1 **SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA INFORMATION C**  **OLLECTION REQUEST NUMBER 2130.05 TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY DETERMINATIONS FOR FEDERALLY**  **FUNDED AND APPROVED TRANSPORTATION PLANS, PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS**  **February 2015** 2 

### Table	of	Contents 1. ID ENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECT ION
................................ ........ 3 1(a) Title of the Information Collection
................................ ................................ ...................... 3 1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract
................................ ................................ ........................... 3 2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION
................................ ............................... 5 2(a) Need/Authorit y for the Collection
................................ ................................ ....................... 5 2(b) Practical Utility

/Users of the Data
................................ ................................ ....................... 5 3. NON
- DUPLICATION, CONSUL TAT IONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRI TERIA 5 3(a) Non
- Duplication
................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 5 3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to I CR Submission to OMB
................................ ................. 6 3(c) Consultations
................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 6 3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection
................................ ................................ ..................... 7 3(e) General Guidelines
................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 8 3(f) Confidentiality
................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 9 3(g) Sensitive Questions
................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 9 4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED
................................ . 9 4(a) State and L ocal Respondents/North American Industry Classification S ys tem .................. 9 4(b) In formation Requested
................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 10 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED

–AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTI ON METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT
................................ .................. 12 5(a) Agency

Activities
................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 12 5(b) Collection Methodology and Management
................................ ................................ ........ 13 5(c) Small Entity

Flexibility
................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 13 5(d) Collection Schedule
................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 14 6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION
........................... 14 6(a) Estimating State and Local Respondent Burden and Cost
................................ ................. 14 6(b) Estimating State and Local Respondent Costs
................................ ................................ ... 29 6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs
................................ ................................ ............... 30 6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs
................................ ... 38 6(e) Bottom L ine Burden Hours and Cost Tables
................................ ................................ ..... 38 6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden
................................ ................................ .......................... 40 6(g) Burden Statement
................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 41 Appendix A: Conformity
- Related Research Considered for This ICR
................................ ........ 423



### 1. **IDENTIFICATION	OF	THE	INFORMATION	COLLECTION 1**  **(a) Title	of	the	Information	Collection**  This information collection request (ICR) is entitled "Transportation Conformity Determinations for Federally Funded and Approved Transportation Plans, Programs and Projects,” ICR number 2130.0 5 . This I CR includes transportation conformity burden anticipated for calendar ye ar s 201 5
- 201 7
. 

### 1(b) **Short	Charac terization/Abstract**  Transportation conformity is required under Clean Air Act section 176(c) [42 U.S.C. 7506(c)] to ensure that federall y supported transportation activities are consistent with (“conform to”) the purpose of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). Transportation activities include transportation plans , transportation improvement programs (TIPs), and federally funded or approved highway

or transit projects. Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or “standards”) or interim milestones
. Transportation conformity applies under EPA’s conform ity regulations at 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A, to areas that are designated nonattainment, and those re
- designated to attainment after 1990 (“maintenance areas” with plans developed under Clean Air Act section 175A) for the following transportation
- related criteria pollutants: ozone, particulate matter (PM 2.5 and PM 10 ), carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the original transportation conformity

rule on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and subsequentl y published several revisions. EPA develops the conformity regulations in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Transportation conformity determinations are required before feder al approval or funding is given to certain types of transportation planning documents as well as non
- exempt highway and transit projects. 1 Inmetropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, conformity determinations are required for transportation plan and TIP updates and amendments. A metropolitan transportation plan is at least a 20
- ye ar planning document that describes the policies, strategies and facilities that are proposed by state and local decision
- makers for future implementation in a metropol itan area. The TIP prioritizes and programs capital highway and transit projects for implementation in a metropolitan area over a four
- ye ar period, consistent with the transportation plan.

1 Projects that are exempt from all or certain conformity requirements include projects listed in 40 CFR 93.126 (e.g., safety projects, maintenance of current roads), projects that do not impact regional emissions in 40 CFR 93.127, and traffic signal synchro nization projects listed in 40 CFR 93.128.4

To meet the Clean Air Act’s conformity requirements, once a SIP is established for a given pollutant and NAAQS, projected regional emissions from a nonattainment or maintenance area’s transportation sy stem must be at or below the motor vehicle emissions level or “budget” for on
- road mobile sources in the area’s SIP. Prior to EPA finding a budget adequate 2 or approving a SIP, the conformity rule provides emissions tests that ensure that Clean Air Act requirements are met in the interim. EPA considered the following in developing this ICR:

 B urden estimates for transportation conformity determinations (including both regional and project
- level) in current nonattainment and maintenance areas for the ozo ne, PM 2.5, PM 10 , CO, and NO 2 NAAQS ;
 F ederal burden associated with EPA’s adequacy review process for submitted SIP budgets that are to be used in conformity determinations ;
 Efficiencies in areas making conformity determinations for multiple NAAQS;

 Differences in conformity resource needs in large and small metropolitan areas and isolated rural areas ;
 Burden es timates for the transition from MOVES2010 to MOVES2014
. 3

 Reduced burden as a result of areas no longer determining conformity for the 1997 ozone NAAQS due to revocation4 , anticipated b y earl y 2015 ; and,

 Reduced burden as a result of areas completing 20 ye ars of maintenance for PM 10 and CO NAAQS, at which time transportation conformity is no longer required
. This I CR does not include burden associated with the general development of transportation planning and air quality planning documents for meeting other federal requirements. There are other I CRs that capture associated burdens for these non
- conformity pl anning requirements and are prepared b y other organizations within EPA and DOT.

2 Per the transportation conformity rule, submitted SIP budgets are appropriate to use prior to EPA’s approval of the SIP w

hen EPA declares them adequate for transportation conformity purposes (40 CFR 93.118(e) and (f)). 3 In this document, “MOVES2010” refers to all of the MOVES2010 models: MOVES2010, MOVES2010a, and MOVES2010b.

4 See 78 FR 34178 (June 3, 2013).5



### 2. **NEED	FOR	AND	USE	OF	THE	COLLECTION 2**  **(a) Need/Authority	for	the	Collection**  The Clean Air Act gives EPA the statutory authority to establish the criteria and procedures for determining whether transportation activities conform to the SIP. EPA promulgated the transportation conformity regulations under the authorit y of Clean Air Act section 176(c). The federal government needs information collected under these regulation s to ensure that metropolitan planning organization (MPO) 5 and federal transportation actions are consistent with state air quality goals. 

### 2(b) **Practical	Utility/Users	of	the	Data** Federal, state, and local transportation agencies use information collecte d under the conformity

regulation to ensure that federally funded or approved transportation actions conform to SIPs for attaining and maintaining clean air. Specificall y, transportation agencies use information they

collect to demonstrate that:

 Regional emissions and/or project
- level anal ys is requirements are satisfied;

 Transportation control measures (TCMs) in approved SIPs are implemented in a timely manner;
 State, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies consult and resolve issues related to conformity

determinations; and,

 Public comments are considered and responses to comments are documented prior to conformity

actions. 

### 3. **NON -**  **DUPLICATION,	CONSULTATIONS,	AND	OTHER	COLLECTION CRITERIA**  **3(a) Non**  **- Duplication**  EPA wrote the transportation conformity regulation and subsequent revisions, in coordination with FHWA and FTA, to avoid duplicating the collection efforts required b y other regulatory

programs. The conformit y regulation works with existing transportation and air quality plann ing requirements from the Clean Air Act, Title 23 of United States Code and other

5 MPO means the policy board of an organization created and designated to carry out the metropolitan transportation planning process (40 CFR 93.101)
.6

federal highway

laws, Federal Transit Laws, and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The conformity regulation relies on but does not duplicate DOT’s transportation planning regulations for developing transportation plans, TIPs, and projects. Many nonattainment and maintenance areas can rely on travel, economic, or other forecasts that are already available for other planning purposes to complete regional conform ity anal ys es. In addition, the conformity regulation does not create an y new fiscal constraint or public participation requirements. The regulation simply

relies upon existing transportation planning requirements. Localized air quality

analy ses (or “ hot
- spot” anal yses) are generated for certain project
level conformity determinations for certain criteria pollutants. When project
- level analy ses are required for both conformity approvals and NEPA, project sponsors may rely on the same anal ys is, assumin g that it meets all necessary air quality

requirements. Finally , although transportation actions are compared to SIP budgets for conformity determinations when they are available, SIPs are required to be submitted for other Clean Air Act purposes, and are not required b y the conformity provisions. 

