[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27769-27771]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12806]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9979-12--Region 10]

Approval of the Application by the State of Idaho To Administer
the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and
Electronic Reporting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: On June 5, 2018, the Administrator for the Environmental
Protection Agency approved the application by the State of Idaho to
administer and enforce the Idaho Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(IPDES) program pursuant to the Clean Water Act. Concurrent with this
approval, EPA is also approving IPDES program for electronic reporting.
The Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (IDEQ) will administer
the approved IPDES program regulating discharges of pollutants into
waters of the United States under its jurisdiction as described in the
state's program application. EPA has approved the State's
implementation plan that transfers the administration of specific
program components from EPA to the State over a four-year period in
accordance with the Memorandum of Agreement between IDEQ and EPA R10
(MOA) and subject to EPA oversight and enforcement. EPA will suspend
issuance of NPDES permits in Idaho in accordance with the State's
approved schedule to transfer NPDES program authority. EPA will retain
the authority to issue NPDES permits for facilities located on tribal
lands and/or discharging to tribal waters.

DATES: On June 5, 2018, the Administrator approved Idaho's IPDES
program including electronic reporting.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Visit EPA's web page at https://www.epa.gov/npdes-permits/idaho-npdes-program-authorization or contact
Karen Burgess, NPDES Permits Unit, EPA Region 10;<PHONE_NUMBER>;
[email protected]. The State's application, supporting
documentation and EPA's response to comments received during the public
comment period and hearings may be viewed or downloaded from EPA's web
page. The IDEQ contact is Mary Anne Nelson, IPDES Program Manager;
[email protected];<PHONE_NUMBER>. IDEQ's application,
related documents and program development documents may be viewed or
downloaded from the IDEQ website

http://www.deq.idaho.gov/water-quality/ipdes/program-application/.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

General Information

A. Does this action apply to me?

    Entities potentially affected by this action are: The EPA; tribal
programs; and the regulated community and citizens within the state of
Idaho. This table is not intended to be exhaustive; rather, it provides
a guide for readers regarding entities that this action is likely to
regulate.

                        Table 1--Entities Potentially Affected by This Proposed Approval
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                Examples of potentially affected
                                   Category                                                 entities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State and Indian Tribal Governments..........................................  States and Indian Tribes that
                                                                                provide certification under
                                                                                section 401 of the CWA; States
                                                                                and Indian Tribes that own or
                                                                                operate treatment works.
Municipalities...............................................................  POTWs required to apply for or
                                                                                seek coverage under an NPDES
                                                                                individual or general permit and
                                                                                to perform routine monitoring as
                                                                                a condition of an NPDES permit.
Industry.....................................................................  Facilities required to apply for
                                                                                or seek coverage under an NPDES
                                                                                individual or general permit and
                                                                                to perform routine monitoring as
                                                                                a condition of an NPDES permit.
NPDES Stakeholders...........................................................  Any party that may review and
                                                                                provide comments on NPDES
                                                                                permits.
Citizens of the state of Idaho...............................................  Any party that may review and
                                                                                provide comments on NPDES
                                                                                permits.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If you have any questions regarding the applicability of this
action to a particular entity, consult the person listed under FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

B. What action is EPA taking?

    EPA approved the State of Idaho's IPDES program granting IDEQ the
authority to administer the NPDES program in Idaho to regulate
discharges of pollutants into waters of the United States under its
jurisdiction. Concurrent with this approval, EPA is also approving
IPDES program for electronic reporting under the NPDES and pretreatment
programs.

C. What is EPA's authority for taking this action?

    The CWA created the NPDES program under which EPA may issue permits
authorizing the point source discharge of pollutants to waters of the
United States under conditions required by the Act. The CWA provides
that EPA shall approve a State to administer its own permit program,
upon the Governor's request, provided that EPA has determined that the
State has adequate authority and a program sufficient to meet the Act's
requirements. 33 U.S.C. 1342(b). The regulatory requirements for state
program approval are set forth in 40 CFR part 123 (https://www.ecfr.gov/); subpart B provides the requirements of state program
submissions, which IDEQ refers to as the IPDES program application. EPA
may approve a partial and phased program under CWA section 402(n)(4).
33 U.S.C. 1342(n)(4).
    Pursuant to CWA section 402(d), 33 U.S.C. 1342(d), EPA can object
to draft IPDES permits proposed by IDEQ and, if the objections are not
resolved, the authority to issue such permits transfers to EPA. EPA
retains enforcement authorities under CWA sections 308, 309, 402(i) and
504 and may take enforcement actions if EPA determines that the State
has not taken timely and/or appropriate enforcement actions for IPDES
program violations as authorized under those provisions.
    Public notice of the application: On August 11, 2017, EPA initiated
the public comment period for the IPDES program application in the
Federal Register (82 FR 37583) pursuant to 40 CFR 123.61. The public
process included informational meetings and public hearings in the
following five Idaho cities on the dates set forth:

    September 11, 2017 at Central Public Library in Idaho Falls.
    September 12, 2017 at Twin Falls Public Library.
    September 13, 2017 at Boise Public Library.
    September 14, 2017 at Lewiston Community Center.
    September 15, 2017 at Coeur d'Alene Public Library.

