1

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS 

EMISSIONS: PESTICIDE ACTIVE INGREDIENT PRODUCTION

PART A

1.0 Identification of the Information Collection

(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection.

This information collection request (ICR) is entitled "Amendments to Requirements for 

Sources regulated by the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Pesticide 

Active Ingredient Production." The EPA tracking number is 1807.05. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) number is 2060-0370.

(b) Short Characterization.

The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Pesticide

Active Ingredient Production were promulgated on June 23, 1999 at 40 CFR 63 Subpart MMM 

(64 FR 33550). This standard applies to all owners and operators of new and existing facilities 

engaged in the production of pesticide active ingredients that emit hazardous air pollutants 

(HAPs). 

Owners or operators of a pesticide active ingredient production facility to which this 

regulation applies, must choose one of the compliance options described in the rule or install and 

monitor a specific control system that reduces HAP emissions to the compliance level. The 

respondents are subject to sections of subpart A of 40 CFR part 63 relating to NESHAP. These 

requirements include: those associated with the applicability determination; the notification that 

the facility is subject to the rule; the notification of testing (control device performance test and 

continuous monitoring system (CMS) performance evaluation); the results of performance 

testing and CMS performance evaluations; startup, shutdown, and malfunction report; 

semiannual or quarterly summary reports and/or excess emissions and CMS performance reports. 

In addition to the requirements of subpart A, many respondents are required to submit a pre 
2

compliance plan and leak detention and repair (LDAR) reports; and plants that wish to 

implement emissions averaging provisions must submit an emission averaging plan. 

Respondents electing to comply with the emission limit or emission reduction 

requirements for process vents, storage tanks, or wastewater must record the values of equipment 

operating parameters as specified in Section 63.1367 of the rule. Owners or operators are 

required to install, operate, and maintain a continuous monitoring system. 

Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part will maintain a file of these 

measurements, and retain the file for at least three years following the date of such 

measurements, maintenance reports, and records. All reports are sent to the delegated state or 

local authority. In the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly 

to the United States Environmental Protection Agency regional office.

Owners or operators of pesticide active ingredient (PAI) production facilities subject to 

the rule must maintain a copy of all monitored equipment operating parameter values that 

demonstrate compliance with the standards. Those records must be maintained for a minimum of 

five years. All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In the event that there is 

no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) regional office. The information is used to determine whether or not all 

sources subject to the NESHAP are achieving the standards.

This ICR includes information collection requirements in the proposed rulemaking that 

amend title 40, chapter I, part 63 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Subpart MMM 

NESHAP for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production. To ensure compliance with this 

requirement, facility owners or operators are required to install electronic indicators on each PRD 

that would be able to identify and record the time and duration of each pressure release and notify 

operators that a pressure release has occurred. Information related to these new provisions is 

required to be submitted in the semi-annual reports required by the existing Pesticide Active 

Ingredient NESHAP. The proposed amendments also add provisions for facility owners or 

operators to use if they wish to assert an affirmative defense to avoid civil penalties for 

exceedances of the applicable standards that are caused by a malfunction. If these provisions are 

used, the owner or operator is required to meet certain criteria during the malfunction, notify the 
3

Administrator of malfunctions that may cause an exceedance of the emissions standards, and 

submit a report for the malfunction to the Administrator, to include a root cause analysis of the 

malfunction, within certain timeframes.

There are approximately 17 existing facilities subject to the major source provisions 

specified under subpart MMM. No new major sources are projected during the 3-year period of 

this ICR.

The 17 pesticide active ingredient production facilities in the United States are all 

privately owned and operated by for-profit businesses. You can find the burden to the “Affected 

Public” listed below in Table 1: Annual Industry Burden and Cost - NESHAP for Pesticide 

Active Ingredient Production (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMM). The Federal government burden 

does not include work performed by Federal employees. The burden refers only to work

performed by contractors, which could be found listed below in Table 2: Average Annual EPA 

Burden - NESHAP for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMM). 

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the currently active ICR without 

any “Terms of Clearance.”