### 3(b) **Public	Notice	Required	Prior	to	ICR	Submission	to	OMB** In compliance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), any agency developing a non - rule related ICR must solicit public comments for a 60
- day period prior to submitting the ICR to OMB. These comments, which are used partly to determine realistic burde n estimates for respondents, must be considered when completing the final Supporting Statement that is submitted to OMB. The announcement of a public comment period for this renewal ICR has been made in the Federal Register under Docket ID No. EPA
- HQ
- O AR
- 2007
- 0269
. 6 

### 3(c) **Consultations** To prepare this I CR, EPA relied upon the previous I CR for information on the number of hours required to complete the following:

 Developing transportation plan, TIP, and project conformity determinations;

 Consulting with state, local, and federal agencies on conformity determinations;

 Performing regional and hot
- spot analy ses;

6 To maintain the integrity of the ICR docket and all the associated ICR renewal records, the original docket number and date from the previous ICR continue to be used. For this renewal, a new Phase of the original docket number has been opened.7

 Documenting that TCMs in approved SIPs are implemented on time;

 Conducting other miscellaneous activities (e.g., reviewing conformity docum ents, responding to conformit y - related public comments, etc.); and,

 Training new state and local government staff to perform conformity
- related duties (for those nonattainment areas without previous conformity experience). EPA also consulted with FHWA and FTA headquarters and field offices. Individuals/staff consulted:

 Karen Perritt , (202) 366
- 9066 , Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration; and,

 Adam Stephenson , (202) 366
- 5183 , Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, Off

ice of Planning and Environment. EPA also requested information from EPA Regional Offices. Finally , EPA relied upon existing research completed on the transportation conformity process that indicated the number of hours associated with making conformity determinations in isolated rural areas
. 7 See Appendix A

– Conformity R elated Research Consid ered for this ICR. 

### 3(d) **Effects	of	Less	Frequent	Collection** The Clean Air Act requires conformity for transportation plans and TIPs to be determined every four years in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. This statutory requirement is typi call y s atisfied when an area updates its long
- range transportation plan to meet the four
- ye ar planning requirement for DOT’s transportation planning regulations. The Clean Air Act and DOT’s transportation planning regulations require TIPs to be updated ev ery four ye ars, and as a result, conformity determinations are also done for TIPs every four ye ars. 8 The Clean Air Act also requires conformity for transportation plans and TIPs within two years of a new SIP motor vehicle emission budget being established
. 9 Conformity

determinations are required in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance

7 Isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas are areas that do not contain nor are part of any metropolitan planning areas as designated under the transportation planning regulations. Isolated rural areas do not have federally required metropolitan transportation plans or TIPs and do not have projects that are part of the emissions analysis of any MPO’s metropolitan transportation plan or TIP. Projects in such areas are instead included in statewide transportation improvement programs. These areas are distinct from donut areas (40 CFR 93.101). 8 Additional plan/TIP amendments are completed on a voluntary basis beyond the required plan/TIP update cycles. These are not addressed in this ICR.

9 EPA assumed that conformity determinations occur infrequently for this scenario and therefore no burden wa s included in this ICR.8

areas onl y when a new project needs federal funding or approval. The Clean Air Act’s minimum four
- ye ar frequency

requirement for transportation plans and TIPs and two year SIP
- related conformity

requirements do not apply in these areas. Therefore, these areas are not required to demonstrate conformity on a regular basis as in metropolitan areas. Conformity determinations before project approvals are made in isolated rural areas and are necessary to meet the goals of the Clean Air Act. In formation collection occurs less frequentl y in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas compared to metropolitan areas , as these areas do not have as man y large transpo rtation projects as metropolitan areas. However, because of the statutory language, the periodic collection of information for metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas cannot be reduced, as these minimum periodic reporting requirements were establ ished to achieve and maintain clean air. In formation collection would cease in areas that reach the end of their 20
- ye ar maintenance period . Once an area has attained the NAAQS for a criteria pollutant, the state may submit a request to the EPA for the redesignation of the nonattainment area for that pollutant under C lean A ir A ct section 175A(a). In general, a ctions on metropolitan transportation plans, TIPs , and FHWA/FTA projects taken on or after the date that is 20 years after the effective date of redesignation will not require a conformit y determination for the applicable pollutant. 10 Finally , reduced information collection will also occur through EPA’s final rule that addresse s revocation for the 1997 ozone NAAQS as part of the Implementation Rule for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. The rule is anticipated to be effective earl y in 2015. 11 Therefore, transportation conformity for the 1997 ozone NAAQS will stop applying on the final rule’s effective date , and ozone conformity continues to apply onl y for 2008 ozone NAAQS nonattainment and maintenance areas
. 

### 3(e) **General	Guidelines** This I CR adheres to the guidelines stated in the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act, OMB’s implementing regulations, and EPA’s Information Collection Req uest Handbook. None of these reporting or record keeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by OMB in 5 CFR 1320.5.

10 40 CFR 93.102(b)(4) and Transportation Conformity Guidance for Areas Reaching the End of the Maintenance Period (EPA
- 420
- B
- 14
- 093, October 2014).

11 The proposed rule can be found at 78 FR 34178 (June 3, 2013)9



### 3(f) **Confidentiality** Respondents for the transportation conformity regulation do not submit confidential informati on for approval. All information collected and submitted in a conformity determination is already publicl y available, pursuant to 40 CFR 93.105(e) of the conformity regulation and 23 CFR 450.316(a) of the transportation planning regulations. 

### 3(g) **Sensitive Questions**  No questions of a sensitive nature are included in any of the information collection requirements for the transportation conformity regulation. Examples of sensitive information include information concerning sexuality or religious beliefs. 

### 4. **THE	RESPONDENTS	AND	THE	INFORMATION	REQUESTED 4(a)**  **State	and	Local	Respondents/North	American	Industry Classification	System**  In the transportation conformity process, the respondent is either a state or local agency
. Depending upon the type of conformit y determination and the ty pe of area involved, the state or local agency

may vary . For instance, in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, MPOs are the primary

local respondent for transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations. Clean Air Act section 176(c)(1) states that “ ... No metropolitan planning organization designated under section 134 of Title 23, shall give its approval to any project, program, or plan which does not conform to an implementation plan approved or promulg ated under section 7410 of this title....” In metropolitan areas, each MPO must formally make a conformity

determination on its transportation plan and TIP prior to submitting them to DOT for an independent review and a conformity

determination. State o r local air agencies also provide technical assistance in supplying air quality data or performing emissions factor modeling for transportation plan and TIP regional conformity

anal ys es. State and local respondents for conformity determinations for proje cts within metropolitan areas can vary depending upon who the project sponsor is. A project sponsor within a metropolitan area may be the state department of transportation, local transit agency , or other state or local agency , depending upon the individu al project. Developing conformity determinations for projects outside metropolitan boundaries is also ty pically the responsibility

of the project sponsor, which is usually the state department of transportation.10

The transportation conformity rule also r equires that state, local and federal transportation and air quality agencies develop interagency consultation procedures for discussing and resolving issues related to conformity determinations. Such agencies include the MPO, local transit agency , state department of transportation, state and local air agencies, EPA, FHWA, and FTA. Federal respondents for conformit y determinations are discussed further in Section 5 of this I CR. The following is a representative list of North American Industry Classification System (NAICS ) codes for the government agencies that would be affected b y the transportation conformity

regulation: 485111 Mixed Mode Transit System 485210 Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation 488490 Other Support Activities for Road Transpo rtation 924110 Administration of Air and Water Resources and Solid Waste Management Programs 925120 Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Rural Development 926120 Regulation and Administration of Transportation Programs 

### 4(b) **Information Requested**  **(i) Data Items, Including Record Keeping Requirements**  Section 4(b)(ii) describes the information requested for and roles conducted by state and local respondents for conformity determinations. Some of the information used in conformity deter minations is also used for other transportation and air quality planning purposes. Specific roles of state and local agencies will vary from area to area. **(ii) Respondent Activities**  **Metropolitan Planning Organizations** MPOs are the lead agency in making transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. The level of information collection requirements for completing such determinations will vary with the size of the area and complexity

of the ai r quality

problem. The following list includes MPO activities for transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations:

 Conduct regional emissions analy ses using the latest planning assumptions and models to determine whether the emissions from the proposed transportation s ys tem are consistent with state air quality

goals;

 Ensure timely

implementation of TCMs in approved SIPs;

 Consult with other state, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies throughout11

the conformity process;
 Circulate draft plan/TIP conformity determinations for interagency review and public comment and respond to any comments on plan/TIP conformity determinations; and,

 Provide travel activity or other data for hot
- spot analy ses. **State Departments of Transportation** State departments of transportation are typicall y the lead agency in developing conformity

determinations for projects in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas. They can also be the lead agency for project
- level conformity determinations in m etropolitan areas. The following list includes state department of transportation activities for conformity determinations:

 Assist the MPOs or conduct the regional emissions analy ses for the MPO, using the latest assumptions and models to determine whethe r the emissions from the proposed transportation sy stem change is consistent with state air quality goals;

 Conduct regional emissions analy ses on projects in isolated rural areas and donut areas 12 using the latest assumptions and models to determine whethe r the emissions from the proposed transportation system change is consistent with state air quality goals;

 Ensure timely

implementation of TCMs in approved SIPs;

 Conduct hot
- spot analy ses for projects when required;

 Comment on draft transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations;

 Consult with other state, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies throughout the conformity process; and

 Circulate draft project conformity determinations for interagency review and public comment and respond to any comments as appropriate. **Local Transit Agencies** Local transit agencies in metropolitan areas are typically the lead agency in developing project
- level conformit y determinations for transit projects in metropolitan areas. The following l ist includes local transit agency activities for project
- level conformity determinations:

12 Donut areas are geographic areas outside a metropolitan planning area boundary, but inside the boundary of a nonattainment or maintenance area that contains any part of a metropolitan area(s). These areas are not isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas (40 CFR 93.101).12

 Conduct hot
- spot analy ses for transit projects when required;

 Comment on draft transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations;

 Consult with other state, loc al, and federal transportation and air quality agencies throughout the conformity process; and,

 Circulate draft project conformity determinations for interagency review and public comment and respond to any comments as appropriate. **State and Local Air Quality Agencies**  State and local air quality agencies may provide technical assistance to transportation agencies in the development of conformity determinations. The following list includes possible state and local air agency activities for conformity determinations:

 Provide air quality

data or perform emissions factor modeling for regional emissions anal ys es for transportation plans and TIPs in metropolitan areas and projects in isolated rural areas;

 Provide similar assistance for hot
- spot analy ses for projects as appropriate;

 Consult with state, local, and federal agencies throughout the conformity process; and,

 Comment on draft conformity determinations. 

