**United States Environmental Protection Agency**

Office of Air and Radiation

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Air Quality Policy Division

New Source Review Group

**August, 2003**

**INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO 40 CFR PARTS 51 AND
52:**

**Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) for Particulate Matter
Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM~2.5~) -- Increments, Significant Impact
Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring Concentration (SMC)**

![](media/image1.wmf){width="7.0in" height="1.7840277777777778in"}

The EPA is revising the regulations governing the Prevention of
Significant Deterioration (PSD) program mandated by part C of title I of
the Clean Air Act (the Act). The PSD and nonattainment major New Source
Review (NA NSR) programs collectively comprise the major NSR program.
Specifically, the PSD regulations are being revised to add increments,
significant impact levels (SILs), and a significant monitoring
concentration (SMC) for particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter
less than or equal to a nominal 2.5 micrometers (PM~2.5~). This action
is being taken as part of our efforts to implement the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for PM~2.5~.

The PSD program is a preconstruction review and permitting program for
new major sources of air pollutants and major modifications at existing
major sources, which applies to sources located in areas that meet the
NAAQS for one or more regulated NSR pollutants (called "attainment
areas") and in areas where there is insufficient information to
determine whether they meet the NAAQS ("unclassifiable areas"). The
types of information collection activities associated with the PSD
program are those necessary for the preparation and submittal of
construction permit applications and the issuance of final permits. The
PSD rule changes addressed in this ICR add increments, SILs, and an SMC
for PM~2.5~ and its precursors, but do not otherwise change the
requirements of the program. For convenience, we refer to this
rulemaking as the "PM~2.5~ Increments Rule" hereafter.

This purpose of this Information Collection Request (ICR) (OMB Control
Number 2060-NEW; EPA ICR Number 2276.01) is to show the burden and cost
associated with the PSD rule changes for PM~2.5~. Table E-1 summarizes
the overall burden and cost for respondents -- sources who must obtain
PSD permits and State and local agencies who issue the permits (called
"reviewing authorities").

+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **TABLE      |             |             |             |             |
| E-1**        |             |             |             |             |
|              |             |             |             |             |
| **BURDEN FOR |             |             |             |             |
| RESPONDENTS  |             |             |             |             |
| RESULTING    |             |             |             |             |
| FROM PM~2.5~ |             |             |             |             |
| INCREMENTS   |             |             |             |             |
| RULE**       |             |             |             |             |
+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Type of    | **Average   | **Average   | **Average   | **Average   |
| Respondent** | Annual      | Annual      | Annual      | Annual Cost |
|              | Burden      | Burden per  | Cost^c^**   | per         |
|              | (Hours)**   | Respondent  |             | Respondent  |
|              |             | (Hours)**   | **(\$       | (\$ 2004)** |
|              |             |             | 2004)**     |             |
+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **           | 14,045      | 53          | \$919,948   | \$3,472     |
| Sources^a^** |             |             |             |             |
|              | 4,143       | 37          | \$180,359   | \$1,610     |
| **Reviewing  |             |             |             |             |
| Auth         |             |             |             |             |
| orities^b^** |             |             |             |             |
+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+
| **Total**    | 18,188      | N/A         | \$1,100,307 | N/A         |
+--------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+-------------+

^a^ We estimate 265 PSD permits per year.

^b^ We assume that there are 112 State and local reviewing authorities.

^c^ All costs are labor costs associated with increased burden; there is
no increase in capital, start-up, or O&M costs.

The EPA is the only Federal entity that will experience burden and cost
as a result of the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule. We estimate that the average
annual burden for EPA will be 452 hours, at a cost of \$16,355 annually.

CAVEAT: This analysis overstates the impact of the rulemaking over the 3
years following promulgation because it has been prepared as if the rule
revisions would be fully implemented upon the effective date of the
rule. In actuality, the full effect of the PSD rule changes for PM~2.5~
will lag the promulgation of this rulemaking due to the time needed for
reviewing authorities with approved PSD programs to modify their
Implementation Plans.

The title of this ICR is "Information Collection Request for Changes to
40 CFR Parts 51 and 52: Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD)
for Particulate Matter Less Than 2.5 Micrometers (PM~2.5~) --
Increments, Significant Impact Levels (SILs) and Significant Monitoring
Concentration (SMC)." This document fulfills the Agency's requirements
under the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) with regard to determining the
regulatory burden associated with adding increments, SILs, and an SMC
for PM~2.5~ to the PSD program required under part C of title I of the
Act. It has been assigned EPA tracking number 2276.01 and OMB Control
Number 2060‑NEW.

The program called the "PSD program" under authority of part C of Title
I of the Act is a preconstruction review and permitting program
applicable to new and modified major stationary sources of air
pollutants. The PSD program applies in attainment areas (areas meeting
the NAAQS) and in areas where there is insufficient information to
determine whether they meet the NAAQS ("unclassifiable areas"). The
applicability of the PSD program must be determined in advance of
construction and is pollutant-specific. When a source triggers PSD, it
must install best available control technology (BACT) and conduct
modeling, monitoring, and other analyses for the regulated NSR
pollutant(s) for which the area is designated as attainment or
unclassifiable.

In 1997, EPA promulgated NAAQS for PM~2.5~ to address fine particle
pollution, while retaining the NAAQS for particulate matter with an
aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to a nominal 10 micrometers
(PM~10~) to address coarse particle pollution. In 2006, we revised the
PM~2.5~ and PM~10~ NAAQS. After delays associated with litigation over
the NAAQS and with building up technical capacity to address PM~2.5~, we
are proceeding with implementation of the PM~2.5~ program, including
implementation of the NSR program for PM~2.5~. In a related rulemaking
action we are adding PM~2.5~ and its precursors to both the PSD program
and the NA NSR program as regulated NSR pollutants.