    These meetings included an overview of both the federal and state
programs and provided an opportunity for question and answer. Each
informational meeting was immediately followed by a public hearing in
accordance with 40 CFR 124.12 and provided interested parties with the
opportunity to give written and/or oral testimony into the official
record. All comments received by EPA were considered and responded to
by EPA with the final IPDES program approval. Information about the
IPDES Program Application is available in the Federal Register document
for the application and the response to comments is available from
EPA's web page https://www.epa.gov/npdes-permits/idaho-npdes-program-authorization.
    IPDES program summary: As required under section 402(b) of the CWA,
33 U.S.C. 1342(b), and 40 CFR 123.22, the IPDES program description
specifies how IDEQ will administer the NPDES program. IDEQ will issue
IPDES permits under their jurisdiction; conduct compliance and
enforcement activities; gather and maintain NPDES records and report to
EPA; and oversee the regulated activities of all IPDES-permitted
facilities. EPA will retain the authority to issue NPDES permits for
facilities located on tribal lands and/or discharging to tribal waters.
The scope of IDEQ permitting authority includes individual and general
permits for discharges to waters of the United States from facilities
or activities, including industrial (e.g., commercial, mining, oil and
gas, and silviculture discharges; animal feeding operations; and
aquatic animal production facilities) and municipal wastewater
treatment facilities (e.g., publicly and privately owned treatment
works); discharges to waters of the United States from federal
facilities; storm water discharges, including municipal separate storm
sewer systems, construction and industrial storm water general permits,
and individual permits for storm water discharges; sewage sludge
(biosolids) program under 40 CFR part 503; and the pretreatment program
under 40 CFR part 403. IDEQ will not have authority to regulate
discharges incidental to the normal operation of a non-military, non-
recreational vessel operating in a capacity as a means of
transportation. Instead, EPA has the authority under CWA section 402,
33 U.S.C. 1342, to regulate those discharges from non-military, non-
recreational vessels and all ballast water discharges.
    IDEQ will assume permitting and compliance authority for the NPDES
program in four phases. EPA will retain full permitting and compliance
authority for the relevant major component(s) until that authority is
transferred to IDEQ in accordance with

the following schedule of anticipated transfer dates:

    Phase I--Individual Municipal Permits and Pretreatment on July
1, 2018.
    Phase II--Individual Industrial Permits on July 1, 2019.
    Phase III--General Permits (Aquaculture, Pesticide, CAFO,
Suction Dredge, Remediation) on July 1, 2020.
    Phase IV--Federal Facilities, General and Individual Stormwater
Permits and Biosolids on July 1, 2021.

    Public process and tribal consultation: EPA opened a 60-day public
comment period that ended on October 10, 2017. In addition, EPA held
public hearings during the week of September 11, 2017, to accept
comments on the IPDES program application. The Response to Comments and
Testimony compiles all comments and testimony submitted to EPA during
the public comment period and provides EPA's response to those comments
available at EPA's website.
    A total of 18 comment letters and testimonials were received during
the comment period. Of those 18, 10 commenters expressed support for
the transfer of NPDES authority to IDEQ. One commenter expressed a
general concern about IDEQ's ability to adequately run a program that
sufficiently protects the environment. The remaining 7 commenters
provided specific comments about the IPDES program application or IPDES
program. EPA provided responses to all comments. No comments resulted
in changes to the IPDES program application as provided with the
Federal Register document for the IPDES program application.
    EPA engaged with all five federally-recognized Idaho tribes
(Shoshone-Bannock Tribe, Shoshone-Paiute Tribe, Nez Perce Tribe
Council, Coeur d'Alene Tribe and the Kootenai Tribe) and two federally-
recognized Eastern Washington tribes (Kalispell Tribe and Spokane
Tribes). EPA participated in several meetings with the Tribes that were
held before and after the public comment period. The primary outcome of
the tribal meetings was the development of IDEQ's IPDES Tribal
Participation Process. This document establishes the process by which
IDEQ will provide early notification of and participation in permit
issuance activities with interested tribes, available at IDEQ's website
http://www.deq.idaho.gov/media/60181337/ipdes-tribal-participation-process.pdf.
    CROMERR: On October 13, 2005, the final Cross-Media Electronic
Reporting Rule (CROMERR) was published in the Federal Register (70 FR
59848) and codified under 40 CFR part 3. CROMERR establishes electronic
reporting as an acceptable regulatory alternative to paper reporting
and establishes requirements to assure that electronic documents are as
legally dependable as their paper counterparts. Per the requirements of
40 CFR 3.2(b)(2), ``A state, tribe, or local government that is
applying for initial delegation, authorization, or approval to
administer a federal program or a program in lieu of the federal
program, and that will allow document submission requirements under the
program to be satisfied with an electronic document, must use the
procedures for obtaining delegation, authorization, or approval under
the relevant part of Title 40 and may not use the procedures set forth
in 40 CFR 3.1000; but the application must contain the information
required by 40 CFR 3.1000(b)(1) and the state, tribe, or local
government must meet the requirements of 40 CFR 3.2000.''
    IDEQ will implement the National Network Discharge Monitoring
Report System (National NetDMR) and Shared CROMERR Services (SCS)
electronic document receiving system in accordance with the application
submitted by IDEQ to EPA on March 26, 2018. The application anticipated
concurrent approval with the State's 40 CFR part 123 (NPDES State
Program Requirements) and part 403 (General Pretreatment Regulations
for Existing and New Source of Pollution) programs to allow electronic
reporting under 40 CFR parts 122, 125, and 403-471. EPA has reviewed
IDEQ's application and determined both that the application contains
the information required 40 CFR 3.1000(b)(1) and that IDEQ's National
NetDMR and SCS systems comply with the requirements for electronic
document receiving systems in 40 CFR 3.2000. This approval is effective
upon the date of this publication in the Federal Register.
    Decision process: The State of Idaho submitted the IPDES program
application to EPA on August 31, 2016. EPA reviewed the application
pursuant to 40 CFR part 123, subpart B and the application was deemed
complete by EPA on September 30, 2016. In accordance with 40 CFR
123.21(d), IDEQ requested and EPA agreed to extend the statutory review
period for the application until June 30, 2018. Pursuant to 40 CFR
123.61, on August 11, 2017, EPA initiated the 60-day public comment
period as noticed in the Federal Register (82 FR 37583). After the
close of the public comment period, completion of the required tribal
consultation and responding to comments, the EPA Administrator approved
the IPDES program based on the requirements of section 402 of the CWA,
33 U.S.C. 1342, and 40 CFR part 123. IDEQ and the Regional
Administrator signed the MOA prior to final IPDES program approval on
June 5, 2018. Upon approval, the Administrator notified the State of
Idaho.
    Authority: This action is taken under the authority of section 402
of the Clean Water Act as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1342. I hereby provide
public notice of EPA's final action authorizing the State of Idaho
through IDEQ to administer the approval IPDES program regulating
discharges of pollutants to waters of the U.S. under its jurisdiction.

