1
Part
A
of
the
Supporting
Statement
1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
and
Number
of
the
Information
Collection
This
ICR
is
entitled
"
Application
Requirements
for
the
Approval
and
Delegation
of
Federal
Air
Toxics
Programs
to
State,
Territorial,
Local,
and
Tribal
Agencies"
and
numbered
as
EPA
ICR
Number
1643.04
and
OMB
Number
2060­
0264.
This
is
a
revision
of
the
OMBapproved
EPA
ICR
Number
1643.03.

1(
b)
Short
Characterization
This
information
collection
is
an
application
from
State,
territorial,
local,
or
tribal
agencies
(
S/
L/
Ts)
for
delegation
of
regulations
developed
under
section
112(
l)
of
the
Clean
Air
Act
(
CAA)
as
amended
in
1990.
In
the
time
frame
for
this
submittal,
we,
the
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
estimate
that
the
majority
of
the
delegated
regulations
will
be
those
developed
under
sections
112(
d)
and
112(
r)
of
the
CAA.
The
procedures
and
requirements
that
the
S/
L/
Ts
will
use
to
request
the
delegations
are
codified
as
40
CFR
63,
subpart
E,
in
accordance
with
section
112(
l)
of
the
CAA.
We
have
amended
subpart
E
to
allow
more
flexibility
in
the
manner
in
which
the
section
112
regulations
are
delegated.

Whereas
the
original
subpart
E
regulations
have
only
three
options
for
delegation
(
rule
adjustment,
rule
substitution,
and
broad
program
approval)
beyond
accepting
straight
delegation,
with
the
amended
subpart
E
regulations,
we
have
modified
and
expanded
these
options
to
include
the
following:

!
Straight
delegation
!
Rule
adjustment
!
Rule
substitution
!
Equivalency
by
permit
!
State
program
approval
Straight
delegation
is
the
option
where
the
respondents,
S/
L/
Ts,
choose
to
enforce
the
section
112
standard
as
written.
The
S/
L/
Ts
may
use
the
rule
adjustment
option
when
they
have
an
S/
L/
T
rule
that
is
unequivocally
no
less
stringent
than
the
otherwise
applicable
standard.
They
may
use
rule
substitution
when
they
wish
to
substitute
individual
rules
in
place
of
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
rule.
They
may
use
the
equivalency
by
permit
option
when
they
wish
to
accept
delegation
of
the
Federal
standard
for
a
limited
number
of
sources
using
title
V
permit
terms
and
conditions.
Finally,
S/
L/
Ts
may
use
the
State
program
approval
option
if
they
want
to
use
their
overall
air
toxics
program
to
accept
delegation
of
several
standards
via
their
program.
2
The
delegation
options
vary
in
the
types
of
changes
allowed,
the
level
of
demonstration
required,
and
the
amount
of
time
and
process
needed
to
implement
them.
Respondents
must
submit
any
packages
requesting
delegation
to
their
EPA
Regional
office.
We
must
then
review
and
approve,
partially
approve,
or
disapprove
the
request
based
on
the
subpart
E
approval
criteria.
The
request
may
only
take
effect
after
our
approval
(
or
partial
approval
of
a
subset
of
the
request),
public
notice,
and,
in
some
cases,
public
comment.

Subpart
E
also
contains
provisions
for
delegating
accidental
release
prevention
program
authorities
under
the
authority
of
section
112(
r)
of
the
CAA.
In
addition,
we
also
reserve
the
right
to
review
and
withdraw
an
approved
S/
L/
T
rule,
program,
or
requirement
if
we
decide
it
is
not
as
stringent
as
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
standard
or
if
the
S/
L/
T
is
failing
to
adequately
implement
or
enforce
it.
Subpart
E
includes
the
procedures
for
this
the
review
and
withdrawal
process.

2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need
/
Authority
for
the
Collection
The
information
is
needed
and
used
to
determine
if
the
entity
submitting
an
application
has
met
the
criteria
established
in
the
subpart
E
amended
rule.
This
information
is
necessary
for
the
Administrator
to
determine
the
acceptability
of
approving
the
S/
L/
T's
rules,
requirements,
or
programs
in
lieu
of
the
Federal
section
112
rules
or
programs.
The
collection
of
information
is
authorized
under
42
U.
S.
C.
7401­
7671q.

2(
b)
Practical
Utility
/
Users
of
the
Data
This
information
is
necessary
for
the
proper
performance
of
our
functions.
The
information
will
have
practical
utility
because
we
will
use
the
information
generated
from
the
collection
to
ensure
that
the
subpart
E
approval
criteria
have
been
met.

3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
3(
a)
Nonduplication
This
information
collection
is
not
unnecessarily
duplicative
of
information
otherwise
reasonably
accessible
to
us.
Rather,
for
instances
where
other
reports
required
by
us
would
duplicate
information
required
by
this
rule
(
for
example,
the
part
70
operating
permits
rule),
it
is
possible
to
use
information
previously
submitted
to
the
EPA
to
meet
the
requirements
of
this
information
collection.
3
3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
We
plan
to
solicit
public
comments
on
this
ICR
prior
to
submitting
it
to
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget.
We
will
issue
a
Federal
Register
notice
requesting
comments
on
the
amended
burden
estimate
reflected
in
this
ICR.

3(
c)
Consultations
We
have
consulted
with
respondents
or
data
users
on
several
occasions
and
in
several
contexts
during
the
development
of
the
amended
subpart
E
rule.
Early
in
the
process
of
developing
the
amended
rule,
we
met
with
representatives
from
S/
L/
Ts
and
environmental
nonprofit
organizations
in
public
meetings.
These
meetings
took
place
in
December
1996
in
Los
Angeles
and
in
March
1997
in
Washington,
D.
C.
In
addition,
several
representatives
from
S/
L/
Ts
participated
in
work
groups
with
us
to
develop
the
framework
of
the
proposed
equivalency
options
and
process.
We
also
received
extensive
input
from
S/
L/
T
air
quality
officials
during
the
development
of
the
Sacramento
Protocol
and
the
subsequent
California
Initiative,
both
of
which
have
influenced
the
final
subpart
E
provisions.
In
August
1997,
we
posted
the
draft
rule
and
preamble
on
the
Internet
and
solicited
informal
comment
from
stakeholders.
We
published
the
proposed
preamble
and
rule
amendments
in
the
Federal
Register
(
64
FR
1880)
on
January
12,
1999.
We
received
10
public
comment
letters
on
the
proposed
amendments,
and
these
comments
addressed
many
aspects
of
the
proposal
in
great
detail.
Based
on
the
issues
discussed
by
commenters,
we
made
numerous
revisions,
both
major
and
minor,
to
the
proposed
rule
amendments.

3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
Applicants
are
only
required
to
submit
information
when
they
wish
to
receive
delegation
of
a
promulgated
section
112
standard.
Subpart
E
specifies
the
minimum
information
we
require
to
determine
whether
their
request
is
approvable.
We
changed
the
final
rule
to
clarify
that
the
respondent
only
needs
to
submit
material
demonstrating
it
meets
the
up­
front
approval
requirements
one­
time,
unless
circumstances
change
at
the
S/
L/
T,
which
would
require
an
updated
submittal.