This ICR addresses rule changes to add increments, SILs, and an SMC for
PM~2.5~ to the PSD rules. For some sources, this will add to the burden
of obtaining a PSD permit because it will add to the number of air
quality analyses that must be carried out in the application process.
Similarly, State and local reviewing authorities will incur increased
burden to review such permit applications and issue the permits.[^1] In
addition, reviewing authorities will incur a one-time burden to revise
their Implementation Plans to incorporate the PSD rule changes.

Title I of the Act authorizes EPA to collect this information. Through
the PSD program it requires owners or operators of emissions units that
emit air pollutants to submit an application for a permit to construct,
modify, or significantly alter the operations of each source of criteria
pollutants.

For EPA to carry out its required oversight function of reviewing
construction permits and assuring adequate implementation of the
program, it must have available to it information on proposed
construction and modifications. The burden estimates included in this
ICR cover activities to provide PM~2.5~ air quality impact projections
for the PSD program.

The information in this ICR is based upon the best data available to the
Agency at this time. However, inconsistencies in reviewing authority
reporting techniques, incomplete data sets, and sampling limitations
necessitated a certain amount of extrapolation and "best-guess"
estimations. Consequently, the reader should not consider the
conclusions to be an exact representation of the level of burden or cost
that *will* occur. Instead, this ICR should be considered a
directionally correct assessment of the impact the programmatic changes
included in this rulemaking.

In fact, this ICR clearly overstates the impact of the PM~2.5~
Increments rulemaking over the 3 years following promulgation because it
has been prepared as if the rule revisions would be fully implemented
upon the effective date of the rule. In actuality, the full effect of
these PSD rule changes for PM~2.5~ will lag the promulgation of this
rule due to the time needed for State and local agencies with approved
PSD programs to modify their Implementation Plans. We believe that this
approach provides a more realistic assessment of the long-term impact of
the rulemaking.

Throughout this ICR, the reader will observe estimated values that show
accuracy to the single hour or dollar. However, reporting values at the
single unit level can be misleading. In most situations, the proper way
to present estimated data would be to determine an appropriate level of
accuracy and truncate values accordingly, usually in terms of thousands
or millions of units. For instance, a spreadsheet-generated estimation
of \$5,456,295 could be presented in the text as \$5.5 (millions) or
\$5,456 (thousands). One problem with such an approach is the loss of
data richness when the report contains a mixture of very large and very
small numbers, which is the case with this ICR. Consequently, to avoid
the loss of information through rounding, this ICR reports all values to
the single unit, and we remind the reader that there is no implied
precision inherent in this style of reporting.

For approval of a proposed ICR, the Agency must ensure that it has taken
every reasonable step to avoid duplication in its paperwork requirements
in accordance with 5 CFR 1320.9. Although the reviewing authorities may
be required to revise their Implementation Plans, this action imposes no
new paperwork requirements.

A 60-day public comment period will be provided after proposal of the
PM~2.5~ Increments Rule, during which all affected parties will be given
the opportunity to comment on the proposed rule and the associated
burden estimate. All comments will be considered, and some may be
reflected in the development of the final regulatory language.

In an earlier proposed rulemaking,[^2] we solicited comment on the
programmatic aspects of PM~2.5~ increments, SILs, and SMCs. We received
numerous comments from sources and State and local reviewing authorities
on the need for these elements in the PM~2.5~ PSD program and the level
of effort associated with them. We considered these comments in
developing this ICR.

The Act defines the rate of reporting by sources, States, and local
entities. Consequently, less frequent collection is not possible.

The OMB's general guidelines for information collections must be adhered
to by all Federal Agencies for approval of any rulemaking's collection
methodology. In accordance with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.5, the
Agency believes:

> 1\. The PM~2.5~ Increments Rule does not require periodic reporting
> more frequently than semi-annually.
>
> 2\. The PM~2.5~ Increments Rule does not require respondents to
> participate in any statistical survey.
>
> 3\. Written responses to Agency inquiries are not required to be
> submitted in less than 30 days.
>
> 4\. Special consideration has been given in the design of the PM~2.5~
> Increments Rule to ensure that the requirements are, to the greatest
> extent possible, the same for Federal requirements and those reviewing
> authorities who already have PSD programs in place.
>
> 5\. Confidential, proprietary, and trade secret information necessary
> for the completeness of the respondent's permit are protected from
> disclosure under the requirements of section 114(c) of the Act.
>
> 6\. The PM~2.5~ Increments Rule does not require more that one
> original and two copies of the permit application, update, or revision
> to be submitted to the Agency.
>
> 7\. Respondents do not receive remuneration for the preparation of
> reports required by the Act or 40 CFR parts 51 or 52.
>
> 8\. To the greatest extent possible, the Agency has taken advantage of
> automated methods of reporting.
>
> 9\. The Agency believes the impact of the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule on
> small entities to be insignificant and not disproportionate.

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements contained in the PM~2.5~
Increments Rule do not exceed any of the Paperwork Reduction Act
guidelines contained in 5 CFR 1320.5, except for the guideline which
limits retention of records by respondents to 3 years. The Act requires
both respondents and State or local agencies to retain records for a
period of 5 years. The justification for this exception is found in 28
U.S.C. 2462, which specifies 5 years as the general statute of
limitations for Federal claims in response to violations by regulated
entities. The decision in *U.S. v. Conoco, Inc.*, No. 83-1916-E (W.D.
Okla., January 23, 1984) found that the 5-year general statute of
limitations applies to the Clean Air Act.

Confidentiality is not an issue for this rulemaking. To the extent that
the information required in a PSD permit under the PM~2.5~ Increments
Rule is proprietary, confidential, or of a nature that could impair the
ability of the source to maintain its market position, that information
is collected and handled subject to the requirements of section 114(c)
of the Act. Information received and identified by owners or operators
as confidential business information (CBI) and approved as CBI by EPA,
in accordance with Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B, shall be
maintained appropriately (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976;
amended by 43 FR 39999, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28,
1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

The consideration of sensitive questions, (i.e., sexual, religious,
personal, or other private matters), is not applicable to this
rulemaking. The information gathered to establish a PSD permit does not
include personal data on any owner or operator.