### 5. **THE	INFORMATION	COLLECTED –**  **AGENCY	ACTIVITIES,	COLLECTION M**  **ETHODOLOGY,	AND	INFORMATION	MA NAGEMENT**  **5(a) Agency	Activities**  **(i) FHWA and FTA Activities**  The FHWA Division Office and the FTA Regional Office are involved in several aspects of the transportation conformity process:
 Making conformity

determinations for transportation plans, TIPs, and projects;

 Reviewing the relevant materials that are submitted to support the conformity determinations including the travel, emissions, or air quality modeling performed to support a conformity determination and comments submitted by the EPA Regional Offi ce; and ,13

 Issuing a letter to the appropriate MPO, state department of transportation, or other project sponsor indicating that they have made a conformity

determination. FHWA and FTA field offices also participate in the interagency consultation process for nonattainment and maintenance areas. The interagency consultation process is used to discuss and resolve issues during the development of transportation plan, TIP, and project conformity determinations. The frequency of meetings varies from area to area. FHWA Resource Centers and FHWA/FTA Headquarters provide technical assistance as needed. **(ii) EPA Activities**  The EPA Headquarters and Regional Offices are involved in several aspects of the transportation conformity process:
 Participating in the interagency consultation process in nonattainment and maintenance areas;

 Reviewing and commenting on conformity determinations for transportation plans, TIPs and projects, including the travel, emissions, or air qualit y modeling per formed to support a conformit y determination;

 Making adequacy

findings for submitted SIP motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA’s adequacy

review is separate from EPA’s review of the S IP for completeness or approval; and,

 Providing technical assistance as needed. 

### 5(b) **Collection	Methodology	and	Management** Federal agencies review conformity determinations in accordance with the Clean Air Act s ection 176(c) and 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A. The interagency consultation process is used to discuss any

outstanding issues on the accuracy or quality

of data used in conformit y anal ys es and determinations. The general public reviews MPO conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs, and federal agencies review MPO responses to these comments. The federal agencies will need to maintain records of their actions, in accordance with other federal record retention requirements. No special machines or processing technologies are employed in reviewing conformity determinations. 

### 5(c **) Small	Entity	Flexibility**  A regulatory

flexibility

analy sis is not required because the rule does not affect a significant number of small entities. However, the rule does affect some isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas which are conside red to be small entities because they14

have populations less than 50,000. EPA has taken steps in the conformity rule to reduce the burden placed on these areas. For example, isolated rural areas are required to demonstrate conformity

onl y when they

have a new non - exempt federally funded or approved highway or transit project. In contrast, metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas are required to demonstrate conformity

at least every

four ye ars. 

### 5(d) **Collection	Schedule** The information collections described in this I CR must be completed before a transportation plan, TIP or project conformity determination is made. DOT’s planning regulations require that transportation plans and TIPs be updated at least every fo ur ye ars, and the Clean Air Act requi res that a conformity determination on the transportation plan and TIP in metropolitan areas be completed at least every four years . 13 Conformity determinations on projects in metropolitan and isolated rural areas are required on an as
- needed basis, as prev iously

described in Section 4, The Respondents and the Information Requested. 

### 6. **ESTIMATING	THE	BURDEN	AND	COST	OF	THE	COLLECTION 6(a)**  **Estimating	State	and	Local	Respondent	Burden	and	Cost (i)**  **Overview** This section of the ICR includes background information on the number of nonattainment and maintenance areas that are subject to transportation conformity regulations. For these areas, EPA has estimated potential burden for the following:

 Transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations for n onattainment and maintenance areas;

 Project
- level conformity determinations for nonattainment and maintenance areas, including burden associated with quantitative PM hot
- spot analy ses;
 The transition from MOVES2010 to MOVES2014; and

 Areas designated nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS
. This I CR covers only

the time period of 201 5 to 201 7 , and EPA has attributed the amount of burden to the above categories during that time period. Further specifics are addressed as each are discussed below. Please refer to S ection 6(b) for additional assumptions used in estimating respondent cost.

13 These are minimum requirements are reflected in the ICR, additional plan/TIP amendments that are done on a voluntary basis beyond the required plan/TIP update cycles are not addressed in this ICR.15

Designations for the 2015 ozone NAAQS have not been made yet and therefore no burden is included in this I CR renewal for conformity determinations for th is NAAQS. **(ii) State and Local Respondent Burden and Costs for Nonattainment and**  **Maintenance Areas Background on**  **Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas** As stated earlier, this I CR includes the burden associated with implementing conformity requirements with respect to nonattainment and maintenance areas for transportation
- related criteria pollutants: ozone, CO, PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and NO 2 . The following table illustrates the number of areas currentl y subject to transportation conformity requirements, using data from EPA’s Green Book for the number of nonattainment and maintenance areas: 14 **Table 1 :**  **Number of A**  **reas Subject to Transportation Conformity Requirements**
**Pollutant/NAAQS Number of Metropolitan**  **Nonattainment/Maintenance**

**Areas Number of Isolated Rural** 

**Nonat tainment/Maintenance** 

**Areas** 2012 PM 2.5 15 12 2 2008 ozone 16 3 9 7 CO 50 2 PM 10 48 36 1997 PM 2.5 17 38 1 2006 PM 2.5 18 29 3 1971 NO 2 19 1 0 2010 NO 2 20 0 0

14 http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps /greenbk/index.html 15 The PM 2.5 areas referred to in this row w ere designated nonattainment for 2012 PM 2.5 NAAQS on January 15, 2015 (80 FR 2206). Transportation conformity starts applying April 15, 2016.

16 The ozone areas referred to in this row w ere designated nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS on May 21, 2012 (77 FR 30088) and June 11, 2012 (77 FR 34221). 17 The PM 2.5 areas referred to in this row w ere designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944).

18 The PM 2.5 areas referred to in this row were designated nonattainment for the 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS on November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688).

19 This entry is for the 1971 annual NO 2 NAAQS. 20 The NO 2 areas referred to in this row were designated attainment/unclassifiab le for the 2010 NO 2 NAAQS on February 17, 2012 (77 FR 9532). No nonattainment areas for this NAAQS were designated at that time.16

This I CR reflects the burden associated with determining conformity for all of these pollutants /NAAQS ; however, EPA’s estimates reflect efficiencies realized when metropolitan areas are nonattainment or maintenance for two or more pollutants/NAAQS since there is often an overlap of time spent in consultation, regional emissions analy sis and other miscellaneous activities for these areas in determining conformity for two or more pollutants. As discussed further below, EPA also has identified the number of nonattainment and maintenance areas with multiple MPOs that are subject to transportation conformi ty for one or more pollutants/NAAQS, since man y metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas have more than one MPO (and consequentl y, more than one transportation plan or TIP conformit y determination). The number of MPOs estimated in the following ta bles is based upon information collected from EPA Regional Offices , EPA’s Green Book, and from other sources. 21 Finally , EPA assumes that the conformit y resource burden will differ among:

 Larger metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas (urbanized area populations over 200,000);

 Smaller metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas (urbanized area populations between 50,000
- 200,000); and,

 Isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas (populations under 50,000). Since conformity requirements, complexity of air quality

issues and geographic size can vary depending on an area’s population, number of MPOs, and number of pollutants involved, EPA believes it is appropriate to account for these differences in calculatin g the conformity burden in nonattainment and maintenance areas. For donut areas, the burden is assumed to be included in the MPO burden estimates. **Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and**  **Maintenance Areas** EPA is relying on information from several sources for this I CR’s estimated state and local burden hours for conformity determinations:

 A s described in Section 3(c), EPA requested burden information from EPA Regions and DOT that regularly

work with state and local organizations responsible for making conformity

determinations for transportation plans and TIPs ;
 EPA has reviewed the conformity burden hour estimates for previous ICRs for the transportation conformity program and the burden hours assumed in DOT’s I CR for the

