SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal)

1. Identification of the Information Collection

1(a) Title of the Information Collection

NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal)

, EPA ICR Number 2046.07, OMB Control Number 2060

- 0542

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Mercu ry Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants were proposed on July 3, 2002

, promulgated on December 19, 2003

, and amended on April 20, 2006. These regulations appl y to existing facilities and new facilities

that are part of a major source of hazardous air pollutant ( HAP) emissions or part of an area

source of HAP emissions . A major source of HAP is one that has the potent ial to emit 10 tons or more of any HAP or 25 tons or more of total HAP per year; an area source is one with a potential

to emit less than this. New facilities include those that commenced construction or reconstruction after the date of proposal. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart IIIII

.

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

.

Any owner/operator subject to the provision s of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least five y ears following the date of such measurements, maintenance reports, and records. All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority.

In the eve nt that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the U

. S

. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional office.

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

The chlorine production source category is divided into two subcategories: (1) mercury

cell chlor

- alkali plants

, and (2) chlorine production plants that do not rely upon mercury cells for chlorine production (e.g., diaphragm cell chlor

- alkali plants, membrane cell chlor

- alkali plants). This Information Collection Request (ICR) only addresses the mercury cell chlor

- alkali subcategory.2

Based on Agency consultations with industry experts

, two sources are currently subject

to the standard

. Also, according to the November 2010 regulatory impact analysis (RIA), which

was conducted in support of a proposed revision to the existing NESHAP , we beli eve that no new mercury cell chlor

- alkali plants will be constructed over the next three years

. The analysis report can be found in the public docket under Docket ID Number EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2002

- 0017.

The RIA’s assertion of zero industry growth is also supported by the fact that no new plants have been constructed in the United States over the last 30 years. Future demand for chlor

- alkali production is anticipated to be met using other types of chlor

- alkali cells that do not result in any

mercu ry emissions and, therefore, are not covered by th e s e standard s . Therefore, no new or reconstructed plants are anticipated.

The active (previous) ICR had the following Terms of Clearance (TOC):

When this ICR is renewed, EPA should review the respondent burden, universe, response number, labor rates, and capital costs and ensure

t hese estimates have been updated.

EPA has addressed each item of concern in the TOC by reviewing and updating the aforementioned items accordingly. Specific updates are discuss ed in detail in Section 6(f).

The “Affected Public” are owners and operators of mercury cell chlor

- alkali plants. The burden to the “Affected Public” may be found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden

and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal). The burden to the Federal Government is attributed entirely to work performed by

either F ederal employees or government contractors and refer s below to Table 2: Average

Annual EPA Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal).

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 ne w 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 the3

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 ac cordance with Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the Admini strator may reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, mercury emissions from mercury cell chlor

- alkali plants cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare. Therefore, the NESHAP were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part

63

, subpart IIIII.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

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

Performance tests are requ ired in order to determine an affected facility ’ s initial capability to comply with t he emission standard s. Continuous emission monitors are used

to ensure compliance with the standard at all times.

The notific ations required in the standard are used to inform the Agency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations. The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated and th e standard is being met. The performance test may also be

observed.

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

determina tions.

3. Non

- duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

The requested recordkeeping and reporting are re quired under 40 CFR part 63, subpart

IIIII

.

3(a) Non

- duplication

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, duplication does not exist.4

3(b) Publ ic Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this ICR was published

in the Federal Register (77 FR 63813) on October 17, 2012 . No comments were received on the burden published in the Fed eral Register

.

3(c) Consultations

The Agency’s industry experts have been consulted, and the Agency’s internal data sources and projections of industry growth over the next three years have been considered. The primary source of information as reported by industry, in compliance with the recordkeeping and reporting provisions in the standard, is the Online Tracking Information System (OTIS) which is operated and maintained by the EPA Office of Compliance. OTI S is the EPA database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of all compliance data.

Consultations with industry representatives (i.e., respondents) were conducted to determine if there is any way for EPA to reduce the recordkeeping and reportin g b urden or improve the language in the standard to make it easier to comply. In developing this ICR,
EPA contacted : 1) the Chlorine Institute

, at ( 703) 894

- 4140 ; and 2) the American Chemistry
Council

, at ( 703) 741

- 5583

. The Agency received information from the Chlorine Institute indicating that two facilities have closed since the publication of the November 2010 RIA,
in which we identified four mercury cell facilities operating in the U.S. According to the
Chlor ine Institute, the two remaining facilities currently operating in the U.S. are the ASHTA
Chemicals facility in Ashtabula, O H

, and the PPG Industries facility in Martinsville, WV

.