The President's priorities in promoting environmental justice (EJ) are
contained in Executive Order 12898. Because the PSD program operates
nationwide and across all industry classifications, the Agency does not
believe there is a disproportionate EJ effect in the PSD program.

Table 4-1 lists the industrial groups that we expect will contain the
majority of the industrial respondents affected by the NSR program.
These categories were chosen because of their historic relative
incidence in seeking NSR permits as established in prior ICRs and
confirmed by a nationwide air pollutant emission inventory developed by
the EPA in 1986-87. These industries have been used as the basis for
impact analysis since that inventory.

**Table 4-1.** **Most Numerous Industrial Respondents by Industrial
Group**

  ----------------------- --------- ----------------------------------------
  **Industry Group**      **SIC**   **NAICS**

  Electric Services       491       221111, 221112, 221113, 221119, 221121,
                                    221122

  Petroleum Refining      291       32411

  Industrial Inorganic    281       325181, 32512, 325131, 325182, 211112,
  Chemicals                         325998, 331311, 325188

  Industrial Organic      286       32511, 325132, 325192, 325188, 325193,
  Chemicals                         32512, 325199

  Miscellaneous Chemical  289       32552, 32592, 32591, 325182, 32551
  Products                          

  Natural Gas Liquids     132       211112

  Natural Gas Transport   492       48621, 22121

  Pulp Mills              261       32211, 322121, 322122, 32213

  Paper Mills             262       322121, 322122

  Automobile              371       336111, 336112, 336712, 336211, 336992,
  Manufacturing                     336322, 336312, 33633, 33634, 33635,
                                    336399, 336212, 336213

  Pharmaceuticals         283       325411, 325412, 325413, 325414
  ----------------------- --------- ----------------------------------------

The respondents also include State and local air regulatory agencies.
Because of the national scope of the PSD program, these governmental
respondents are in all 50 States.

This section discusses the data items that must be collected and
reported and the activities that respondents must carry out under the
PM~2.5~ Increments Rule.

The data required from sources for a complete PSD permit application can
be found in parts 51 and 52 of title 40 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (40 CFR). Section 51.166 specifies the minimum requirements
that a PSD permit program under title I, part C of the Act must contain
to warrant approval as a revision to an Implementation Plan. Section
52.21 delineates the Federal PSD permit program which applies to all
Federally controlled areas, such as Tribal lands, outer continental
shelf sources, and States that have not submitted a PSD program meeting
the requirements of 40 CFR 51.166. These citations can be found on the
EPA website at:

> <http://www.epa.gov/epacfr40/chapt-I.info/chi-toc.htm>

Respondent data and information requirements for PSD permits can be
found in the Supporting Statement for the 2005 ICR renewal for the
entire major NSR program (ICR #1230.17), including appropriate
references in 40 CFR part 51 for the data and information requirements
that govern the way States implement NSR programs.[^3]

The data requirements associated with the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule are a
small subset of the total data required for PSD permits. Specifically,
this rule enables the air quality impact analyses that already must be
carried out for other significant pollutants to be implemented for
PM~2.5~. Thus, when the rule is implemented, the modeling analyses
required by 40 CFR 51.166(k) and (l) or 52.21(k) and (l), whichever is
applicable, will have to be conducted by sources for PM~2.5~ and
submitted for review by reviewing authorities.

The Supporting Statement for the 2005 ICR renewal for the entire major
NSR program (ICR #1230.17) identifies the activities for PSD permitting
for source and reviewing authority respondents.[^4] For source
respondents, the activities are divided into three broad categories:
(1) preparation and planning, (2) data collection and analysis, and
(3) permit application. The PM~2.5~ Increments Rule will add new burden
for the data collection and analysis category as sources will have to
conduct these activities for PM~2.5~.

Reviewing authority respondents' activities involve interacting with the
source during its preparation of an application, reviewing the
application and making a determination, implementing the public notice
and comment process, issuing the permit, and transmitting information to
EPA. The PM~2.5~ Increments Rule will add new burden for attending
pre-application meetings, answering sources' questions, and logging in
and reviewing data submissions, as reviewing authorities will have to
conduct these activities for PM~2.5~.

In addition to the activities associated with reviewing and issuing
major NSR permits under the revised regulations, reviewing authority
respondents may have to revise their Implementation Plans to add
increments, SILs, and an SMC for PM~2.5~ to their PSD programs.

The Supporting Statement for the 2005 ICR renewal for the entire major
NSR program (ICR #1230.17) identifies EPA's activities associated with
PSD permitting.[^5] These activities generally involve oversight review
of PSD permitting actions to verify that the requirements of the Act and
the implementing part 51 and 52 regulations are being met. The PM~2.5~
Increments Rule will add new burden for oversight review of air quality
analyses. In addition, EPA will have to review the Implementation Plan
revisions submitted by the reviewing authorities.

The owner or operator of a new or modified major stationary source
affected by the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule must conduct PM~2.5~ air quality
analyses and submit the data and conclusions in a construction permit
application to the reviewing authority, who logs in the permit
application, stores the application in a central filing location,
notifies the Federal Land Manager (FLM) of the permit, and provides a
copy of the application (if applicable) to the FLM and transmits a copy
of each application to EPA.

