2686t03 Burden Calculation Tables

2686t03.xlsx

2022 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System General Permit for Discharges from Construction Activities (Renewal)

2686t03 Burden Calculation Tables

OMB: 2040-0305

Document [xlsx]
Download: xlsx | pdf

Overview

Agency Burden
Respondent Burden and Cost
Turbidity Monitoring
Number of Respondents


Sheet 1: Agency Burden

2022 CGP ICR - Agency Labor Burden





Federal: Labor rate (2024)








$51.15

Hours Per Response Number of Annual Reponses Annual Hours Burden Annual Cost Burden 2
Activity 2017 NPDES Program ICR 1 2022 CGP Incremental Change 2022 CGP Total Hours per Response 2022 CGP No. Annual Responses 2022 CGP Incremental Change in Annual Burden (hrs) 2022 CGP Annual Burden (hrs) 2022 CGP Incremental Change in Annual Cost 2022 CGP Annual Cost
NOI review 1 0 1 3,630 0 3,630 $0 $185,675
NOT review 0.25 0 0.25 3,631 0 908 $0 $46,431
Waiver Certification Review 1 0 1 182 0 182 $0 $9,309
SWPPP review 1 0 1 3,631 0 3,631 $0 $185,726
Standard/Other Reports 12 0 12 176 0 2,112 $0 $108,029
Turbidity Monitoring Report Review NA 0.16 0.16 835 134 134 $6,834 $6,834
Turbidity Report Follow-up NA 0.5 0.5 167 84 84 $4,271 $4,271
Total Agency Activities

12,252 217 10,680 $11,105 $546,275









Table Endnotes







1 NA indicates that the 2017 NPDES Programmatic ICR did not account for this new burden item.







2 In the 2022 CGP ICR, EPA assumed that the fully loaded cost of employment for a federal employee is $46.02.








Sheet 2: Respondent Burden and Cost

2022 CGP ICR - Respondent Burden and Cost Table








Labor rate (2024)











$73.47


Hours Per Response Number of Annual Reponses Annual Hours Burden Annual Cost Burden
Activity 2017 NPDES Program ICR 1 2022 CGP Incremental Change 2022 CGP Total 2022 CGP Number of Respondents Number of Occurrences Per Year 2022 CGP Incremental Change in Annual Responses 2022 CGP Number of Annual Responses 2022 CGP Incremental Change in Annual Burden (hrs) 2022 CGP Total Annual Burden (hrs) 2022 CGP Incremental Change in Annual Cost 2 2022 CGP Total Annual Cost 2
Reporting Requirements

NOI - Large Sites

With ESA Evaluation and No Consultation 1.5 -0.4 1.1 980 1 0 980 -392 1078 -$28,800 $79,201
With ESA Evaluation and Informal Consultation 6 -0.4 5.6 609 1 0 609 -244 3,410 -$17,927 $250,533
With ESA Evaluation and Formal Consultation 20 -0.4 19.6 44 1 0 44 -18 862 -$1,322 $63,331
NOI - Small Sites with ESA Evaluation and Consultation 3.7 -0.4 3.3 1997 1 0 1997 -799 6,590 -$58,703 $484,167
Appendix D - Eligibility Procedures Relating to Threatened and Endangered Species Protection Included in NOI burden - - - - - - - - - -
Appendix E - Historic Property Screening Step 5 (Contact SHPO/THPO) Included in NOI burden - - - - - - - - - -
Appendix L - Request for Chemical Treatment Included in NOI burden - - - - - - - - - -
Appendix C - Small Construction Waiver 1 0 1 182 1 0 182 0 182 $0 $13,372
NOT 0.5 0.7 1.2 3631 1 0 3631 2,542 4,357 $186,761 $320,109
Turbidity Benchmark Monitoring - Sampling NA 0.5 0.5 835 29 24215 24215 12,108 12,108 $889,575 $889,575
Turbidity Benchmark Monitoring - Reporting NA 0.75 0.75 835 4 3340 3340 2,505 2,505 $184,042 $184,042
Standard/Other Reporting











Planned Facility Changes 4 0 4 18 1 0 18 0 72 $0 $5,290
Anticipated Noncompliance 5 0 5 4 1 0 4 0 20 $0 $1,469
24hr reporting - Unanticipated Bypass or Upset (Verbal) 5 0 5 4 1 0 4 0 20 $0 $1,469
24hr reporting - Unanticipated Bypass or Upset (Written) 2 0 2 3 1 0 3 0 6 $0 $441
24hr reporting - Violation of Maximum Daily Discharge (Verbal) 3 0 3 73 1 0 73 0 219 $0 $16,090
24hr reporting - Violation of Maximum Daily Discharge (Written) 2 0 2 36 1 0 36 0 72 $0 $5,290
Other Noncompliance reporting 5 0 5 36 1 0 36 0 180 $0 $13,225
Other Info - Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information 2 0 2 2 1 0 2 0 4 $0 $294
Reporting Subtotal




