As with many
other pretreatment ICRs, this justification statement should
explain in greater useful detail why the burden changed. Simpl
stating that the number of respondents changed from "x" to "y" is
insufficient. The text should explain why it changed and provide
back-up data to substantiate the explanation. Unlike many other
pretreatment justification statements, the "Purpose" section of
this one does contain a clear, succinct statement of what i covered
by the ICR - although it's in the last paragraph of the sectio
Please include such a short sentence at the beginning of each
"Purpose section.
Inventory as of this Action
Requested
Previously Approved
06/30/1987
06/30/1987
50
0
0
8,000
0
0
0
0
0
AN INDUSTRIAL USER OF A PUBLICLY OWNED
TREATMENT WORKS (POTW) MAY REQUEST A VARIANCE FROM ITS APPLICABLE
CATEGORICAL STANDARD TO OBTAIN INDIVIDUALIZED EFFLUENT LIMITS. A
POTW MAY ALSO REQUEST A VARIANCE ON BEHALF OF A USER. TECHNICAL
DATA DESCRIBING THE USER AND ITS DISCHARGE ARE SUBMITTED TO THE
DIRECTOR (EPA OR STATE AGENCY), WHO APPROVES/DENIES THE
VARIANCE.
On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that
the collection of information encompassed by this request complies
with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR
1320.8(b)(3).
The following is a summary of the topics, regarding
the proposed collection of information, that the certification
covers:
(i) Why the information is being collected;
(ii) Use of information;
(iii) Burden estimate;
(iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a
benefit, or mandatory);
(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and
(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control
number;
If you are unable to certify compliance with any of
these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked
and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.