The
intent
of
this
voluntary
program
is
to
encourage
S/
L/
Ts
to
accept
delegation
of
the
Federal
section
112
standards,
and
to
allow
them
to
adjust
or
substitute
S/
L/
T
requirements
when
they
can
be
shown
to
be
at
least
as
stringent
as
the
Federal
requirements.
These
provisions
for
alternatives
will
help
preserve
existing
S/
L/
T
programs
and
prevent
dual
regulation
of
sources.

We
also
reserve
the
right
to
review
and
withdraw
an
approved
S/
L/
T
rule,
program,
or
requirement
if
we
decide
it
is
not
as
stringent
as
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
standard
or
if
the
S/
L/
T
is
failing
to
adequately
implement
or
enforce
it.
In
this
case,
the
S/
L/
T
would
be
asked
to
submit
information
regarding
permits,
monitoring,
resources,
etc.
We
will
use
this
information
to
4
decide
if
the
rule,
program,
or
requirement
should
be
withdrawn.
Our
ability
to
review
and
withdraw
approval
is
needed
to
ensure
we
can
satisfy
our
obligations
under
the
Act
to
implement
and
enforce
the
section
112
standards.

3(
e)
General
Guidelines
None
of
the
general
information
collection
guidelines
in
5
CFR
1230.5(
d)(
2)
of
the
OMB
regulations
implementing
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
is
being
exceeded
in
the
proposed
subpart
E
amendments.

3(
f)
Confidentiality
All
information
submitted
to
us
for
which
a
claim
of
confidentiality
is
made
will
be
safeguarded
according
to
the
policies
set
forth
in
Title
40,
Chapter
1,
Part
2,
Subpart
B,
Confidentiality
of
Business
Information.
See
40
CFR;
41
FR
36902,
September
1,
1976;
amended
by
43
FR
3999,
September
8,
1978;
43
FR
42251,
September
28,
1978;
and
44
FR
17674,
March
23,
1979.
Even
where
we
have
determined
that
data
received
in
response
to
an
ICR
is
eligible
for
confidential
treatment
under
40
CFR
Part
2,
Subpart
B,
we
may
nonetheless
disclose
the
information
if
it
is
"
relevant
in
any
proceeding"
under
the
statute
[
42
U.
S.
C.
7414(
c);
40
CFR
2.301(
g)].
The
information
collection
complies
with
the
Privacy
Act
of
1974
and
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
Circular
108.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
This
section
is
not
applicable.
This
ICR
does
not
contain
any
sensitive
questions
relating
to
sexual
behavior
or
attitudes,
religious
beliefs,
or
other
matters
usually
considered
private.

4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
Respondents
/
SIC
Codes
Respondents
are
S/
L/
Ts
participating
in
this
voluntary
program.
These
government
establishments
are
classified
under
Standard
Industrial
Classification
Code
(
SIC)
9511,
Air
and
Water
Resource
and
Solid
Waste
Management.
No
industries
under
any
SIC
Codes
will
be
included
among
respondents.
5
4(
b)
Information
Requested
(
i)
Data
Items,
including
Recordkeeping
Requirements
6
The
information
requirements
will
vary
depending
upon
the
type
of
option
an
S/
L/
T
chooses
for
accepting
delegation
of
the
Federal
standards.
The
information
requirements
are
as
follows:

For
overall
approval
to
receive
delegation
(
§
63.91)

!
Confirmation
letter
from
the
State
Attorney
General.

!
Demonstration
of
respondent's
resources.

!
Copy
of
the
respondent's
statutes,
regulations
and
other
requirements
that
contain
appropriate
provisions
granting
authority
to
implement
and
enforce
the
respondent's
rule
or
program
upon
approval
us.

!
Respondent's
implementation
schedule.

!
Respondent's
compliance
plan.

!
Respondent's
enforcement
plan.

Once
respondents
have
demonstrated
they
meet
the
overall
approval
criteria,
they
may
request
straight
delegation
(
§
63.91)
of
the
unchanged
section
112
standards.
This
request
may
be
automatic,
i.
e.,
the
overall
delegation
established
that
the
respondent
agreed
to
accept
delegation
of
all
future
MACT
standards.
Alternatively,
the
overall
delegation
may
establish
a
procedure
where
the
respondent
requests
delegation
of
individual
standards
when
they
are
promulgated.
Respondents
choosing
to
utilize
any
of
the
other
options
to
demonstrate
the
equivalency
of
their
requirements
to
the
Federal
requirements
must
supply
the
following
information:

For
the
rule
adjustment
option
(
§
63.92):

!
Stringency
and
compliance
demonstration.

For
the
rule
substitution
option
(
§
63.93):

!
Demonstration
of
S/
L/
T
rule
equivalency
with
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
standard.

For
the
equivalency
by
permit
option
(
§
63.94):

!
A
list
of
affected
sources
and
standards
within
the
respondent's
jurisdiction.

!
Draft
permit
terms
and
conditions.

!
Demonstration
of
the
equivalency
of
S/
L/
T
permit
terms
and
conditions
to
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
standard.

For
the
State
program
approval
option
(
§
63.97):

!
Source
categories
for
submission
within
the
respondent's
jurisdiction.
7
!
Description
of
enforcement
measures
for
area
sources
(
if
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
standard
applies
to
area
sources).

!
Collection
of
the
respondent's
rules,
regulations,
permits,
implementation
plans,
or
other
enforceable
mechanisms.

!
Equivalency
demonstration
of
respondents
alternative
rules
to
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
standard.

For
the
accidental
release
prevention
program
(
§
63.95):

!
Demonstration
of
adequate
resources.

!
Demonstration
of
adequate
enforcement
authority.

!
Description
of
coordination
mechanisms.

We
also
have
the
option
of
withdrawing
a
program
if
we
decide
that
the
S/
L/
T
is
not
properly
implementing
its
rule
or
program
in
lieu
of
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
standard.
Under
the
EPA
review
and
withdrawal
option
(
§
63.96),
the
respondents
must
submit
the
following:

!
Information
regarding
permits,
monitoring,
resources,
etc.

(
ii)
Respondent
Activities
The
respondent
activities
required
by
the
rule
are
listed
in
the
Table
1a
through
1g.
These
activities
vary
by
option
because
of
the
different
types
of
information
required
under
each
option.
To
the
maximum
extent
practicable,
these
activities
were
developed
to
allow
the
S/
L/
Ts
to
respond
in
ways
that
are
consistent
and
compatible
with
their
existing
reporting
and
recordkeeping
practices.

5.
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
­­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
This
section
addresses
the
our
activities
to
review
the
applications
submitted
by
the
S/
L/
Ts
under
subpart
E.
The
activities
vary
according
to
the
option
used
by
the
S/
L/
T
and
are
as
follows:

For
the
overall
approval
to
receive
delegation
(
§
63.91):

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
seeking
public
comment.