    Dated: June 5, 2018.
E. Scott Pruitt,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2018-12806 Filed 6-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 115 (Thursday, June 15, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 39189]
[FR Doc No: 2023-12936]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 180

Tolerances and Exemptions for Pesticide Chemical Residues in Food

CFR Correction

    This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register
to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most
recent annual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.

0
In Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 150 to 189,
revised as of July 1, 2022, in section 180.415, in the table to
paragraph (a), revise the entry for ``Pepper/eggplant, subgroup 8-10''
to add a footnote to read as follows:

Sec.  180.415  Aluminum tris (O-ethylphosphonate); tolerances for
residues.

    (a) * * *

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                               Parts per
                          Commodity                             million
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                * * * * *
Pepper/eggplant, subgroup 8-10B\1\..........................        0.01

                               * * * * *
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ There are no US registrations as of December 23, 2014.

* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-12936 Filed 6-14-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 0099-10-P


[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 18 (Thursday, January 27, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4917-4918]
[FR Doc No: 2011-1756]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[Docket No. FDA-2010-N-0250]

Agency Information Collection Activities; Announcement of Office
of Management and Budget Approval; Premarket Approval of Medical
Devices

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is announcing that a
collection of information entitled ``Premarket Approval of Medical
Devices'' has been approved by the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Daniel Gittleson, Office of
Information Management, Food and Drug Administration, 1350 Piccard Dr.,
PI50-400B, Rockville, MD 20850,<PHONE_NUMBER>,
<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the Federal Register of September 24,
2010

(75 FR 58396), the Agency announced that the proposed information
collection had been submitted to OMB for review and clearance under 44
U.S.C. 3507. 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. OMB has now approved the
information collection and has assigned OMB control number 0910-0231.
The approval expires on December 31, 2013. A copy of the supporting
statement for this information collection is available on the Internet
at http://www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAMain.

    Dated: January 21, 2011.
Leslie Kux,
Acting Assistant Commissioner for Policy.
[FR Doc. 2011-1756 Filed 1-26-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-P


[Federal Register Volume 81, Number 184 (Thursday, September 22, 2016)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Pages 65313-65315]
[FR Doc No: 2016-22761]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 52

[EPA-R04-OAR-2016-0359; FRL-9952-73-Region 4]

Air Plan Approval; TN; Revisions to the Knox County Portion of
the TN SIP

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to
approve a State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision submitted by the
State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department of Environment and
Conservation (TDEC), on January 11, 2016. The proposed revision was
submitted by TDEC on behalf of the Knox County Department of Air
Quality Management, which has jurisdiction over Knox County, Tennessee.
The revision that EPA is proposing for approval amends the Knox County
Air Quality Management Department's regulations, which are part of the
Tennessee SIP, to address EPA's startup, shutdown, and malfunction
(SSM) SIP call for Knox County. EPA is proposing approval of the
January 11, 2016, SIP revision because the Agency has determined that
it is in accordance with the requirements for SIP provisions under the
Clean Air Act (CAA or Act).

DATES: Comments must be received on or before October 24, 2016.

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, identified by Docket ID No. EPA-R04-
OAR-2016-0359 at http://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online
instructions for submitting comments. Once submitted, comments cannot
be edited or removed from regulations.gov. EPA may publish any comment
received to its public docket. Do not submit electronically any
information you consider to be Confidential Business Information (CBI)
or other information whose disclosure is restricted by statute.
Multimedia submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be accompanied by a
written comment. The written comment is considered the official comment
and should include discussion of all points you wish to make. EPA will
generally not consider comments or comment contents located outside of
the primary submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or other file sharing
system). For additional submission methods, the full EPA public comment
policy, information about CBI or multimedia submissions, and general
guidance on making effective comments, please visit http://www2.epa.gov/dockets/commenting-epa-dockets.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Madolyn Sanchez, Air Regulatory
Management Section, Air Planning and Implementation Branch, Air,
Pesticides and Toxics Management Division, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Region 4, 61 Forsyth Street SW., Atlanta, Georgia
30303-8960. The telephone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. Ms. Sanchez can
also be reached via

electronic mail at<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

I. What action is EPA proposing today?

    EPA is proposing to approve a revision to the Tennessee SIP at Knox
County Regulation Section 32.0, ``Use of Evidence.'' The revision would
remove the existing text of provision Section 32.1(C), which states:
``A determination that there has been a violation of these regulations
or orders issued pursuant thereto shall not be used in any lawsuit
brought by any private citizen.'' This text would be replaced with
``(Reserved).'' TDEC submitted the January 11, 2016, SIP revision to
address EPA's final action entitled ``State Implementation Plans:
Response to Petition for Rulemaking; Restatement and Update of EPA's
SSM Policy Applicable to SIPs; Findings of Substantial Inadequacy; and
SIP Calls To Amend Provisions Applying to Excess Emissions During
Periods of Startup, Shutdown and Malfunction,'' 80 FR 33839 (June 12,
2015), hereafter referred to as the ``SSM SIP Action.''