21 Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 84, May 1, 2002, Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Qualifying Urban Areas for Ce nsus 2000 and Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 130, July 8, 2002, Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration/Federal Highway Administration Designation of Transportation Management Areas.17

transportation planning regulations; and,

 EPA reviewed existing conformity research studies for conformity burden in current rural nonattainment and maintenance areas. These research studies are listed in Appendix A of this I CR. The following paragraphs describe estimated state and local burden hours for conformity determinations in experienced metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. The ICR assumes that all conformity determination work is co mpleted b y state and local emplo yees, although in practice some work may be completed by

consultants. EPA again notes that transportation plan and TIP burden hour estimates are based on demonstrating conformity for 4
- ye ar transportation plan and TIP updat es as required by statute and regulation, rather than more frequent plan and TIP revisions or amendments which are not required b y the Act. This ICR captures the burden associated with meeting the minimum transportation conformity requirements. EPA has calculated the burden associated with transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations by

considering the number of MPOs that are subject to conformity , the size of these MPOs, and the number of pollutants that apply
. To estimate burden hours that M POs incur to determine conformi ty for just one pollutant/NAAQS, EPA and DOT field offices were asked for estimated state and local respondent burden for the various tasks involved in a transportation plan or TIP conformity determination. For burden hours a ssociated with each additional pollutant, EPA relied on data from ICR 2130.0 4 for incremental burden hours associated with performing transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations for each additional pollutant/NAAQS, which w ere based on federal sur vey responses. For each burden hour estimated, EPA assumed that state and local agencies work only on conformity
- related activities. This I CR does not include burden for the general development of transportation plans, TIPs, projects, or motor vehicle emissions budgets, since these documents are developed to meet other requirements. EPA is assuming that some data collection for transportation planning or SIP purposes could also be used in conformity without additional conformity
- related burden. The following tables illustrate the burden hours and cost associated with meeting the conformity

requirements for a transportation plan and TIP update in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas that are designated for one or more pollutants/NAAQS. These MPOs and metropolitan areas have experience with the conformity process, have established interagency

consultation procedures and have developed models for conducting plan and TIP conformity

determinations. While transportation plan and TIP updates are now able to be done with the same frequency (at least every

4 years), EPA estimates that it is only those MPOs serving smaller populations (50,000
- 200,000 populations) that will perform conformity determinations for transportation plans and T IP s at the same time, thus leading to efficiencies in burden hours and cost. In contrast, MPOs in larger areas may cho o se not to align transportation plan and TIP update conformity

determinations as regularl y, since these areas are expected to have more18

c omplex transportation planning considerations. Therefore, for purposes of this analy sis, EPA assumes that conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs will alway s occur at different times in large metropolitan areas ( Tables 2 through 5) and that conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs will occur at the same time in small metropolitan areas (see Table s 6 and 7).

. **Table 2: State and Local Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan Conformity Determination**  **by MPO** 

**– Population of 200,000 or More** 

**MP O Dem**  **onstrating Conformity For Consultation**  **Regional Emissions**  **Analysis 22**  **Other**

**Activities Total** 

**Burden Hours**  One Pollutant/NAAQS 5 5 280 45 380 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 7 2 375 60 507 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 88 465 75 628
**Table 3: State and Local Annual Cost Transportation Plan Conformity Determinations**  **by MPO**

**– Population of 200,000 or More** 

**MP O**  **Dem onstrating Conform** **ity For Burden**  **Hours No. of** 

**MP Os**  **Frequency**

**of Action Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost** 

**Per Hour**  **Total**

**Annual Cost**  One Pollutant/NAAQS 380 2 6 4 years 2 , 470 $ 59.40 23 $ 146,718 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 507 2 2 4 years 2 , 788 $ 59.40 $ 165,607 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 628 39 3 years 8,164 $ 59.40 $ 484,942

**Total for All Transportation Plan Actions: 13,422**  **hours /year x $**  **5 9**  **. 40**  **/hour = $**  **797,267 /year** 

22 The burden for regional emissions analyses is framed in this ICR as an MPO responsibility but we recognize that some State DOTs or other agencies may also perform the analyses, in cooperation with or instead of the MPO.

23 See Section 6(b) Estimating State and Local Respondent Costs, for a description of how the Cost per Hour was calculated.19 **Table 4: State and Local Burden Hours Each TIP Conformity Determination**  **by MPO**

**– Population of 200,000 or More** 
**MP O**  **Dem onstrating Conform** **ity For Consultation**  **Regional Emissions**  **Analysis Other Activities**  **Total Burden**  **Hours** One Pollutant/NAAQS 4 4 280 45 369 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 5 5 375 60 490 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 6 6 465 75 606
**Table 5: State and Local Annual Cost TIP Conformity Determinations**  **by MPO**

**– Population of 200,000 or More** 

**MP O**  **Dem onstrating Conform** **ity For Burden**  **Hours No. of** 

**MP Os**  **Frequency**

**of Action Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost** 

**Per Hour**  **Total**

**Annual Cost**  One Pollutant/NAAQS 369 26 4 years 2,399 $ 59.40 $ 1 42,501 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 490 2 2 4 years 2, 695 $ 59.40 $ 16 0,083 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 606 3 9 4 years 5, 909 $ 59.40 $ 3 50,994 **Total for All TIP Actions:**  **11, 003**  **hours/year x $ 59.40**  **/hour = $**  **6 53,578**  **/year**20 **Table 6: State and Local Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity**  **Determination by MPO** 

**– Population Between 50,000**  **- 200,000** 
**MP O**  **Dem onstrating Conform** **ity For Consultation**  **Regional Emissions**  **Analysis Other Activities**  **Total Burden**  **Hours** One Pollutant/NAAQS 50 120 30 200 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 6 1 160 40 261 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 7 7 200 50 327
**Table 7: State and Local Annual Cost Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations**  **by MPO**

**– Population Between 50,000**  **- 200,000** 

**MP O**  **Dem onstrating Conform** **ity For Burden**  **Hours No. of** 

**MP Os**  **Frequency**

**of Action Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost** 

**Per Hour**  **Total**

**Annual Cost**  One Pollutant/NAAQS 200 24 4 years 1,200 $ 59.40 $ 71,280 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 261 8 4 years 522 $ 59.40 $ 31,007 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 327 7 3 years 763 $ 59.40 $ 45,322 **Total for All Transportation Plan and TIP**  **Actions: 2,485**  **hours/year x $ 59.40**  **/hour = $**  **147,609 /year**  In addition, EPA has also estimated the s tate and l ocal start
- up burden associated with the transition to EPA’s latest emissions model, MOVES 2014
. During the previous I CR cycle, the burden included training/workshops plus additional time to transition from the emissions model called MOBILE6.2 to the new MOVES emissions model . The transition started in December 2009 with the release of MOVES 2010
. In this ICR time period, state and local agencies have some start
- up burden associated with the latest version of MOVES, but not as much as in the previous period. MOVES2014 was released in July 2014. For this I CR, EPA has again assumed that half of the MP Os have already taken a MOVES training class and have experience working with MOVES 2010
. EPA included a reduced amount of burden for training for a smaller percentage of staff to account for turn
- over as well as transition time to convert input data betwe en MOVES2010 and MOVES2014. The burden hours for consultation remained the same. The start - up burden for MOVES2014 is shown in Tables 8 and 9
.21

EPA published a Notice of Availability and corresponding grace period in the Federal Register (79 FR 60343 ) , after the release of MOVES2014. The Notice include s a grace period before MOVES2014 is required in regional emissions analy sis. EPA also issu ed policy guidance on the use of th is model. 24

. **Table 8**  **: State and Local Burden Hours**  **One -**  **time Start -**  **up For Transition to MOVES**  **2014 for Regional Emissions Analyses** 

**Action Total**  **Burden Hours** Training 30 Transition 50 **Total burden hours for State and Local Respondents for Start -**  **up of MOVES**  **Analysis: 8**  **0 hours**  **Table 9**  **: State and Local Costs**  **One -**  **time Start -**  **up For**  **Transition to MOVES 2014**  **for Regional Emissions Analyses Training** **/Transition Hours**  **No. of MPOs**  **Total Burden Hours**  **Cost Per Hour Total Cost**  80 63 5,040 $ 59.40 $299,376 **Total cost for State and Local Respondents for Transition to MOVES2014**  **: 5**  **, 040**  **x $**  **59.40 /hour=**  **$299,376 Project**  **- Level Conformity Determinations in**  **Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas**  Tables 10 and 11 estimate the burden and cost associated with making conformity determinations for projects in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. These tables are intended to illustrate burden associated with a ty pical project
- level conformity determination. To calculate burden for state and local agencies in preparing project
- level conformity determinations for these areas, EPA polled its regional offices and DOT which typically work with state and local agencies in project
- level conformity determinations. EPA headquarters estimated the time necessary to conduct the hot
- spot analy ses based on the guidance documents for these anal ys es and professional experience. State and local burden hours for consultation and conducting the hot
- spot analy ses in Table 10 reflect averages of the responses received. EPA calculated the average number of annual actions based upon survey responses from EPA Regional Office s and DOT offices that are responsible for working with state and local

