                             SUPPORTING STATEMENT
	ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters at Major Sources of HAP

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

      1(a)  Title of the Information Collection

NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters at Major Sources of HAP (40 CFR part 63, Subpart DDDDD)

      1(b)  Short Characterization/Abstract

      This supporting statement addresses information collection activities that will be imposed by the NESHAP for Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters at Major Sources of HAP, 40 CFR part 63 subpart DDDDD (Boiler MACT/Boilers NESHAP).  On September 13, 2004, under authority of section 112 of the Clean Air Act, EPA promulgated national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for new and existing industrial/commercial/institutional boilers and process heaters.  On June 19, 2007, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated and remanded the national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants for industrial/commercial/institutional boilers and process heaters.  On June 4, 2010 EPA issued a proposal in response to the vacatur and in March 2011 EPA promulgated the rule in response to the vacatur.  Also in March 2011, EPA issued a voluntary  reconsideration of the final rule and this ICR documents the recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with EPA's proposed reconsideration for the Boiler MACT.

      The information collection activities in this information collection request (ICR) include initial and annual stack tests, fuel analyses, operating parameter monitoring, one-time and periodic reports, and maintenance of records.  Varying levels of requirements apply to each subcategory.  The Boiler MACT contains nineteen subcategories for existing boilers and in-direct fired process heaters: Pulverized coal/solid fossil fuel units; Stokers designed to burn coal/solid fossil fuel; Fluidized bed units designed to burn coal/solid fossil fuel; Stokers/sloped grate/other units designed to burn kiln dried biomass/bio-based solids; Stokers/sloped grate/other units designed to burn wet biomass/bio-based solids; Fluidized bed units designed to burn biomass/bio-based solids; Suspension burners designed to burn biomass/bio-based solids; Dutch ovens/pile burners designed to burn biomass/bio-based solids; Fuel Cells designed to burn biomass/bio-based solids; Hybrid suspension/grate burners designed to burn wet biomass/bio-based solids; Units designed to burn solid fuel; Units designed to burn liquid fuel; Units designed to burn heavy liquid fuel; Units designed to burn light liquid fuel; Units designed to burn liquid fuel in non-continental States or territories; Units designed to burn natural gas, refinery gas or other gas 1 fuels; Units designed to burn gas 2 (other) gases; Metal process furnaces; and Limited-use boilers and process heaters.  These same 19 subcategories apply to new boilers and in-direct fired process heaters.  The information collection activities will enable EPA to determine initial and continuous compliance with emission standards for regulated pollutants, and ensure that facilities conduct proper planning, operation, and unit maintenance.

      Records and reports required by the NESHAP for industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters at major sources of HAP are necessary to enable EPA to identify sources subject to the standards and to ensure that the standards are being achieved.  Records and reports must be maintained at the facility and/or submitted to EPA.  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.

      Approximately 14,111 existing units at 1,704 facilities and 1,844 new units at 231 facilities would be subject to the regulation over the next three years.  The cost of this Information Collection Request (ICR) will be $291 million (rounded).

      The burden to the "Affected Public" for each boiler subcategory may be found in Tables 1.A-12.C in Attachment A.  The burden to the "Federal Government" is attributed entirely to work performed by federal employees or government contractors; this burden may be found in Tables 13.A-13.C of Attachment B.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2.  Need for and Use of the Collection
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      2(a)  Need/Authority for the Collection
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The EPA is charged under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants.  These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction.  In addition, section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require any owner/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, pollutant emissions from industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.  Therefore, the NESHAP are proposed for this source category at 40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDD.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      2(b)  Practical Utility/Users of the Data
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      The information will be used by EPA to: (1) Identify new, modified, reconstructed and existing sources subject to the Boiler MACT; (2) ensure that the Boiler MACT is being properly applied; (3) ensure that the Boiler MACT is being complied with; (4) ensure, on a continuous basis, that the operating parameters established during the initial performance test are not exceeded.

      In addition, records and reports are necessary to enable EPA to identify facilities that may not be in compliance with the Boiler MACT.  Based on reported information, EPA will decide which facilities should be inspected and what records or units should be inspected at the facilities.  The records that facilities maintain will indicate to EPA whether facility personnel are properly operating and maintaining the boiler or process heater and control equipment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3.  Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The requested recordkeeping and reporting will be required under (40 CFR part 63, subpart DDDDD).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      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 its 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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      A public notice of this collection was provided in the notice of proposed rulemaking for the 2011 reconsideration of the Boilers NESHAP.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      3(c)  Consultations
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      In July 2008, the EPA issued a survey, entitled "Information Collection Effort for Facilities with Combustion Units (ICR No. 2286.01)."  This ICR was distributed to 3,396 facilities with boilers and process heaters firing any fuel type and other combustion units firing non-fossil solids. In May 2009, the EPA issued a follow-up ICR (ICR No 2286.03) requesting a subset of these facilities to conduct stack testing to fill data gaps. Throughout each of these two ICRs, the Agency received comments on the estimated costs to conduct stack testing and fuel analysis, and the types of pollutants to request testing from. These comments have been incorporated into the estimates for the ICR on the proposed Boiler MACT.

      In January 2009, the EPA convened a panel, in compliance with the Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act (SBREFA) to request input about the proposed Boiler and Process Heater NESHAP and the Area Source Boiler NESHAP. During this SBREFA panel EPA received comments from panel members on the cost estimates for work practice standards being proposed in the rulemaking. The comments on the cost to conduct energy audits at industrial facilities have been incorporated into the cost estimates contained in this ICR.

      The public was also provided the opportunity to review and comment on the burden estimated in this Information Collection Request during the comment period for the June 4, 2010 proposal (75 FR 32006).  As part of this reconsideration, we have reviewed these comments and have revised our inventory of affected units in response to comments received, which has in turn increased the number of facilities estimated to have a burden related to this rulemaking. Further, in response to public comments and petitions for reconsideration, we have also adopted several changes to the compliance requirements in the proposed reconsideration notice to minimize the burden on affected entities. Significant items that have reduced the burden on affected entities include:

         *          Removal of dioxin/furan emission limits and associated stack testing. Instead, each boiler and process heater is now required to conduct a tune-up work practice.
         *          For the other gaseous fuel specification analysis, H2S analysis is no longer required and only Hg must be tested.  Further, we have provided additional allowances on the fuel specification to exempt units firing gaseous streams subject to other NESHAP standards from the specification requirements in an effort to reduce duplication.
         *          Continuous monitoring of PM emissions for large units has been modified from a continuous emissions monitoring system (CEMS) to a continuous parametric monitoring system (CPMS). Further, these CPMS are now only required for a subset of boilers with an average annual heat input rate of greater than 250 mmBtu/hr from solid fossil fuel and/or residual oil.
         *          For solid fuel units an alternative compliance option of meeting a total selected metals (TSM8) limit instead of a PM limit is provided to increase regulatory flexibility and reduce the burden.
         *          Also to increase regulatory flexibility, we have proposed long-term CO CEMS based emission limits. Because it is unknown at this time how many units will opt to comply with the CEMS-based emission limits vs. the annual stack-test based emission limits, the burden associated with this CO CEMS compliance alternative is not discussed or estimated in this ICR.
         *          For very small (less than 5 mmBtu/hr) gaseous and light liquid units, we have reduced the tune-up frequency in order to reduce the overall long term burden of this rule. Since this initial ICR captures the burden associated with the initial tune-up, the benefits of the reduced frequency is not estimated in this initial ICR.
         *          For the burden to the agency, two additional line items were added to more appropriately account for the costs; the activity of reviewing and approving both a monitoring plan and fuel monitoring plan.