The reviewing authority reviews the PM~2.5~ air quality analyses and
checks the quality of data submitted by the applicant on a case-by-case
basis. The applicant will be required to submit information on how the
data were obtained and how the calculations and modeling were performed.
The reviewing authority personnel will check data quality by reviewing
the modeling documentation and checking engineering calculations.
Confidential information submitted by the applicant (if any) will be
handled by the reviewing authority's confidential information handling
procedures. The public will be provided the opportunity to review a
permit application and other materials relevant to the reviewing
authority's decision on issuing the permit, including FLM findings, by
obtaining a copy from the permit reviewing authority or by attending the
public hearing. The PM~2.5~ Increments Rule will not require information
through any type of survey.

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires regulatory agencies, upon
regulatory action, to assess that action's potential impact on small
entities (businesses, governments, and small non-governmental
organizations) and report the results of the assessments in (1) an
Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (IRFA), (2) a Final Regulatory
Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), and (3) a Certification. For ICR approval,
the Agency must demonstrate that it "has taken all practicable steps to
develop separate and simplified requirements for small businesses and
other small entities" (5 CFR 1320.6(h)). In addition, the agencies must
assure through various mechanisms that small entities are given an
opportunity to participate in the rulemaking process.

A Regulatory Flexibility Act Screening Analysis (RFASA) developed as
part of a 1994 draft Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) and incorporated
into the September 1995 ICR renewal analysis reported an initial
regulatory flexibility screening analysis showed that the changes to the
NSR program due to the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments would not have an
adverse impact on small entities.[^6] This analysis encompassed the
entire universe of applicable major sources that were likely to also be
small businesses. The Agency estimates there are approximately 50 "small
business" major sources.[^7] Because the administrative burden of the
NSR program are the primary source of the NSR program's regulatory
costs, the analysis estimated a negligible "cost to sales" (regulatory
cost divided by the business category mean revenue) ratio for this
source group. The new burden resulting from the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule
is small compared to the overall burden of the PSD program. Thus, there
is no economic basis for a different conclusion regarding the PM~2.5~
Increments Rule.

The Agency may not, under any circumstances, exempt a major source of
air pollution from the requirements of PSD. Since the impacts of PSD
regulations which may impact small entities occur predominantly at major
sources, little room exists for regulatory flexibility to avert the
impact of the proposed rulemaking on small entities through exemption.

Even though the PSD program does not have an adverse impact on a
significant number of small businesses, EPA takes measures to assist
sources in affected small entities through the implementation of small
business stationary source technical and environmental compliance
assistance programs, as called for in section 507 of the Act. These
programs reduce the reporting burden of small entities that are subject
to PSD and may significantly alleviate the economic burden on small
sources by (1) establishing programs to assist small businesses with
determining what Act requirements apply to their sources and when they
apply, and (2) providing guidance on alternative control technology and
pollution prevention for small businesses.

Respondents are not subjected to a collection schedule per se under the
PSD regulations. In general, each major stationary source is required to
submit an application as a prerequisite to receiving a construction
permit. Preparation of a major source construction permit application is
a one-time-only activity for each project involving construction of a
new major stationary source or major modification of an existing major
stationary source. The applicable Implementation Plan typically states
the time period that is necessary to process a permit application and
issue a permit. Consequently, a prospective source would be obliged to
work backward from the desired commencement date for construction to
determine the optimum submittal date for the application.

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; and transmit or
otherwise disclose the information. In addition to the labor hours
expended by the respondents, the burden estimate should include: (1)
total capital and start-up costs annualized over the useful life of the
purchased equipment, and (2) total costs for operation, maintenance, and
purchases of services. Each component should be divided into burden
borne directly by the respondent and any services that are contracted
out.

This section discusses the development of burden estimates and their
conversion into costs, which are separated into burden costs and capital
and operating and maintenance (O&M) costs. According to the latest
guidance for ICRs (EPA 2005), capital and O&M costs display the cost of
any new capital equipment the source or reviewing authority may have to
purchase solely for information collection, assimilation, and storage
purposes. For example, if a source had to purchase a new mini-computer
to store and manipulate data, that computer would be a cost of
administration subject to reporting in the ICR. In addition, the latest
guidance instructs the Agency to differentiate the burden associated
with a source's labor and that which it hires through outside
contractors. To the extent a source contracts out for administrative
purposes (e.g., employing consultants to perform modeling functions),
the burden associated with those contracted tasks are not a burden to
the source - but they still remain a cost. The reader should read this
section with the following considerations in mind:

> • The Agency believes the time necessary to perform a task is
> independent of the origins of its labor. In other words, if a source
> would employ 20 hours of burden to fully perform a function, then a
> contractor hired by the source would also take 20 hours to perform
> that same task. Furthermore, the Agency assumes no economies or
> diseconomies of scale. The linear combination of any amount of
> contractor and source effort will also sum to 20. Therefore, the
> burden estimates in this ICR act as an assessment of the total burden
> to affected sources and reviewing authorities, given the affected
> entity does not employ contracted labor.
>
> • For some burden categories, the Agency believes the hours assigned
> to them will be divided between the source and outside contractors.
> For these categories, the Agency established a composite cost per hour
> by developing a weighted average of the source and contractor wages,
> with the weight defined by the percentage of total effort each burden
> source applied. Consequently, the cost developed in this ICR should be
> interpreted as an upper bound on the actual cost of administration by
> the source or reviewing authority. The methodology for determining
> cost per hour can be found in greater detail in section 6.2, below.

The requirements of the PSD program apply to new or modified sources on
a pollutant-by-pollutant basis (for those pollutants for which the area
is designated as attainment or unclassifiable). That is, a source must
meet the requirements of the program for each pollutant that it will
emit in amounts greater than the applicable threshold, and must address
each such pollutant in its permit application. Thus, PSD permitting
actions very often involve more than one pollutant.

The PM~2.5~ Increments Rule adds increments, SILs, and an SMC for
PM~2.5~ to the PSD program. When the rule is implemented, sources will
be required to conduct the air quality impact analyses for PM~2.5~ that
they are already required to conduct for other pollutants. Thus, the
rule will add new burden as sources and reviewing authorities carry out
the activities associated with such analyses for PM~2.5~.