!
Review
public
comments.

!
Evaluate
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
approval
or
disapproval
of
the
S/
L/
T
8
submittal.

For
the
straight
delegation
of
individual
standards,
the
Agency
will
either
automatically
delegate
them
to
the
S/
L/
T
or
delegate
them
in
response
to
a
written
request,
depending
on
the
mechanism
established
via
the
overall
approval.
If
the
S/
L/
T
decides
to
use
any
of
the
other
options
listed
within
subpart
E
to
demonstrate
the
equivalency
of
their
rules
to
the
Federal
rule,
then
we
will
complete
both
the
following
activities
listed
in
the
applicable
option
below.

For
the
rule
adjustment
option
(
§
63.92):

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
seeking
public
comment.

!
Review
public
comments
and
S/
L/
T
responses.

!
Evaluate
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
the
approval
or
disapproval
of
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.

For
the
rule
substitution
option
(
§
63.93):

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
seeking
public
comment.

!
Review
public
comments.

!
Evaluate
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
approval
or
disapproval
of
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.

For
the
equivalency
by
permit
option
(
§
63.94):

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
seeking
public
comment
on
the
up­
front
approval
of
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.

!
Review
public
comments
and
S/
L/
T
responses.

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
approval
or
disapproval
of
the
S/
L/
T
upfront
submittal.

!
Evaluate
the
draft
permit
terms
and
conditions
submitted
by
the
S/
L/
T.

!
Create
a
final
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
approval
or
disapproval
of
the
draft
permit
terms
and
conditions.

For
the
State
program
approval
option
(
§
63.97):

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
seeking
public
comment
on
the
up­
front
approval
of
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.

!
Review
public
comments
and
S/
L/
T
responses.

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
approval
or
disapproval
of
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.
9
!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
seeking
public
comment
on
the
specific
alternative
rule
submitted
by
the
S/
L/
T.

!
Review
public
comments
and
S/
L/
T
responses.

!
Evaluate
the
equivalency
demonstration
submitted
by
the
S/
L/
T.

!
Create
a
final
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
approval
or
disapproval
of
the
alternative
rules
submitted
by
the
S/
L/
T.

For
the
accidental
release
prevention
program
(
§
63.95):

!
Evaluate
and
approve
or
disapprove
the
S/
L/
T
submittal.

Furthermore,
we
reserve
the
right
to
review
and
withdraw
a
S/
L/
T
rule
or
program
if
we
decide
that
the
program
is
not
as
stringent
as
the
otherwise
applicable
Federal
standard.
During
the
EPA
review
and
withdrawal
option
(
§
63.96),
we
conduct
the
following
activities:

!
Request
information
from
the
affected
S/
L/
T.

!
Evaluate
technical
information,
data,
and
results
of
any
site
visits
within
the
jurisdiction
of
the
S/
L/
T.

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
our
intent
to
withdraw
the
S/
L/
T
program
or
rule.

!
Evaluate
public
comments
and
S/
L/
T
responses.

!
Create
a
Federal
Register
notice
announcing
the
final
decision.

The
EPA
activities
required
by
the
rule
and
the
technical
hours
associated
with
them
are
found
in
Tables
2a
through
2g.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
All
S/
L/
Ts
using
subpart
E
to
accept
delegation
of
Federal
standards
must
submit
the
proper
application
to
us
for
review
and
evaluation.
They
should
prepare
their
applications
using
guidance
we
have
and
will
issue
in
conjunction
with
the
subpart
E
implementation.
The
amended
regulations
contain
no
forms.

Qualified
staff
that
work
for
the
EPA
Regional
offices
as
well
as
EPA
Headquarters
will
review
the
subpart
E
applications.
The
S/
L/
Ts
must
supply
any
calculations
and
assumptions
supporting
the
technical
portion
of
the
application,
and
we
will
review
these
supporting
materials
to
verify
them.
In
regard
to
information
management,
we
have
planned
and
allocated
resources
for
the
efficient
and
effective
use
of
the
information,
including
the
processing
of
the
information
in
a
manner
which
enhances
the
utility
of
the
information
to
us
and
to
the
public.
For
example,
in
most
cases,
existing
S/
L/
T
part
70
operating
permit
program
approvals
may
be
used
to
meet
the
up­
front
approval
criteria
in
§
63.91.
10
The
amended
subpart
E
regulations
will
not
require
the
request
of
information
through
any
type
of
survey.

5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
Minimizing
the
information
collection
burden
for
all
sizes
of
organizations
is
a
continuing
principle
for
our
efforts.
We
have
reduced
the
application,
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
to
include
only
the
information
needed
by
us
to
determine
compliance
with
the
rule.
We
have
reduced
the
collection
burden
to
the
extent
practicable
and
appropriate,
including
consideration
of
the
resources
available
to
the
respondents
and
clarifying,
consolidating,
and
simplifying
the
requirements.
Furthermore,
we
do
not
anticipate
that
any
small
entities
will
be
participating
in
this
program.

5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
The
subpart
E
amended
regulations
are
scheduled
for
promulgation
in
late
1999
or
early
2000.
This
ICR
does
not
require
surveys.
Each
S/
L/
T
will
be
required
to
submit
an
application
under
one
of
the
five
options
discussed
in
section
1(
b).
Preparation
of
an
application
in
compliance
with
subpart
E
is
a
one­
time
per
standard
activity.
The
subpart
E
amended
regulations
will
not
require
periodic
reporting
or
surveys.

6.
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
This
ICR
requires
the
calculation
of
the
amount
of
burden
hours
associated
with
each
activity
for
each
respondent
(
S/
L/
T)
when
complying
with
the
subpart
E
amended
regulations.
In
calculating
the
burden
hours
for
subpart
E,
we
made
assumptions
about
the
number
of
S/
L/
Ts
that
would
use
each
option
as
well
as
the
total
number
of
Federal
standards
delegated
by
each
option.
Over
the
3­
year
period
of
this
ICR,
we
expect
to
promulgate
the
remaining
7­
year
section
112(
d)
standards
(
the
"
MACT"
standards)
and
all
of
the
10­
year
MACT
standards,
which
is
approximately
105
MACT
standards.
For
the
purposes
of
this
ICR,
we
assumed
that
all
127
of
the
S/
L/
Ts
would
submit
applications
to
receive
overall
approval
to
receive
subpart
E
delegation
in
the
first
year
of
the
approval
period.
This
assumption
overstates
actual
burden,
because
a
number
of
S/
L/
Ts
have
already
received
delegation
and
others
merely
need
to
write
a
letter
referencing
their
Title
V
delegation,
which
satisfies
the
approval
criteria
demonstration.