24 Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2014 for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes, ( EPA
- 420
- B
- 14
- 008 July 2014).22

respondents in making project
- lev el conformity determinations
. Conformity

determinations for projects in metropolitan ozone and NO 2 nonattainment and maintenance areas are fairl y straightforward, because projects onl y need to come from a conforming transportation plan and TIP to meet al l conformity requirements. A hot
- spot anal ys is is not required for project determinations in these nonattainment and maintenance areas. Alternativel y, conformity determinations for all non
- exempt federal projects in CO areas must include either a qualitative or quantitative hot
- spot analy sis (depending on the t ype of project)
. 25 InPM 2.5 and PM 10 areas, project
- level conformity determinations must include a hot
- spot analy sis if the project is of local air quality concern. 26 With the release of MOVES (an d EMFAC in California) in December of 2010 and the end of the subsequent conformity grace period, all required PM hot
- spot analy sis must now be quantitative. 27 EPA has also issued policy guidance on the use of these models . The use of the MOVES model is re quired for PM hot
- spot anal yses and other purposes
. 28 The total burden estimates for project
- level conformity determinations represent 50% of total state and local burden for a PM or CO hot
- spot analy sis. We are assuming that the anal ys is would also be used for satisfying NEPA requirements, so only half of the burden would be included in the conformity I CR. These numbers include scoping the project anal ys is, emissions modeling, air qual ity modeling , determining background concentrations, calculating design values, quality

assurance, and preparing the final documentation. The state and local burden hours for completing both qualitative CO and quantitative PM and CO hot
- spot analyses are shown in Table 10 . EPA calculated the average number of annual actions based on past experience and input given b y the EPA Regional Office s and DOT O ffices that are responsible for working with state and local respondents in making project
- level conf ormity determinations
. EPA is assuming that some data for hot
- spot analy ses will already be available because it is necessary for project development (e.g., traffic data). Consultation with other state and local agencies is an important activity for these

25 See the conformity rule (40 CFR 93.123(a)) for the types of projects that require qualitative versus quantitative CO hot
- spot analyses.

26 Per the conformity rule (40 CFR 93.123(b)(1)), projects of local air quality concern include: “(i) new highway projec ts that have a significant number of diesel vehicles, and expanded highway projects that have a significant increase in the number of diesel vehicles ; (ii) projects affecting intersections that are at Level
- of
- Service D, E, or F because of increased traff ic volumes from a significant number of diesel vehicles related to the project; (iii) new bus and rail terminals and transfer points that have a significant number of diesel vehicles congregating at a single location; (iv) expanded bus and rail terminals and transfer points that significantly increase the number of diesel vehicles congregating at a single location; and, (v) projects in or affecting locations, areas, or categories of sites which are identified in the PM 10 or PM 2.5 applicable SIP or SIP submi ssion as appropriate, as sites of violation or possible violation.”

27 Notice of Availability: Official Release of the MOVES2010a and EMFAC2007 Motor Vehicle Emissions Models for Transportation C onformity Hot
- Spot Analyses and Availability of Modeling Gui dance, 75 FR 79370 (December 2010).

28 “Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2014 for State Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes,” EPA
- 420
- B
- 14
- 0008 (July 2014).23

anal ys es and EPA estimates that on average seven state and local agencies participate in one consultation meeting on each transportation project. EPA is assuming that conformity
- related consultation would be one of man y issues discussed through consu ltation meetings as a project proceeds through the NEPA process. EPA assumes that the total burden hours for project
- level conformity determinations would be approximately

the same for larger and smaller metropolitan areas because requirements for project
- level conformity determinations do not differ based upon population size served by

an MPO. Requirements for project
- level conformity determinations are the same for large and small metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. **Table 10**  **: State and Local Burden Hours**  **Each Project -**  **level Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas** 

**Pollutant Type of Hot**  ****

**spot Analysis Consultation**  **Hot -**  **spot Analysis**  **Other**

**Activities Total** 

**Burden Hours**  Ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 29 None 0.5 N/A 0.5 1
PM 2.5 or PM 10 Quantitative 18 71 3 92 CO Quantitative 6 14 2 22 CO Qualitative 3 2 1 6

29 Most projects in PM 10 and PM 2.5 areas do not require a quantitative hot
- spot analysis. In contrast, all non - exempt CO projects in CO areas require some type of hot
- spot analysis.24 **Table 11**  **: State and Local Annual Cost Project**  **- level Conformity Determinations**  **Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas**

**Me tropolitan**  **Area/Pollutant Burden**  **Hours Per**  **Action Average** 

**No. of Actions/year**  **No. of**

**MP Os**  **Total**

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost Per** 

**Hour Total** 

**Annual Cost**  Project level conformity determination

- No Hotspot Analysis

– ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 Pop.

200,000+ 1 65 87 5 , 655 $5 9.40 $335,907 Pop. 50,000
- 200,000 1 15 39 585 $5 9.40 $34,749
PM 2.5 Hot
- spot Analyses 92 0.1 30 79 727 $59.40 $ 43,184
PM 10 Hot
- spot Analyses 92 0.1 48 442 $59.40 $ 26,255 CO Quantitative Hot
- spot Analyses 22 5 50 5 ,500 $59.40 $ 3 26,700 CO Qualitative Hot
- Spot Analyses 6 0.5 50 1 50 $59.40 $ 8, 910 **Total for All Project -**  **level Actions: 1**  **3 ,**  **059 /year x $**  **5 9.40**  **hour= $ 77**  **5 ,**  **705 /year**  **State and Local Burden Associated with the Transition to MOVES2014 for**  **Project Level Requirements**  EPA estimated the state and local costs associated with the transition from MOVES2010 to MOVES2014 for quantitative PM and CO hot
- spot analy ses in this I CR. The previous ICR included costs associated with start
- up of quantitative anal ys is and MOVES2010
. Training include d learning new quantitative PM hot
- spot modeling guidance as well as training for

30 The number of average actions per year for PM hot
- spot analysis has been reduced, reflecting EPA’s experi ence to date
.25

emissions and air quality

modeling. 31 EPA anticipates offering MOVES2014 on - site training, as well as webinars. For burden estimates, we are anticipating utilizing webinars to present the revised guidance for quantitative PM hot
- spot guidance using MOVES2014 , advanced topics via webinars, and training for the use of emissions and air quality models. We have also included a one
- time start
- up burden for l earning to use MOVES for quantitative CO hot
- spot anal ys es in CO nonattainment and maintenance areas. The burden hours per action is less than those in PM nonattainment and maintenance areas as the CO areas already perform quantitative anal ys is and theref ore the start
- up burden only includes training time for MOVES, rather than other aspects of CO hot
- spot analy ses . The burden estimates in Table s 1 2 and 1 3 reflect only the share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requireme nts for hot
- spot anal ys es (i.e. half of the burden hours associated with anal ys es). **Table 1**  **2 : State and Local**  **Burden Hours**

**One -**  **time Start -**  **up For**  **Quantitative Hot -**  **Spot Analysis Using MOVES2014** 

**Action Burden Hours per Action**  PM Training and Start
- up 30 CO Training and Start
- up 10

**Table 1**  **3 : State and Local**  **Costs One**  **- time Start**  **- up**  **For Quantitative Hot**  **- Spot Analysis**  **Using MOVES2014**

**Pollutant Training Hours**  **No. of Areas**  **Total**

**Burden Hours**  **Cost Per**

**Hour Total Cost**  PM 2.5 and PM 10 30 142 4,260 $5 9.40 $ 253,044 CO 10 15 150 $5 9.40 $ 8,910 **Total cost for State and Local Respondents for Start -**  **up of Quantitative Analysis: 4,410**  **hours /yr**  **x $5**  **9.40 /hour=**  **$ 261,954/yr** 

31 EPA has provided guidance for those areas required to do quantitative hot
- spot analysis for PM 2.5 and PM 10 nonattainment and maintenance areas: “Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot
- spot Analyses in PM 2.5 and PM 10 Nonatta inment and Maintenance Areas”, EPA
- 420
- B
- 13
- 053 and “Using MOVES in Project
- Level Carbon Monoxide Analyses”, EPA
- 420
- B
- 10
- 041
.26

The number of PM areas in Table 1 3 includes both metropolitan and isolated rural areas. Of the 1 69 PM nonattainment and maintenance areas, 10 MPOs are nonattainment or maintenance for both a PM 2.5 and PM 10 NAAQS and 17 are located in California (where MOVES is not used) , which reduces the total number of nonattainment and maintenance areas to 142 . We believe that there will be efficiencies gained for these areas which are not captured in the burden estimates. For example, the same MOVES modeling can be used for meeting both a PM 10 and PM 2.5 NAAQS, rather than conduct emissions modeling twice. However, we have not reflected these efficiencies in the I CR; we have kept the burden estimates separate for PM 2.5 and PM 10 for these areas. The number of CO areas in Table 1 3 includes both metropolitan and isolated rural areas. Of the 50 CO nonattainment and maintenance areas, 26 are also nonattainment or maintenance for PM and 9 are located in California (where MOVES is not used), which reduces the total number of nonattainme nt and maintenance areas to 15
. **Project -**  **Level Conformity Determinations in Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance**  **Areas** Table s 1 4 through 1 6 includes the state and local government burden estimated with performing regional emissions analy sis and project
- level conformity determinations in ozone, CO, PM 2.5 and PM 10 isolated rural areas
. 32 EPA considered several factors in developing these estimates. EPA assumed that state departments of transportation will continue to be the lead agency in prepari ng project
- level conformity

determinations in all isolated rural areas. Some state air quality agencies may

also provide emissions modeling assistance to isolated rural areas, as is now done in some areas. We also retained the assumption made in the previous I CR ( 2130.0 4 ) supporting statement that isolated rural areas that are nonattainment or maintenance for more than one pollutant/NAAQS will have additional burden hours, because these areas may be required to conduct a regional emissions analy sis fo r an additional year and may have additional technical issues to resolve. Therefore, we included more burden hours for consultation, conducting regional emissions anal ysis, and performing other activities in these areas, as in previous ICRs.