2. Need For and Use of the Collection

(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 (HAP). These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of 

HAP and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction. In addition, section 114(a) 

states that the Administrator may require any owner or operator subject to any requirement of this 

Act to:

“(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C)

install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such

audit procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in

accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at

such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the
4

Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control

equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data

when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit

compliance certifications in accordance with Section 114(a)(3); and

(G) provide such other information as the Administrator may

reasonably require.”

In the Administrator's judgment, HAP emissions from Pesticide Active Ingredient cause 

or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or 

welfare. Therefore, the NESHAP was promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part 63, 

subpart MMM.

(b) Use/Users of the Data.

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standard ensure compliance with the 

applicable regulations which were promulgated (and which are proposed in the amendments) in 

accordance with the Clean Air Act. The collected information is also used for targeting 

inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings.

Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected facility’s initial capability 

to comply with the emission standard. Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure 

compliance with the standard at all times. During the performance tests, a record of the operating 

parameters under which compliance was achieved may be recorded and used to determine 

compliance in place of a continuous emission monitor.

The notifications required in the standard are used to inform the Agency or delegated 

authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations. The reviewing 

authority may then inspect the source to ensure that the pollution control devices are properly 

installed and operated, that leaks are being detected and repaired, and that the standards are being 

met. The performance test may also be observed. 

The information collection specified in this ICR will also be used by the delegated 

authority to determine if a source meets the criteria for affirmative defense. If a source meets the 
5

affirmative defense criteria, they may be excused from civil penalties for exceedances of an 

emission limit.

3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

(a) Nonduplication.

If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is sent directly to the 

appropriate EPA regional office. Otherwise, the information is sent directly to the delegated state 

or local agency. If a state or local agency has adopted their own similar standards to implement 

the Federal standards, a copy of the report submitted to the state or local agency can be sent to 

the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the Federal standards. Therefore, no 

duplication exists.

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

This ICR is related to proposed amendments to the Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP. 

Comments will be solicited on the proposal package and the proposed ICR.

(c) Consultations. 

Upon review of the standard, information available and the data, the Agency has 

determined the recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the “Active” ICR is fully supported 

and necessary to fulfill the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA). It has been determined that 

no further consultations with industry are necessary to calculate the burden associated with the 

amendments to the Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP. 

(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection.

Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that 

facilities are continuing to meet the standards. Requirements for information gathering and 

recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are 

applied and emission limitations are met. If the information required by these standards was 

collected less frequently, the proper operation and maintenance of control equipment and the 

possibility of detecting violations would be less likely.
6

(e) General Guidelines.

None of these reporting or recordkeeping requirements violate any of the regulations 

established by OMB at 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 fiveyear records retention requirement is consistent with the Part 70 permit program and the five-year 

statute of limitations on which the permit program is based. The retention of records for five 

years allows EPA to establish the compliance history of 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 the five years. In addition, EPA would be 

prevented from pursuing the violators due to the destruction or nonexistence of essential records.

(f) Confidentiality.

All information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will 

be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart 

B--Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; 

amended by 43 FR 39999, September 28, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 

17674, March 23, 1979).

(g) Sensitive Questions. 

This section is not applicable because this ICR does not involve matters of a sensitive 

nature.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested

(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes.

Potential respondents under Subpart MMM are owners or operators of any existing or 

new Pesticide Active Ingredient manufacturing facility that is a major source of HAP emissions, 

including any facilities who may wish to make use of the new affirmative defense provisions to 

avoid civil penalties resulting from the exceedance of an emission limit. The source category and

affected sources regulated by the Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP are classified under the 
7

North American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) code 325320, for Pesticide and Other 

Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing.

The Pesticide Active Ingredient source category is estimated to consist of 17 existing 

facilities nationwide, all of which are major sources and would be subject to the major source 

provisions specified under the Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP. All 17 existing facilities 

could make use of the new affirmative defense provisions added to the rule. No new major 

sources are projected during the 3-year period of this ICR. 

(b) Information Requested.

(i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements. In this ICR, all the data 

recorded or reported is required by National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for 

Pesticide Active Ingredient Production (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMM).