It is our policy to respond after a thorough review of comments received si nce the last ICR renewal as well as those submitted in response to the first Federal Register notice.

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

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

3(e) General Guidelines

T hese reporting or recordk eeping requirements do not violate any of the regulations promulgated by OMB under 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

These standards require the respondents to maintain all records, including reports and notifications for at least five years. This is consistent with the General Provisions as applied to

the standards. EPA believes that the five

- year records retention requirement is consistent the Part 70 permit program and the five

- year statute of li mitations on which the permit program is

based. T he retention of records for five years allow s EPA to establish the compliance history of5

a source
, any pattern of non

- compliance and to determine the appropriate level of enforcement

action. EPA has found that the most flagrant violators have violations extending beyond five

years. In addition, EPA would be prevented from pursuing the violators due to either the

destruction or nonexistence of essential records

.

3(f) Confidentiality

Any information submi tted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B

- Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI) (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20,
1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

3(g) Sensitive Questions

T he reporting or recordkeeping requirements in the standard s do not include sensitive questions.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a) Respondents/SIC Codes

The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are mercury cell chlor

alkali plants. The United States Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) co de for the respondents affected by the standard is SIC 2812, “Alkalis and Chlorine,” which corresponds to the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 325181, “Alkalis and Chlorine Manufacturing” for mercury cell chlor

- alkali plants.

4(b ) Information Requested

(i) Data Items

I n this ICR , all the data that is recorded or reported is required by the NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII).

A source must make the following reports:

Notification s
Initial startup or conversion of minor source to major source 63.9(b)

Application of construction or reconstruction 63.9(b)

Request for extension of complianc e 63.9(c)

Subject to special compliance requirements 63.9(d)6

Notification s

Performance tests 63.7(b), (c), 63.9(e)

Performance evaluation of continuous monitoring systems 63.8(e), (f)

Continuous monitoring systems dates of operation 63.9(g)

Initial compliance 63.8252(e)

Compliance status 63.9(h)

Reports

Report of performance evaluations 63.7(g ), 63.10 ( d)( 2)

Immediate startup, shutdown and malfunction 63.8254(c)

Semiannual reports 63.8254(a), (b)

A source must keep the following records:

Recordkeeping

Notifications and reports 63.8256(a), 63.10(b)(2)(xiv)

Maintain records of monitoring data, monitoring system calibration checks, occurrence and duration of periods where the monitoring system is malfunctioning or inoperative and system operations 63.8256(a), 63.8256(b), 63.8258

Work practice standards 63.8256(c)

Periodic monitoring option 63.8 256(d)

Electronic Reporting

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

at a plant site.

Also, regulatory agencies

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

us e electronic reporting.7

(ii) Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate opacity and/or parameter monitors.

Perform initial performance test and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above.

Enter information required to be recorded above.

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

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

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purpose of disclosing and providing in formation.

Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

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

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

5(a) Agency Activities

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

Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests, if necessary.

Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions8

Agency Activities

reports, required to be submitted by industry.

Audit facility records.

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

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority could inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated. Performance test reports are used by the Agency to discern a source ’ s initial capability to comply with the emission standard. Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs. Immediate startup, shutdown and malfunction notifications and reports al ert the Agency to atypical operations conditions which

result in violations of the emission limitations. The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance

determinations.

Inform ation contained in the re ports is entered into OTIS which is operated and maintained by EPA's Office of Compliance. OTIS is EPA ’ s database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and

governmen t

- owned facilities. EPA uses the OTIS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters. EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and analyze the dat a.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner/operator for five

years.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

Half of the respondents are small entities (i.e., small businesses). Information from both Agency consultation with indust ry experts and the November 2010 RIA for the proposed rule indicate that currently one source, the ASHTA Chemicals facility in Ashtabula, OH, qualifies as a small entity. T he impact on small entities was taken into consideration during the development

of the regulation. In the final rulemaking notice, EPA prepared a regulatory flexibility analysis (FRFA) which examined the impact of the final rule on small entities (68 FR 7092 5, December 19, 2003).

Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the types of control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and large entities. The Agency considers these to be the minimum require ments needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities. To the extent9

that larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden

will be reduced.

5(d) Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collection activity within this request is

shown in below Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury Cell

Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal)

.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart included in this ICR. The individual burdens are expressed under standar dized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Where ver 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 th ree years from these record

keeping and reporting requirement s is estimated to be 3,682 ( T otal Labor Hours from Table 1)

below

. T hese hours are based on Agency studies and background documen ts from the development of the regulation, Agency knowledge an d experience with the NESHAP program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

(i) Estimating Labor Costs

This ICR uses the following labor rates:

Managerial $1 21

. 4 4 ($5 7

. 8 3 + 110%)

Technical $ 100

. 23 ($4 7

. 73 + 110%)

Clerical $ 50

. 5 1 ($2 4

. 05 + 110%)

These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March

2012

, “ Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group. ” The rates are from column 1, “ Total co mpensation. ” The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.10

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

The type of industry costs associated with the information collection activities in the subject standard are both labor costs

, which are addressed elsewhere in this ICR

, and the costs associated with continuous monitoring. Th e capital/startup costs are one

- time costs when a facility becomes s ubject to the regulation. The annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the monitor s and other costs su ch as photocopying and postage.

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

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

(A)

Continuous Monitoring Device (B)

Capital/Start up Cost for

One Respondent (C)

Number of

New Respondents (D)

Total Capital/Startup Cost, (B X C) (E)

Annual O&M

Costs for One Respondent (F)

Number of Respondents

with O&M (G)

Total
O&M, (E X F)

Mercury

Concentration CMS $17,000 0 $0 $7,300 2 $14,600

Cell Room Mercury Monitoring System $56,000 0 $0 $900 2 $1,800

Total $16,400

There are no capital/startup costs for this ICR, as shown in column D in the above table.

The total O&M costs for this ICR are $16,400 . This is the total of column G.

The average annual cost for capital/startup and operation and maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the ICR is estimated to be $16,400 . 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 i ncludes activities such as

the examination of records maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected informati on.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $ 2,488

.11

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

Managerial $ 6 2.27 (GS

- 13, Step 5, $ 3 8. 92 + 60% )

Technical $ 4 6

. 21 (GS

- 12, Step 1, $ 28. 88 + 60% )

Clerical $2 5.01 (GS

- 6, Step 3, $ 15. 63 + 60% )

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM)

, 20 1 1 General Schedule

, which excludes locality

, rates of pay. The rates have been increased by 60 percent to account for the benefit pa ckages available to government employees

. Details upon which this estimate is based appear below in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury

Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal)

.

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

Based on our research for this ICR, on average over the next three years, approximately

two existing respondents will be subject to the standard s

. It is estimated that no additional respondents per year will become subject. The overall average number of respondents, as shown

in the table below

, is two per year.

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

Number of Respondents

Respondents That Submit Reports Respondents That Do Not Submit Any Reports

Year (A)

Number of New Respondents 1 (B)

Number of Existing Respondents (C)

Number of Existing Respondents that keep

records but do not submit reports (D)

Number of Existing Respondents That

Are Also New Respondents (E)

Number of Respondents (E=A+B+C

- D)

1 0 2 0 0 2

2 0 2 0 0 2

3 0 2 0 0 2

Average 0 2 0 0 2

1 New respondent include sources with constructed, reconstructed

, and modified affected facilities.

C olumn D is subtracted to avoid double

- counting respondents

. As shown above, the average Number of Respondents over the three

- year period of this ICR is two

.12

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

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity (B)

Number of Respondents (C)

Number of Responses (D)

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

Total Annual Responses E=(BxC)+D

Notifications 0 0 0 0

Startup, s hutdown, and m alfunction 0 0 0 0

Compliance r eport ( s emiannual) 2 2 0 4

Total 4

The number of Total Annual Responses is four

.

The total annual labor costs are $ 356,552

. Details regarding these estimates may be

found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury Cell

Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal)

.

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

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

(i) Respondent Tally

The total annual labor hours are 3,682 hours at a cost of $356,552

. Details regarding these estimates may be found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal)

.

Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 921 hours per response

.

The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity are $16,400 . The

cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii), Capital/Startup vs. O peration and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

(ii) The Agency Tally

The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is estimated to be 5 5

labor hours at a cost of $ 2,488 . See below Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) ( Renewal).13

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

There is an adjustment decrease in the total estimated burden as currently identified in

the OMB Inve ntory of Approved Burdens. The decrease in labor hours and costs is due to fewer sources being subject to the standard, and is not due to any program changes. The previous ICR estimated that nine mercury cell chlor

- alkali facilities were subject to the NESHAP. In 2010, EPA conducted an industry analysis in support of a proposed rule revision, which indicated that there has been a decrease in the respondent universe, and that only four fa cilities were subject to

the rule at the time . In consulting wit h the Chlorine Institute for this current ICR, it was found that only two facilities are in operation in 2013 due to recent plant closures. Therefore, the total

number of sources was decreased from nine to two. The decrease in the number of sources also

results in a decrease in the total O&M costs.

Respondent and Agency b urden calculations presented in t he previous ICR estimated

individual technical, managerial, and clerical labor hours separately for each burden item

. To make the calculation methodology consistent with other ICRs, we have revised the burden

tables to show estimates of technical labor hour per occurrence for each burden activity

. M anagerial and clerical labor hours for each burden item are assumed to account fo r an additional 5 and 10 percent , respectively, of estimated technical labor hours

.

6(g) Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 921 hours per response. Burden mea ns 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 utiliz e 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

- OEC A

- 2012

- 0691. 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 identified14

in this document. The documents are also available for public viewing at the En forcement 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 (202) 566

- 1744, and the telephone

number for the docket center i s (202) 566

- 17 52

. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Manageme nt and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID

Number EPA

- HQ

- OECA

- 2012

- 0691 and OMB Control Number 2060

- 0542 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

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

information.15

Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal)

Burden Item A B C D E F G H

Technical

person

hours per

occurrence No. of

occurrences

per respondent

per year Technical

person

- hours per respondent

per year (AxB) Respondents

per year a Technical

hours

per year (CxD) Management

hours

per year (Ex0.05) Clerical

hours

per year (Ex0.10) Total cost

per year ($) b

1. Reporting requirements

a. Read instructions c 32 1 32 0 0 0 0 $ 0 b. Prepare st artup/ s hutdown/ m alfunction plan c 32 1 32 0 0 0 0 $ 0
c. Prepare w ashdown p lan c 16 1 16 0 0 0 0 $ 0 d. Prepare site

- specific monitoring plan c 32 1 32 0 0 0 0 $ 0

e. Record date/time of washdowns d 0.1 365 36.5 2 73 3.65 7.3 $ 8,128.77 f. Measure cell room mercury vapor level and

record data d 0.5 365 182.5 2 365 18.25 36.5 $ 40,643.85

g. Monitor vent mercury concentration and record CMS data, daily averages, and

deviations d 0.5 365 182.5 2 365 18.25 36.5 $ 40,643.85

h. Perform vent mercury concentration CMS inspections and calibration checks and record

results 8 2 16 2 32 1.6 3.2 $ 3,563.3 0

i. Perform twice daily inspections (for vessels and process equipment problems, hydrogen and/or mercury vapor leaks at decomposers and hydrogen piping up to the hydrogen header) and record information e 0.75 730 547.5 2 1,095 54.75 109.5 $ 121,931.54

j. Inspect cell room floors for cracks, spalling,

or other deficiencies and record information f 2 12 24 2 48 2.4 4.8 $ 5,344.94

k. Inspect pillars and beams for cracks, spalling,

and other deficiencies and record information 8 2 16 2 32 1.6 3.2 $ 3,563.3 016

Burden Item A B C D E F G H

Technical

person

hours per

occurrence No. of

occurrences

per respondent

per year Technical

person

- hours per respondent

per year (AxB) Respondents

per year a Technical

hours

per year (CxD) Management

hours

per year (Ex0.05) Clerical

hours

per year (Ex0.10) Total cost

per year ($) b

l. Perform daily cell room inspections (for caustic leaks in caustic system equipment and piping, liquid mercury spills or accumulations on floors and surfaces, for liquid mercury leaks from vessels, piping, and equipment in liquid mercury service) and re cord information d 1.25 365 456.25 2 912.5 45.63 91.25 $ 101,609.61

