INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST (ICR)

OMB-83 SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

OFFICE OF AIR & RADIATION

A.	JUSTIFICATION

1.	Identification of the Information Collection

a.	Title:  Recordkeeping and Reporting for Performance-Based Measurement
System for Fuels.

EPA Number:      2459.01

b. Short characterization:

	With this proposed information collection request (ICR), the Office of
Air and Radiation (OAR)  is seeking permission to collect applications
from refiners’ and importers’ fuel testing laboratories, and from
independent fuel testing laboratories, in order to permit them to use
performance-based test methods for measuring various characteristics of
fuels under 40 CFR Part 80 programs.

	In the past, we would set up a designated test method for measuring
compliance with various fuel parameters.  Typically, this test method
was an American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) procedure that
our laboratory used.  Regulated parties would have to use the same
method for compliance purposes.  In certain circumstances, alternative
test methods were named in our regulations.  If a regulated party used
an alternative test method, all results would have to be correlated to
the designated test method.  Simply put, the party would have to develop
and apply a correlation equation to all its results to bring them in
line with the designated test method.  A limited performance-based test
method approach was adopted to address the measurement of sulfur in
diesel fuel; however, outside of the diesel program, there was no real
opportunity for laboratories to use test methods developed outside of
voluntary consensus-based standards groups (i.e., “VCSB methods”) or
to choose VCSB test methods not designated in our regulations as
recognized alternative test methods.    The proposed regulation seeks to
permit laboratories greater flexibility with respect to choosing test
methods, while ensuring that adequate accuracy and precision, and the
use of good laboratory practices.  

	The performance-based approach we are proposing sets up accuracy and
precision criteria, but permits regulated parties to qualify their
laboratories to use their own test methods.  Industry supported our
approach to diesel sulfur and welcomed it as a first step to a more
comprehensive performance-based approach to test method issues. This
proposed rule seeks to implement the more comprehensive approach.   

In order to be qualified to use a test method, a refiner's or importer's
laboratory, or an independent laboratory, will have to submit certain
information to us.  The information submitted will depend upon the
nature of the method – e.g., we anticipate that much less information
would be required for a published, voluntary consensus based standards
organization method (i.e., a “VCSB method”) than for a test method
developed, in house, by the individual laboratory (i.e., a “non-VCSB
method.”).  There will be recordkeeping and reporting burdens
associated with qualifying laboratories on test methods.  In addition,
laboratories will have to engage in quality control activities that will
have a recordkeeping component.  Statistical quality control (SQC)
activities are an industry standard practice, and we do not anticipate
any real increase in that burden do to our proposal.  However, since we
propose to require retention of SQC records in order to demonstrate
compliance, we have estimated that burden. 

	

2.  Need For, and Use of, the Collection

Authority for the Collection

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Sections 114 and 208 of the Clean Air Act (CAA),
42 U.S.C. §§ 7414 and 7542, authorize EPA to require recordkeeping and
reporting regarding enforcement of the provisions of Title II of the
CAA.  The relevant regulations are in 40 CFR Part 80, Regulation of
Fuels and Fuel Additives.  

	

	b. Practical Utility/Uses of the Data

	The reported data will enable EPA to:

	1)  Qualify laboratories to use test methods based upon accuracy and
precision criteria supported by industry.

	2)  Ensure that various fuels meet the standards required under the
regulations at 40 CFR Part 80 and that the associated benefits to human
health and the environment are realized.

3.  Non-duplication, Consultation, and other Collection Criteria

	a.  Non-duplication

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Efforts have been made to eliminate duplication
in this information collection. Where possible, information requirements
from various organizations within the Agency have been combined to
minimize the submittal of duplicate information in different formats. 
The information in this collection will not be available from another
source.

	b.	Public Notice

	EPA will submit the ICR to OMB for review, along with the notice of
proposed rulemaking.  This proposed supporting statement is being
docketed in order to permit interested parties to fully comment upon the
performance-based approach and the recordkeeping and reporting costs
associated with it.  

	c. Consultations

	EPA is providing an opportunity for notice and comment regarding the
proposed rule and this proposed supporting statement.  We anticipate
that the notice of proposed rulemaking and the proposed information
collection will generate comments from interested parties.  We will
consider these comments in generating a supporting statement for
submission to OMB in connection with the final rule.        

	d. Effects of Less Frequent Data Collection

	The frequency of response is controlled by the submitter of the
information – i.e., a laboratory would qualify based upon how many
test methods it wishes to qualify and use.  For most parties, this will
be a one-time submission of information.  

	e.	General Guidelines

	This rule does not exceed any of the OMB guidelines.  