A source must make the following reports:

Notification Reports

Request for approval to use alternative monitoring parameters 63.8(f), 63.1366(b)(4), 

and 63.1368(e)(1)

Periodic reports of excess emissions and noncompliance 63.10(e)(3), 63.1368(g)

Notification of process change 63.1368(h)

Reports

Equipment leaks reports 63.1363(h), 63.1368(j)

Emissions averaging reports 63.1368(k)

Heat exchange systems 63.1368(l)

PRD requirements in periodic reports 63.1363(h)(4)

Reports and notifications of malfunctions that result in an 

exceedance of the standard for the purpose of affirmative defense §63.1360(k)
8

A source must keep the following records:

Recordkeeping

Control device operating parameters to monitor and record

63.1366(b)(1), 

63.1367(b)(1), and 

63.1367(b)(5)

Monitoring and records for process vent annual emission limits 

standard

63.10(c), 63.1366(b)(5), 

63.1367(a)(4), 

63.1367(b)(3)

Monitoring and records for process vent annual emission limits 

standard

63.1366(c), 

63.1367(b)(4)

Monitor and records for equipment leaks 63.1366(d), 63.1367(c)

Monitoring and records for heat exchanger systems 63.1362(f), 63.1366(e), 

and 63.1367(e)

Monitoring and records for pollution prevention 63.1366(f), 

63.1367(b)(2)

Monitoring and records for emission averaging 63.1366(g), 63.1367(d)

Records for process operating parameters 63.1367(b)(6), 

63.1367(b)(7)

Records for vapor collection systems and closed-vent systems 63.1367(f)

Electronic Reporting

Some of the respondents are using monitoring equipment that automatically records 

parameter data. Although personnel at the affected facility must still evaluate the data, internal 

automation has significantly reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping at

a plant site.

Also, regulatory agencies in cooperation with the respondents continue to create reporting 

systems to transmit data electronically. However, electronic reporting systems are still not widely 

used. At this time, it is estimated that approximately 20 percent of the respondents use electronic 

reporting.

(ii) Respondent Activities. 
9

Respondent Activities

Read instructions

Perform initial performance test and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed in Table 1

Enter information required to be recorded in Table 1.

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 information.

Adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and 

requirements.

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information.

(iii) Summary of the proposed amendments. The proposed amendments to the Pesticide 

Active Ingredient NESHAP require that facilities report any pressure device releases with the 

next periodic report required by the existing Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP. Facility 

owners or operators are required to install electronic indicators on each PRD to identify and 

record the time and duration of each pressure release. For affirmative defense, the primary data 

item required is a written report which proves that all the criteria for asserting an affirmative 

defense have been met. The report also must include a root cause analysis of the malfunction and 

must be submitted within 45 days of the initial occurrence of the emissions exceedance. The 

owner or operator must notify the administrator within 2 days of the initial occurrence of the 

malfunction if it wishes to avail itself of an affirmative defense. 

EPA is including in Table 3 (located at the end of this supporting statement) an estimate 

of the burden associated with performing an affirmative defense. EPA is providing this as an 

illustrative example of the potential additional administrative burden a source may incur to assert 

in an Affirmative Defense in response to an action to enforce the standards set forth in the 

applicable subpart. 

This illustrative estimate is not considered a duplicate estimate of cost under the General 

Duty to Minimize Emissions clause under 63.6(e)(1)(i), which states: “At all times, the owner 
10

and operator must operate and maintain any affected source, including associated air pollution 

control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with safety and good air 

pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. Determining whether such operation and 

maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to the 

Administrator which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, review of operation 

and maintenance procedures, review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the 

source.” 

To provide the public with an estimate of the relative magnitude of the burden associated 

with an assertion of the affirmative defense position adopted by a source, EPA provides an 

administrative adjustment to this ICR that estimates the costs of the notification, recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements associated with the assertion of the affirmative defense. EPA’s 

estimate for the required notification, reports and records, including the root cause analysis, 

associated with a single incident totals approximately $2,188 and is based on the time and effort 

required of a source to review relevant data, interview plant employees, and document the events 

surrounding a malfunction that has caused an exceedance of an emission limit. The estimate also 

includes time to produce and retain the records and reports for submission to EPA. EPA 

provides this illustrative estimate of this burden because these costs are only incurred if there has 

been a violation and a source chooses to take advantage of the affirmative defense. 