      The preamble and proposed reconsideration notice discuss the significant changes made since the March 2011 promulgated rule.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      3(d)  Effects of Less Frequent Collection
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      For sources with applicable emission limits, the Boilers NESHAP provides the option of demonstrating compliance through initial and periodic fuel analysis (for sources that burn fuels with pollutant contents lower than the emission limits) or through initial and annual stack testing.  If a source can demonstrate that the fuel(s) burned in the boiler or process heater has a pollutant content that is less than the applicable emission limit, then the Boilers NESHAP requires that the source conduct initial fuel analyses, periodic fuel analysis, and initial and semiannual reporting.  Sources that demonstrate compliance through performance testing must continuously monitor operating parameters and conduct periodic fuel analyses, and complete initial and semiannual reporting.  The EPA chose the frequency of these activities to provide an adequate margin of assurance that affected facilities will not operate for extended periods in violation of the regulations.

      The annual performance testing, where applicable, will ensure, on an ongoing basis, that the air pollution control device is operating properly and its performance has not deteriorated.

      During the initial stack tests (for particulate matter (or total selected metals), mercury, hydrogen chloride, and carbon monoxide), the owner or operator must establish maximum or minimum values for each applicable operating parameter.  Thereafter, the owner or operator must, in some cases, conduct annual stack tests for particulate matter (or total selected metals), mercury, hydrogen chloride, and carbon monoxide and must always continuously monitor the operating parameters.  The activities associated with setting these site-specific operating limits include monitoring of the parameters during the performance test, reviewing and averaging the monitoring data, and, if necessary, calculating average values for fuel pollutant content.  Although continuous monitoring of operating parameters cannot provide a direct measurement of emissions, it is less expensive than CEMS and the collected information can ensure that the boiler or process heater and associated air pollution control equipment are operated properly.  This information assures EPA and the public that the reductions envisioned by the Boilers NESHAP are being achieved.  Less frequent monitoring would not ensure continuous compliance. In addition to demonstrating compliance with these emission limits, all large boilers and process heaters must conduct annual tune-ups as a work practice for controlling dioxin/furan emissions. They must report the findings of the tune-up in the semi-annual compliance report covering the period when the tune-up was conducted.

      The semiannual reporting requirement allows the submittal of required information and data on established operating parameters so that any potential problems can be identified in a timely fashion.

      New and existing small (less than 10 mmBtu/hr) boilers firing solid, liquid, or gaseous fuels and all limited use (operates less than 876 hr/yr) boilers demonstrate compliance with the rule by conducting a biennial tune-up.  Certain small units firing gaseous or light liquid fuels that have a design capacity of less than 5 mmBtu/hr are subject to tune-ups on a 5-year frequency. Since these frequencies are less than the semi-annual compliance report frequency typically required from sources in this source category, a biennial or five-year compliance report is required.  These tune-up reports can be requested by the Administrator upon request but are not required to be submitted.

      New and existing large Gas 1 boilers demonstrate compliance by conducting an annual tune-up.  These boilers are thus required to submit annual compliance reports. Units firing gaseous fuels other than natural gas and refinery gas or other MACT regulated gas streams must demonstrate that those fuels meet the specification for Hg contained in the proposal in order to qualify under the Gas 1 subcategory. If the content of these constituents are not going to exceed the specifications, these units may conduct an initial testing and include a statement that the gas will not exceed the specification in the initial Notification of Compliance Status. If the gaseous fuel constituents will vary, the unit is required to conduct monthly testing and maintain records to demonstrate that the gaseous fuels meet the specifications. Monthly testing and recordkeeping at units with variable gas quality ensures continuous compliance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      The Boilers NESHAP requires all records to be maintained at the source for a period of five years.  In 40 CFR part 63, subpart A, "General Provisions for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories," owners or operators of facilities are required to keep and maintain records for a period of five years.  These records must be kept on file for use, if needed, by the regulating authority to ensure that the plant personnel are operating and maintaining the unit and the control equipment properly.  The title V permit programs also require records to be retained for five years.  These records must be kept on file for use, if needed, by the regulating authority to ensure that the plant personnel are operating and maintaining the unit and the control equipment properly.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      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 (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). In response to public comments with respect to concerns of confidential information contained in the energy assessment report, EPA has modified the requirements to submit the entire results in order to protect potential confidential business information. Instead a signed certification that the energy assessment was completed is to be included in the Notification of Compliance Status.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      3(g)  Sensitive Questions
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The reporting or recordkeeping requirements in the standard do not include sensitive questions.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4.  The Respondents and the Information Requested
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      4(a)  Respondents/NAICS Codes
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are owners or operators of new or existing industrial, commercial, or institutional boilers and process heaters.  The Boilers Major Source NESHAP affects any industry, state, local, or tribal government, or any institution (e.g., university) using a boiler as defined in the regulation.  This includes, but is not limited to, the following North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes listed in Table 1 below.