32 There are no current NO 2 nonattainment or maintenance areas in isolated rural areas. See Table 1 for further information.27 **Ta ble**  **14 : State and Local Burden Hours**  **Each Project -**  **level Conformity Determination Regional Emissions Analysis**  **For Isolated Rural Areas**
**– Population Less Than 50,000** 

**Dem onstrating Conform** **ity For Consultation**  **Regional Emissions**  **Analysis Other Misc.** 

**Activities Total** 

**Burden Hours**  One Pollutant/NAAQS 28 65 15 108 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 33 90 20 143

**Table 15**  **: State and Local Annual Cost Each Project**  **- level Conformity Determination**  **Regional Emissions Analysis For Isolated Rural Areas** 
**– Population Less**  **than 50,000**

**Dem onstrating Conform** **ity For Burden**  **Hours No. of** 

**Areas Frequency** 

**of Action Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost** 

**Per Hour**  **Total Annual Cost**  One Pollutant/NAAQS 108 47 5 1, 015 $5 9.40 $ 60,291 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 143 4 5 114 $5 9.40 $ 6,772 **Total for All Actions:**  **1 ,129**  **hours/year x $ 5**  **9.40 /hour =**  **$ 67,063**  **/year** Table 1 5 reflects a frequency of project
- level conformity determination s being done once every

five ye ars in each isolated rural area, which is less than MPOs in the previous burden calculations. MPOs are required b y regulation to determine conformity once every

four ye ars. Our experience from previous I CRs and existing research (see Appendix A) is that isolated rural areas determine conformity less than once every

four ye ars. In general, conformity

determinations for projects in isolated rural areas are more involved than for projects in metropolitan areas, because a regional emissions analysis is also performed when a regionally significant project “not from a conforming trans portation plan and TIP” is to receive federal funding or approval. 33 EPA notes that this I CR may overestimate burden associated with determining conformity

for projects in isolated rural areas, since conformity determinations for non
regionally

significant projects may

not require that a new regional emissions analy sis be completed every

time.

33 Isolated rural areas are not required by federal law to develop metropolitan transportation plans or TIPs.28

Consultation between state and local agencies would also occur for each project requiring a hot
- spot analy sis. 34 Li ke metropolitan projects, EPA is also assumi ng that conformity
- related topics would be one of man y issues discussed through consultation meetings as a project proceeds through the NEPA process. Localized anal ys es are assumed to be used to meet both transportation conformity and NEPA requirements . Therefore, EPA is assuming that the estimated burden associated with consultation and preparation of these hot
- spot analy ses would be divided equally between transportation conformity and NEPA. Accordingly , the burden estimates in Table 1 6 reflect only the share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requirements for hot
- spot analy ses (i.e., half of the burden hours associated with the analy ses).

. **Table 16**  **: State and Local Burden Hours For**

**Each Project -**  **Level Conformity Determination**

**Hot -**  **S pot Analysis**  **Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas**
**Pollutant Type of Hot**  **** **spot Analysis Consultation**  **Hot -**  **spot Analysis**  **Total Burden** 

**Hours** CO Quantitative 6 14 20 CO Qualitative 3 2 5 Table 17 shows state and local burden hours estimated for performing project
- level conformity

determinations in CO isolated rural areas. EPA did not include PM quantitative anal ys is for isolated rural areas in this ICR, reflecting our experience to date. To calculate the total burden hours for state and local agencies in isolated rural areas, EPA assumed that a conformity determination occurs once every five years, as in the previous ICR. Also, the transportation conformity regulation requires a hot
- spot analy sis for every non exempt project in a CO nonattainment or maintenance area. Because there are two isolated rural areas that are nonattainment or maintenance for CO, we assumed there would be two CO hot
- spot analy ses in isolated rural areas over a fi ve - ye ar period.

34 EPA estimates that four state and local agencies would participate in one consultation meeting on each transportation project.29 **Table 1 7**  **: State and Local Annual Cost Project**  **- Level Conformity Determinations** 

**Hot -**  **Spot Analysis Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas** 

**Me tropolitan**  **Area Burden** 

**Hours per Action**  **No. of Areas Frequency of**  **Action Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost Per** 

**Hour Total** 

**Annual Cost**  CO
- Quantitative Hot
- spot Analyses 20 2 5 years 8 $5 9.40 $ 475 CO

– Qualitative Hot
Spot Analyses 5 2 5 years 2 $5 9.40 $ 119 **Total State and Local Respondent Burden for Project Level Conform ity Determinations:**  **10 hours/year x**  **$ 5**  **9.40 /hour = $**  **594** 

### 6(b) **Estimating	State	and	Local	Respondent	Costs** The following paragraphs describe the assumptions used for estimating state and local respondent costs illustrated in S ection 6(a): **(i) Estimating Labor Costs**  EPA assumed that each state and local burden hour associated with conformity determinations i s completed by an experienced technical staff person at a state or local agency or contractor. In addition to salary costs, EPA is also including overhead costs associated with employing an experienced technical staff person, such as paid leave, health in surance, retirement savings, office space, computers, and other business expenses. EPA is assuming that state and local burden hours would be completed b y an experienced technical staff person being paid at a GS
- 13, Step 3 federal government employee sal ary of $ 77,217 /year. 35 EPA then divided the annual 20 1 4 GS
- 13, Step 3 salary rate by 2080 (the number of hours in a work year) and multiplied this number by the standard government overhead factor of 1.6. This calculation results in a state and local cost of $ 59.40 /burden hour. **(ii) Estimating Capital/Start**  **- up and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs**  In general, EPA is not expecting that additional computers, software, or other capital

35 January 2014 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2014
- GS, 2014 General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/policy
- data
- oversight/pay
- leave/salaries
- wa ges/salary
- tables/pdf/2014/GS.pdf30

investments are needed to do conformity anal ys es. Planners sh ould be able to adapt existing equipment and sy stems for conformit y use. The transportation conformity regulation does not contain any continuing record
keeping or reporting requirements that require additional capital or O&M costs for individual state o r local respondent actions. Thus, no capital or O&M cost s are included for record
keeping and reporting actions. **(iii) Annualizing Capital Costs**  EPA has assumed the following in annualizing estimates:

 Estimates for transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations are annualized over a four
- ye ar period, to correspond with Clean Air Act requirements that transportation plans and TIPs conform with a new conformity determination and regional emissions anal ys is every

four years. EPA included the cost associated with meeting the minimum requirements, and therefore assumed that onl y one transportation plan or TIP conformity determination will be done for each MPO every four years in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas , with one exception
. For MPOs designated nonattainment or maintenance for 3 or more NAAQS, the frequency is assumed to be once every 3 years. For the purposes of this ICR, EPA is not considering additional burden from MPOs updating or revising transportation plans and TIPs voluntarily , or as required by state regulations, on a more frequent basis. 

### 6(c) **Estimating	Agency	Burden	and	Costs** This section of the ICR shows federal agency burden and costs associated with carrying out transportation conformity regulations. **(i) Estimating Federal Labor Costs**  EPA estimates that each DOT and EPA federal burden hour associated with conformity determinations and adequacy findings is completed by an experienced technical staff person. EPA is also including overhead costs associated with employing an experienced technical staff person, such as paid leave, health insurance, retirement savings, office space, computers, and other business expenses. EPA assum ed that federal burden hours w ould be completed by an experienced te chnical staff person being paid at a GS
- 13, Step 3 federal government employee salary of $ 77,217 /year. 36 EPA then divided the annual 20 1 4 GS
- 13, Step 3 salary rate by 2080 (the number of hours in a work year) and multiplied this number by the standard gove rnment overhead factor of 1.6. This calculation result ed in a federal cost of $ 59.40 /burden hour.