Of the number of excess emission events reported by source operators, only a small 

number would be expected to result from a malfunction, and only a subset of excess emissions 

caused by malfunctions would result in the source choosing to assert the affirmative defense. 

Thus we believe the number of instances in which source operators might be expected to avail 

themselves of the affirmative defense will be extremely small. For this reason, we estimate no 

more than 2 or 3 such occurrences for all sources within a given category over the 3-year period 

covered by this ICR. For the purpose of this estimate, we are adding two (2) instances of 

affirmative defense. We expect to gather information on such events in the future and will revise 

this estimate as better information becomes available. 

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

Information Management
11

(a) Agency Activities.

EPA conducts one or more of the activities provided in Table 2 (attached) in connection 

with the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required information. These tables 

are introduced in Section 6(c) of this ICR.

(b) Collection Methodology and Management.

Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in 

compliance and enforcement programs of the delegated permitting authority. The semiannual 

reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and 

for compliance determinations. The required report for facilities who wish to avail themselves of 

the affirmative defense will be used by the delegated authority to determine if a source meets the 

criteria for affirmative defense. If a source meets the criteria for affirmative defense, they may be 

excused from civil penalties for exceedances of an emission limit.

EPA is the permitting authority until the state agency is delegated authority to implement 

the rule. Therefore, information contained in the reports submitted to the Regional Administrator 

will be entered into the Air Facility System (AFS), which is operated and maintained by EPA’s 

Office of Compliance. AFS is EPA’s database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of 

compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government-owned facilities. EPA 

uses the AFS for tracking air pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory 

agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters. EPA and its delegated authorities can edit, 

store, retrieve and analyze the data.

(c) Small Entity Flexibility.

A majority of the affected facilities are large entities (e.g., large businesses). However, 

the impact on the one small entity (i.e., small business) in this source category was taken into 

consideration during development of the proposed amendments. Due to the proposed type of 

monitoring equipment to be used, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for 

both small and large entities. The Agency considers these requirements the minimum needed to 

ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities. 
12

(d) Collection Schedule.

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

shown in Table 1: Annual Industry Burden for NESHAP for Pesticide Active Ingredient 

Production (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMM).

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

(a) Estimating Respondent Burden.

The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements is estimated to be 11,374 (Total Labor Hours from Table 1). These 

hours are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the 

regulation, Agency knowledge and experience with the NESHAP program, the previously 

approved ICR, and any comments received. No burden estimates are provided for new sources 

because no new facilities are expected to become affected sources during the 3-year period of this 

ICR.

(b) Estimating Respondent Costs.

The estimates of total technical-hours per year per source and the number of activities per 

respondent per year for the new PRD requirements are listed in Table 1 and are based upon 

experience with similar information collection requirements in the Polyvinyl Chloride and 

Copolymers Production NESHAP (Subpart HHHHHHH).

EPA’s estimate for an affirmative defense and root cause analysis is based on the time 

and effort required of a source to review relevant data, interview plant employees, and 

reconstruct the events prior to a malfunction in order to determine primary and contributing 

causes. The level of effort also includes time to produce and retain the report in document form 

so that the source will have it available should EPA or state enforcement agencies ever request to 

review it. The estimates of total technical-hours per year per source for asserting an affirmative 

defense are listed in Table 1 and are based upon experience with similar information collection 

requirements in the Sewage Sludge Incineration Units NESHAP (Subpart MMMM).

(i) Estimating Labor Costs. 
13

The ICR uses the following labor rates:

Technical $51.62 ($24.58 + 110%)

Managerial $104.92 ($49.96 + 110%)

Clerical $41.66 ($19.84 + 110%)

Labor rates and associated costs are based on data from the United States Department of 

Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) from July 2010. Wages for technical labor are from the 

category "chemical plant and system operators"; wages for management labor are from the 

category "general and operations managers”; and wages for clerical labor are from the category 

“secretaries and administrative assistants”. These rates represent salaries plus fringe benefits. 