Table 1: NAICS Categories for Various Affected Sources

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Codes

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
NAICS Codes
 211
 Extractors of crude petroleum or natural gas.
 321
 Wood product manufacturing.
 322
 Pulp and paper mills.
 325
 Chemical manufacturers.
 324
 Petroleum refineries and manufacturers of coal products.
 316/326/339
 Manufacturers of rubber and miscellaneous plastic products.
 331
 Steel works, blast furnaces.
 332
 Electroplating, plating, polishing, anodizing, and coloring.
 336
 Manufacturers of motor vehicle parts and accessories.
 221
 Electric, gas, and sanitary services.
 622
 Health services.
 611
 Educational services
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Based on the distribution of major source facilities with affected boilers or process heaters reported in the 2008 survey entitled "Information Collection Effort for Facilities with Combustion Units (ICR No. 2286.01)," along with additional information submitted there are 1,704 existing facilities with affected boilers or process heaters. Of these, 94 percent are located in the private sector and the remaining 6 percent are located in the public sector.  The agency is projecting 231 new facilities with 1,844 affected boilers and process heaters.  For the purpose of this ICR, the EPA is estimating that all new facilities will be in the private sector.  Considering new and existing sources together, 94 percent of facilities are estimated to be in the private sector.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      4(b)  Information Requested
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            (i)  Data Items
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      In this ICR, all the data that is recorded or reported will be required by (40 CFR part 63, Subpart DDDDD).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      In Attachment B, tables 1.A-C, 2.A-C, 3.A-C, 4.A-C, 5.A-C, 6.A-C, 7.A-C, 8.A-C, 9.A-C, 10.A-C, 11.A-C, and 12.A-C present a summary of the testing, monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements of the Boiler MACT.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            (ii)  Respondent Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The respondent activities proposed by Boiler MACT are provided under the first column of tables 1.A-12.C.  All respondent burden items are included in tables 1.A-12.C.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      	(iii)  Summary of Requirements
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      The information collection activities in this ICR include initial and annual stack tests, fuel analyses, operating parameter monitoring, continuous O2 monitoring for all large units, CPMS at units with an average annual heat input rate greater than 250 mmBtu/hr from solid fossil fuel or residual oil, certified energy audits, annual, biennial, or every five-year tune-ups (depending on the size of the combustion equipment) and a site-specific monitoring plan, one-time and periodic reports, and the maintenance of records.

      For sources that can demonstrate compliance through fuel analysis, the regulation requires an initial fuel analysis and monthly fuel analyses.  Sources must conduct additional fuel analyses if they burn a new type of fuel. For sources that are demonstrating that their gaseous fuels other than natural gas, refinery gas, and MACT-regulated gases meet the specification for Hg contained in the rule, they must conduct either an initial or monthly fuel analysis to remain in the gas 1 subcategory. If the content of these constituents are not going to exceed the specifications, these units may conduct an initial testing and include a statement that the gas will not exceed the specification in the initial Notification of Compliance Status. If the gaseous fuel constituents will vary, the unit is required to conduct monthly testing and maintain records to demonstrate that the gaseous fuels meet the specifications.

      An initial performance test must be completed for particulate matter (or total selected metals), mercury, hydrogen chloride, and carbon monoxide for affected sources with applicable emission limits.  During the initial performance test, the owner or operator must establish maximum or minimum values for each operating parameter.  Thereafter, the owner or operator must, in some cases, conduct annual stack tests for particulate matter (or total selected metals), mercury, hydrogen chloride, and carbon monoxide and must continuously monitor the operating parameters.  Following the initial performance test, the owner or operator must submit a report that documents the performance test results and the values for their required operating parameters.

      All existing units will be required to conduct an initial certified energy audit by qualified personnel which includes a visual inspection of the boiler system, establishing operating characteristics, identifying major energy consuming systems and energy savings potential, reviewing available engineering plans, and listing major energy conservation measures. A signed certification that an audit has been completed should be submitted to the Agency for each energy audit.

      All new and existing large units must perform annual tune-ups.  This is a work practice for dioxin/furan emissions to ensure proper boiler operation.

      All new and existing small and limited use units, and all large units firing natural gas, refinery gas, or other gas 1 fuels meeting the fuel spec can demonstrate compliance by conducting a tune-up of the boiler.  Small and limited use units are requested to conduct a tune-up biennially, large natural gas, refinery gas, or other gas 1 units will conduct a tune-up annually, and very small units firing gaseous fuels or light liquids are requested to conduct a tune-up every five years. Any large natural gas, refinery gas, or other gas 1 unit will also submit a notification of alternative fuel use if the unit fires alternative fuels during periods of gas curtailment or gas supply emergencies.

      For all units other than small and limited use boilers and process heaters and units firing natural gas a semiannual report is required that documents the values for the operating parameters; any deviation; the results of any annual stack tests; the results of any fuel analysis and emissions calculations; fuel usage, and if no deviation occurred, a statement that no deviations occurred.

      As specified in the Boiler and Process Heater NESHAP, owners or operators of boilers and process heaters must keep records of certain parameters and information for a period of five years.  Owners or operators must maintain records of the initial performance test, annual stack tests, fuel analyses, and any subsequent stack tests or fuel analyses.  Owners or operators must also maintain records of the monitoring data for the operating parameters and daily fuel usage.

      Owners or operators must also maintain records for periods of boiler or process heater startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) and any deviations from the operating parameters. Records must also be maintained of all monitoring device calibration data.  For startup and shutdown (SS) periods, as part of the work practice it is necessary to train all personnel in startup and shutdown procedures, including maintenance and cleaning, safety, control device startup, and procedures to minimize emissions. This training is included in line item 4.E of the burden tables. Although this training line item broadly covers training on the rule recordkeeping and reporting requirements, it is expected to be sufficient to cover training necessary for SS recordkeeping training. Many sites are already expected to undergo SS training for health and safety reasons.

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      5(a)  Agency Activities
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A list of agency activities is provided in section 6(c) and in tables 13A-C (see Attachment B).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      5(b)  Collection Methodology and Management
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Data obtained during periodic visits by EPA personnel, from records maintained by the respondents, and from information provided in semiannual reports will be tabulated and published for internal EPA use in compliance and enforcement programs.  The Boiler MACT allows records to be retained in hardcopy or electronic format to allow flexibility and minimize burden.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Most emissions and monitoring information in the reports are reported in an electronic format using the Electronic Reporting Tool (ERT). The data will be extracted from the ERT files and can be viewed through EPA's Central Data Exchange. Other information contained in the reports is entered into the AFS which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance.  AFS is EPA's database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned facilities.  EPA uses the AFS 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/operator for five years.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      5(c)  Small Entity Flexibility
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      The EPA expects that the Boilers and Process Heater NESHAP will have a substantial impact on a significant number of small entities.  In developing the regulation, small entity is defined as: (1) A small business according to Small Business Administration size standards by the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) category of the owning entity.  The range of small business size standards for the 45 affected 3-digit NAICS industries ranges from 500 to 1,000 employees, except for petroleum refining and electric utilities.  In these latter two industries, the size standard is 1,500 employees and a mass throughput of 75,000 barrels/day or less or 4 million kilowatt-hours of production or less, respectively; (2) a small governmental jurisdiction that is a government of a city, county, town, school district or special district with a population of less than 50,000; and (3) a small organization that is any not-for-profit enterprise that is independently owned and operated and is not dominant in its field.

      Based on responses to the 2008 survey "Information Collection Effort for Facilities with Combustion Units (ICR No. 2286.01)" as well as follow-up information submitted to the docket, the EPA has determined that 151 of the 1,704 facilities with existing boilers or process heaters, or 9 percent of the total, affected by the regulation may be small entities.