We
assumed
that
we
would
promulgate
35
MACT
standards
per
year
during
the
3­
year
period
of
this
ICR.
We
assumed
that
the
MACTs
would
be
delegated
as
follows:
4,065
through
the
straight
delegation
option;
1
through
the
rule
adjustment
option;
148
through
the
rule
substitution
option;
221
through
the
equivalency
by
permit
option,
and
10
through
the
State
program
approval
option.
For
those
S/
L/
Ts
requesting
straight
delegation,
we
assumed
they
11
would
submit
a
request
for
each
promulgated
MACT
standard.
For
those
S/
L/
Ts
requesting
delegation
under
the
equivalency
by
permit
option
and
the
State
program
approval
option,
we
assumed
that
a
subset
of
S/
L/
Ts
would
use
these
options
and,
therefore,
request
approval
to
use
these
options
as
an
additional
activity.
In
addition,
we
assumed
that
all
127
S/
L/
Ts
would
accept
delegation
of
the
section
112(
r)
program
and
that
we
would
withdraw
up
to
two
approvals
over
the
3­
year
period.

Figure
1
provides
a
flowchart
on
how
we
allocated
the
number
of
S/
L/
Ts
using
each
option.
Table
3a
contains
these
numbers
in
a
spreadsheet
format.
Figure
2
provides
the
allocation
of
MACTs
delegated
by
option.
Table
3b
shows
the
total
number
of
occurrences
for
each
option.
Based
on
this
information,
we
estimate
that
the
average
number
of
responses
per
year
is
4,555.

In
calculating
the
burden
hours
associated
with
each
delegation
option,
we
revised
the
activities
presented
in
the
previous
ICR
renewal
(
ICR
no.
1643.02)
for
subpart
E
to
be
consistent
with
the
amended
subpart
E
regulations.
We
conducted
internal
consultations
in
order
to
derive
the
number
of
burden
hours
for
each
specific
activity.
Furthermore,
we
calculated
management
hours
as
5
percent
of
technical
hours
and
clerical
hours
as
10
percent
of
technical
hours.
However,
for
any
activity
associated
with
heavy
clerical
labor,
management
labor
was
5
percent
of
the
total
hours
allotted
to
that
activity
and
technical
labor
was
calculated
as
15
percent.
Clerical
labor
was
80
percent
of
the
total
hours.
Table
4
contains
the
results
of
the
burden
hours
calculation
for
each
activity
during
each
year
of
this
ICR.
Overall,
the
amended
subpart
E
regulations
contain
an
average
burden
of
130,198
hours
per
year.

6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Cost
The
previous
renewal
ICR
used
the
Comprehensive
Assessment
and
Information
Rule
(
CAIR)
economic
analysis
to
estimate
the
labor
cost
for
management,
technical,
and
clerical
personnel.
However,
to
be
consistent
with
guidance
supplied
in
the
ICR
Handbook,
we
used
wage
rates
obtained
from
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
BLS).
We
chose
the
different
pay
grade
levels
for
management,
technical,
and
clerical
personnel
by
following
the
example
set
by
other
ICRs.
By
comparing
the
unloaded
hourly
rates
for
S/
L/
Ts
to
the
rates
specified
under
"
Total
compensation"
we
calculated
the
percentage
of
salary
devoted
to
benefits.
We
chose
20
percent
as
the
percentage
of
salary
that
constitutes
overhead.
The
addition
of
benefits
and
overhead
to
the
hourly
rate
produces
a
pay
rate
that
reflects
the
true
cost
to
employ
a
State
worker.
Following
is
a
summary
of
the
computed
wages
for
S/
L/
T
personnel.

Labor
Type
Hourly
Rate
Benefits
(%
Salary)
Overhead
(%
Salary)
Adjusted
Hourly
Rate
Management
27.70
34%
0.2
42.66
Technical
26.54
35%
20%
41.14
12
Clerical
11.60
51%
20%
19.84
The
respondent
labor
costs
are
found
by
multiplying
the
burden
hours
associated
with
each
activity
by
the
hourly
rate
associated
with
each
labor
type.
In
total,
the
amended
subpart
E
regulations
contain
an
average
labor
cost
of
$
5,306,520
per
year.
Table
4
contains
the
results
of
the
calculation
of
labor
costs
for
the
respondents.

The
subpart
E
amended
regulations
contain
no
compliance
costs
or
recordkeeping
costs.

6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Cost
Under
the
subpart
E
amended
regulations,
we
must
review
and
evaluate
the
subpart
E
applications
submitted
by
the
S/
L/
Ts.
In
reviewing
and
evaluating
these
applications,
we
will
carry
out
the
activities
listed
in
section
5(
a)
of
this
ICR.
Managerial
activities
are
considered
5
percent
of
the
technical
hours
while
clerical
activities
are
considered
10
percent
of
the
technical
hours.

We
calculated
hourly
rates
for
EPA
employees
using
information
on
annual
salaries
from
the
Internet
site
for
the
Office
of
Personnel
Management
for
the
appropriate
pay
grade
levels
for
management,
technical,
and
clerical
personnel.
We
divided
the
annual
pay
rate
by
2080,
the
amount
of
working
hours
during
a
calendar
year,
to
get
the
hourly
wage
rate
and
then
multiplied
this
rate
by
1.6
to
produce
a
pay
rate
that
reflects
the
true
cost
to
the
Federal
government
to
employ
a
Federal
worker.
The
value
of
1.6
incorporates
the
addition
of
benefits
at
40%
(
0.4)
of
salary,
and
the
addition
of
overhead
at
20%
(
0.2)
of
salary,
to
the
hourly
rate.
Following
is
a
summary
of
the
computed
wages
for
EPA
personnel.
13
Labor
Type
Pay
Grade
Annual
Salary
Hourly
Rate
Benefits
(%
Salary)
Overhead
(%
Salary)
Adjusted
Hourly
Rate
Management
GS­
15
74,773
35.95
40%
20%
57.52
Technical
GS­
12
45,236
21.75
40%
20%
34.80
Clerical
GS­
6
22,948
11.03
40%
20%
17.65
The
EPA
labor
costs
are
found
by
multiplying
the
burden
hours
associated
with
each
activity
by
the
hourly
rate
associated
with
each
labor
type.
Overall,
the
average
burden
hours
for
the
EPA
is
85,123
hours
per
year.
Table
5
contains
a
breakdown
of
EPA
burden
hours
per
year.
The
average
labor
cost
for
the
EPA
is
$
2,935,770
dollars
per
year.
Table
5
contains
a
breakdown
of
EPA
labor
costs
per
year.

6(
d)
The
Respondent
Universe
In
order
to
estimate
the
number
of
S/
L/
Ts
participating
in
the
subpart
E
program,
we
reviewed
the
information
available
in
our
MACT
tracking
system
to
determine
how
many
S/
L/
Ts
exist.
Based
upon
the
assumption
that
100
percent
of
all
S/
L/
Ts
will
participate
in
the
subpart
E
program,
the
breakdown
of
the
number
of
S/
L/
Ts
participating
is
as
follows:
50
State
agencies,
4
territorial
agencies,
68
local
agencies,
and
5
tribal
agencies
for
a
total
of
127
S/
L/
Ts
participating
in
the
subpart
E
program.