The wages provided above were increased by a rate of 110 percent to account for overhead.

(ii) Estimating Capital and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) 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 

monitoring. As part of the proposed amendments to the Pesticide Active Ingredient NESHAP, 

facility owners or operators are required to install electronic indicators on each PRD to identify 

and record the time and duration of each pressure release. The cost of each monitoring system is 

expected to be $188,913, and the total cost for these capital expenditures for all 17 facilities in 

the Pesticide Active Ingredient source category is estimated to be $3,211,521. 

Annualized costs are calculated by multiplying the capital recovery factor by the capital 

cost. The capital recovery factor is 0.1424 based on an interest rate of 7 percent and an assumed 

equipment life of 10 years. The total annualized capital cost is $457,249. 

The annual operation and maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to maintain the 

monitor and other costs such as photocopying and postage. The previous ICR estimated the 

annual O&M costs to be $1,325 per source. Inflating this number from 2007 dollars to 2011 

dollars gives $1,450 per source. The total annual O&M cost for all 17 facilities in the Pesticide 

Active Ingredient source category is expected to be $24,650.

The total annual cost (non-salary), including the annualized capital for the monitoring 

equipment and the annual O&M costs, is estimated to be $481,899.

(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost.
14

The only costs to the Agency are those costs associated with analysis of the reported 

information. The EPA compliance and enforcement program includes activities such as: the 

examination of records maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of 

emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected information. The average annual 

Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $10,986. 

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

Technical $55.45 (GS-12, Step 1, $34.66 x 1.6)

Managerial $74.73 (GS-13, Step 5, $46.70 x 1.6) 

Clerical $30.01 (GS-6, Step 3, $18.76 x 1.6)

Agency labor rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 2011 General 

Schedule Salary Table 2011-GS, which excludes locality rates of pay. Labor rates are inflated 

20% to reflect average locality pay increase from base rates. Details upon which this estimate is 

based appear in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden, NESHAP for Pesticide Active Ingredient 

Production (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMM), below.

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

There are approximately 17 existing facilities subject to the major source provisions 

specified under subpart MMM. No new major sources are projected during the 3-year period of 

this ICR. 

While all 17 of the existing facilities could make use of the new affirmative defense 

provisions added to the rule, EPA estimates only two total instances of the use of these 

provisions over the three year ICR period. Consequently, the average annual number of Pesticide 

Active Ingredient manufacturing facility respondents during the 3-year period of this ICR is 2.

The total number of annual responses per year is calculated using the following table:
15

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity

(B)

Number of 

Respondents

(C)

Number of 

Responses

(D)

Number of Existing 

Respondents that 

Keep Records but 

do not Submit 

Reports

(E)

Total 

Annual 

Responses 

E=(BxC)+D

Notification of process changes 2 1 N/A 2

Quarterly reporting 2 4 N/A 8

Semiannual reporting 15 2 N/A 30

Leak detection and repair report 17 2 N/A 34

Emissions averaging plan 2 1 N/A 2

Affirmative defense 0.7 1 N/A 0.7

Total 76.7

The number of Total Annual Responses is 76.7.

The total annual labor costs are $604,028. Details regarding these estimates may be found 

in Table 1: Annual Industry Burden and Cost – NESHAP for Pesticide Active Ingredient 

Production (40 CFR Part 63, subpart MMM), below. 

(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The detailed bottom line burden cost calculations for the respondents and the Agency are 

shown in Tables 1 and 2 respectively, and summarized below.

(i) Respondent tally. The total annual labor costs are $604,028. Details regarding these 

estimates may be found in Table 1. Annual Respondent burden and Cost: NESHAP for Pesticide 

Active Ingredient Production (40 CFR 63, Subpart MMM), below. Furthermore, the annual 

public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to 

average 59 hours per response. 

The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity are $482,000. The 

cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(ii).

(ii) The Agency tally. The average annual Agency burden and cost over the next three 

years is estimated to be 207 labor hours at a cost of $10,986. See Table 2. Annual Agency 

Burden and Cost: NESHAP for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production (40 CFR Part 63, subpart 

MMM), below. 
16

(iii) Variations in the annual bottom line. This section does not apply since no 

significant variation is anticipated.