Under PSD, sources are generally required to conduct dispersion modeling
to determine the air quality impacts of the criteria pollutants that
they emit in significant quantities.[^8] Up until now, the lack of
PM~2.5~ increments, SILs, and SMCs have prevented sources from carrying
out the full range of air quality impact analyses that would otherwise
have been required for significant sources of PM~2.5~. Instead, in
accordance with our stated policy, sources and reviewing authorities
have used PM~10~ analyses as a surrogate for PM~2.5~. As a result of the
PM~2.5~ Increments Rule, we expect most PM~2.5~ sources to be required
to carry out modeling analyses for both PM~2.5~ and PM~10~ (as well as
any other criteria pollutants that they emit), resulting in a new burden
to obtain a PSD permit. In addition, a corresponding new burden will
result for reviewing authority respondents to review permit applications
and issue permits.

To estimate the magnitude of the permitting burden that will result from
the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule, we considered two factors: (1) which
permitting activities are likely to be affected by an increase in the
number of air quality impact modeling analyses, and (2) the new burden
for carrying out the affected activities for PM~2.5~. These factors are
discussed further below.

As noted previously, there is currently an approved ICR for the overall
NSR program (2005 ICR renewal; ICR #1230.17), which includes the PSD
program. This approved ICR indicates that the average burden to a source
to obtain a PSD permit is 839 hours. Of these, 350 hours are associated
with data collection and analysis activities, which we believe are the
activities that will be most affected by an increase in the number air
quality modeling analyses. The approved ICR also indicates that the
average burden to a reviewing authority for issuing a PSD permit is 272
hours, of which 72 hours are associated with attending pre-application
meetings, answering sources' questions, and logging in and reviewing
data submissions (the activities most related to air quality modeling
analyses).

To determine the new burden per PSD permit for carrying out the affected
activities for PM~2.5~, we assumed that PSD permit applicants who would
be subject to the requirements for PM~2.5~ currently conduct an average
of four modeling impact analyses.[^9] After implementation of the
PM~2.5~ Increments Rule, we believe that this number will increase by
one (i.e., by 25 percent) to an average of five such analyses.[^10]
Thus, for sources subject to PSD permitting for PM~2.5~, the new,
additional burden associated with the affected activities will be 25
percent of the currently approved burden. We assumed the same percent
increase for reviewing authorities where PSD permits must address
PM~2.5~.

However, not all sources that must obtain a PSD permit will be subject
to PSD for PM~2.5~. To estimate the percentage of permits that will have
to address PM~2.5~, we consulted the RBLC to determine what percentage
has historically been subject to major NSR for particulate matter.[^11]
We found that over the last 10 years, approximately 60 percent of
facilities that obtained control technology determinations obtained a
determination for particulate matter. We used this percentage as a
weighting factor to determine the weighted average increase in burden
for the affected activities across all PSD permits (i.e., those that
address PM~2.5~ and those that do not). This weighted average is 15
percent (0.60 x 0.25 = 0.15). We applied this weighted average burden
increase to the affected PSD activities for both source respondents and
reviewing authority respondents to determine the average new burden per
PSD permit associated with the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule.

Table 6-1 shows the average new burden per PSD permit for source and
reviewing authority respondents. As the table shows, we estimate an
average burden for sources of 53 hours per PSD permit. Based on the
current approved total burden for a PSD permit (839 hours), this
represents an increase of about 6 percent. For reviewing authorities, we
estimate an average burden of 10 hours per permit, or about 4 percent of
the current approved total burden of 272 hours.

**Table 6-1. Burden for Source and Reviewing Authority Respondents,
Hours per PSD Permit**

+-------------+-----------------------+--------------+----------------+
| **Type of   | **Activities          | **Approved   | **Additional   |
| R           | Affected**            | Burden       | Burden         |
| espondent** |                       | Absent       | Resulting from |
|             |                       | PM~2.5~      | PM~2.5~        |
|             |                       | Increments   | Increments     |
|             |                       | Rule         | Rule (hours)** |
|             |                       | (hours)**    |                |
+-------------+-----------------------+--------------+----------------+
| Sources     | Data collection and   | **350**      | **53**         |
|             | analysis              |              |                |
+-------------+-----------------------+--------------+----------------+
| Reviewing   | Attending             | 36           | 5              |
| authorities | pre-application       |              |                |
|             | meetings              | 20           | 3              |
|             |                       |              |                |
|             | Answering sources'    | [16]         | [              |
|             | questions             | {.underline} | 2]{.underline} |
|             |                       |              |                |
|             | Logging in and        | **72**       | **10**         |
|             | reviewing data        |              |                |
|             | submissions           |              |                |
|             |                       |              |                |
|             | **Total**             |              |                |
+-------------+-----------------------+--------------+----------------+

In addition to issuing permits, the reviewing authorities must ensure
that their PSD programs meet the requirements that EPA specifies for
such programs pursuant to part C. The PM~2.5~ Increments Rule revises
these requirements. Therefore, each reviewing authority must submit
changes to its existing Implementation Plan program or demonstrate that
its existing program is no less stringent than EPA's new requirements.
Because the changes needed for updating Implementation Plans are small
and the requirements for Implementation Plan development differ from
State to State, the EPA assumed it would take no more than 40 hours for
each reviewing authority to fully incorporate this rulemaking into its
plan. This assumption includes legislative review, public comment, and
all legal and legislative processes necessary for all of the above
components. This is a one-time burden that will occur during the 3-year
period covered by this ICR.

In order to allow a direct cost comparison with the existing approved
ICR for the major NSR program (i.e., the 2005 renewal, ICR #1230.17), we
use the same cost factors in this ICR. These cost factors are laid out
below.