      The Boilers NESHAP does not contain any provisions reserved exclusively for the benefit of small entities.  However, the regulation does contain several provisions that reduce the impact on all regulated entities, which include small entities.  For instance, operating parameter monitoring is required instead of CEMS.  The rule provides an option to demonstrate compliance with fuel analysis in lieu of stack testing for boilers combusting fuels with mercury, TSM8, or chlorine contents less than their associated emission limit.  In addition, providing a work practice standard for small and limited use boilers and process heaters firing all fuel types and for boilers of all sizes firing natural gas, refinery gas, or other gas 1 fuels, the EPA has substantially reduced the burden of the rulemaking, including reducing the burden on small entities. For example, 35 of the 151 small entities have only small or limited use boilers and process heaters installed at the facilities. The option to demonstrate compliance using an annual, biennial, or every five-year tune-up is a substantial savings compared with the requiring stack testing, parameter monitoring, and add-on air pollution control devices.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      5(d)  Collection Schedule
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

      Information collected includes the following one-time-only activities: reading the regulation, initial performance tests (for particulate matter (or TSM8), mercury, hydrogen chloride, and carbon monoxide for units with applicable emission limits), initial fuel analyses (for mercury, TSM8, and chlorine for units demonstrating compliance using fuel analysis), setting of operating parameter values, report prior to initial startup, report following initial stack tests (includes operating parameter values), conducting an energy audit, and development of a site-specific monitoring plan and fuel analysis plan.  Since compliance is not required until year 3 for existing facilities, EPA assumes that half of the existing facilities will conduct initial performance tests and related activities in year 2 and the other half will conduct such activities in year 3.

      Year 1 for new and existing sources includes the one-time activity of reading the regulation and submitting the initial notification that the source is subject to the regulation. The burden associated with this activity is estimated on a facility basis.  The database developed from the 2008 survey "Information Collection Effort for Facilities with Combustion Units (ICR No. 2286.01),"and subsequent public comments to adjust the inventory indicates that each affected facility has on average eight boilers or process heaters.  This is a conservative estimate of recordkeeping and reporting burden, as EPA knows that some of the affected facilities have more than eight sources and will be able to benefit from consolidated reporting.  New major sources would also submit the following one-time only notifications: intent to construct, start of construction date, anticipated start-up date, and actual start-up date.  These notifications generally would be submitted within 60 days of the activity.

      In year 1, new facilities will begin training their personnel regarding the use of monitoring equipment and the startup and shutdown procedures.  Half of the existing facilities will train personnel in year 2 and the other half will train personnel in year 3.

      Also in year 1, new sources will begin activities to comply with the subpart such as conducting performance tests, conducting tune-ups, setting operating limits, developing a site-specific monitoring plan and fuel analysis plan, installing and operating applicable monitoring equipment, and submitting the notification of compliance status.

      In year 2, the new sources from year 1 will conduct annual performance tests, tune-ups, and submit semiannual compliance reports and the new sources in year 2 will conduct initial performance tests, tune-ups, and other initial compliance activities and will also submit all initial notifications.  Also in year 2, half of the existing large affected sources will conduct initial performance tests, fuel analyses, certified energy audits, tune-ups, related activities, and submit initial notifications of compliance status.  Half of the existing small and limited use affected sources will conduct certified energy audits and tune-ups.

      In year 3, the new sources from year 1 and from year 2 and half of the existing sources that began complying with the subpart in year 2 will conduct annual performance tests, if applicable, annual tune-ups, and will submit semiannual compliance reports. The new sources from year 3 will conduct performance tests, tune-ups, and fuel analyses. Also in year 3, the other half of existing affected sources for which testing is required will conduct performance tests, fuel analyses, tune-ups, and certified energy audits.  The remaining half of existing small and limited use sources will conduct initial tune-ups and certified energy audits.  Finally, in year 3 all facilities with affected boilers or process heaters will submit the notification of compliance status and those required to submit semi-annual compliance reports will begin submitting these in year 3.

      In year 1, new sources will begin keeping records of data such as operating limits, start-up shutdown and malfunctions, tune-up procedures, monitoring device calibrations, stack test results, submitted reports, and fuel usage.  In year 2, the new sources from years 1 and 2 will keep records of such data.  In year 3, all new and existing affected facilities will keep records of such data.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
6.  Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Tables 1.A-12.C document the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for each year 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.  Where 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 $97.1 million.   The average annual recordkeeping hours shown in Tables 1.A-12.C is 82,000.  The average annual reporting requirement hours shown in Tables 1.A-12.A is 245,000.  These hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, and any comments received.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      6(b)  Estimating Respondent Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            (i)  Estimating Labor Costs
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      This ICR uses the following labor rates:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Managerial	$114.49 ($54.52 + 110%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Technical	$98.20 ($46.76 + 110%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Clerical	$48.53 ($23.11 + 110%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To be consistent with previous estimates of burden for this rulemaking, these rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2009, "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.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The type of industry costs associated with the information collection activities in the subject standard(s) are both labor costs which are addressed elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated with continuous monitoring, hiring third party contractors to perform stack tests, energy audits, and boiler tune-ups.  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(s) conduct subsequent testing or tune-ups, and other costs such as photocopying and postage.

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

      Costs associated with O&M include the annual operation and maintenance costs associated with the continuous parameter monitoring equipment, initial and annual stack and performance testing and/or fuel analysis, and certified energy audits and/or annual/biennial tune-ups.  Below are the estimated total annualized capital and startup costs and O&M costs for the affected units for the first 3 years after promulgation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

         Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs
                                (A)
Boiler Type
                    (B)
Number of Respondents (facilities)
             (C)
Total Annualized Capital and O&M over 3 years
                  (D)
Total Capital/Startup Cost over 3 years
       (E)
Average Annual O&M and Annualized Capital Costs per year
                          Existing Large Solid Units
                                      131
                                  $97,104,012
                                  $92,478,324
                                  $32,368,004
                             New Large Solid Units
                                      10
                                  $10,094,916
                                  $6,015,594
                                  $3,364,972
                  Existing Small and Limited Use Solid Units
                                       5
                                   $171,668
                                      $0
                                    $57,223
                             New Small Solid Units
                                       1
                                    $17,824
                                      $0
                                    $5,941
                          Existing Large Liquid Units
                                      71
                                  $23,343,893
                                  $27,305,301
                                  $7,781,298
                            New Large Liquid Units
                                       0
                                      $0
                                      $0
                                      $0
                  Existing Small and Limited Use Liquid Units
                                      43
                                  $1,484,008
                                      $0
                                   $494,669
                            New Small Liquid Units
                                       0
                                      $0
                                      $0
                                      $0
                         Existing Large Gaseous Units
                                      549
                                  $32,519,633
                                   $478,101
                                  $10,839,878
                            New Large Gaseous Units
                                      98
                                  $4,516,625
                                      $0
                                  $1,505,542
                 Existing Small and Limited Use Gaseous Units
                                      905
                                  $26,484,361
                                      $0
                                  $8,828,120
                            New Small Gaseous Units
                                      122
                                  $2,896,400
                                      $0
                                   $965,467
                                     Total
                                     1,935
                                 $198,633,340
                                 $126,277,320
                                  $66,211,113
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are $126 million.  This is the total of column D in the above table. This reflects the initial costs to purchase monitoring equipment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The total operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for this ICR are $199 million.  This is the total of column C.  This reflects the costs to operate the monitoring equipment, and fees paid to third parties to conduct initial and annual stack testing, tune-ups, and one-time energy audits.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            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 $66 million as shown in column E.   These are recordkeeping costs.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      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 $5.3 million.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