m. Inspect equipment and piping in the hydrogen system from the header to the last control device for hydrogen and/or mercury vapor leaks and record information on these

leaks 4 4 16 2 32 1.6 3.2 $ 3,563.3 0

n. Record information on handling and storage of mercury

- containing waste d 0.25 365 91.25 2 182.5 9.13 18.25 $ 20,321.92

o. Record the mass of virgin mercury added to

cells g 0.25 2 0.5 2 1 0.05 0.1 $ 111.35

Subtotal for Reporting Requirements 3,608.7 $ 349,425.71

2. Recordkeeping requirements

a. Read instructions c

------------------------ Included in 1a

---------------------------- b. Initial n otifications c 6 1 6 0 0 0 0 0

c. Notification of i ntent to conduct a performance test c 3 1 3 0 0 0 0 0

d. Notification of c ompliance s tatus c 16 1 16 0 0 0 0 0 e. Startup, s hutdown, and m alfunction 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

f. Semiannual c ompliance r eports h 16 2 32 2 64 3.2 6.4 $ 7,126.59

Subtotal for Recordkeeping Requirements 73.6 $ 7,126.59
TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST ( rounded ) 3,682 $ 356,552

Assumptions:

a. We have assumed that there are approximately 2 respondents subject to the rule, with no new sources expected over the next three

- years of this ICR.

b. This ICR uses the following labor rates: Technical $100.23 ($47.73 + 110%); Managerial $121.44 ($57.83+ 110%); and Clerical $ 50.51 ($24.05 + 110%). These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 2012, “Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group.” The rates are17

from column 1, “Total compensation.” The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages availa ble to those employed by private industry.

This ICR assum es that Managerial hours are 5 percent of Technical hours, and Clerical hours are 10 percent of Technical hours.

c. We assume that this is a one

- time only activity for new facilities.

d. We have assume that information should be recorded 365 days per yea r.

e. We have assumed that inspection should be performed two times per day for a total of 730 times per year.

f. We have assumed that inspection should be done and recorded once per month.

g. We have assumed that it will take 0.25 hours two times per year to record information.

h. We have assumed that it will take each respondent 16 hours to two times per year to complete semiannual compliance reports.18

Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Mercury Cell Chlor

- Alkali Plants (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart IIIII) (Renewal)

Burden Item A B C D E F G H

Technical

person

hours per

occurrence No. of

occurrences

per respondent

per year Technical

person

H ours per respondent

per year (AxB) Respondents

per year a Technical

hours

per year (CxD) Management

hours

per year (Ex0.05) Clerical

hours

per year (Ex0.10) Total cost

per year ($) b

a. Review Initial Notification 4 1 4 0 0 0 0 $ 0

b. Review Notification of in tent to conduct a performance test 4 3 12 0 0 0 0 $ 0

c. Observe performance tests 16 3 48 0 0 0 0 $ 0

d. Review Notification of Compliance Status (including site

- specific monitoring plans and operation & maintenance plans) c 32 1 32 0 0 0 0 $ 0

e. Review performance test reports c 8 1 8 0 0 0 0 $ 0

f. Review semiannual compliance reports d 12 2 24 2 48 2.4 4.8 $ 2,487.58
TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST ( rounded ) 55 $ 2,488

Assumptions:

a. We have assumed that there are approximately 2 respondents subject to the rule, with no new sources expected over the next three

- years of this ICR. Facilities subject to the NESHAP rules are located in 13 States.

b. This cost is based on the average hourly labor rate as follows: Technical $46.21 (GS

- 12, Step 1, $28.88 + 60%); Managerial $62.27 (GS

- 13, Step 5, $38.92 + 60%); and Clerical $25.01 (GS

- 6, Step 3, $15.63 + 60%). This ICR assumes that Managerial hours are 5 percent of Technical hours, and Clerical hours are 10 percent of Technical hours. These rates are from the OPM, 2012 General Schedule, which excludes loc ality rates of pay. The rates have been increased by 60 percent to account for the benefit packages available to government employees.

c. We assume that this is a one

- time only cost.

d. We assume that it will take 12 hours tw o times per year to review t he semiannual compliance reports.