As in the 2005 ICR renewal for the major NSR program, the hourly labor
rate for source respondents used for this analysis is \$65.50 per hour
(in 2004 dollars). This labor rate was calculated by taking 70 percent
of the 2004 in-house labor rate, which was derived using fully loaded
but weighted technical, clerical, and managerial staff wages, and adding
the resulting labor rate to 30% of the 2004 fully loaded weighted
consultant rate for technical, clerical, and managerial staff.

Similarly, the labor rate used in this analysis for reviewing authority
respondents is \$43.53 per hour. This rate was derived for the 2005 ICR
renewal by inserting 2004 Federal government pay schedule wage rates for
clerical, technical, and managerial staff into the weighting system
developed in the 1997 renewal ICR and described in the November 2002 ICR
update.[^12]

Capital/start-up and O&M costs are non-labor related costs. One-time
capital/start-up costs are incurred with the purchase of durable goods
needed to provide information. According to the Paperwork Reduction Act,
capital/start-up cost should include among other items, preparations for
collecting information such as purchasing computers and software,
monitoring, sampling, drilling, and testing equipment.

Even if an applicant is a brand new company and the prospective source
is a "greenfield" source (the EPA estimates less than 1 percent of
source respondents fit that description) most, and perhaps all, of the
equipment needed to prepare permit applications (for example, the
computers and basic software) will be part of the source's business
operation inventory. Furthermore, the models for performing ambient air
impact analyses are available in electronic form from several different
EPA web sites for just the Internet access charges, which are typically
absorbed in routine business overhead expenses. Thus, the PM~2.5~
Increments Rule will not cause any new capital costs to be incurred by
any respondents.

Since the purchase of capital equipment is believed to be an
insignificant factor in permit application preparation, we assume that
the O&M and services for same are negligible. Further, once a permit is
issued, there is no O&M cost associated with it. It remains unaltered
unless the source or the reviewing authority discovers specific reasons
to reexamine it and change any conditions or specifications. If purely
administrative, the changes are handled exclusively by the reviewing
authority. If changes have the potential for environmental consequences,
the action may be significant enough to be counted as a separate and new
application, to which a new burden and cost may be ascribed.

Typically, annualized capital cost would be derived from a discounted
net present value of the stream of costs that would occur over the life
of the permit, or the ICR, whichever is shorter. However as discussed
above, there are no capital costs in the case of the PM~2.5~ Increments
Rule. Therefore, the annualized capital costs for this ICR to industry
respondents are zero.

Staff in EPA's Regional Offices typically review PSD permits. In the
currently approved ICR for the overall NSR program (2005 ICR renewal;
ICR #1230.17), the average EPA burden per PSD is 14 hours. Under the
PM~2.5~ Increments Rule we expect an additional burden of 1 hour per
permit associated with our review of additional PM~2.5~ air quality
modeling analyses. This new burden was derived as discussed above in
section 6.1 for the source and reviewing authority burden increases.
That is, for those activities that will be affected by the number of
modeling analyses conducted for a PSD permit, the weighted average
burden per permit will increase by 15 percent. The additional 1 hour of
EPA burden will amounts to about 7 percent of the currently approved EPA
burden for PSD permits.

To facilitate cost comparisons between this ICR update and the 2005 ICR
renewal, we have used the Federal labor rate from the 2005 ICR of
\$36.21 per hour.[^13] The rate reflects the assumption, made in the
July 10, 1997 renewal ICR and the February 2001 renewal ICR, that the
staff reviewing permits are classified as Grade 11 Step 3. The
corresponding salary is loaded with benefits at the rate of 60%.

In addition, there will be Agency burden to review the revised
Implementation Plans submitted by the reviewing authorities to verify
that the revisions fully meet the requirements of the PSD program, as
changed by the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule. Due to the nature of the
Implementation Plan revisions needed, the Agency expects that each
Implementation Plan revision will require about 5 hours of review. We
expect this one-time burden to occur during the period covered by this
ICR.

For the purpose of estimating the total burden in this ICR, the
respondent universe is defined by the annual number of permit
applications prepared by sources and the number of reviewing authorities
that must process such permit applications. It also includes the number
of reviewing authorities that will have to revise their Implementation
Plans.

As discussed above in section 6.1, the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule will
result in addition burden per PSD permit. However, we do not believe
that the number of permits will be affected because the rule does not
affect PSD applicability. For this reason, this analysis uses the same
number of PSD permits (265 per year) used in the 2005 ICR renewal (ICR
#1230.17). For purposes of this ICR, we carried out the analysis as if
the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule would be fully implemented immediately upon
promulgation. That is, we have allowed for no lag time for reviewing
authorities to submit Implementation Plan revisions and for EPA to
review and approve the revisions. This approach results in a
"worst-case" analysis for the 3-year period covered by this ICR, but
more accurately reflects the long-term impacts of the rule.

For the number of respondent reviewing authorities associated with major
NSR permitting and Implementation Plan revisions, we used the 112
reviewing authority count used by other permitting ICRs. Again, we
carried out this "worst-case" analysis as if all reviewing authorities
would begin issuing PSD permits for PM~2.5~ immediately, with no lag
time for Implementation Plan revisions. We also included the reviewing
authorities' burden for revising the Implementation Plans in this ICR.

Based on the estimates presented above for the new burden for PSD
permits, the labor rates for source and reviewing authority respondents,
and the number of respondents, we have estimated the total burden and
costs that will result from the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule. Table 6-2
presents the totals for source respondents for each year of the 3 years
covered by this ICR. Table 6-3 shows the average annual totals for
reviewing authority respondents.