II. What is the background for EPA's proposed action?

    On June 30, 2011, the Sierra Club (the Petitioner) filed a petition
for rulemaking with the EPA Administrator, asking EPA to take action on
specific provisions in the SIPs of 39 states. The petition included
interrelated requests concerning state rule treatment of excess
emissions by sources during periods of SSM. Exemptions from emission
limits during periods of SSM exist in a number of state rules, some of
which were adopted and approved into SIPs by EPA many years ago. The
petition alleged that SSM exemptions undermine the emission limits in
SIPs and threaten states' abilities to achieve and maintain compliance
with national ambient air quality standards, thereby threatening public
health and public welfare. The Petitioner requested that EPA either (i)
notify the states of the substantial inadequacies in their SIPs and
finalize a rule requiring them to revise their plans pursuant to CAA
section 110(k)(5) (referred to as a ``SIP call''), or (ii) determine
that EPA's action approving the implementation plan provisions was in
error and revise those approvals so that the SIPs are brought into
compliance with the requirements of the CAA pursuant to CAA section
110(k)(6).
    On February 22, 2013 (78 FR 12459), EPA proposed an action that
would either grant or deny the Sierra Club petition with respect to
each of the SIP provisions alleged to be inconsistent with the CAA.
That proposal summarizes EPA's review of all of the provisions that
were identified in the petition, providing a detailed analysis of each
provision and explaining how each one either does or does not comply
with the CAA with regard to excess emission events. For each SIP
provision that appeared to be inconsistent with the CAA, EPA proposed
to find that the existing SIP provision was substantially inadequate to
meet CAA requirements and thus proposed to issue a SIP call under CAA
section 110(k)(5) of the CAA.
    On May 22, 2015, the EPA Administrator signed the final SSM SIP
Action. That action responds to the Sierra Club petition by granting it
with respect to the provisions determined to be deficient and denying
it with respect to the others. The final action responds to all public
comments received on the proposed action and calls for 36 states to
submit corrective SIP revisions by November 22, 2016, to bring
specified provisions into compliance with the CAA. In addition, the
final action reiterates EPA's interpretation of the CAA regarding
excess emissions during SSM periods and clarifies EPA's longstanding
SSM Policy as it applies to SIPs.
    With regard to the Knox County portion of the Tennessee SIP, the
Petitioner objected to Regulation 32.1(C), arguing that the provision
prevents required reports of SSM conditions from being used as evidence
in citizen suits, thereby undermining the express authorization of
citizen enforcement actions under the CAA. After consideration of
public comments on the SSM SIP proposal, EPA agreed that the Knox
County rule is inconsistent with the fundamental requirements of CAA
sections 113(e)(1), 114(c) and 304 and the credible evidence rule \1\
for the reasons fully explained in Section IX.E.11 of the SSM SIP
proposal. Therefore, EPA determined in its final SIP call action that
Knox County Regulation 32.1(C) is substantially inadequate to meet CAA
requirements and thus issued a SIP call requiring the State to submit a
corrective SIP revision addressing this provision. See 80 FR 33965.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 40 CFR 51.212(c); see also ``Credible Evidence Revisions,''
62 FR 8314 (Feb. 24, 1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. Why is EPA proposing this action?

    In the SSM SIP Action, EPA granted the Sierra Club's petition with
respect to Knox County Regulation 32.1(C), finding this provision
substantially inadequate to meet CAA requirements. Today's action, if
finalized, would remove the existing text of this provision from Knox
County's EPA-approved SIP regulation. EPA is proposing to find that
this revision is consistent with the CAA and that it adequately
addresses the SSM SIP call with respect to the Knox County portion of
the Tennessee SIP.

IV. Incorporation by Reference

    In this rule, EPA is proposing to include in a final EPA rule
regulatory text that includes incorporation by reference. In accordance
with requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is proposing to incorporate by
reference the Knox County Regulation 32.0 entitled ``Use of Evidence,''
effective November 12, 2015, which replaces the language previously
included in Section 32.1(C) with ``(Reserved).'' EPA has made, and will
continue to make, these materials generally available through
www.regulations.gov and/or at the EPA Region 4 office (please contact
the person identified in the ``For Further Information Contact''
section of this preamble for more information).

V. Proposed Action

    EPA is proposing to approve the Tennessee SIP revision consisting
of replacing the language in Section 32.1(C) currently in the EPA-
approved SIP for Knox County with ``(Reserved).'' EPA is proposing
approval of the January 11, 2016, SIP revision because the Agency has
determined that it is in accordance with the requirements for SIP
provisions under the CAA.

VI. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews

    Under the CAA, the Administrator is required to approve a SIP
submission that complies with the provisions of the Act and applicable
federal regulations. See 42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). Thus, in
reviewing SIP submissions, EPA's role is to approve state choices,
provided that they meet the criteria of the CAA. Accordingly, this
proposed action merely approves state law as meeting federal
requirements and does not impose additional requirements beyond those
imposed by state law. For that reason, this proposed action:
     Is not a significant regulatory action subject to review
by the Office of Management and Budget under Executive Orders 12866 (58
FR 51735, October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, January 21, 2011);
     does not impose an information collection burden under the
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.);
     is certified as not having a significant economic impact
on a

substantial number of small entities under the Regulatory Flexibility
Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
     does not contain any unfunded mandate or significantly or
uniquely affect small governments, as described in the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-4);
     does not have Federalism implications as specified in
Executive Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 1999);
     is not an economically significant regulatory action based
on health or safety risks subject to Executive Order 13045 (62 FR
19885, April 23, 1997);
     is not a significant regulatory action subject to
Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 28355, May 22, 2001);
     is not subject to requirements of Section 12(d) of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272
note) because application of those requirements would be inconsistent
with the CAA; and
     does not provide EPA with the discretionary authority to
address, as appropriate, disproportionate human health or environmental
effects, using practicable and legally permissible methods, under
Executive Order 12898 (59 FR 7629, February 16, 1994).
    The SIP is not approved to apply on any Indian reservation land or
in any other area where EPA or an Indian tribe has demonstrated that a
tribe has jurisdiction. In those areas of Indian country, the rule does
not have tribal implications as specified by Executive Order 13175 (65
FR 67249, November 9, 2000), nor will it impose substantial direct
costs on tribal governments or preempt tribal law.