	f. Confidentiality

	EPA informs respondents that they may assert claims of business
confidentiality for any or all of the information they submit. 
Information claimed as confidential will be treated in accordance with
40 CFR Part 2 and established Agency procedures.  The template for
qualification that we use for diesel sulfur permits a party to clearly
assert a claim of business confidentiality on the actual submission. 
The in-use spreadsheets/forms for diesel sulfur may be viewed at:   
HYPERLINK "http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/reporting/diesel.htm" 
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/reporting/diesel.htm  (accessed January
12, 2012.)We anticipate developing a similar form for this approach when
it is finalized.  Information that is received without a claim of
confidentiality may be made available to the public without further
notice to the submitter under 40 CFR § 2.203.

g.	Sensitive Information

	

	Individual reporting data may be claimed as sensitive and will be
treated as confidential information in accordance with the procedures
outline in 40 CFR Part 2.

4.	The Respondents and the Information Requested

	a.	Respondents/SIC Codes

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The respondents to this information collection
are:

Refiners’ testing laboratories (i.e., refiners)

Importers’ testing laboratories (i.e., importers)

Independent fuel testing laboratories (i.e., laboratories)

	

	Recordkeeping and reporting are required by the following industries,
with SIC Code/2002 NAICS Code indicated in parentheses:  refiners
(2911/324110), importers (5172/424720), and laboratories (8734/541380).

	b.	Information Requested

		In order to qualify a test method, the following information must be
provided to the Agency

		A)	Reporting:  Respondents must submit information that will establish
that the test method to be used by the laboratory, in fact, meets the
accuracy and precision requirements under the fuel regulations.

		B)	Recordkeeping:  Respondents must retain underlying records related
to qualifying test methods for five (5) years.  This time period is
consistent with the required record retention for all 40 CFR Part 80
fuels programs.

5.  The Information Collected, Agency Activities, Collection
Methodology, and Information Management

a.	Agency Activities

All reported data will be reviewed by EPA.

EPA will use the data to determine if the test method meets the accuracy
and precision criteria of the regulation.

EPA will prepare a written response to the respondent qualifying (or not
qualifying) the laboratory to perform the test method.

The data will be stored.

b. 	Collection and Methodology and Management

	Data will be collected by industry and reported to EPA in the form of a
template to be developed, typically submitted with an accompanying
letter and contact information.    We expect to use a form similar to
those already approved for diesel sulfur.  These in-use
spreadsheets/forms may be viewed at:    HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/reporting/diesel.htm" 
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fuels/reporting/diesel.htm  (accessed January
12, 2012.)

 

c.	Small Entity Flexibility

	This collection will not adversely affect small entities.  The proposed
regulation provides a means of qualifying test methods that we expect to
be welcome by industry and may encourage development of new test methods
by entities of all sizes.

d.	Collection Schedule

	Test methods are expected to be submitted on a one time basis by nearly
all parties.  The time of collection is driven by the respondent.  We
anticipate that the majority of applications will be received during the
period of the proposed ICR (i.e., between November 1, 2013 and October
1, 2014), with applications dropping off substantially in future years. 
 This expectation is based upon our experience with laboratory
qualifications on test methods for the existing diesel sulfur program.  

6.	Estimating the Burden and Cost of Collection

a.	We drew upon experience implementing similar regulations among the
same entities to develop estimates of the burden associated with this
collection.  We estimated 750 laboratories, based upon our experience
with diesel sulfur qualifications.    At present, there are a total of
11 fuel parameters for which testing is conducted; we have assumed that
each laboratory may submit up to 10 applications to qualify VCSB methods
and that each laboratory will also submit one application to qualify a
non-VSCB test method.  

   

b.	Three labor categories are involved:  managerial (includes legal and
professional review), technical, and clerical. The estimates use the
Bureau of Labor Statistics figures from "Employer Costs for Employee
Compensation - Table 12 - Private Industry, Manufacturing, and
Non-Manufacturing Industries by Occupational Group” (December 2003),
with a 3% annual inflation factor applied to bring the values to the
present.  Using this method, the following wages and benefits apply by
category:

Wages and Benefits

Managerial 		$53.87 per hour

Technical		$35.29 per hour

Clerical		$24.56 per hour

Doubling for company overhead beyond wages and benefits, and for
convenience, rounding up to the dollar, gives the following rates for
this proposed ICR:

Total Employer Cost

Managerial		$108 per hour

Technical		$71 per hour

Clerical		$49 per hour

It is assumed that for each hour of activity the mix will be about 0.1
hour managerial, 0.7 hour technical, and 0.2 hour clerical.  This gives
an average labor cost of $71 per hour, which will be used in this ICR. 
We estimate the following burden:  

The annual estimates for hours and burden follow:

Table I -   Parameters Tested under Current 40 CFR Part 80 Regulations

(as of January 12, 2012)

Fuel Parameters

Sulfur in gasoline

Sulfur in butane

Sulfur in diesel at 15 ppm

Sulfur in diesel at 500 ppm

Olefins

RVP

Distillation

Benzene

Aromatics in gasoline

Oxygen Content

Aromatics in diesel fuel



Table II - Laboratory Qualification Submissions 

Assumes 750 laboratories (based upon our experience with diesel sulfur),
each submitting 10 VCSB and one non-VCSB method.  