**Table 6-2. Annual Burden and Costs for Source Respondents**

  ----------------------- ---------- ----------- ----------- ------------ -----------
  **Activity**            **Number   **Burden    **Annual    **Labor      **Annual
                          of Permits per Permit  Burden      Rate**       Cost (\$
                          per Year** (Hours)**   (Hours)**                2004)**

  PSD Permitting          265        53          14,045      \$65.50/hr   \$919,948
  ----------------------- ---------- ----------- ----------- ------------ -----------

**Table 6-3. Annual Burden and Costs for Reviewing Authority
Respondents**

  ----------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ---------------
  **Major NSR                                                              
  Permitting**                                                             

  **Activity**            **Number of **Burden    **Annual    **Labor      **Annual Cost
                          Permits per per Permit  Burden      Rate**       (\$ 2004)**
                          Year**      (Hours)**   (Hours)**                

  PSD Permitting          265         10          2,650       \$43.53/hr   \$115,354

  **Implementation Plan                                                    
  Revisions**                                                              

  **Activity**            **Number of **Burden    **Average   **Labor      **Average
                          Plan        per         Annual      Rate**       Annual Cost^c^
                          Revisions   Revision    Burden^b^                (\$ 2004)**
                          per         (Hours)**   (Hours)**                
                          Year^a^**                                        

  Revision of             37.33       40          1,493       \$43.53/hr   \$65,005
  Implementation Plan                                                      

  **Reviewing Authority                                                    
  Totals**                                                                 

  **TOTAL**                                       **4,143**                **\$180,359**
  ----------------------- ----------- ----------- ----------- ------------ ---------------

^a^ Each of the 112 reviewing authorities may submit one Implementation
Plan revision to conform their PSD programs to the revised rules over
the 3-year period covered by this ICR. Thus, the average annual number
of such revisions is 112 / 3 = 37.33 per year.

^b^ Each reviewing authority will revise its Implementation Plan once
for a 3-year total burden of 4,480 hours. Average annual burden is 4,480
/ 3 = 1,493 hours.

^c^ Total 3-year cost is 4,480 hours x \$43.53 = \$195,014. Average
annual cost is \$195,014 / 3 = \$65,005.

Based on the estimates presented above for the Federal burden hours for
each activity, the Federal labor rate, and the number of permits and
Implementation Plan revisions, we have estimated the total average
annual Federal burden and costs that will result from the PM~2.5~
Increments Rule. All of the Federal burden and costs are incurred by
EPA. Table 6-4 presents the estimated burden and costs.

**Table 6-4. Federal Annual Burden and Costs**

  ----------------------- ----------- -------------- -------------- ------------ --------------
  **Major NSR                                                                    
  Permitting**                                                                   

  **Activity**            **Number of **Additional   **Additional   **Labor      **Annual Cost
                          Permits per Burden per     Annual Burden  Rate**       (\$ 2004)**
                          Year**      Permit         (Hours)**                   
                                      (Hours)**                                  

  PSD Permitting          265         1              265            \$36.21/hr   \$9,596

  **Implementation Plan                                                          
  Review**                                                                       

  **Activity**            **Number of **Burden per   **Average      **Labor      **Average
                          Plans to    Plan Review    Annual         Rate**       Annual Cost^c^
                          Review per  (Hours)**      Burden^b^                   (\$ 2004)**
                          Year^a^**                  (Hours)**                   

  Review of               37.33       5              187            \$36.21/hr   \$6,759
  Implementation Plans                                                           

  **Federal Totals**                                                             

  **TOTAL**                                          **452**                     **\$16,355**
  ----------------------- ----------- -------------- -------------- ------------ --------------

^a^ The EPA will review one Implementation Plan revision submitted by
each of the 112 reviewing authorities over the 3-year period covered by
this ICR. Thus, the average annual number of Implementation Plan reviews
is 112 / 3 = 37.33 per year.

^b^ The EPA will review a total of 112 Implementation Plan revisions for
a 3-year total burden of 560 hours. Average annual burden is 560 / 3 =
187 hours.

^b^ Total 3-year cost is 560 hours x \$36.21 = \$20,278. Average annual
cost is \$20,278 / 3 = \$6,759.

Table 6-5 displays the annual burden and costs for source and reviewing
authority respondents that we estimate will result from the PM~2.5~
Increments Rule, as well as the total across all respondents. Table 6-6
shows the annual burden and costs for the EPA that we estimate will
result from the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule.

**Table 6-5. Total Estimated Annual Respondent Burden and Costs**

  ----------------------- ------------- ---------------- ----------------- ------------- -----------------
  **Type of Respondent**  **Number of   **Total Burden   **Total Labor     **Total       **Total Costs
                          Responses**   (Hours/Year)**   Costs (\$/Year)** Capital Costs (\$/Year)**
                                                                           (\$/Year)**   

  Sources                 265           14,045           \$919,948         \$ 0          \$919,948

  Reviewing               302.33        4,143            180,359           0             180,359
  Authorities^a^                                                                         

  **TOTAL**               **567.33**    **18,188**       **\$1,100,307**   **\$ 0**      **\$1,100,307**
  ----------------------- ------------- ---------------- ----------------- ------------- -----------------

^a^ During the 3-year period of this ICR, the 112 reviewing authorities
will review 265 PSD permits each year and submit an average of 37.33
Implementation Plan revisions per year (112 / 3 = 37.33), for a total of
302.33 responses per year.

