jkt 238001
a mailed response if they cannot access
the internet. EPA is specifically
soliciting comments on simplifying the
census format. In addition, EPA is
soliciting comments on EPA’s approach
to developing the mailing list, and has
made a draft available in the Docket (see
Instructions section of this notice for
further information).
Burden statement: This information
collection is a one-time event. The total
respondent reporting and recordkeeping
burden for this collection of information
is estimated to average 3.5 hours per
response for 90 percent of the
respondents and 1.5 hours per response
for 10 percent of the respondents.
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. The burden estimate
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;
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.
The ICR provides a detailed
explanation of the Agency’s estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
Estimated total number of potential
respondents: No more than 20,000
POTWs, 40 POTWs for site visits, 100
state or small municipal association
contacts.
Frequency of response: One-time data
collection.
Estimated total average burden for
each respondent: POTW screener survey
response—3.5 hours for 90 percent of
the respondents ($147) and 1.5 hours for
10 percent of the respondents ($65);
POTW site visit respondent—8 hours,
$224; State/Small Municipal
Association contact—1 hour, $55.
Estimated total respondent burden
hours: 66,420.
Estimated total respondent costs:
$2,792,713. This estimate reflects unit
costs for labor and operational and
maintenance costs.
What is the next step in the process for
this ICR?
EPA will consider the comments
received and amend the ICR, the
screener questionnaire, and its approach
as appropriate. During this public
comment period, EPA will be working
with stakeholders to refine the survey
instrument and will revise the
instrument as appropriate after
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
64153
considering the comments expressed
during those interactions and in
response to this notice. The final ICR
package will then be submitted to OMB
for review and approval pursuant to 5
CFR 1320.12. At that time, EPA will
issue another Federal Register notice
pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to
announce the submission of the ICR to
OMB and a 30 day opportunity to
submit comments to OMB on this ICR.
If you have any questions about this ICR
or the approval process, please contact
the technical person listed above under
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.
Dated: September 12, 2016.
Elizabeth Southerland,
Director, Office of Science and Technology.
[FR Doc. 2016–22498 Filed 9–16–16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560–50–P
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS
COMMISSION
[OMB 3060–1021]
Information Collection Being Reviewed
by the Federal Communications
Commission Under Delegated
Authority
Federal Communications
Commission.
ACTION: Notice and request for
comments.
AGENCY:
As part of its continuing effort
to reduce paperwork burdens, and as
required by the Paperwork Reduction
Act (PRA) of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501–
3520), the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC or Commission)
invites the general public and other
Federal agencies to take this
opportunity to comment on the
following information collections.
Comments are requested concerning:
Whether the proposed collection of
information is necessary for the proper
performance of the functions of the
Commission, including whether the
information shall have practical utility;
the accuracy of the Commission’s
burden estimate; ways to enhance the
quality, utility, and clarity of the
information collected; ways to minimize
the burden of the collection of
information on the respondents,
including the use of automated
collection techniques or other forms of
information technology; and ways to
further reduce the information
collection burden on small business
concerns with fewer than 25 employees.
The FCC may not conduct or sponsor a
collection of information unless it
displays a currently valid OMB control
number. No person shall be subject to
SUMMARY:
E:\FR\FM\19SEN1.SGM
19SEN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 181 (Monday, September 19, 2016)]
[Notices]
[Pages 64151-64153]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22498]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
[EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0404; FRL-9952-57-OW]
Proposed Collection; Comment Request; Proposed Information
Collection Request for the National Study of Nutrient Removal and
Secondary Technologies: Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) Screener
Questionnaire
AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to submit an
information collection request (ICR) for a mandatory survey, ``Proposed
Information Collection Request for the National Study of Nutrient
Removal and Secondary Technologies: Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POTW) Screener Questionnaire'' (EPA ICR No. 2553.01, OMB Control No.
2040-NEW). Before submitting the ICR to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) for review and approval in accordance with the Paperwork
Reduction Act, EPA is soliciting public comments on specific aspects of
the proposed information collection as described below. 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.
DATES: Comments must be submitted on or before November 18, 2016.
ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, referencing Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-
2016-0404 online using www.regulations.gov (our preferred method), by
email to OW-Docket@epa.gov, Attention Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-
0404, or by mail to: EPA Docket Center, Environmental Protection
Agency, Mail Code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC
20460.
Instructions: Direct your comments to Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-
0404. EPA's policy is that all comments received will be included in
the public docket without change and may be made available online at
https://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information
provided, unless the comment includes information claimed to be
Confidential Business Information (CBI) or other information whose
disclosure is restricted by statute. Do not submit information that you
consider to be CBI or otherwise protected through https://www.regulations.gov or email. The https://www.regulations.gov Web site
is an ``anonymous access'' system, which means EPA will not know your
identity or contact information unless you provide it in the body of
your comment. If you send an email comment directly to EPA without
going through https://www.regulations.gov, your email address will be
automatically captured and included as part of the comment that is
placed in the public docket and made available on the Internet. If you
submit an electronic comment, EPA recommends that you include your name
and other contact information in the body of your comment along with
any disk you submit. If EPA cannot read your comment due to technical
difficulties and cannot contact you for clarification, EPA may not be
able to consider your comment. Electronic files should avoid the use of
special characters, any form of encryption, and be free of any defects
or viruses. For additional information about EPA's public docket, visit
the EPA Docket Center homepage at https://www.epa.gov/epahome/dockets.htm.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Paul Shriner, Engineering and
Analysis Division (4303T), Environmental Protection Agency, 1200
Pennsylvania Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20460; telephone number: 202-566-
1076; email address: nutrient-removal-study@epa.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
How can I access the docket and/or submit comments?
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA--EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0404, which is available at https://www.regulations.gov, or for in person viewing at the Water Docket in
the EPA Docket Center, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution
Ave. NW., Washington, DC. The 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 Public Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the
telephone number for the Water Docket is (202) 566-2426.
Use https://www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft
collection of information supporting statement, obtain a draft of the
screener, review the draft mailing list of screener respondents, submit
or view public comments, view the index listing of the contents of the
docket, and access those documents in the public docket that are
available electronically. Once in the system, select ``search,'' then
key in the docket ID number identified in this document.
What information is EPA particularly interested in?
Pursuant to section 3506(c)(2)(A) of the PRA, EPA specifically
solicits comments and information to enable it to:
(i) Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is
necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the Agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility;
(ii) Evaluate the accuracy of the Agency's estimate of the burden
of the proposed collection of information, including the validity of
the methodology and assumptions used;
(iii) Enhance the accuracy, quality, utility, and clarity of the
information to be collected; and
(iv) Minimize the burden of the collection of information on those
who are to respond, including the use of appropriate automated
electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection techniques or
other forms of information technology (e.g., permitting electronic
submission of responses). In particular, EPA is requesting comments
from small POTWs (those that service a population of less than 50,000)
on examples of specific additional ways EPA can reduce the paperwork
burden on small facilities.
[[Page 64152]]
What should I consider when I prepare my comments for EPA?
You may find the following suggestions helpful for preparing your
comments:
1. Explain your views as clearly as possible and provide specific
examples.
2. Describe any assumptions that you used.
3. Provide copies of any technical information and/or data you used
that support your views.
4. If you estimate potential burden or costs, explain how you
arrived at the estimate that you provide.
5. Offer alternative ways to improve the collection activity.
6. Make sure to submit your comments by the deadline identified
under DATES above.
7. To ensure proper receipt by EPA, be sure to identify the docket
ID number assigned to this action in the subject line on the first page
of your response. You may also provide the name, date, and Federal
Register citation.
What information collection activity or ICR does this apply to?
Affected entities: Entities potentially affected by this action are
approximately 16,000 (but no more than 20,000) POTWs that meet the
definition under 40 CFR 403.3(q), as well as up to 100 state and/or
small municipal association contacts.
Title: National Study of Nutrient Removal and Secondary
Technologies: Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) Screener
Questionnaire Information Collection Request.
ICR numbers: EPA ICR No. 2553.01, OMB Control No. 2040--NEW.
ICR status: This ICR is for a new information collection activity.