6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Cost
Over
the
3­
year
period
of
this
ICR,
the
total
average
annual
burden
and
labor
cost
for
the
respondents
resulting
from
the
subpart
E
amended
regulations
are
130,198
hours
and
$
5,306,520,
respectively.
There
are
no
capital
or
operation
and
maintenance
cost
burdens
associated
with
this
collection.
Table
4
contains
the
bottom
line
estimate
of
burden
hours
associated
with
the
amended
subpart
E
regulations.

6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
The
currently
approved
burden,
based
on
ICR
no.
1643.03,
is
79,885
hours
per
year.
We
are
requesting
an
increase
in
burden
to
130,198
hours
per
year.
This
difference,
50,313
hours,
is
due
to
a
program
adjustment,
which
includes
changes
in
the
size
of
the
respondent
universe,
or
corrections
of
clerical
or
computational
errors.
The
following
discussion
explains
these
changes.

When
the
original
subpart
E
regulations
were
promulgated
in
1993,
an
ICR
was
approved.
This
ICR
was
renewed
in
1996.
The
1996
renewal
ICR
(
no.
1643.02)
requested
79,884
hours,
which
was
revised
to
79,885
hours
with
ICR
no.
1643.03
to
extend
the
previously
14
approved
collection.
Because
the
1996
ICR
provides
the
basis
for
the
hours
estimate
that
is
currently
approved,
we
will
discuss
the
change
in
burden
relative
to
the
1996
ICR.

When
the
original
subpart
E
regulations
were
first
promulgated
in
1993,
many
S/
L/
Ts
chose
not
to
request
approval
to
adjust
or
substitute
their
requirements
or
programs,
because
they
found
subpart
E
too
cumbersome
to
use.
With
the
January
1999
proposed
amendments
to
subpart
E,
we
created
a
new
delegation
option
(
equivalency
by
permit)
and
also
increased
the
flexibility
for
S/
L/
Ts
to
use
any
of
the
other
options.
We
believe
that
because
of
these
changes,
more
S/
L/
Ts
will
volunteer
to
accept
delegation
using
subpart
E.
The
1996
ICR
assumed
that
only
40
percent
of
State
and
territorial
agencies
and
25
percent
of
local
agencies
would
submit
subpart
E
applications.
In
contrast,
we
now
anticipate
100
percent
participation
of
the
127
S/
L/
Ts
through
at
least
one
of
the
delegation
options.

The
1996
ICR
also
assumed
that
S/
L/
Ts
would
only
request
equivalency
demonstrations
for
one
or
two
section
112(
d)
standards
per
year.
In
contrast,
we
believe
the
S/
L/
Ts
will
request
delegation
for
100
percent
of
the
35
section
112(
d)
standards
we
estimate
will
be
promulgated
for
each
year
in
the
3­
year
approval
period.
We
also
think
that
all
of
the
S/
L/
Ts
will
take
delegation
of
the
section
112(
r)
accident
release
prevention
program
during
the
3­
year
period
in
contrast
to
the
two
occurrences
per
year
estimated
in
the
1996
ICR.

In
addition,
the
1996
ICR
did
not
estimate
burden
for
S/
L/
Ts
requesting
straight
delegation
of
the
section
112(
d)
standards.
We
now
believe
that
70
percent
of
the
S/
L/
Ts
will
use
straight
delegation
for
100
percent
of
their
standards
and
the
remaining
agencies
will
use
straight
delegation
for
a
percentage
of
the
standards
they
request.
Because
this
is
a
crucial
component
of
subpart
E,
we
feel
its
omission
in
the
previous
ICR
was
an
error
that
we
need
to
correct
with
this
ICR.

In
completing
this
ICR,
we
revisited
the
estimates
of
respondent
burden
to
complete
each
task
associated
with
the
delegation
options
and
the
review
and
withdrawal
procedures.
Based
on
changes
we've
made
to
subpart
E
to
increase
flexibility
and
our
increased
understanding
of
the
effects
of
the
program
requirements,
we
reduced
the
overall
burden
per
event
by
approximately
30
percent,
even
when
we
include
the
new
option,
equivalency
by
permit.
In
the
1996
ICR,
the
combined
burden
of
all
of
the
single
events
was
1,222
hours.
We
currently
estimate
the
same
burden
to
be
833
hours.
Even
though
this
revision
reduced
the
burden
of
the
collection,
its
effect
is
small
compared
to
the
program
adjustments
discussed
above.
Therefore,
100
percent
of
the
change
in
burden
is
the
result
of
program
adjustments.

6(
g)
Burden
Statement
This
estimate
includes
all
activities
associated
with
the
respondents
or
government
agencies.
Overall,
the
subpart
E
program
will
have
the
following
total
average
annual
burden:
130,198
hours
and
$
5,306,520
(
labor
costs)
for
the
respondents
and
85,123
hours
and
$
2,935,770
15
(
labor
costs)
for
the
EPA.
Tables
4
and
5
provide
a
breakdown
of
the
amount
of
hours
and
dollars
spent
each
year.
(
This
ICR
corrects
an
error
in
ICR
no.
1643.03
by
including
the
burden
and
cost
for
the
Accidental
Release
Program
and
EPA
Review
and
Withdrawal
in
the
total
and
average
burden
and
cost
calculations.)

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
need
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,
processing
and
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
regulation
are
listed
in
40
CFR
Part
9
and
48
CFR
Chapter
15.

Send
comments
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
through
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques
to
the
Director,
OPPE
Regulatory
Information
Division,
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
2137),
401
M.
St.,
S.
W.,
Washington,
D.
C.
20460;
and
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Include
the
EPA
ICR
number
and
OMB
control
number
in
any
correspondence.
16
Part
B
of
the
Supporting
Statement
Part
B
is
not
applicable
because
statistical
methods
are
not
used
in
data
collection
associated
with
this
regulation.
17
FIGURES
18
100%
S/
L
Agencies
Use
112(
l)
for
100%
MACT
(
127
Agencies,
35
MACT/
Agency)

70%
S/
L
Agencies
use
SD
for
100%
MACT.
(
89
S/
L
Agencies)
(
35
MACT/
yr)
1%
S/
L
Agencies
use
SPA
and
SD
options.
(
1
S/
L
Agency)
(
35
MACT/
yr)
1%
S/
L
Agencies
use
SD,
RA,
RS
and
EBP
for
100%
of
MACTs.
(
1
S/
L
Agency)
(
35
MACT/
yr)
28%
S/
L
Agencies
use
SD,
RS,
and
EBP
options.
(
36
S/
L
Agencies)
(
35
MACT/
yr)

35
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
SD.
10
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
SPA.