36 January 2014 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2014
- GS, 2014 General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/policy
- data
- oversight/pay
- leave/salaries
- wa ges/salary
- tables/pdf/2014/GS.pdf31

**Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment/Maintenance Areas** 

**– Federal Burden Hours and Cost**  Table s 18 throu gh 20 show estimated federal burden hours and cost associated with making conformity

determinations for transportation plans and TIP s in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. EPA assumes that federal burden in these areas is associated onl y wi th conformity
- related work prior to an MPO ’ s determination and for reviewing transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations and that MPOs have established interagency

consultation procedures with regularl y scheduled meetings for discussing conformity issues. Because MPOs serving smaller metropolitan areas (populations between 50,000
- 200,000) ty pically do conformit y determinations for transportation plans and TIPs at the same time since they are t ypicall y on the same four
- ye ar update cycle, EPA also assumes that federal burden associated with consulting on and reviewing transportation plan and TIP conformity

determinations for these MPOs is done at the same time as well. Therefore, federal burden associated with transportation conformity requirements in smaller metropolitan areas (50,000
- 200,000) is half the burden associated with transportation plan and TIP conformity

determinations in large metropolitan areas. EPA calculated estimated f ederal burden hours based upon survey responses from EPA Regional Office s and DOT offices that are responsible for work associated with making conformity

determinations for transportation plans and TIPs.

**Table 18**  **: Federal Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan or TIP Conformity Determination**  **Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas** 

**Population of 200,000 or More Me**  **tropolitan Planning Organization**  **Activity FHWA**  **FTA EPA**  **Total**
Per Conformity Determination (Includes all areas with populations of 200,000+) Attending Consultation Meetings 12 12 12 36 Conformity
- Related Work Prior to MPO Submission 12 1 3 16
Revie wing Plan Conformity Determination 13 2 7 22 **Federal Hours Burden Hours for Each Plan or TIP Conform ity Determination:**  **74**32 **Table 19**  **: Federal Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan/TIP**  **Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas** 

**Population of 50,000 -**  **200,000 Me**  **tropolitan Planning Organization**  **Activity FHWA**  **FTA EPA**  **Total** Per Conformity Determination (Includes all areas with populations of 50,000
- 200,000) Attending Consultation Meetings 12 12 12 36

Conformity
- Related Work Prior to MPO Determination 12 1 3 16
Revie wing Plan Conformity Determination 13 2 7 22 **Federal Hours Burden For Each Plan/ TIP Conform ity Determ** **ination :**  **74 Table**  **20 : Federal**  **Annual Cost for MPOs Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations**  **Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas**

**Action Me**  **tropolitan**

**Nonattainm ent Area**  **Burden Hours**  **Per Action**  **No. of**

**MP O’s**  **Frequency**

**of Action Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost** 

**Per Hour**  **Total**

**Annual Cost**  Plan Per Conformity

Determination (Pop. 200,000+) 74 87 4 years 1,609 $5 9.40 $ 95,575
TIP Per Conformity

Determination (Pop. 200,000+) 74 87 4 years 1,609 $5 9.40 $ 95,575 Plan/ TIP Per Conformity

Determination (pop. 50,000
- 200,000) 74 39 4 years 721 $5 9.40 $ 42,8 2 7 **Total Federal Burden for Plan and TIP Actions: 3,9**  **39 hours/year x $5**  **9.40 /hour = $**  **233,977**33

**Project -**  **Level Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas** 

**– Federal Burden**  **Hours and Cost** Table s 21 and 2 2 estimate the burden hours and cost that federal agencies incur associated with conformity determinations for projects in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. These tables are intended to illustrate burden asso ciated with a ty pical project
- level conformit y determination. To calculate burden for federal agencies associated with consultation and reviewing project
- level conformit y determinations for metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, EPA polled it s regional offices and DOT. The following tables show federal burden associated with consultation and reviewing project
- level conformity determinations prepared b y state and local respondents. State and local respondents burden hours and cost associated w ith consultation, hot
- spot analy sis and regional emissions analy sis may be found in Table s 10 and 11
. **Table 21**  **: Federal Burden Hours Each Project**  **- level Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and**  **Maintenance Areas**

**Pollutant Type of Hot**  **** **spot Analysis**  **Consultation Reviewing Project**  **** **level conform ity**  **determinations Total** 

**Burden Hours**  Ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 None 0.5 0.5 1 PM 2.5 and PM 10 Quantitative 5 11 16 CO Quantitative 1 2 3 CO Qualitative 0.25 1.25 1.534 **Table 2 2**  **: Federal Annual Cost Project**  **- level Conformity Determinations**  **Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas**

**Type of Analysis Burden**  **Hours Per Action**  **Average**

**No. of Actions/**  **Year No. of** 

**MP Os**  **Total**

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost** 

**Per Hour**  **Total**

**Annual Cost**  Project level conformity determination

- No Hot
- spot Analysis Pop.

200,000+ 1 6 5 87 5,656 $5 9.40 $ 335,966 Pop. 50,000
- 200,000 1 15 39 585 $5 9.40 $ 34,749
PM 2.5 Hot
- spot Analyses 16 0 .1 79 126 $5 9.40 $ 7,484 PM 10 Hot
- spot Analyses 16 0 .1 48 77 $5 9.40 $ 4,574 CO Quantitative Hot
- spot Analyses 3 5 50 7 5 0 $5 9.40 $ 4 4 , 550 CO Qualitative Hot
- Spot Analyses 1.5 0.5 50 3 7 $5 9.40 $ 2,1 9 8

**Total for All Project -**  **level Actions: 7,231**  **hours/year x $ 5**  **9.40 /hour= $**  **42 9**  **, 521**  **/year Project**  **- Level Conformity**  **Determinations in Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas** 

**– Federal Burden Hours and Cost**  Table 2 3 shows federal burden associated with conformity determinations for a typical regionally

significant project in an isolated rural nonattainment or maintenance area. Table 24 shows federal burden associated with interagency consultation and review of hot
- spot anal ys es in isolated rural CO, PM 2.5 and PM 10 nonattainment and maintenance areas. Table 25 shows federal annual cost associated with conform ity determinations for project
- level conformit y determinations in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas. In general, conformity

determinations for projects in isolated rural areas are more involved than for metropolitan areas, since isolated rural areas also need to perform a regional emissions analy sis when a regionall y significant project is to receive federal funding or approval. To account for additional burden hours spent b y state and local agencies for consultation, the consultation for Federal agencies has also been increased t o support additional meetings and activities.35 **Table 2 3**  **: Federal Burden Hours Each Project**  **- Level Conformity Determination**  **Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintena nce Areas**  **Regional Emissions Analysis Component Type of Project**  **Activity FHWA**  **FTA EPA**  **Total**

Projects in Isolated Rural Area Attending Consultation Meetings 6 1 1 8

Conformity
- Related Work on Draft

Determination 6 1 2 9
Revie wing Project Conformity Determination 10 1 5 16

**Total for Each Isolated Rural Area Project Determ ination:**  **33 Table**  **24 : Federal Burden Hours Each Project**  **- Level Conformity Determination Isolated** 

**Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas Hot**  **- spot Analysis Component** 

**Pollutant Type of Hot**  **** **spot Analysis Consultation**  **Reviewing Project**   ** level conform****ity determinations**  **Total**

**Burden Hours**  CO Quantitative 1 2 3 CO Qualitative 0 .25 1.25 1.536 **Table 25**  **: Federal Agency Burden Cost For Project**  **- Level Conformity Determinations**  **Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas**
**Type of Project Burden** 

**Hours per Action**  **No. of**

**Isolated Rural Areas**  **Frequency of**

**Action Total** 

**Annual burden hours**  **Cost Per**

**Hour Total** 

**Annual Cost**  Projects in Isolated Rural Areas

– Regional Analysis 33 5 1 5 years 33 7 $5 9.40 $ 20, 018 CO

– Quantitative Hot
- spot Analyses 3 2 5 years 1 $5 9.40 $59 CO

– Qualitative Hot
- spot Analyses 1.5 2 5 years 1 $5 9.40 $59 **Total Federal Agency Burden for Project Level Conformity Determ inations:**  **3 39**  **hours/year x $ 5**  **9.40 /hour =**  **$ 20,**  **136 /year**  **Adequacy Findings for SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets** 

**– Federal Burden**  **H ours**  One component of the federal burden associated with transportation conformity is EPA’s role in making adequacy

findings for SIPs with new motor vehicle emissions budgets. The conformity

r egulation requires the motor vehicle emissions budget (s) from a submitted SIP to be used as the measure of conformity on ce EPA finds such a budget (s) adequate (40 CFR 93.118(e) and (f)). 37 The total burden of the adequacy review process is completed by EPA. No other federal agencies are involved in the adequacy review process. This I CR also does not account for an y state or local work associated with developing the SIP because SIPs are developed to meet other non
- conformity requirements. EPA based burden hours associated with each adequacy review on the average amount of EPA staff time needed per adequacy determination , EPA s taff time includes the time needed to notify the public that a SIP has been submitted and is under adequacy review , the adequacy review of the SIP ’s budget(s) , respond ing to an y public comments, and publish ing a Federal Register notice with EPA’s finding. Table 26 illustrates EPA’s burden hours for each adequacy finding. These estimates were
37 Per 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), EPA will find a budget adequate if the following minimum criteria is met: (i)The submitted SIP is en dorsed by the Governor or his/her designee and has been subject to a state public hearing; (ii) Interagency consultation took place and any EPA stated concerns have been addressed; (iii) The budget is clearly identified and precisely quantified; (iv) The b udget, when considered with all other emissions sources, is consistent with applicable SIP requirements; (v) The budget is consistent with and is clearly related to the emissions inventory and submitted SIP control measures; and, (vi) Revisions to a previo usly submitted SIP explain and document any changes to the previous budget and control measures, impacts on point and source emissions, and any changes to established safety margins and reasons for those changes37

drawn from a recent survey of EPA Regional Office s, as well as an estimate of the time spent at headquarters. **Table 2 6**  **: Federal Burden Hours Adequacy F indings of**  **SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets Activity**  **Hours to perform** Per Adequacy Finding Adequacy Review 17 Federal Register Notice Preparation and