**Table 6-6. Total Estimated Annual Federal Burden and Costs**

  ----------------------- ------------ ---------------- -------------- ------------- --------------
  **Type of Entity**      **Number of  **Total          **Total        **Total       **Total
                          Entities**   Incremental      Incremental    Incremental   Incremental
                                       Burden           Labor Costs    Capital Costs Costs
                                       (Hours/Year)**   (\$/Year)**    (\$/Year)**   (\$/Year)**

  **Federal Agency        **1**        **452**          **\$16,355**   **\$0**       **\$16,355**
  (EPA)**                                                                            
  ----------------------- ------------ ---------------- -------------- ------------- --------------

As discussed in the previous sections, the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule will
result in new burden associated with obtaining and issuing PSD permits.
This change in the PSD regulations is necessary under the Clean Air Act
because EPA has, in other rulemakings, promulgated NAAQS for PM~2.5~ to
protect the public health and welfare. This new rule adds increments,
SILs, and an SMC for PM~2.5~ to the PSD program, but it does not
otherwise change the requirements of the program. We expect the rule to
add to the burden associated with applying for and issuing those PSD
permits that will now involve PM~2.5~ air quality modeling analyses in
addition to analyses for other pollutants, but we do not expect any
change in the number of PSD permits that must be issued (i.e., no change
in the number of source respondents). In addition, reviewing authorities
may incur a one-time burden to revise their Implementation Plans to
incorporate the PSD rule changes. The magnitude of the new burden is
presented above in Tables 6‑5 and 6‑6.

We estimate that the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule will result in a total
annual burden on 265 source respondents of about 14,000 hours and
\$920,000 per year (see Tables 6-2 and 6-5), for an average burden of
about 19 hours and \$1,200 per source. For the 112 reviewing authority
respondents, we estimate that the total annual burden will be about
4,100 hours and \$180,000 (see Tables 6-3 and 6-5), for an average
burden of about 37 hours and \$1,600 per reviewing authority.

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 currently valid OMB control number. The
OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9
and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

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-2007-0628, which is available for online viewing at
[www.regulations.gov](http://www.regulations.gov/), or in-person viewing
at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket
Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW,
Washington, D.C. 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 (202) 566-1744, and the
telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. An electronic
version of the public docket is available at
[www.regulations.gov](http://www.regulations.gov/). This site can be
used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the
contents of the public 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 above.
Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW,
Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include
the EPA Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0628 and OMB Control
Number 2060-NEW in any correspondence.

[^1]: The term "reviewing authority" is synonymous with the term
    "permitting authority" used in previous permit-related analyses. The
    reader should consider these terms interchangeable for comparison
    purposes.

[^2]: "Proposed Rule to Implement the Fine Particle National Ambient Air
    Quality Standards," 70 FR 65984, November 1, 2005.

[^3]: A. Rios and J. Santiago. *Information Collection Request for 40
    CFR Part 51 and 52 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and
    Nonattainment New Source Review*. U.S. Environmental Protection
    Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. October 2004. Appendix A.

[^4]: A. Rios and J. Santiago. *Information Collection Request for 40
    CFR Part 51 and 52 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and
    Nonattainment New Source Review*. U.S. Environmental Protection
    Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. October 2004. Pages 17 and 18.

[^5]: A. Rios and J. Santiago. *Information Collection Request for 40
    CFR Part 51 and 52 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and
    Nonattainment New Source Review*. U.S. Environmental Protection
    Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. October 2004. Page 19.

[^6]: "Economic Assessment of the Impacts of Part C and D Regulatory
    Changes," June 2, 1994.

[^7]: The definition for "small business" employed for all SIC
    categories in this analysis was any business employing fewer than
    500 employees.

[^8]: "Criteria pollutants" are those for which NAAQS have been
    established, i.e., ozone, nitrogen dioxide (NO~2~), sulfur dioxide
    (SO~2~), carbon monoxide (CO), lead, PM~10~, and PM~2.5~. Ozone is
    not emitted directly, but is formed in the atmosphere by complex
    photochemical reactions involving volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
    and oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Impact modeling is not required for
    ozone under PSD because existing models are not capable of
    accurately predicting the impacts of a single source.

[^9]: Full modeling analyses must be conducted for each criteria
    pollutant emitted by the source for which PSD increments (i.e.,
    maximum allowable increases above baseline ambient concentrations)
    have been established. These analyses must be carried out for each
    averaging period that has been established for the pollutants.
    Sources subject to PSD for PM~2.5~ currently must conduct modeling
    analyses for PM~10~ for two averaging periods -- annual and 24-hour.
    Some such sources also are subject to PSD for SO~2~ and/or NOx.
    Sources subject for SO~2~ must conduct analyses for three averaging
    periods (annual, 24-hour, and 3-hour), while NOx sources only need
    to conduct an analysis for the annual averaging period. To account
    for overlapping SO~2~ and NOx applicability, we believe it is a
    reasonable assumption that PM~2.5~ sources must conduct an average
    of two additional modeling analyses, for a total of four (prior to
    the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule).

[^10]: Under the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule, sources subject to PSD for
    PM~2.5~ will be required to conduct PM~2.5~ modeling analyses for
    two averaging periods -- annual and 24-hour. Because most such
    sources also will be subject to PSD for PM~10~, they will be
    required to conduct one PM~10~ modeling analysis for the 24-hour
    averaging period (there is no longer an annual NAAQS for PM~10~ and
    the annual increment for PM~10~ is eliminated by the PM~2.5~
    Increments Rule). The rule will not affect the average of two
    analyses that we assume for SO~2~/NOx. Thus, the average total
    number of modeling analyses under the PM~2.5~ Increments Rule will
    be five.

[^11]: The Reasonably Available Control Technology (RACT), Best
    Available Control Technology (BACT), Lowest Achievable Emission Rate
    (LAER) Clearinghouse, or RBLC, is a database of RACT/BACT/LAER
    determinations made in site-specific permitting analyses. It is
    generated and updated using information provided by State and local
    permitting agencies.

[^12]: U.S., Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality
    Planning and Standards, *Draft Information Collection Request For
    Changes To The 40 CFR Part 51 And 52 Prevention Of Significant
    Deterioration And New Source Review Applicability Requirements For
    Modifications To Existing Sources*, November 2002, p. 29.

[^13]: A. Rios and J. Santiago. *Information Collection Request for 40
    CFR Part 51 and 52 Prevention of Significant Deterioration and
    Nonattainment New Source Review*. U.S. Environmental Protection
    Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC. October 2004. Page 13.