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Carbon monoxide,
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Lead, Nitrogen
dioxide, Ozone, Particulate matter, Reporting and recordkeeping
requirements, Sulfur oxides, Volatile organic compounds.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 7401 et seq.

    Dated: September 13, 2016.
V. Anne Heard,
Acting Regional Administrator, Region 4.
[FR Doc. 2016-22761 Filed 9-21-16; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NSPS for Asphalt Processing and Roofing Manufacture

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NSPS for Asphalt Processing and Roofing Manufacture (40 CFR part 60,
subpart UU) (Renewal)

1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

The New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Asphalt Processing and
Asphalt Roofing Manufacture were proposed on November 18, 1980, amended
on May 26, 1981, and promulgated on August 6, 1982.  These standards
apply to each saturator and each asphalt storage facility at asphalt
roofing plants; and to each asphalt storage tank and each blowing still
at asphalt processing plants, petroleum refineries, and asphalt roofing
plants.  New facilities include those that commenced construction,
modification or reconstruction after the date of proposal.  This
information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 60,
subpart UU.

In general, all NSPS standards require initial notifications,
performance tests, and periodic reports.  Owners or operators are also
required to maintain records of the occurrence and duration of any
startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected
facility, or any period during which the monitoring system is
inoperative.  These notifications, reports, and records are essential in
determining compliance, and are required of all sources subject to NSPS.

Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall
maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least
two years following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports,
and records.  Reports to the regulatory authority are made semiannually.
 All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority.  In the
event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent
directly to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
regional office.

Based on our consultations with industry representatives, it was
determined that there is an average of four affected facilities at each
plant site, and that each plant site has only one respondent (i.e., the
owner/operator of the plant site).

Over the next three years, an average of 144 facilities per year will be
subject to the standard, and it is estimated that two additional sources
will undergo reconstruction and become new sources subject to the
regulation each year over the next three years.

There are approximately 144 asphalt processing and roofing manufacture
plants in the United States, which are all publicly owned and operated
by the asphalt processing and roofing manufacturers industry.  None of
the 144 facilities in the United States are owned by either state,
local, tribal or the Federal Government.  They are all owned and
operated solely by privately owned for-profit businesses.  You can find
the burden to the “Affected Public” listed below in Table 1: Annual
Industry Burden and Cost - NSPS for Asphalt Processing and Roofing
Manufacture (40 CFR part 60, subpart UU).  The Federal government burden
does not include work performed by Federal employees only work performed
by contractors, which could be found listed below in Table 2: Average
Annual EPA Burden - NSPS for Asphalt Processing and Roofing Manufacture
(40 CFR part 60, subpart UU).

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the currently active
ICR without any “Terms of Clearance.”

2.  Need for and Use of the Collection

2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection

The EPA is charged under section 111 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as
amended, to establish standards of performance for new stationary
sources that reflect:

. . . application of the best technological system of continuous
emissions reduction which (taking into consideration the cost of
achieving such emissions reduction, or any non-air quality health and
environmental impact and energy requirements) the Administrator
determines has been adequately demonstrated.  Section 111(a)(l).

The Agency refers to this charge as selecting the best demonstrated
technology (BDT).  Section 111 also requires that the Administrator
review and, if appropriate, revise such standards every four years.

In addition, section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require
any owner or operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C)
install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit
procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with
such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during
such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe);
(E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables
or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is
impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with
Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the
Administrator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, particulate matter emissions from
asphalt processing and roofing manufacture cause or contribute to air
pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health
or welfare.  Therefore, the NSPS was promulgated for this source
category at 40 CFR part 60, subpart UU.

2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standard ensure
compliance with the applicable regulations which where promulgated in
accordance with the Clean Air Act.  The collected information is also
used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings.

Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected
facility’s initial capability to comply with the emission standard.
Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure compliance with the
standard at all times.  During the performance tests, a record of the
operating parameters under which compliance was achieved may be recorded
and used to determine compliance in place of a continuous emission
monitor.

The notifications required in the standard are used to inform the Agency
or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements
of the regulations.  The reviewing authority may then inspect the source
to ensure that the pollution control devices are properly installed and
operated, that leaks are being detected and repaired, and that the
standard is being met.  The performance test may also be observed.

The required semiannual reports are used to determine periods of excess
emissions, identify problems at the facility, verify
operation/maintenance procedures, and for compliance determinations.

3.  Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part
60, subpart UU.

3(a)  Nonduplication

If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is
sent directly to the appropriate EPA regional office.  Otherwise, the
information is sent directly to the delegated state or local agency.  If
a state or local agency has adopted their own similar standards to
implement the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the
state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the
report required by the Federal standards.  Therefore, no duplication
exists.

3(b)  Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR
was published in the Federal Register (72 FR 10735) on March 9, 2007.
No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal
Register.

3(c)  Consultations

Over the next three years, an average of 144 facilities per year will be
subject to the standard, with two existing sources undergoing
reconstruction each year over the next three years.  In estimating the
affected number of sources and the growth rate of asphalt processing and
roofing manufacture subject to this standard, EPA contacted Mr. James
Baker, Asphalt Roofing Manufacturers Association (ARMA),<PHONE_NUMBER>,
Mr. Robert Adler, Energy Information Administration (EIA), (202)
586-1134, and Mr. Earl Arp, Asphalt Institute,<PHONE_NUMBER>.  We
referenced the most recent data available.  We reviewed information
available from the Online Tracking Information System (OTIS) which is
the primary source of information regarding the number of existing
sources.  OTIS data was used in conjunction with industry consultation
to verify the number of sources and the industry growth rate.