Publication 19 Preparation for and Website Posting 3

**Burden hours per Adequacy Finding: 39**  **Adequacy Findings**

**– Federal Costs**  Table 27A shows the total federal annualized cost associated with making adequacy determinations for SIP motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA based the number of adequacy reviews need each ye ar based on the historical average number of SIPs that EPA has processed for adequacy

over the past seven years, and re sponses from EPA regions regarding the anticipated number of SIP s expected to process for adequacy in fiscal ye ar 2015
. Table 2 7 B show costs associated with Fede ral Register notices of adequacy findings. A Federal Register notice of EPA’s adequacy determination is alway s required, but often such notice is given with a proposed or final rulemaking action to approve the submitted SIP which is required due to other non
- conformit y requirements
. Therefore, EPA included in the above table only the cost associated with Federal Register notices that were published separate from a proposed or final rulemaking action to approve the submitted SIP.

**Table 2 7**  **A: Federal Annual Cost of Adequacy Findings**

**Action Average** 

**Number of Actions per**  **Region No. of** 

**Regions Burden** 

**Hours per Action**  **Total**

**Annual Burden**  **Hours Cost Per** 

**Hour Total** 

**Annual Burden**  **Cost** Adequacy Finding 3 10 39 1,170 $5 9.40 $69,49838 **Table 2 7**  **B: Federal Annual Cost of Federal Register**  **Notices**

**Action Average**  **Number of Actions**  **No. of**

**Regions Total Federal Register** 

**Notice Publications Average**  **cost per Publication**  **Total**

**Annual Burden**  **Cost** Federal Register Notice

– Publication Costs 3 10 30 $413 $12,390 **Total Burden for Adequacy Findings: 1,170**  **hours/year x $5 9.40**  **/hour =$ 69,498**  **+ $ 12,390**  **= $ 81,888**  

### 6(d) **Estimating	the	Respondent	Universe	and	Total	Burden	and	Costs** EPA estimates that 126 MPOs will be subject to conformity requirements during the period covered b y this I CR and that EPA Regional Offices, the FHWA and FTA will be involved in interagency

consultation, and review of any transportation
- related conformity determinations performed by MPOs duri ng this process. EPA also estimates that similar consultation will occur for projects in isolated rural areas. 

### 6(e) **Bottom	Line	Burden	Hours	and	Cost	Tables** The bottom line annual burden for all s tate and local respondents is **50,5 5**  **8** hours with a cost o f **$ 3,003,146**  **.** The bottom line annual burden for f ederal agency

respondents is **12,6 79**  hours with a cost of **$ 76**  **5 ,**  **522 .**  **38** Finally , the bottom line burden to all federal, state, and local agency respondents over the 3
- ye ar period covered by this ICR is est imated at **18 9**  **, 7**  **1 1**  hours with a cost of approximately **$ 11,**  **306,004 .**  **(i) State and Local Agency**  **Tally** The bottom
- line annual burden for all State and local agencies in performing transportation conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs in nonattainment and maintenance areas and isolated rural areas is **3 3**  **, 079**  hours/year with a cost of **$ 1,**  **9 64**  **, 893**  **/**ye ar.

38 To obtain bottom
- line annual Federal agen cy cost associated with conformity determinations, EPA multiplied the bottom
- line Federal agency annual burden hours by estimated hourly labor costs of $59.40 and then added $ 12,390 in Federal Register notice publication costs from Table 27A and B to reach the bottom line Federal agency annual estimated cost of $ 734,038
.39

The bottom
- line annual burden for all State and local agencies in performing project level conformity determinations and, where applicable, hot
- spot anal ys es in metropolitan areas, and isolated rural areas i s **17, 4**  **7 9**  hours /year at a cost of **$ 1,038,253**  /year. **(ii) Federal Agency Tally**  The bottom
- line annual burden for Agencies associated with transportation conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs in nonattainment areas and isolated rural areas is **3,939** hours **/**ye ar at a cost of **$ 233,977** /year. The bottom
- line annual burden for Agencies associated with project level conformity determinations (including, where applicable, hot
- spot analy sis) in metropolitan areas and isolated rural areas is **7,520** hours/year at a cost of **$ 449,657** /year. The bottom
- line annual burden for EPA burden associated with adequacy determinations for motor vehicle emission budgets associated with SIPs is **1,170** hours/year at a cost of **$ 81,888**  /year . 39 Tables 2 8 and 2 9 show the total annual estimated burden hours and cost associated with transportation conformity determinations requirements incurred by state, local and federal respondents. **Table 2 8**  **: Total Annual Burden Hours Transportation Conformity Determinations**  **Type of Conform ity**  **Determ ination**  **Total Annual State and Local**  **Burden Hours Total Annual**  **Federal Burden Hours**  **Total Annual Conform** **ity Burden Hours**  Transportation Plan/ TIP Conformity Determination 33,079 3,939 37,018 Project Conformity Determination 17, 4 7 9 7,570 25,0 4 9 Adequacy Finding N/A 1,170 1,170 Total 50,5 5 8 12,679 63,2 3 7 BOTTOM LINE ANNUALBURDEN HOURS: 63,2 3 7 / year

39 To obtain bottom
- line annual cost associated with adequacy determinations for motor vehicle emission budgets, EPA multiplied the total burden hours in Table 27A and B by estimated hourly labor costs of $59.40 and then added $ 12,390 in Federal Register notice publication costs to reach the bottom line annual cost of $ 81,888
.40 **Table 2 9**  **: Total Annual Costs Transportation Conformity Determinations**  **Type of Action Total Annual State and**  **Local Cost Total Annual Federal**  **Cost Total Annual** 

**Conform ity Costs**  Transportation Plan/ TIP Conformity Determination $ 1,964,893 $ 233,977 $2,198,870 Project Conformity Determination $ 1,038,253 $ 449,657 $1,487,910 Adequacy Finding Determinations N/A $ 81,888 $ 81,888 Total $3,003,146 $765,522 $3,768,668 BOTTOM LINE ANNUAL COST: $ 3,768,668/year 40 **(iii) Variations in the Annual Bottom Line**  EPA does not anticipate significant variations in the annual respondent reporting burden or cost over the course of the clearance period. 

### 6(f) **Reasons	for	Change	in	Burden**
Decrease in state and local respondent burden hours since the previous I CR w as approved is approximately 45, 400 hours/ ye ar : **(i) Adjustment for decreased burden associated with decreased transportation**  **conformity analysis for PM 10**  **, CO ,**  **and 1997 Ozone**  **NAAQS** A decrease in burden was projected due to the requirement for transportation conformity ending in PM 10 and CO areas that have reached the end of the 20
- year maintenance period. A decrease in burden was also projected due to fewer transportation conformity determinations for areas previousl y designated nonattainment or maintenance for 1997 ozone NAAQS that is anticipated to be revoked in earl y 2015, which is early in the period covered by

this ICR. (ii) **Adjustment for decreased burden associated with the transition from MOVES2010 to MOVES2014** 

40 To obtain bottom
- line costs associated with conformity determinations (Table 29), EPA multiplied the bottom
- line b urden hours in Table 28 by estimated hourly labor costs of $59.40 and then added $ 12,390 in Federal Register notice publication costs from Table 27A and B to reach the bottom line annual cost of $ 3,992,708
.41

A decrease in burden was projected over the previous I CR for model transitions. During the period covered b y the previous I CR, the transition between MOBILE6.2 to MOVES2010 occurred, which was more resource
- intensive than the transition from MOVES2010 to MOVES2014. The amount of training hours w as reduced however, the burden hours for consultation remained the same. The transition from MOVES2010 to MOVES2014 occurs in the period covered b y this I CR. (iii) **Adjustment for decreased burden associated with project -**  **level conformity** A d ecrease in burden was projected over the previous I CR for project
- level conformity as fewer areas are performing PM 2.5 and PM 10 quantitative project
- level hot
- spot analy sis. 

### 6(g) **Burden Statement** Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended b y 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 sy stems 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 an y previously applicable in structions 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 spo nsor, 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 15.42



### Appendix	A:	Confor **mity -**  **Related	Research	Considered	for	This	ICR** The following is the conformity research studies that were considered for this I CR. EPA has cited in the I CR when these studies were utilized as appropriate.

 April 2003, “Transportation/Air Quality I ssues in Rural Areas,” FHWA and Dye Management Group.

 October 2003, “Rural Conformity : A Survey of Practice,” NCHRP and I CF Consulting.