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 information
collections are displayed either by publication in the Federal Register
or by other appropriate means, such as on the related collection
instrument or form, if applicable.
Abstract: Nutrient pollution remains the single greatest challenge
to our Nation's water quality, and presents a growing threat to public
health and local economies--contributing to toxic harmful algal blooms,
contamination of drinking water sources, and costly impacts on
recreation, tourism and fisheries. The multi-phase study described
here, when completed, will provide a rich database of nutrient removal
performance at secondary treatment POTWs nationwide, and will help
POTWs understand the range of nutrient removal performance and
opportunities to optimize nutrient removals based on data from their
peers. It will also serve as a major new resource for POTWs, states and
stakeholders to evaluate the most cost effective approaches to nutrient
reduction at the watershed scale. The EPA is collaborating with states
to make greater progress in reducing nutrient loadings discharged into
the Nation's waters from all sources. With this goal in mind, EPA's
Office of Water is planning to collect data to evaluate the nutrient
removals and related technology performance of POTWs with conventional
secondary treatment. For the purposes of this study ``conventional
secondary treatment'' are those processes used by industry to meet the
regulatory requirements for secondary treatment. The goals of this
study would be to establish a baseline of nutrient performance
nationally for secondary treatment facilities and to document the
capability of POTWs to reduce nutrient discharges by implementing
changes to operations and maintenance, without making extensive capital
investments.
The full study would be conducted in multiple phases over the
course of four to five years, allowing for interactions with
stakeholders and experts in each phase. The first phase of the study is
a screener questionnaire which is the focus of this ICR.
To initiate this study, EPA first needs to update existing
information on the universe of POTWs in the U.S., including tribally
owned facilities, and collect basic information on the characteristics
of these POTWs. There are no currently available datasets which
identify all the POTWs in the country, or that identify which POTWs are
conventional secondary treatment plants. These conventional secondary
plants would then be the focus of study over the next four years to
determine how efficiently these plants remove nutrients and how
enhancements to operation and maintenance have improved that
performance. EPA envisions conducting future surveys of a statistically
representative sample of the population of secondary treatment plants
but will not know the exact format of the collection until it receives
data from this screener. Regardless of the method, EPA's objective is
to create a database of the full population of POTWs in the U.S. and
use that database for further statistical study of nutrient removal
performance. EPA plans to make this database publically available--
subject to confidentiality concerns that may arise. Currently only a
small number of case studies are available documenting how secondary
treatment plants can reduce nutrient discharges through enhanced
operation and maintenance procedures. The study EPA is planning would
provide statistically representative data on improved nutrient removal
by secondary treatment plants resulting from changes in operation and
maintenance. This study would help States and POTWs agree to and set
well-informed and realistic nutrient load reduction targets for
wastewater treatment facilities where appropriate, and provide
information on the time and costs needed to make enhancements in
operation and maintenance procedures.
EPA's Office of Water plans to administer the initial survey as a
mandatory census of POTWs in the U.S. Clean Water Act Section 308
authority constitutes a broad authority \1\ to request information to
carry out any objective under the Clean Water Act. 33 U.S.C. 1318(a).