3(d)  Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of
assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards.
Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful
techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are
applied and emission limitations are met.  If the information required
by these standards was collected less frequently, the proper operation
and maintenance of control equipment and the possibility of detecting
violations would be less likely.

3(e)  General Guidelines

These reporting or recordkeeping requirements do not violate any of the
regulations promulgated by OMB under 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

3(f)  Confidentiality

Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of
confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency
policies set forth in title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B -
Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI) (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR
36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43
FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3(g)  Sensitive Questions

None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive
questions.

4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a)  Respondents/SIC Codes

The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are
asphalt processing and roofing manufacture facilities.  The United
States Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes which correspond
to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes could
be found in the following table:

40 CFR part 60, subpart UU	SIC Codes	NAICS Codes

Petroleum Refineries	2911	324110

Asphalt Paving Mixtures and Block Manufacturing	2951	324121

Asphalt Felts and Coatings	2952	324122

4(b)  Information Requested

None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the
regulations established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

(i)  Data Items

In this ICR, all the data recorded or reported is required by the New
Source Performance Standards for Asphalt Processing and Roofing
Manufacture (40 CFR part 60, subpart UU).

A source must make the following reports:

Notifications

Notification of construction/reconstruction	60.7(a)(1)

Notification of actual startup date	60.7(a)(3)

Notification of physical or operational change which may increase the
emission rate	60.7(a)(4

Notification of demonstration of continuous monitoring system	60.7(a)(5)

Notification of initial performance test	60.8(d)

Report of initial performance test	60.8(c)

A source must keep the following records:

Recordkeeping

Startup, shutdown, malfunctions, periods where the continuous monitoring
system is inoperative	60.7(b)

Operating temperature measurements of pollution control devices as
appropriate, and the initial performance test results including
temperature measurements	60.7(d)

Continuously monitor and record the temperature of the gas at the inlet
of the control device	60.473(a)

Continuously monitor and record the temperature in the combustion zone
of the afterburner	60.472(b)(1)

For control devices not mentioned in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this
section, describing the operation of the control device and the process
parameter(s)	60.473(c)

Records are required to be retained for two years	60.7(f)

Electronic Reporting

Some of the respondents are using monitoring equipment that
automatically records parameter data.  Although personnel at the
affected facility must still evaluate the data, internal automation has
significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and
recordkeeping at a plant site.

Also, regulatory agencies in cooperation with the respondents continue
to create reporting systems to transmit data electronically.  However,
electronic reporting systems are still not widely used.  At this time,
it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use
electronic reporting.

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate temperature monitoring device.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Perform initial performance test, Reference Methods 5A, 9, 22 and repeat
performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and
utilizing technology and systems for the purpose o collecting,
validating, and verifying information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of processing and maintaining information.

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the
purpose of processing and maintaining 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.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

	Currently, sources are using monitoring equipment that provides
parameter data in an automated way e.g., continuous parameter monitoring
system.  Although personnel at the source still need to evaluate the
data, this type of monitoring equipment has significantly reduced the
burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping.

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

5(a)  Agency Activities

EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the
acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required
information.

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if
necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports,
excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the Online Tracking Information
System (OTIS).

5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management

Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect
the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are
properly installed and operational.  Performance test reports are used
by the Agency to discern a source’s initial capability to comply with
the emission standard, and note the operating conditions under which
compliance was achieved.  Data and records maintained by the respondents
are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement
programs.  The semiannual reports are used for problem identification,
as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance
determinations.

Information contained in the reports is entered into OTIS which is
operated and maintained by the EPA Office of Compliance.  OTIS is an EPA
database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance
data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned
facilities.  EPA uses OTIS for tracking air pollution compliance and
enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices
and EPA headquarters.  EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit,
store, retrieve and analyze the data.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner or
operator for two years.

5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility

The majority of the respondents are large entities (i.e., large
businesses).  However, the impact on small entities (i.e., small
businesses,) was taken into consideration during the development of the
regulation.  Due to technical considerations involving the process
operations and the types of control equipment employed, the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and
large entities.  The Agency considers these to be the minimum
requirements needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce
them further for small entities.  To the extent that larger businesses
can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden
will be reduced.

5(d)  Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within
this request is shown in Table 1: Annual Industry Burden, NSPS for
Asphalt Processing and Roofing Manufacture (40 CFR part 60, subpart UU).

6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the
recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for
the subpart included in this ICR.  The individual burdens are expressed
under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept
of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act.  Wherever appropriate,
specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified.  Responses to
this information collection are mandatory.

The 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.

6(a)  Estimating Respondent Burden

The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from
these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 33,912
(Total Labor Hours from Table 1).  These hours are based on Agency
studies and background documents from the development of the regulation,
Agency knowledge and experience with the NSPS program, the previously
approved ICR, and any comments received.

6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs

(i)  Estimating Labor Costs

This ICR uses the following labor rates:

Managerial	$107.63 ($51.25 + 110%)

Technical	$93.41   ($44.48 + 110%)

Clerical	$45.87   ($21.84 + 110%)

These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics, March 2007, Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational
and industry group.  The rates are from column 1, Total compensation.
The rates have been increased by 110% to account for the benefit
packages available to those employed by private industry.