3%
MACT
delegated
by
RA.
(
1
MACT/
yr)
70%
MACT
delegated
by
SD.
(
25
MACT/
yr)

16%
MACT
delegated
by
EBP.
(
5
MACT/
yr)
18%
MACT
delegated
by
EBP.
(
6
MACT/
yr)

11%
MACT
delegated
by
RS.
(
4
MACT/
yr)
12%
MACT
delegated
by
RS.
(
4
MACT/
yr)
3,115
Total
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
SD.
10
Total
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
SPA.

950
Total
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
SD.

1
Total
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
RA.
5
Total
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
EBP
4
Total
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
RS.
216
Total
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
EBP.
144
Total
MACT/
yr
delegated
by
RS.

127
S/
L
agencies
will
use
the
accidental
release
prevention
program
on
a
one­
time
only
basis.
The
delegation
of
the
accidental
release
prevention
program
will
take
place
during
Year
1
and
Year
2
of
this
ICR.
The
EPA
predicts
that
at
a
maximum
it
will
have
to
withdraw
2
S/
L
rules
and/
or
programs
during
year
3
of
this
ICR.
SD
=
Straight
Delegation
Option
RA
=
Rule
Adjustment
Option
RS
=
Rule
Substitution
Option
EBP
=
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
SPA
=
State
Program
Approval
Option
Option
4
Option
3
Option
2
Option
1
Figure
1.
Division
of
Subpart
E
Options
for
the
ICR
Analysis.
19
To
ob
tain
th
e
total
N
umber
of
M
ACTs
d
e
legated
per
year
for
a
ll
age
ncies,

multiply
the
num
ber
of
ag
encies
choosin
g
the
options
by
the
num
ber
o
f
MACTs
delegated
u
nder
that
o
p
tion
per
year.

Option
1
:

Straig
ht
D
eleg
ation
(
SD)
only
O
ption
2:

S
traight
D
elegation
(
SD)

&
S
tate
P
rogram
A
pprova
l
(
SPA)
only**
O
pt
ion
3
:

Straight
D
elegation
(
SD),

Rule
S
ub
stitution
(
RS
)*,
&

Equ
ivalency
b
y
Permit
(
EBP)**
Option
4:

Straight
D
elegation
(
SD),

R
ule
A
d
justme
nt
(
RA)*
,

R
ule
Subst
itu
tion
(
RS),
&

Equivalency
by
Permit
(
EBP)

89
Agencies
use
SD
only
to
delegate
35
MACTs
per
year.

89
*
3
5
=
3,115
MACTs
per
y
ear
d
e
legated
by
SD
o
n
ly.
1
Agency
uses
SD
to
de
legate
25
MACTs
per
year.

1
*
25
=
25
MACTs
per
year
d
e
legated
by
SD.

1
Agency
uses
SPA
to
delegate
10
MACTs
per
year.

1
*
10
=
10
MACTs
per
y
ear
d
e
legated
by
SPA.
36
Agencies
use
SD
to
d
e
legate
25
MACTs
per
year.

36
*
25
=
900
MACTs
per
year
d
e
legated
by
SD.

36
Agencies
use
RS
to
delegate
3
MACTs
pe
r
year.

36
*
4
=
144
MACTs
per
y
ear
delegated
by
RS.

36
A
gencies
use
EBP
to
delegate
6
MACTs
p
er
yea
r.

36
*
6
=
216
M
ACTs
per
year
delegated
by
EBP
.
1
Agency
uses
SD
to
delegate
25
M
ACTs
per
y
ear.

1
*
2
5
=
25
MACTs
pe
r
year
delegated
b
y
SD.

1
Agency
uses
RA
to
delegate
1
M
ACT
pe
r
year.

1
*
1
=
1
MACT
per
year
delegated
by
RA.

1
Agency
uses
RS
to
delegate
4
MACTs
per
year.

1
*
4
=
4
MACTs
pe
r
year
delegated
by
RS.

1
A
gency
uses
EBP
to
delegate
5
M
ACTs
per
y
ear.

1
*
5
=
5
MACTs
per
y
ear
delegated
by
EBP
.