		Managerial	$62.27 (GS-13, Step 5, $38.92 + 60%)
		Technical	$46.21 (GS-12, Step 1, $28.88 + 60%)
		Clerical	$25.01 (GS-6, Step 3, $15.63 + 60%)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 2010 General Schedule, which excludes locality rates of pay.  The rates have been increased by 60 percent to account for the benefit packages available to government employees.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

      The total number of respondents is referred to as the respondent universe.  The respondent universe for this ICR is based on the EPA's population database of industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers and process heaters.  Industry burden is calculated based on 14,111 existing units in the database, however, many units have minimal reporting requirements (i.e., initial reporting requirement) and many other units have no requirements under the Boilers NESHAP.  Approximately 1,844 new units will be constructed or reconstructed, but many of those sources are projected to be gas-fired and will have minimal or no requirements.  Units that demonstrate continuous compliance through continuous parameter monitoring must establish a site-specific monitoring plan.  A table showing the estimated number of sources for each category is shown below.

Table 2 Number of Responses for New and Existing Units
                                (A)
Boiler Type
                    (B)
Number of Respondents (facilities)
                 (C)
Total Number Responses for 3-year Period
                    (D)
Average Annual Number of Responses
                          Existing Large Solid Units
                                      131
                                      655
                                      218
                             New Large Solid Units
                                      10
                                      62
                                      21
                          Existing Small Solid Units
                                       5
                                      18
                                       6
                             New Small Solid Units
                                       1
                                       4
                                       1
                          Existing Large Liquid Units
                                      71
                                      355
                                      118
                            New Large Liquid Units
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                          Existing Small Liquid Units
                                      43
                                      151
                                      50
                            New Small Liquid Units
                                       0
                                       0
                                       0
                         Existing Large Gaseous Units
                                      549
                                     3,001
                                     1000
                            New Large Gaseous Units
                                      98
                                      396
                                      132
                         Existing Small Gaseous Units
                                      905
                                     3,168
                                     1056
                            New Small Gaseous Units
                                      122
                                      328
                                      109
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
* Some responses are one-time only requirements and do not occur each year. Initial one-time requirements are included in the annual average for this initial 3-year ICR period.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      6(e)  Bottom Line 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.A-12.C and 13.A-13.C in Appendix A and B respectively, and summarized below.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            (i) Respondent Tally
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The total annual labor hours are 327,000.  Details regarding these estimates may be found in tables 1.A-12.C in Appendix A.  Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per response.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity are $66 million.  The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii), Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            (ii) The Agency Tally
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is estimated to be 101,400 labor hours at a cost of $5.3 million.  See tables 13.A-C in Appendix B.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      6(f)  Reasons for Change in Burden
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The decrease in burden from the ICR associated with the March 2011 promulgation and this proposed reconsideration ICR is due to changes in the proposed reporting and recordkeeping requirements, despite an increase in the boiler population. There were increases of 271 existing boilers and 1,205 additional new boilers as a result of new data added from public comments and revised projections of biomass and natural gas fuel consumption in the industrial and commercial sectors.  However, in this proposed reconsideration, emission limits for dioxins/furans are removed, which were the most expensive component of the stack test. In lieu of a numerical limit for dioxins/furans, the cost and burden for an annual tune-up work practice for all boilers greater than10 mmBtu/hr was added. Further,  rule changes for PM CPMS requirements which now apply to only a subset of very large units that are firing solid fossil and residual fuel oil resulted in a smaller number of  PM CPMS expected to be installed.   Additionally, based on a revised dataset, the subcategories have been adjusted and the MACT floor limits have been edited since the March 2011 promulgation. These edits have reduced the number of expected control devices needed to meet the limits and their associated monitoring burden.   Further, the inclusion of an alternative TSM8 emission limit affected the number of units required to install PM/TSM8 controls and associated parameter monitoring.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      6(g)  Burden Statement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to be 120 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 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-OAR-2002-0058.  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 contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically.  When in the system, select "search," then 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 Ave., NW, 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 docket center is<PHONE_NUMBER>.  Also, you can send comments 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.  Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0058 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

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


                     INDEX TO DOCKET EPA-R09-OAR-2011-0047              NEVADA INFRASTRUCTURE SIP FOR THE 1997 8-HOUR OZONE,                          1997 PM2.5 AND THE 2006 PM2.5                       NATIONAL AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARD                                 (July 30, 2012)                                                                          PROPOSED RULE

CATEGORY I	RULEMAKING DOCUMENTS

   1.       Proposed Rule, "Partial Approval and Disapproval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Nevada; Infrastructure Requirements for Ozone and Fine Particulate Matter," signed July 20, 2012 (pre-publication version).

   2.       EPA Region IX, "Technical Support Document: EPA Evaluation of Nevada Provisions for 1997 Ozone, 1997 PM2.5, and 2006 PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Sections 110(a)(2)(A) thru (C), Sections 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) and (D)(ii), Sections 110(a)(2)(E)(i) and (E)(iii), and Sections 110(a)(2)(F) thru (M)," July 2012.

   3.       EPA Region IX, "Technical Support Document: Evaluation of EPA Evaluation of Nevada Provisions for Section 110(a)(2)(E)(ii)/Section 128," July 2012.

   4.       EPA Region IX, "Technical Support Document for EPA's Proposed Action on the State of Nevada's 2009 Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (Transport Portion) for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standard," July 2012.

4.A   	EPA Region IX, "Technical Support Document for EPA's Proposed Action on the State of Nevada's 2009 Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (Transport Portion) for the 2006 24-hour Fine Particulate (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Appendix A  -  List of Nonattainment and Maintenance Receptors for 2006-2010," July 2012.

4.B 	EPA Region IX, "Technical Support Document for EPA's Proposed Action on the State of Nevada's 2009 Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (Transport Portion) for the 2006 24-hour Fine Particulate (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Appendix B  -  Nonattainment Receptors," July 2012.