27,555 35,174 15,702 31,685 $1,153,626 $2,327,898
Recordkeeping Requirements











Develop New SWPPP - Large Sites 36.4 0 36.4 1634 1 0 1634 0 59,478 $0 $4,369,849
Develop New SWPPP - Small Sites 22.7 0 22.7 1997 1 0 1997 0 45,332 $0 $3,330,542
SWPPP Benchmark Monitoring Procedure 3 NA 4 4 835 Part of developing a SWPPP 3,340 3,340 $245,390 $245,390
Update SWPPP Included in SWPPP development burden - - - - - - - - - -
Site Inspections - Large Sites 0.5 0 0.5 1634 26 0 42,484 0 21,242 $0 $1,560,650
Site Inspections - Small Sites 0.25 0 0.25 1997 26 0 51,922 0 12,981 $0 $953,714
Dewatering Inspections NA 0.25 0.25 3631 29 105299 105,299 26,325 26,325 $1,934,098 $1,934,098
Corrective Action Records Included in burden estimate for site inspections, dewatering inspections, and turbidity monitoring - - - - - - - - - -
Recordkeeping Subtotal
105,299 203,336 29,665 168,698 $2,179,488 $12,394,243
Total Labor Burden and Cost
132,854 238,510 45,367 200,383 $3,333,114 $14,722,141
Total Capital and O&M


$888,440 $888,440
Grand Total


$4,221,554 $15,610,581




















Hours (respondent + agency) 211,063










Responses (respondent + agency) 250,762



Table Endnotes





hours per response 0.841685941251067


$296,146.67
1 NA indicates that the 2017 NPDES Programmatic ICR did not account for this new burden item.











2 In the 2022 CGP ICR, EPA assumed that the fully loaded cost of employment for a private sector employee is $73.47.











3 A subpopulation of respondents need to document their benchmark monitoring procedures in their SWPPP. This is not considered a new response, as it is included in the overall SWPPP response. The burden is calculated in a separate line because the burden applies to a subset of the respondent population












Sheet 3: Turbidity Monitoring

Calculations for Turbidity Monitoring Requirements


















Dewatering Turbidity Monitoring Reports








Activity Estimate Notes
Average data entry time per element 1 (hours) 0.06 This average is based on burden reported in the Economic Analysis of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Electronic Reporting Final Rule (9/2015, Table 4-9 Page 4-14). It is an average of the Hybrid and Batch methods. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/npdesea.pdf
No. of elements to report per DMR 13 Respondents need to fill in either "no dewatering discharge" or the weekly sampling average for every week in the quarter, which is 13 weeks.
Hours per Response 0.75




















Turbidity Meter Capital and Operation & Maintenance Costs








Monitoring Device Capital/ Startup Cost for One Respondent 1 Number of Respondents Total Capital/ Startup Cost Annual O&M Costs for One Respondentb Number of Respondents with O&M Total O&M


Turbidity Meter $1,064 835 $888,440 $0 835 $0


a EPA surveyed publicly available price information from a variety of analytical instrument retailers for prices and instrument information. Of the instruments with publicly available prices that were advertised as able to comply with EPA analytical method standards for turbidity, prices ranged from $970 - $1,870 with a median price of $1,043. Further information on this survey can be found in the Incremental Cost Impact Analysis for the 2022 CGP.








b EPA assumes that calibration standards are included with the purchase of a turbidity meter, and thus the O&M cost of purchasing calibration standards is included in the capital cost estimate.



















































$296,146.67






Sheet 4: Number of Respondents


Respondent Percentage Proposed 2022 CGP ICR Notes
# of NOIs (including Idaho) - NA https://permitsearch.epa.gov/epermit-search/ui/search
# of NOIs (excluding Idaho) - 3631 2022 CGP NOI Data (Years 1 and 2 of 2022 CGP NOI Data)
Operators with Large Sites 45% 1634 37% used in 2017 NPDES Program ICR, updated to 41% using 2017 CGP NOI Data (2017-2020), and updated to 45% using the first two years of the 2022 CGP NOI data for 2022 CGP ICR (sites greater than 5 acres)
NOI - Large Sites (ESA Criterion A, B) 60% 980 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR: 60% of large sites
NOI - Large Sites (ESA Criterion C, D, E - Informal Eval) 37.3% 609 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR: 37.3% of large sites
NOI - Large Sites (ESA Criterion F - Formal Eval) 2.7% 44 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR: 2.7% of large sites
Operators with Small Sites 55% 1997 63% used in 2017 NPDES Program ICR, updated to 59% using 2017 CGP NOI Data (2017-2020). Updated to 55% in 2024 using the first two years of 2022 CGP NOI Data for the 2022 CGP ICR (sites less than 5 acres)
Operators that discharge into Sensitive Water 23% 835 Based on analysis of the first two years of 2022 CGP NOI data , where impairment or TMDL was listed in NOI form based on the following search terms: sediment, turbidity, TSS, solids, or transparency or the water was Tier 2, 2.5, or 3.
Waivers (5%) 5% 182 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR: 5% on top of the total number of NOIs submitted each year
# NOTs 100% 3631 Same number as number of NOIs
Planned Facility Changes 0.50% 18 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR
Anticipated Noncompliance 0.10% 4 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR
24hr reporting - Unanticipated Bypass or Upset (Verbal) 0.10% 4 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR
24hr reporting - Unanticipated Bypass or Upset (Written) 0.08% 3 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR
24hr reporting - Violation of Maximum Daily Discharge (Verbal) 2% 73 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR
24hr reporting - Violation of Maximum Daily Discharge (Written) 1% 36 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR
Other Noncompliance reporting 1% 36 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR
Other Info - Permittee Report of Inaccurate Previous Information 0.05% 2 Same assumption made in 2017 NPDES Program ICR
File Typeapplication/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet
File Modified0000-00-00
File Created0000-00-00

© 2025 OMB.report | Privacy Policy