Figure
2.
Flow
Chart
of
EPA
Allocation
of
MACT
Standards.
20
TABLES
21
Table
1a.
Activity
and
Burden
for
the
Overall
Approval
to
Receive
Delegation/
Straight
Delegation
(
§
63.91)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Read
Rule
2
B.
Receive
Training
on
Rule
0
C.
Plan
Process
10
D.
Create
Confirmation
Letter
from
Attorney
General
1
E.
Create
Adequate
Resources
Demonstration/
Legal
Authority
2
F.
Supply
a
Copy
of
State
Statutes,
Regulations,
and
Requirements
10
G.
Create
Expeditious
Implementation
Schedule
and
Compliance
Plan
2
H.
Compile,
Process,
and
Review
Information
25
I.
Create
Overall
Cover
Letter
1
J.
Fill
Out
Completeness
Checklist
1
K.
Send
Submittal
to
EPA
1.5
L.
Store,
File,
and
Maintain
Information
20
Total
(
hr/
yr)
65.5
M.
Request
Straight
Delegation
of
MACT
Standards
10
Table
1b.
Activity
and
Burden
for
the
Rule
Adjustment
Option
Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Conduct
State
Rulemaking
35
B.
Collect
Alternative
Rule
and
NESHAP
for
Analysis
and
Demonstrate
Stringency
15
C.
Fill
out
Completeness
Checklist
1
D.
Send
Submittal
to
EPA
1.5
E.
Store,
File,
and
Maintain
Information
20
Total
(
hr/
yr)
72.5
22
Table
1c.
Respondent
Activity
and
Burden
for
the
Rule
Substitution
Option
(
§
63.93)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Conduct
Rulemaking
and
Respond
to
Public
Comments
45
B.
Prepare
Equivalency
Demonstration
Table
60
C.
Prepare
Narrative
Text
for
Equivalency
Demonstration
Table
60
D.
Prepare
Cover
Letter
and
Completeness
Checklist
for
Submittal
Package
10
E.
Send
Submittal
to
EPA
1.5
F.
Respond
to
Public
Comments
25
G.
Store,
File,
and
Maintain
Information
20
Total
(
hr/
yr)
166.5
23
Table
1d.
Respondent
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
(
§
63.94)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Preparation
of
List
of
Affected
Sources
and
Affected
112
Standards
20
B.
Collection
of
Draft
Terms
and
Conditions
to
Submit
to
EPA
20
C.
Alteration
of
Draft
Terms
and
Conditions
26
D.
Preparation
of
Side­
by­
Side
Comparison
of
Alternative
Requirements
30
E.
Preparation
of
Narrative
to
Side­
by­
Side
Comparison
30
F.
Completion
of
Cover
Letter
and
Completeness
Checklist
for
Submittal
to
EPA
10
G.
Send
Submittal
to
EPA
1.5
H.
Incorporation
of
Alternative
Requirements
into
Permits
20
I.
Store,
File,
and
Maintain
Information
20
Total
(
hr/
yr)
166.5
24
Table
1e.
Respondent
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
State
Program
Approval
Option
(
§
63.97)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Respond
to
Information
Requests
(
permits,
monitoring,
meetings,
etc.)
30
B.
S/
L/
T
attempts
to
correct
deficiencies
30
C.
Notification
to
Sources
of
Withdrawal
40
D.
Participation
in
the
Review
of
Public
Comments
and
Consultations
20
E.
Collection
of
State
Rules,
Regulations,
Permits,
Implementation
Plans,
or
Other
Enforceable
Mechanisms
and
State
Rulemaking
60
F.
Preparation
of
Equivalency
Demonstration
Table
40
G.
Preparation
of
Narrative
to
Accompany
Equivalency
Demonstration
Table
40
H.
Preparation
of
Submission
to
EPA
and
Completeness
Checklist
5
I.
Submittal
Sent
to
EPA
1.5
J.
Store,
File,
and
Maintain
Information
20
Total
(
hr/
yr)
186.5
Table
1f.
Respondent
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
Accidental
Release
Prevention
Program
(
§
63.95)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Resource
Demonstration
5
B.
Demonstration
of
Adequate
Enforcement
Authority
20
C.
Description
of
Coordination
Mechanism
15
D.
Preparation
of
Package
for
Submission
to
the
EPA
25
Total
(
hr/
yr)
65
25
Table
1g.
Respondent
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
EPA
Review
and
Withdrawal
Option
(
§
63.96)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Respond
to
Information
Requests
(
permits,
monitoring,
meetings,
etc.)
30
B.
S/
L/
T
attempts
to
correct
deficiencies
30
C.
Notification
to
Sources
of
Withdrawal
40
Total
(
hr/
yr)
100
26
Table
2a.
EPA
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
Overall
Approval
to
Receive
Delegation/
Straight
Delegation
(
§
63.91)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Review
Submission
for
Completeness
10
B.
Notification
to
State
of
Complete/
Incomplete
Application
5
C.
Creation
of
Federal
Register
Notice
to
Seek
Public
Comment
5
D.
EPA
Review
of
Public
Comments
and
S/
L/
T
Responses
5
E.
EPA
Evaluation
of
General
Criteria
10
F.
Creation
of
Final
Federal
Register
Notice
5
G.
Answer
Respondent
Questions
10
H.
Store,
File,
and
Compile
Information
10
Total
(
hr/
yr)
60
I.
Send
Letter
Granting
Straight
Delegation
5
Table
2b.
EPA
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
Rule
Adjustment
Option
(
§
63.92)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Creation
of
Federal
Register
Notice
to
Seek
Public
Comment
5
B.
EPA
Review
of
Public
Comments
and
S/
L/
T
Responses
20
C.
EPA
Evaluation
of
General
Criteria
5
D.
Creation
of
Final
Federal
Register
Notice
5
E.
Answer
Respondent
Questions
15
F.
Store,
File,
and
Compile
Information
10
Total
(
hr/
yr)
60
27
Table
2c.
EPA
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
Rule
Substitution
Option
(
§
63.93)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Review
Submission
for
Completeness
10
B.
Creation
of
Federal
Register
Notice
to
Seek
Public
Comment
5
C.
EPA
Review
of
Public
Comments
20
D.
EPA
Evaluation
of
Equivalency
Demonstrations
80
E.
Creation
of
Final
Federal
Register
Notice
10
F.
Answer
Respondent
Questions
35
G.
Store,
File,
and
Compile
Information
10
Total
(
hr/
yr)
170
28
Table
2d.
EPA
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
(
§
63.94)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Notification
of
Whether
Alternative
Rule
Submittal
is
Complete
(
Letter
and
Consultations)
10
B.
Creation
of
Federal
Register
notice
for
Public
Comment
for
Up­
front
Approval
5
C.
Review
of
Public
Comments
and
S/
L
Responses
for
Up­
front
Approval
30
D.
Creation
of
Federal
Register
Notice
to
Approve/
Disapprove
Program
25
E.
Notification
to
Respondent
of
Complete
Package
of
Alternative
Terms
and
Conditions
for
Approval
10
F.
Evaluation
of
Draft
Permit
Terms
and
Conditions
50
G.
Creation
of
Notification
of
Approved/
Disapproved
Draft
Permit
Terms
and
Conditions
(
Letters
and
Meetings)
20
H.
Creation
of
Final
Federal
Register
Notice
for
Notification
15
I.
Answer
Respondent
Questions
35
J.
Store,
File,
and
Maintain
Information
10
Total
(
hr/
yr)
140
29
Table
2e.
EPA
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
State
Program
Approval
Option
(
§
63.97)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Notification
by
Letter
and
Meetings
of
Whether
Alternative
Rule
Submittal
is
Complete
10
B.
Creation
of
Federal
Register
Notice
for
Public
Comment
for
Up­
front
Approval
5
C.
Review
of
Public
Comments
and
S/
L/
T
Responses
for
Up­
front
Approval
30
D.
Creation
of
Federal
Register
Notice
to
Approve/
Disapprove
Submittal
25
E.
Notification
of
Complete
Alternative
Requirements
10
F.
Creation
of
Federal
Register
Notice
for
Public
Comment
on
Alternative
Rules
5
G.
Review
of
Public
Comments
and
State
Responses
on
Alternative
Rules
40
H.
Evaluation
of
Equivalency
Demonstration
40
I.
Creation
of
Final
Federal
Register
Notice
for
Notification
25
J.
Answer
Respondent
Questions
35
K.
File,
Store,
and
Maintain
Information
10
Total
165
Table
2f.
EPA
Burden
and
Activities
for
the
Accidental
Release
Prevention
Program
(
§
63.95)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
Evaluation
of
Submission
for
Approval
25
30
Table
2g.
EPA
Activities
and
Burden
for
the
EPA
Review
and
Withdrawal
Option
(
§
63.96)

Activity
Technical
Hours
per
Occurrence
A.
Creation
of
Request
for
Information
15
B.
Evaluation
of
Information
Submitted
by
S/
L/
Ts
(
Permits,
Site
Visits,
Monitoring
Data)
180
C.
Letter
Informing
S/
L/
T
of
Inadequate
Program
10
D.
Creation
of
Notice
for
Proposed
Withdrawal
15
E.
Evaluation
of
Public
Comments
and
S/
L/
T
Responses
50
F.
Notification
of
Changes
for
S/
L/
Ts
to
Make
to
Correct
Deficiencies
15
G.
Notification
of
Withdrawal
10
H.
Publication
of
Schedule
for
Compliance
5
Total
(
hr)
300
31
Table
3a.
Summary
of
Delegations
by
S/
L/
Ts
%
Agencies
Choosing
Option
Number
of
Agencies
Choosing
Options
%
MACT
Delegated
per
Year
Number
of
MACT
Delegated
per
Year
Total
Number
of
MACTs
Delegated
per
Year
Option
1
0.7
89
­­­
­­­
­­­

­­­­
Straight
Delegation
­­­
­­­
1
35
3115
Option
2
0.01
1
­­­
­­­
­­­

­­­­
Straight
Delegation
­­­
­­­
0.7
25
25
­­­­
State
Program
Approval
­­­
­­­
0.3
10
10
Option
3
0.28
36
­­­
­­­
­­­