(f) Reasons for Change in Burden.

The decrease in burden from the most recently approved ICR is due to adjustment in both 

the types of information which must be collected and the number of sources submitting the 

required information. Specifically, burden items related to start-up, shutdown, and malfunction 

reports are eliminated under the proposed amendments. The previous (active) ICR calculated 

burden based on 88 existing sources, two new sources, and one existing source that will be 

reconstructed; whereas this ICR calculates burden based on 17 existing sources. Although there 

are additional reporting requirements for PRD and affirmative defense (optional), the overall 

change in burden from the previous ICR is a decrease; primarily due to the large decrease in the 

number of affected sources. 

EPA provides an adjustment to this ICR that estimates the costs of the notification, 

recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with the assertion of the affirmative 

defense. EPA’s estimate for the required notification, reports and records, including the root 

cause analysis, associated with a single incident totals approximately $2,188 and is based on the 

time and effort required of a source to review relevant data, interview plant employees, and 

document the events surrounding a malfunction that has caused an exceedance of an emission 

limit. The estimate also includes time to produce and retain the records and reports for 

submission to EPA. For the purpose of estimating the annual burden, EPA is attributing a total of 

2 instances of affirmative defense over a three year period across all sources in the category. 

EPA is using this frequency of 2 events in three years because, of the number of excess emission 

events reported by source operators, only a small number would be expected to result from a 

malfunction, and only a subset of excess emissions caused by malfunctions would result in the 

source choosing to assert the affirmative defense. Thus, we believe the number of instances in 

which source operators might be expected to avail themselves of the affirmative defense will be 

extremely small. 

(g) Burden Statement
17

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information 

is estimated to average 59 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial 

resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to 

or for a Federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, 

install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 

verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing 

information; adjust the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and 

requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data 

sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose 

the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a 

collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB 

control numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

To comment on the Agency’s need for this information the accuracy of the provided 

burden estimates, and any suggestions for minimizing respondent burden, including through the 

use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0435, which is available for online viewing at 

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 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 

Air Docket is (202) 566-1742. An electronic version of the public docket is available at 

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 one of 

the Docket ID Numbers identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, 
18

Washington, DC 20503, Attention Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the relevant Docket ID 

Number (EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0435) in any correspondence.

PART B

This section is not applicable because statistical methods are not used in data collection 

associated with the rule.
19

Burden Item

(A)

Person hours 

per occurrence

(B)

No. of 

occurrences 

per respondent 

per year

(C)

Person hours 

per respondent 

per year 

(C=AxB)

(D)

Respondents 

per year

(E) 

Technical 

person-hours 

per year

(E=CxD)

(F) 

Management 

person hours per 

year (Ex0.05)

(G) 

Clerical 

person hours 

per year

(Ex0.1)

(H) 

Cost, $

1. Applications N/A

2. Survey and studies N/A

3. Reporting requirements N/A

A. Read instructions N/A

B. Required activities N/A

Performance evaluation test 

(certification of CMS) N/A

C. Create information N/A

D. Gather existing information N/A

E. Write Report

Notification of construction/ 

reconstruction N/A

Notification of process changesa8 1 8 2 16 0.8 1.6 $977

Notification of anticipated startup N/A

Notification of actual startup N/A

Notification of applicability of the 

standard N/A

- Existing source N/A

- New source N/A

Pre-compliance plan N/A

Notification of initial performance 

test N/A

Notification of initial CMS 

performance evaluation N/A

- With performance test N/A

- Without performance test N/A

F. Write periodic report

 - Quarterly reportingb24 4 96 2 192 9.6 19.2 $11,718

 - Semiannual reportingc8 2 16 15 240 12 24 $14,648

-PRD reporting (with 

semiannual) 5.5 2 11 15 165 8.25 16.5 $10,070

Table 1: Annual Respondent burden and Cost -- NESHAP for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production 

(40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMM)
20

Burden Item

(A)

Person hours 

per occurrence

(B)