4.C	EPA Region IX, "Technical Support Document for EPA's Proposed Action on the State of Nevada's 2009 Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (Transport Portion) for the 2006 24-hour Fine Particulate (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Appendix C  -  Maintenance Receptors," July 2012.

4.D	EPA Region IX, "Technical Support Document for EPA's Proposed Action on the State of Nevada's 2009 Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (Transport Portion) for the 2006 24-hour Fine Particulate (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Appendix D  -  IMPROVE Monitoring Data," July 2012.

4.E 	EPA Region IX, "Technical Support Document for EPA's Proposed Action on the State of Nevada's 2009 Infrastructure State Implementation Plan (Transport Portion) for the 2006 24-hour Fine Particulate (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standard, Appendix E  -  Additional Technical Data for Greater Salt Lake Area, Utah and Butte, Montana," July 2012.

CATEGORY II 	STATE SUBMITTALS

   1. Letter from Leo M. Drozdoff, Administrator, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP), "CAA 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) Requirements in the Current Nevada State Implementation Plan for 8-Hour Ozone" to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, February 1, 2008 with enclosures.

   2. Letter from Leo M. Drozdoff, Administrator, NDEP, "CAA 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) Requirements in the Current Nevada State Implementation Plan for PM2.5" to Wayne Nastri, Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, February 26, 2008 with enclosures.

   3. Letter from Leo M. Drozdoff, Administrator, NDEP, "CAA 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) Requirements in the Current Nevada State Implementation Plan for PM2.5" to Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, September 15, 2009 with enclosures.

   4. Letter from Leo M. Drozdoff, Administrator, NDEP, "Current CAA 110(a)(2)(A)-(M) Requirements in Washoe County Portion of Nevada's PM2.5 infrastructure State Implementation Plan" to address 2006 24-hour PM2.5 national ambient air quality standard to Laura Yoshii, Acting Regional Administrator, EPA Region 9, December 4, 2009 with enclosures.

   5. Letter from Colleen Cripps, Administrator, NDEP, "Revisions to Nevada's CAA § 110(a)(2)State Implementation Plan Submittals; Parallel Processing Request" to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administer, EPA Region 9, July 5, 2012.

CATEGORY III	INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE DOCUMENTS

[Reserved]

CATEGORY IV	OFFICIAL PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE NPRM

[Reserved]

CATEGORY V	OTHER DOCUMENTS

         1. A Legislative History of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, 95th Congress 2d Session, Volume 3 at 526-527, August, 1978.

         2. Memorandum from David O. Bickart to Regional Air Directors, "Guidance to States for Meeting Conflict of Interest Requirements of Section 128," Suggested Definitions, March 2, 1978.

         3. Memorandum issued by Edward E. Reich, Director of the Division of Stationary Source Enforcement, "Clarification of Requirements for Inclusion of Continuous Emission Monitoring Provisions in State Implementation Plans," May 9, 1980.

         4. "Agreement for Delegation of the Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection," October 19, 2004.

         5. Consent Decree, Environmental Defense and American Lung Association (represented by Earthjustice)v. Johnson, March 10, 2005.

         6. Memorandum issued by William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, "Guidance for State Implementation Plan Submissions to Meet Current Outstanding Obligations Under Section 110(a)(2)(D)(i) for the 8-Hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards," August 15, 2006.

         7. U.S. EPA OAQPS "Guidance on the Use of Models and Other Analyses for Demonstrating Attainment of Air Quality Goals for Ozone, PM2.5 and Regional Haze" April, 2007

         8. Memorandum issued by William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, "Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 1997 8-hour Ozone and PM2.5 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)," October 2, 2007.

         9. "Agreement for Delegation of the Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 to the Washoe County District Health Department", March 13, 2008.

         10. "Agreement for Delegation of the Federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program by the United States Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection," September 15, 2009.

         11. Memorandum issued by William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, "Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)," September 25, 2009.

         12. Letter from Colleen Cripps, Administrator, NDEP, transmitting Clark County Ozone Redesignation Request and Maintenance Plan to Jared Blumenfeld, Regional Administer, EPA Region 9, April 11, 2011. The Letter contains link to entire submittal.

         13. Comments by Midwest Environmental Defense Center to EPA Region 5, dated May 31, 2011.

         14. NDEP Bureau of Air Quality Planning, "Ambient Air Network Monitoring Plan," 2011.

         15. Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management "Annual Network Plan Report," June 2011

         16. Washoe County Air Quality Management Division, "2011 Ambient Air Monitoring Network Plan" July 1, 2011.

         17. Consent Decree, WildEarth Guardians and Sierra Club v. Jackson, No. 3:11-cv-00190-WHA (N.D.C.A.), entered October 20, 2011.

         18. Letter from Matthew Lakin, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA to Rob Bamford, Chief, Bureau of Air Quality Planning, NDEP, November 1, 2011.

         19. Letter from Matthew Lakin, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA to Mike Sword, Engineering Manager, Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management, November 1, 2011.

         20. Letter from Matthew Lakin, Air Quality Analysis Office, U.S. EPA to Kevin Dick, Director, Air Quality Management Division, Washoe County Health District, November 1, 2011.

         21. Settlement Agreement between the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and Sierra Club and WildEarth Guardians, No. 3:10-cv-04060-CRB (N.D. Cal), November 30, 2011.

         22. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Violation Day Count Report for 2006 24-hour PM2.5, July 9, 2012.

         23. United States Environmental Protection Agency, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Stationary Source Permits," (pre-publication version), July 13, 2012.

         24. Email from Mike Elges (NDEP) to Amy Zimpfer (EPA) regarding "NV Infrastructure SIP--Conflict of Interest Provisions," July 18, 2012.

CATEGORY VI	FEDERAL REGISTER NOTICES

   1. 37 FR 10842, "Part 52 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans," May 31, 1972.

   2. 38 FR 12702, "Part 52 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans," May 14, 1973.

   3. 40 FR 13306, "Part 52 - Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans," March 26, 1975.

   4. 45 FR 46384, "Nevada State Implementation Plan Revision: Nevada Revised Statutes and the Emergency Episode Plan," July 10, 1980.

   5. 46 FR 43141, "Nevada State Implementation Plan Revision," August 27, 1981.

   6. 47 FR 26620, "Nevada; Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans," June 21, 1982.

   7. 48 FR 28271, "Prevention of Significant Deterioration; Delegation of Authority, State of Nevada," June 21, 1983.

   8. 49 FR 11626, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Nevada State Implementation Plan Revision," March 27, 1984.

   9. 58 FR 51735, "Executive Order 12866," October 4, 1993.

   10. 59 FR 7629, "Executive Order 12898," February 16, 1994.

   11. 61 FR 38664, "Correction of Implementation Plans; American Samoa, Arizona, California, Hawaii and Nevada State Implementation Plans," July 25, 1996.