­­­­
Straight
Delegation
­­­
­­­
0.7
25
900
­­­­
Rule
Substitution
­­­
­­­
0.12
4
144
­­­­
Equivalency
by
Permit
­­­
­­­
0.18
6
216
Option
4
0.01
1
­­­
­­­
­­­

­­­­
Straight
Delegation
­­­
­­­
0.7
25
25
­­­­
Rule
Adjustment
­­­
­­­
0.03
1
1
­­­­
Rule
Substitution
­­­
­­­
0.11
4
4
­­­­
Equivalency
by
Permit
­­­
­­­
0.16
5
5
Total
1
127
4445
32
Table
3b.
Distribution
of
Different
Options
for
Agencies
Choosing
to
Use
Subpart
E
Total
Number
of
Occurrences
per
Year
Year
1
Year
2
Year
3
Total
Option/
Year
(
occ/
yr)
(
occ/
yr)
(
occ/
yr)
(
occ)

Requests
to
Receive
Overall
Approval
for
Delegation
127
0
0
127
MACTs
Delegated
through
Straight
Delegation
­­
(
§
63.91)
4,065
4,065
4,065
12,195
MACTs
Delegated
through
the
Rule
Adjustment
Option
(
§
63.92)
1
1
1
3
MACTs
Delegated
through
the
Rule
Substitution
Option
(
§
63.93)
148
148
148
444
MACTs
Delegated
through
the
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
­­
One
Time
Application
(
§
63.94)
37
0
37
74
MACTs
Delegated
through
the
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
­­
per
MACT
(
§
63.94)
221
221
221
663
MACTs
Delegated
through
the
State
Program
Approval
Option
­­
One­
Time
Application
(
§
63.97)
1
0
0
1
MACTs
Delegated
through
the
State
Program
Approval
Option
­­
per
MACT
(
§
63.97)
10
10
10
30
Number
of
Agencies
Using
Accidental
Release
Prevention
Programs
(
§
63.95)
95
32
0
127
Number
of
Rules
or
Programs
Withdrawn
by
EPA
(
§
63.96)
0
0
2
2
Total
4705
4477
4484
13666
Average
occurrences/
yr
4555
33
Table
4.
Total
Annual
Burden
for
Respondents
Person­
Hours
Labor
Costs
Year
Year
1
Year
2
Year
3
Total
Year
1
Year
2
Year
3
Total
Option
(
hr/
yr)
(
hr/
yr)
(
hr/
yr)
(
hr/
yr)
($
1,000/
yr)
($
1,000/
yr)
($
1,000/
yr)
($
1,000/
yr)

Overall
Approval
to
Receive
Delegation
(
§
63.91)
8,318.5
0.0
0.0
8,318.5
376.50
0.00
0.00
376.50
Straight
Delegation
(
§
63.91)
40,650.0
40,650.0
40,650.0
121,950.0
1,839.82
1,839.82
1,839.82
5,519.46
Rule
Adjustment
Option
(
§
62.92)
91.8
91.8
91.8
275.4
3.46
3.46
3.46
10.38
Rule
Substitution
Option
(
§
63.93)
38,924.0
38,924.0
38,924.0
116,772.0
1,509.35
1,509.35
1,509.35
4,528.05
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
(
§
63.94)
(
One­
Time
Application)
851.0
0.0
851.0
1,702.0
33.49
0.00
33.49
66.98
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
(
§
63.94)
(
Per
MACT)
41,857.4
41,857.4
41,857.4
125,572.2
1,613.71
1,613.71
1,613.71
4,841.13
State
Program
Approval
(
§
63.97)
(
One­
Time
Application)
74.8
0.0
0.0
74.8
2.94
0.00
0.00
2.94
State
Program
Approval
(
§
63.97)
(
Per
MACT)
2,227.5
2,227.5
2,227.5
6,682.5
86.14
86.14
86.14
258.42
Accidental
Release
Prevention
Program
(
§
63.95)
6,745.2
2,272.0
0.0
9,017.2
229.40
77.27
0.00
306.67
EPA
Review
and
Withdrawal
(
§
63.96)
0.0
0.0
230.0
230.0
0.00
0.00
9.05
9.05
Total
139,740.2
126,022.7
124,831.7
390,594.6
5,694.80
5,129.75
5,095.02
15,919.57
Average/
yr
130,198.2
5,306.52
34
Table
5.
EPA
Total
Annual
Burden
Person­
Hours
Labor
Costs
Year
Year
1
Year
2
Year
3
Total
Year
1
Year
2
Year
3
Total
Option
(
hr/
yr)
(
hr/
yr)
(
hr/
yr)
(
hr/
yr)
($
1,000/
yr)
($
1,000/
yr)
($
1,000/
yr)
($
1,000/
yr)

Overall
Approval
to
Receive
Delegation
(
§
63.91)
7,620.0
0.0
0.0
7,620.0
300.53
0.00
0.00
300.53
Straight
Delegation
(
§
63.91)
635.0
635.0
635.0
1,905.0
25.04
25.04
25.04
75.13
Administrative
Criteria
(
§
63.91)
(
First
Application)
5,244.0
2,622.0
5,175.2
13,041.2
179.85
89.93
177.50
447.28
Administrative
Criteria
(
§
63.91)

(
Subsequent
Applications)
7,659.2
7,659.2
7,659.2
22,977.6
262.69
262.69
262.69
788.07
Rule
Adjustment
Option
(
§
63.92)
69.2
69.2
69.2
207.6
2.38
2.38
2.38
7.14
Rule
Substitution
Option
(
§
63.93)
28,934.0
28,934.0
28,934.0
86,802.0
992.34
992.34
992.34
2,977.02
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
(
§
63.94)

(
One­
Time
Only
Application)
2,978.6
0.0
2,978.6
5,957.2
102.16
0.00
102.16
204.32
Equivalency
by
Permit
Option
(
§
63.94)

(
Per
MACT)
35,581.1
35,581.1
35,581.1
106,743.3
1,220.31
1,220.31
1,220.31
3,660.93
State
Program
Approval
Option
(
§
63.97)

(
One­
Time
Only
Application)
80.6
0.0
0.0
80.6
2.77
0.00
0.00
2.77
State
Program
Approval
Option
(
§
63.97)

(
Per
MACT)
1,897.5
1,897.5
1,897.5
5,692.5
65.08
65.08
65.08
195.24
Accidental
Release
Prevention
Program
(
§
63.95)
2,731.3
920.0
0.0
3,651.3
93.67
31.55
0.00
125.22
EPA
Review
and
Withdrawal
(
§
63.96)
0.0
0.0
690.0
690.0
0.00
0.00
23.66
23.66
Total
93,430.5
78,318.0
83,619.8
255,368.3
3,246.83
2,689.32
2,871.16
8,807.32
Average
85,122.8
2,935.77