Any use of 308 authority is never taken lightly by EPA, and much
deliberation went into this decision. Key to our decision are the goals
of the overall study and the concern that voluntary submission or self-
selection could result in a low or unrepresentative survey response
rate. This census, the first phase of the study, is essential to the
future phases of the study. Requiring facilities to participate is
necessary to identify all of the secondary treatment or equivalent
facilities in the U.S. EPA's Office of Water intends to use this
information for research and statistical purposes only. Information is
not being collected for purposes of enforcement or to compel facilities
to submit information regarding activities that might be potential
violations of their National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permits. This census will solicit basic facility
identification, characterization, and technical information necessary
to develop the future detailed questionnaire, to select the sample of
secondary treatment plants planned for subsequent phases of the study,
and to select POTWs where future influent and effluent sampling could
be conducted to document performance. EPA would prepare a second ICR
for the subsequent phases of the study after the first phase census is
completed and the sample frame for the
[[Page 64153]]
subsequent phases developed. EPA is considering utilizing pre-tests,
pilots, or other techniques to obtain stakeholder input in the
development of the subsequent phases of this study which may not need
to be conducted using 308 authority.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. U.S. EPA, 822
F.2d 104, 119 (D.C. Cir. 1987) (``[i]n our view, the statute's sweep
is sufficient to justify broad information disclosure requirements
relating to the Administrator's duties, as long as the disclosure
demands which he imposes are `reasonable.' '')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The rationale for conducting this effort as a mandatory census is
two-fold. Currently there exist multiple, disparate databases
containing information concerning various subsets of treatment
facilities; however, each of these databases is incomplete with respect
to identifying all facilities. In addition, each database has missing
or incomplete data fields. Second, historic precedent indicates that
voluntary survey designs have extremely low response rates and issues
with bias. Both of these facts make getting an accurate, national
profile of POTWs infeasible without making it mandatory to respond. EPA
also intends to conduct up to 40 POTW site visits and up to 100 state
and small municipality association phone contacts to solicit
information on industry terminology, typical treatment trains and modes
of operation, and nutrient removal technologies and operating
practices, and this ICR addresses these activities as well.
EPA is limiting the information requested by the census to that
which is necessary to create a complete population of POTWs and to
identify basic information about that population. Questions include
those necessary to identify and stratify the universe of POTWs and,
within that population, the secondary treatment POTWs not designed
specifically to remove nitrogen and phosphorus. A draft of the screener
is available at Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2016-0404 as part of today's
request for comments (see Instructions section of this notice for
further information).
The draft screener makes use of multiple choice and yes/no
questions, with the intention to use drop down menus and checkboxes
from which respondents will choose the best answer. EPA is not
including open-ended questions in the screener questionnaire which
would likely be unwieldy due to the number and expected variation of
responses and the extensive follow-up needed when entering the
responses into a database. EPA intends to design the screener
questionnaire as a web-based survey that POTWs can fill out and submit
online. EPA intends to require the submittal of a signed certification
form that will either be uploaded with the screener, or may be mailed
directly to the Agency. EPA will provide a mechanism for POTWs to
respond with a mailed response if they cannot access the internet. EPA
is specifically soliciting comments on simplifying the census format.
In addition, EPA is soliciting comments on EPA's approach to developing
the mailing list, and has made a draft available in the Docket (see
Instructions section of this notice for further information).
Burden statement: This information collection is a one-time event.
The total respondent reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information is estimated to average 3.5 hours per
response for 90 percent of the respondents and 1.5 hours per response
for 10 percent of the respondents. 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.
The burden estimate 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; 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.
The ICR provides a detailed explanation of the Agency's estimate,
which is only briefly summarized here:
Estimated total number of potential respondents: No more than
20,000 POTWs, 40 POTWs for site visits, 100 state or small municipal
association contacts.
Frequency of response: One-time data collection.
Estimated total average burden for each respondent: POTW screener
survey response--3.5 hours for 90 percent of the respondents ($147) and
1.5 hours for 10 percent of the respondents ($65); POTW site visit
respondent--8 hours, $224; State/Small Municipal Association contact--1
hour, $55.
Estimated total respondent burden hours: 66,420.
Estimated total respondent costs: $2,792,713. This estimate
reflects unit costs for labor and operational and maintenance costs.
What is the next step in the process for this ICR?
EPA will consider the comments received and amend the ICR, the
screener questionnaire, and its approach as appropriate. During this
public comment period, EPA will be working with stakeholders to refine
the survey instrument and will revise the instrument as appropriate
after considering the comments expressed during those interactions and
in response to this notice. The final ICR package will then be
submitted to OMB for review and approval pursuant to 5 CFR 1320.12. At
that time, EPA will issue another Federal Register notice pursuant to 5
CFR 1320.5(a)(1)(iv) to announce the submission of the ICR to OMB and a
30 day opportunity to submit comments to OMB on this ICR. If you have
any questions about this ICR or the approval process, please contact
the technical person listed above under FOR FURTHER INFORMATION
CONTACT.
Dated: September 12, 2016.
Elizabeth Southerland,
Director, Office of Science and Technology.
[FR Doc. 2016-22498 Filed 9-16-16; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P