Collection Activity	Total Number 

of Respondents	Number of Responses per Respondent	Total Number of
Responses	Hours Per Response	Total Hours	Total 

Cost

$

Submission of VCSB method documentation	750	10	7,500	0.5

(1.5 hours/3)	3,750	266,250

Information describing precision of the VCSB method	750	10	7,500	0.5

(1.5 hours/3)	3,750	266,250

Information showing the method has been evaluated using ASTM D 6708	750
10	7,500	0.5

(1.5 hours/3)	3,750	266,250

Development of, and submission of, documentation for the non-VCSB method
750	1	750	 13.3

(40 hours/3)	10,000	710,000

Information describing the precision of the non-VCSB method	750	1	750
13.3

(40 hours/3)	 10,000	710,000

Information

showing that method has been evaluated using ASTM D 6708	750	1	750	 40

(120 hours/3)	

30,000	

2,130,000

TOTAL



	  =SUM(ABOVE)  61,250 	  =SUM(ABOVE)  4,348,750 



 Table III – Recordkeeping associated with Statistical Quality
Control (SQC)

Assumes that a SQC record must be generated every two weeks; and
creating each record takes 1 hour.

  

Collection Activity	Total Number of Respondents	Number of Responses per
Respondent	Total Number of Responses	Hours Per Response	Total Hours
Total

Cost

$

Record-

Keeping 

Associated w/ SQC	750	104	78,000	1	78,000	5,538,000



Table IV - Annual Recordkeeping Burden Associated with Establishing
Reference Installations

Assumes that 75 laboratories (10% of total population) would apply as
reference installations, and that preparing and submitting the
appropriate records would take 24 hours.  

  

Collection Activity	Total Number of Respondents	Number of Responses per
Respondent	Total Number of Responses	Hours Per Response	Total Hours
Total

Cost

$

Record-

Keeping 

Associated w/ SQC	75	1	75	24	1,800	127,800



c. Estimating the Agency Burden and Cost

	The Agency burden consist of one GS-13 chemist (estimated at $161,000
including overhead; one GS-13 statistician (estimated at $161,000
including overhead); with the assistance of 0.10 of a GS-7 clerical
worker ($76,000 including overhead), or $7,600.  This yields a total of
$329,600.  We expect nearly all this expense to be in the first year of
the ICR.  After the first year of the ICR (when most applications would
be received), we would expect the burden to decrease substantially.    

d.	Estimating the Respondent Universe

	We were able to estimate the number of regulated entities drawing upon
experience regulating the same entities.  

e.	Bottom Line Annual Burden Hours and Costs

	We estimate an annual reporting burden of 61,250 hours and $4,348,750. 
We estimate an annual recordkeeping burden of 78,000 hours and $
5,538,000.  For those laboratories that wish to be reference
installations, we estimate an annual recordkeeping burden of 1,800 and
$127,800.    

f.	Reason for Change in Burden

	This proposed supporting statement has been prepared in anticipation of
EPA’s future submission of a proposed, new collection to OMB.  

g.	Burden Statement

	

	We estimate an annual reporting burden of 95 hours per respondent and
an annual recordkeeping burden of 104 hours, yielding a total of 199
hours.  For those laboratories that elect to be reference installations,
the annual reporting burden would be 95 hours and the annual
recordkeeping burden would be 128 hours. 

	Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed
to review the instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transit or otherwise disclose the information.  

	An Agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently
valid OMB control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations
are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Interested parties are
urged to comment on the Agency's need for this information collection,
the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods
for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated
collection technique.  

	To comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, EPA has established a public docket for this rule,
which includes this ICR.   Submit any comments related to the ICR to EPA
and OMB.  Send comments to OMB at the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street,
NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA.  Since OMB is
required to make a decision concerning the ICR between 30 and 60 days
after publication in the Federal Register, a comment to OMB is best
assured of having its full effect if OMB receives it within 30 days of
publication.  The final rule will respond to any OMB or public comments
on the information collection requirements contained in this proposal.	

Part B of the Supporting Statement

This part of the supporting statement is not applicable.

 PAGE   

 PAGE   1 