   12. 62 FR 19885, "Executive Order 13045," April 23, 1997.

   13. 62 FR 34641, "Correction of Implementation Plans; American Samoa, Arizona, California, Hawaii and Nevada State Implementation Plans," June 27, 1997.

   14. 62 FR 38652, "National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter," July 18, 1997.

   15. 62 FR 38856, "National Ambient Air Quality Standard for Ozone," July 18, 1997.

   16. 63 FR 57356, "Finding of Significant Contribution and Rulemaking for Certain States in the Ozone Transport Assessment Group Region for Purposes of Reducing Regional Transport of Ozone," October 27, 1998.

   17. 64 FR 43255, "Executive Order 13132," August 10, 1999.

   18. 65 FR 67249, "Executive Order 13175," November 9, 2000.

   19. 66 FR 28355, "Executive Order 13211," May 22, 2001.

   20. 66 FR 63188, "Clean Air Act Full Approval of Title V Operating Permits Programs; Clark County Department of Air Quality Management, Washoe County District Health Department, and Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Nevada," December 5, 2001

   21. 67 FR 80186, "Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment New Source Review: Baseline Emissions Determination, Actual-to-Future-Actual Methodology, Plantwide Applicability Limitations, Clean Units, Pollution Control Projects," December 31, 2002.

   22. 68 FR 11323, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Prevention of Significant Deterioration," March 10, 2003.

   23. 68 FR 74489, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Prevention of Significant Deterioration," December 24, 2003.

   24. 69 FR 23858, "Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Early Action Compact Areas With Deferred Effective Dates," April 30, 2004.

   25. 69 FR 34076, "Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the 8-Hour Ozone; National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Deferral of Effective Date," June 18, 2004.

   26. 69 FR 54006, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; New Source Review; State of Nevada, Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management," September 7, 2004.

   27. 69 FR 55956, "Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards; Las Vegas, NV Nonattainment Area," September 17, 2004.

   28. 69 FR 67062, "Corrections to the California State Implementation Plan," November 16, 2004.

   29. 70 FR 944, "Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Fine Particles (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards," January 5, 2005.

   30. 70 FR 25162, "Rule to Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone (Clean Air Interstate Rule); Revisions to Acid Rain Program; Revisions to the NOx SIP Call," May 12, 2005.

   31. 70 FR 68218, "Revisions to the Guideline of Air Quality Models: Adoption of a Preferred General Purpose (Flat and Complex Terrain) Dispersion Model and Other Revisions," November 9, 2005.

   32. 70 FR 71612, "Final Rule To Implement the 8-Hour Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standard -- Phase 2; Final Rule To Implement Certain Aspects of the 1990 Amendments Relating to New Source Review and Prevention of Significant Deterioration as They Apply in Carbon Monoxide, Particulate Matter and Ozone NAAQS; Final Rule for Reformulated Gasoline," November 29, 2005.

   33. 71 FR 51766, "Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan," August 31, 2006.

   34. 71 FR 61144, "National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particulate Matter," October 17, 2006.

   35. 71 FR 67061, "Notice of Resolution of Notice of Deficiency for Clean Air Operating Permits Program; Maricopa County, AZ," November 20, 2006.

   36. 71 FR 71486, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Monitoring and Volatile Organic Compound Rules," December 11, 2006.

   37. 71 FR 75690, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Excess Emissions Provisions," December 18, 2006.

   38. 72 FR 11, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Requests for Rescission," January 3, 2007

   39. 72 FR 19801, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Definition, Emergency Episode, and Monitoring Regulations," April 20, 2007.

   40. 72 FR 32526, "Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) and Nonattainment New Source Review (NSR): Removal of Vacated Elements," June 13, 2007.

   41. 72 FR 33397, "Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan, Washoe County District Health Department," June 18, 2007.

   42. 72 FR 41629, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; States of Arizona and Nevada; Interstate Transport of Pollution," July 31, 2007.

   43. 73 FR 16205, "Completeness Findings for Section 110(a) State Implementation Plans for the 8-hour Ozone NAAQS," March 27, 2008.

   44. 73 FR 20536, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Stationary Source Permits," April 16, 2008.

   45. 73 FR 28321, "Implementation of the New Source Review (NSR) Program for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM2.5)," May 16, 2008.

   46. 73 FR 62902, "Completeness Findings for Section 110(a) State Implementation Plans Pertaining to the Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) NAAQS," October 22, 2008.

   47. 74 FR 57051, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Corrections to the Arizona and Nevada State Implementation Plans," November 3, 2009.

   48. 74 FR 58688, "Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards," November 13, 2009.

   49. 75 FR 31514, "Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Title V Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule," June 3, 2010.

   50. 75 FR 42342, "Approval and Disapproval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Colorado; Revisions to Regulation 1," July 21, 2010.

   51. 75 FR 45210, "Federal Implementation Plans To Reduce Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone," August 2, 2010.

   52. 75 FR 59090, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans and Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; State of Nevada; Redesignation of Las Vegas Valley to Attainment for the Carbon Monoxide Standard," September 27, 2010

   53. 75 FR 77698, "Action To Ensure Authority To Issue Permits Under the Prevention of Significant Deterioration Program to Sources of Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Finding of Substantial Inadequacy and SIP Call," December 13, 2010.

   54. 75 FR 82536, "Limitation of Approval of Prevention of Significant Deterioration Provisions Concerning Greenhouse Gas Emitting Sources in State Implementation Plans; Final Rule," December 30, 2010.

   55. 76 FR 4540, "Approval and Disapproval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Colorado; Revisions to Regulation 1," January 26, 2011.

   56. 76 FR 6056, "Additional Air Quality Designations for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards, 110(k)(6) Correction and Technical Correction Related to Prior Designation, and Decisions Related to the 1997 Air Quality Designations and Classifications for the Annual Fine Particles National Ambient Air Quality Standards," February 3, 2011.

   57. 76 FR 17343, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Nevada; Determination of Attainment for the Clark County 8-Hour Ozone Nonattainment Area," March 29, 2011.

   58. 76 FR 21639, "Finding of Substantial Inadequacy of Implementation Plan; Call for Utah State Implementation Plan Revision," April 18, 2011.

   59. 76 FR 36450, "Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Nevada; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan," June 22, 2011.

   60. 76 FR 48208, "Federal Implementation Plans: Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals," August 8, 2011.

   61. 76 FR 55577, "Findings of Failure to Submit a Complete State Implementation Plan for Section 110(a) Pertaining to the 2006 Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5) NAAQS," September 8, 2011.

   62. 77 FR 17334 at 17339, "Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; State of Nevada; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan," March 26, 2012.