(ii)  Estimating Capital/Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs

The only costs to the regulated industry resulting from information
collection activities required by the subject standard are labor costs.
The type of industry costs associated with the information collection
activities in the subject standard are both labor costs which are
addressed elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated with continuous
monitoring.  The capital/startup costs are one-time costs when a
facility becomes subject to the regulation.  The annual operation and
maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitor and
other costs such as photocopying and postage.

		 (iii)  Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

(A)

Continuous Monitoring Device	(B)

Capital/Startup Cost for One Respondent 1 	(C)

Number of New Respondents	(D)

Total Capital/

Startup Cost,  (B X C)	(E)

Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent 	(F)

Number of Respondents with O&M	(G)

Total O&M,

(E X F)

Temperature Monitors	$100,000 	2	$200,000	$35,000	144	$5,040,000

The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are $200,000.  This is the
total of column D in the above table.

The total operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are
$5,040,000.  This is the total of column G.

The average annual cost for capital/startup and operation and
maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $5,240,000.

6(c)  Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of
the reported information.  EPA's overall compliance and enforcement
program includes activities such as the examination of records
maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of
emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected
information.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is
estimated to be $148,498.

This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows:

           Managerial	$58.18 (GS-13, Step 5, $36.36 + 60%)

           Technical	$43.17 (GS-12, Step 1, $26.98 + 60%)

           Clerical	$23.36 (GS-6, Step 3, $14.60 + 60%)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 2007
General Schedule which excludes locality rates of pay.  Details upon
which this estimate is based appear in Table 2: Average Annual EPA
Burden, NSPS for Asphalt Processing and Roofing Manufacture (40 CFR part
60, subpart UU), below.

6(d)  Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

Based on our research for this ICR, on average over the next three
years, approximately 144 existing respondents will be subject to the
standard.  It is estimated that two additional respondent will become
subject over the next three years.

The number of respondents is calculated using the following table that
addresses the three years covered by this ICR.

Number of Respondents

Year	(A)

Number of 1 New Respondents	(B)

Number of Existing Respondents	(C)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit
Reports	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents	(E)

Number of Respondents

(E=A+B+C-D)

1	2	144	0	2	144

2	2	144	0	2	144

3	2	144	0	2	144

Average	2	144	0	2	144

1 New respondent include sources with constructed, reconstructed and
modified affected facilities.  In this standard existing respondents
submit initial notifications.

To avoid double-counting respondents, column D is subtracted.  As shown
above, the average Number of Respondents over the three-year period of
this ICR is 144.

The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the
following table:

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity	(B)

Number of Respondents	(C)

Number of Responses	(D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit
Reports	(E)

Total Annual Responses

E=(BxC)+D

Notification and application of construction/ reconstruction 	2	1	n/a	2

Notification of actual startup	2	1	n/a	2

Notification of physical or operational change which may increase the
emission rate	2	1	n/a	2

Notification of demonstration of continuous monitoring system.	2	1	n/a	2

Notification of initial performance test	2	1	n/a	2

Report of initial performance test	2	1	n/a	2

Semiannual reports	144	2	n/a	288

	Total	300

The number of total respondents is 144.

The number of Total Annual Responses is 300.  This is the number in
column E of the Respondent Universe and Number of Responses per year in
table above.

The total annual labor costs are $3,474,925.  Details regarding these
estimates may be found in Table 1: Annual Industry Burden, NSPS for
Asphalt Processing and Roofing Manufacture (40 CFR part 60, subpart UU),
below.

6(e)  Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the
respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2, respectively,
and summarized below.

(i) Respondent Tally

The total annual labor costs are $3,474,925.  Details regarding these
estimates may be found in Table 1. Annual Respondent Burden and Cost:
NSPS for Asphalt Processing and Roofing Manufacture (40 CFR part 60,
subpart UU), below.  Furthermore, the annual public reporting and
recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to
average 113 hours per response.

The total annual capital/startup and O&M cost to the regulated entity
are $5,240,000.

(ii) The Agency Tally

The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is
estimated to be 2,747 labor hours at a cost of $148,498.  See Table 2.
Annual Agency Burden and Cost: NSPS for Asphalt Processing and Roofing
Manufacture (40 CFR part 60, subpart UU), below.

6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden

There is an adjustment increase in the total estimated burden hours as
currently identified in the OMB inventory of burdens because the
previous tables did not represent all of the reporting requirements.
The decrease in the number of sources was caused by buy-outs and/or
consolidation which the industry has been experiencing for the last
several years.  The decrease in the capital startup and O&M cost
estimates as compared with the previous ICR is attributed solely to the
decrease in the number of sources.  This ICR renewal corrects the
deficiencies.

6(g)  Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection
of information is estimated to average 113 hours per response.  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
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; 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 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 valid OMB
Control Number.  The OMB Control Numbers for EPA’s regulations are
listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

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, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number
EPA-HQ-OECA-2007-0051.  An electronic version of the public docket is
available at http://www.regulations.gov which may be used to obtain a
copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the content of the docket, and to
access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  When in the system, select “search” than key in the
docket ID number identified in this document.  The documents are also
available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket
and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room
3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC.  The EPA Docket
Center 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
Reading Room is<PHONE_NUMBER>, and the telephone number for the
Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center Docket is (202)
566-1752.  Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street,
N.W., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA.  Please
include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OECA-2007-0051 and OMB Control
Number 2060-0002 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in
collecting this information.