No. of 

occurrences 

per respondent 

per year

(C)

Person hours 

per respondent 

per year 

(C=AxB)

(D)

Respondents 

per year

(E) 

Technical 

person-hours 

per year

(E=CxD)

(F) 

Management 

person hours per 

year (Ex0.05)

(G) 

Clerical 

person hours 

per year

(Ex0.1)

(H) 

Cost, $

- LDAR reporting 94 2 188 17 3196 159.8 319.6 $195,058

 - Emissions averaging pland40 1 40 2 80 4 8 $4,883

G. Affirmative defensee18 - - 0.67 12 8 0 $1,459

4. Recordkeeping requirements N/A

A. Read instructions N/A

B. Plan activities N/A

C. Implement activities N/A

D. Develop record system N/A

E. Develop startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction plan N/A

F. Develop QA/QC plan for CMS N/A

G. Time to enter information N/A

- Records of startup, shutdown 

and malfunction N/A

 - Record continuously 

 monitored parametersf1 320 320 17 5440 272 544 $332,014

 - Enter/verfity information for 

 semi-annual reportg16 2 32 17 544 27.2 54.4 $33,201

H. Calibration of CMS N/A

I. Time to train personnel N/A

J. Time for audits N/A

Subtotal Labor Burden and Cost 9885 501.65 987.3 $604,028

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND 

COST $604,028

a

 Assume 10% of facilities will implement process changes

b

 Assume 10% of facilities will have exceedances and periods of noncompliance

c

 Assume 90% of facilities will have no exceedances

d

 Assume 90% of facilities will comply with emissions averaging requirements

e

 Assume 2 affirmative defense reports for entire industry during the 3-yr ICR period. Formulas are not followed for person-hours per year. 

For affirmative defense, hours required assumes 18 hours technical, 12 hours management, 0 clerical for each instance of affirmative defense.

f Assume it will take one hour to record continuously monitored parameters.

g

 assume it will take sixteen hours to enter/verify information for semiannual report.

11,374.0
21

Burden Item

(A)

EPA Person 

hours per 

occurance

(B)

No. of 

ocurrences per 

plant per year

(C)

EPA Person 

hours per 

plant per year 

(C=AxB)

(D)

Plants per 

year

(E) 

Technical 

personhours per 

year

(E=CxD)

(F) 

Management 

person hours 

per year 

(Ex0.05)

(G) 

Clerical 

person hours 

per year

(Ex0.1)

(H) 

Cost, $

Activity N/A

Initial performance test N/A

Repeat performance test N/A

Report review N/A

Notification of applicability N/A

Notification of contruction/ recontruction

N/A

Notification of anticipated startup N/A

Notification of actual startup N/A

Notification of process changes 8 1 8 2 16 0.8 1.6 $977

Notification of pre-compliance report N/A

Notification of performance test N/A

Notification of CMS performance eval. N/A

Review of notification of compliance 

status N/A

- With performance test N/A

- Without performance test N/A

Review of emissions averaging plan 20 1 20 2 40 2 4 $2,441

Review of semiannual reports 2 2 4 15 60 3 6 $3,662

Review of quarterly reports 8 4 32 2 64 3.2 6.4 $3,906

Review of NESHAP waiver application N/A

Subtotal Labor Burden and Cost 180 9 18 $10,986

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST $10,986

Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden - NESHAP for Pesticide Active Ingredient Production

(40 CFR Part 63, Subpart MMM)

207
22

RCFA Personnel Number of Personnel Time Requirement (hours) Total Hours Hourly Rate ($/hr) Total

Technical Personnel 3 6 18 51.62 929.16

Managerial Personnel 2 6 12 104.92 1,259.04

Total 5 30 2,188.20

*Ref. 1: Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupational earnings tables: United States, December 2009 - January 2011 (average reference date July 2010) 

Table 4. Full-time private industry workers: Mean and median hourly, weekly, and annual earnings and mean weekly and annual hours. Available at 

http://www.bls.gov/ncs/ocs/sp/nctb1478.pdf

Table 3. Cost Estimate for Affirmative Defense/Root Cause Analysis