   63. 77 FR 21913, "Approval and Promulgation of State Implementation Plans; Hawaii; Infrastructure Requirements for the 1997 8-Hour Ozone and the 1997 and 2006 Fine Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards," April 12, 2012.

   64. 77 FR 38557, "Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Revisions to the Nevada State Implementation Plan; Stationary Source Permits," June 28, 2012.

   65. 77 FR 43206, "Limited Approval and Disapproval of Air Quality Implementation Plans; Nevada; Clark County; Stationary Source Permits," July 24, 2012.

CATEGORY VII	OTHER DOCUMENTS (TRANSPORT)

   1. South Coast Air Quality Management District, Final 2007 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) Appendix V Modeling and Attainment Demonstrations.

   2. State of Idaho Department of Environmental Quality, "Idaho Area Designation Recommendations for the 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS," December 14, 2007.

   3. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, "Final 2008 Owens Valley PM10 Planning Area Demonstration of Attainment State Implementation Plan, Chapter 3  -  Air Quality Setting" January, 28, 2008.

   4. Great Basin Unified Air Pollution Control District, "Final 2008 Owens Valley PM10 Planning Area Demonstration of Attainment State Implementation Plan, Chapter 6  -  Air Quality Modeling," January, 28, 2008.

   5. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, "Sources of Bay Area Fine Particles," April 2008.

   6. Neil Frank, US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Availability of New Speciation Data for Some Areas that EPA Intends to Designate as Nonattainment," September 18, 2008.

   7. Neil Frank, US EPA, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, "Limited 2004-06 Speciation Data Derived from FRM Filters for Twenty Areas," September 18, 2008.

   8. Technical Support Document for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS Designations (74 FR 58688, November 13, 2009), "Area Designations for the 24-hour Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards - California," December 2008.

   9. Technical Support Document for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS Designations (74 FR 58688, November 13, 2009), "Area Designations for the 24-hour Fine Particle National Ambient Air Quality Standards  -  Utah and Utah-Idaho," December 2008.

   10. US EPA, Region 9, PM2.5 Air Quality Trends, 1999-2009.

   11. California Air Resources Board. 2009 Almanac Emission Projection Data  -  Butte County 2008 Estimated Annual Average Emissions, 2009.

   12. California Air Resources Board, 2009 Almanac Emission Projection Data  -  Sacramento County 2008 Estimated Annual Average Emissions, 2009.

   13. California Air Resources Board, 2009 Almanac Emission Projection Data  -  Sutter County 2008 Estimated Annual Average Emissions, 2009.

   14. Memorandum issued by William T. Harnett, Director, Air Quality Policy Division, "Guidance on SIP Elements Required Under Sections 110(a)(1) and (2) for the 2006 24-Hour Fine Particle (PM2.5) National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)," September 25, 2009.

   15. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, "Fine Particulate Matter Data Analysis and Modeling in the Bay Area," October 2009.

   16. "Technical Support Document for Determination that the Cowtown Monitor is Ineligible for Comparison with the Annual PM2.5 NAAQS," U.S. EPA, Region 9, April 26, 2010.

   17. David Ogulei, PhD, PE, Washington State Department of Ecology, "Sources of Fine Particles in the Wapato Hills-Puyallup River Valley PM2.5 Nonattainment Area," April 2010.

   18. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, "Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Benefits of the Wood Burning Rule in the San Francisco Bay Area for Winter of 2009-2010," May 2010.

   19. PM2.5 Speciation Data  -  Butte Montana, 2008-2010.

   20. Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, "Background on Air Quality in the Klamath Falls Nonattainment Area," Klamath Falls Advisory Committee, Item B, March 21, 2011.

   21. Robert Kotchenruther, USEPA, Region 10, "Modeling for PM2.5 Attainment Demonstrations in EPA Region 10 (WA, ID. OR, & AK)- An Assortment of Proposed Models from CMAQ to Linear Rollback," June 10, 2011.

   22. US EPA, "Emissions Inventory Final Rule, TSD" Technical Support Document (TSD) for the Final Transport Rule, Docket No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0491, June 28, 2011.

   23. Bay Area Air Quality Management District, "Trends in Bay Area Ambient Particulates," November 2011.

   24. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA (No. 11-1302 and consolidated cases) (D.C. Circuit), December 30, 2011.

   25. South Coast Air Quality Management District, "Draft 2012 Air Quality Management Plan, Chapter 5  -  Future Air Quality," 2012.

   26. US EPA PM2.5 Design Values - 2008-2010, January 11, 2012.

   27. Bong-Mann Kim, South Coast Air Quality Management District, 2008 PM2.5 Air Quality Characterization- Scientific, Technical & Modeling Peer Review Advisory Group, January 19, 2012.

   28. Robert Kotchenruther, US EPA, Region 10, "Source apportionment modeling for multiple urban and rural PM2.5 chemical speciation sites within the Pacific Northwest  -  Draft," March 6, 2012.

   29. US EPA, Region 10, "Source apportionment modeling for multiple urban and rural PM2.5 chemical speciation sites within the Pacific Northwest  -  Appendix A1," March 6, 2012.

   30. US EPA, Region 10, "Source apportionment modeling for multiple urban and rural PM2.5 chemical speciation sites within the Pacific Northwest  -  Appendix A2," March 6, 2012.

   31. Karen Magliano - California Air Resources Board, "Nature of PM2.5 in the San Joaquin Valley," April 27, 2012.

   32. Great Basin Unified Air District, Owens Lake Dust ID Network Map, Updated: May 16, 2012.

   33. Joe Cassmassi, South Coast Air Quality Management District, PM2.5 Preliminary Attainment Demonstration  -  Scientific, Technical & Modeling Peer Review Advisory Group Meeting for 2012 AQMP, June 14, 2012.

   34. US EPA, Brian Timin, Memo to file regarding CSAPR Daily Upwind Contribution, July 2012.


[Federal Register Volume 84, Number 117 (Tuesday, June 18, 2019)]
[Notices]
[Page 28311]
[FR Doc No: 2019-12863]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4428-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2019-0001]

Kentucky; Amendment No. 2 to Notice of a Major Disaster
Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Kentucky (FEMA-4428-DR), dated April 17, 2019,
and related determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued May 24, 2019.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW,
Washington, DC 20472,<PHONE_NUMBER>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration
for the Commonwealth of Kentucky is hereby amended to include the
following areas among those areas determined to have been adversely
affected by the event declared a major disaster by the President in his
declaration of April 17, 2019.

    Nicholas and Owen Counties for Public Assistance.

The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)
are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, Community
Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis Counseling;
97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster Unemployment
Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance Grant; 97.048,
Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and Households In
Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, Presidentially
Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing Operations for
Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially Declared Disaster
Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other Needs; 97.036,
Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared
Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Pete Gaynor,
Acting Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2019-12863 Filed 6-17-19; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9111-23-P