Table 1:  Annual Respondent Burden and Cost – NSPS for Asphalt
Processing and Roofing Manufacture (40 CFR part 60, subpart UU)

 	(A)	(B)	(C)	(D)	(E)	(F)	(G)	 (H)

 Burden item 	Person- hours per occurrence	No. of occurrences per
respondent per year	Person- hours per respondent per year (C=AxB)
Respondents per year (a)	Technical person- hours per year (E=CxD)
Management person-hours per year (Ex0.05)

	Clerical person-hours per year

(Ex0.1)

	Cost ($) (b)

1. Applications	N/A

2. Survey and Studies	N/A

3. Reporting requirements

    A.  Read instructions	1	1	1	2	2	0.10	0.20	$233.77

    B.  Required activities

         Initial performance tests c	72	1	72	2	144	7.2	14.4	$16,831.80

         Repeat of performance test d	72	1	72	0.2	14.4	0.72	1.44
$1,683.18

    C.  Create Information	See 3B

	    D.  Gather existing information 	See 3B

	    E.   Write report

         Notification of construction/

         reconstruction e         	2	1	2	2	4	0.2	0.4	$467.55

         Notification and demonstration of

         CMS f	40	1	40	2	80	4	8	$9,351.00

 Notification of actual startup 	2	1	2	2	4	0.2	0.4	$467.55

 Notification of initial performance test	2	1	2	2	4	0.2	0.4	$467.55

 Report of performance test                               	See 3B

	 Notification of physical or operational

 change g	2	1	2	2	4	0.2	0.4	$467.55

         Semiannual reports	24	2	48	144	6,912	345.6	691.2	$807,926.40

4.  Recordkeeping requirements

  A.  Read instructions	See 3A

	      B.  Plan activities	See 3B

      C.  Implement activities	See 3B

  D.  Develop record system 	N/A

  E.  Time to enter information

       Records of daily production rate and

       hours of operation h	0.13	250	32.5	144	4,680	234	468	$547,033.50

          Records of operating parameters of

          CMS i	0.25	250	62.5	144	9,000	450	900	$1,051,987.50

          Records of  startup, shutdown, and

          malfunctions j	60	1	60	144	8,640	432	864	$1,009,908.00

      F.  Train personnel	N/A

	     G.  Audits	N/A

	Subtotal

	29,488.4	1,474.42	2,948.84	$3,474,925.10

TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

33,912

  $3,474,925

Assumptions:

a.  We have assumed that the average number of respondents that is
subject to the regulation will be 144 with  two source undergoing
reconstruction per year over the three-year period of this ICR.

b.  This ICR uses the following labor rates: $107.63 per hour for
Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor; $93.41 per hour for
Technical labor, and $45.87 per hour for Clerical labor.  These rates
are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, March 2007, “Table 2.  Civilian Workers, by occupational
and industry group.” The rates are from column 1, “Total
compensation.”  The rates have been increased by 110 percent to
account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private
industry.

c  We have assumed that it will take 72 hours of each respondent to
perform initial performance test.

d.  We have assumed that 20 percent of respondents will fail the
performance test and will have to repeat it.

e.  We have assumed that each respondent will take two hours to write
notification of construction/reconstruction report.

f.   We have assumed that each respondent will take 40 hours to write
notification and demonstration of CMS report.

g.  We have assumed that each respondent will take 2 hours to write
notification of physical or operational change.

h.  We have assumed that each respondent will enter information of daily
production rate and hours of operation 250 times per year.

i.  We have assumed that each respondent will take 15 minutes 250 times
per year to record the operating parameters of CMS.

j.  We have assumed that each respondent will take 60 hours to record
startup, shutdown, and malfunction information.

Table 2:  Average Annual EPA Burden – NSPS for Asphalt Processing and
Roofing Manufacture (40 CFR part 60, subpart UU)

 	(A)	(B)	(C)	(D)	(E)	(F)	(G)	 (H)

Activity 	EPA person- hours per occurrence	No. of occurrences per plant

per year	EPA person- hours per plant per year (C=AxB)	Plants per year
(a)	Technical person- hours per year (E=CxD)	Management person-hours per
year (Ex0.05)

	Clerical person-hours per year

(Ex0.1)

	Cost ($) (b)

Initial performance tests

     New or modified facility c	24	1	24	2	48	2.4	4.8	$2,323.92

Repeat performance test

     New or modified facility d	24	0.2	4.8	2	9.6	0.48	0.96	$464.79

Report review

     New or modified facility

       Notification of construction/

       reconstruction e                                           	2	1	2
2	4	0.2	0.4	$193.66

       Notification of physical/operational

       changes f	2	1	2	2	4	0.2	0.4	$193.66

       Notification of actual startup	0.5	1	0.5	2	1	0.05	0.1	$48.42

   Notification of performance test                      	0.5	1	0.5	2	1
0.05	0.1	$48.42

       Review of performance test results g	8	1	8	2	16	0.8	1.6	$774.64

       Notification of demonstration of  CMS	0.5	1	0.5	2	1	0.05	0.1
$48.42

       Semiannual reports	8	2	16	144	2,304	115.2	230.4

	TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (rounded)

2,747

$148,498

Assumptions:

a.  We have assumed that the average number of respondents will be 144
with two source undergoing reconstruction per year over the three-year
period of this ICR.

b.  The cost is based on the following labor rate which incorporates a
1.6 benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead
expenses.  Managerial rates of $58.18 (GS-13, Step 5, $36.36x1.6),
Technical rate of $43.17 (GS-12, Step 1, $26.95 x 1.6), and Clerical
rate of $23.36 (GS-6, Step 3, $14.60 x 1.6).  These rates are from the
Office of Personnel Management (OPM) “2007 General Schedule” which
excludes locality rates of pay.

c.  We have assumed that it will take 24 hours of each respondent to
perform initial performance test.

d. We have assumed that 20 percent of respondents will fail the
performance test and will have to repeat it.

e.  We have assumed that it will take each respondent two hours one time
per year to review notification of construction/reconstruction report.

f.  We have assumed that it will take each respondent two hours one time
per year to review notification of physical/operation changes.

g.  We have assumed that it will take each respondents eight hours to
one time per year to review the performance test results report.

 PAGE

 PAGE   12

 PAGE