**SUPPORTING STATEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY**  **NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAAA) (Renewal)**  **1. Identification of the Information Collection 1(a) Title of the Information Collection**  NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAAA) (Renewal), EPA I CR Number 2072.05 , OMB Control Number 2060

- 0544 **1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract** The National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Lime Manufacturing were : 1) proposed on December 20, 2002, (67 FR 7804 6 ) ; 2) promulgated on January 5, 2004 (69 FR 394 ) ; and 3) last

- amended on April 20, 2006

. These regulations appl y to both existing facilities and new lime manufacturing plants (LMP) that either emits or has the potential to emit any

single hazardous air pollutant (HAP) at a rate of 9.07 megagrams (10 tons) or more per ye ar or any combination of HAP at a rate of 22.68 megagrams (25 tons) or more per year from all emission sources at the p lant site. This subpart applies to each existing and new lime kilns and their associated coolers, and processed stone handling (PSH) operation sy stems located at a LMP that is a major source. A new lime kiln is a lime kiln, and its associated lime cooler for which construction or reconstruction began after December 20, 2002, and a new PSH operations sy stem is the equipment for which construction or reconstruction began after December 20, 2002

. This information is being collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAAA. In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notification report s, performance tests, and periodic reports b y the owners/operators of the affected facilities. They are also required to maintain records of the occurrenc e and duration of any startup, shutdown, or malfunction in the operation of an affected facility , or any period during which the monitoring sy stem is inoperative. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all affected facilities subject to NESHAP. Any owner/operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these measurements, and retain the file for at least five 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 directl y to the U

. S

. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional office. Based on our consultations with industry representatives, there is an average of three affected facilities at each plant site and that each plant site has only one respondent (i.e., the owner/operator of the plant site). Over the next three ye ars, an av erage of 65 respondents per ye ar will be subject to the se standard s , and one additional respondent per year will become subject to the se same standard s
.2

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the currentl y- active Information Collection Request (I CR) without any “Terms of Clearance.” The “Affected Public” are existing and new lime kilns , associated coolers, and PSH operations s ys tems located at a LMP that is a major source. The “burden ” to the Affected Public may be found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAAA) (Renewal). The ”b urden ” to the Federal Government is attributed entirely to work performed by either F ederal employees or government contractors and may

be found below in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR P art 63, Subpart AAAAA ) (Renewal).
**2. Need for and Use of the Collection 2(a) Need/Authority for**  **the Collection** The EPA is charged under Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, as amended, to establish standards of performance for each category or subcategory

of major sources and area sources of hazardous air pollutants. These standards are applicable to new or existing sources of hazardous air pollutants and shall require the maximum degree of emission reduction. Inaddition, section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require any

owner/operator subject to any requirement of this Act to: (A) Estab lish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports;

(C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit complian ce certifications in accordance with Section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the Admini strator may reasonabl y require. In the Administrator's judgment, HAP emissions from lime manufacturing cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to either endanger public health and/or welfare. Therefore, the NESHAP were promulgated for this source category at 40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAAA. **2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data** The recordkeeping and reporting requirements in the standard ensure compliance with the applicable regulations which were promulgated in accordance with the Clean Air Act. The collected information is also used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings. Performance tests are required in order to determine an affected facility ’s initial3

capability to comply

with the emission standard. Continuous emission monitors are used to ensure compliance with the standard s at all times. During the performance test 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 Ag ency or delegated authority when a source becomes subject to the requirements of the regulations. The reviewing authority may then inspect the source to check if the pollution control devices are properl y installed and operated and leaks are being detecte d and repaired and the standard is being met. The performance test may also be observed. The required semiannual reports are used to determine periods of excess emissions, identify problems at the facility , verify operation/maintenance procedures and for compliance determinations.
**3. Non**
**- duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria**  The requested recordkeeping and reporting are required under 40 CFR part 63, subpart AAAAA. **3(a) Non**
**- duplication**  If the subject standards have not been delegated, the information is sent directl y to the appropriate EPA regional office. Otherwise, the information is sent directl y to the delegated state or local agency . If a state or local agency has adopted its own similar standards to implement the Federal standards, a cop y of the report submitted to the state or local agency can be sent to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the Federal standards. Therefore, duplication does not exist. **3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB**  An announcement of a public comment period for the renewal of this I CR was published in the Federal Register (78 FR 33409) on June 4, 2013. No comments were received on the burden published in the Federal Register

. **3(c) Consultations** Consultations with industry representatives (i.e., respondents) were conducted to determine if there is any way for EPA to reduce the recordkeeping and reporting burden or improve the language in the standard to make it easier to comply . In developing this I CR, we contacted : 1) the National Lime Association , at hprillaman@lime.org ; and 2) Carmeuse Lime & Stone , at (412) 995

- 5500. We received c omments from Carmeuse Lime & Stone on October 24 , 2013. The se comments indicated that the current cost of a repeat Method 5 performance test is between $7,000 and $8,500 ; therefore, the capital costs associated with performance testing in this I CR has been updated to reflect the comments received.4

It is our policy to respond after a thorough review of comments received since the last ICR renewal , as well as those submitted in response to the first Federal Register notice. **3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection** Less frequent information collection would decrease the margin of assurance that facilities are continuing to meet the standards. Requirements for information gathering and recordkeeping are useful techniques to ensure that good operation and maintenance practices are applied and emission limitations are met. I f 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

. **3(e) General Guidelines** These reporting or recordkeeping requirements do not violate any of the regulations promulgated b y OMB under 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5. These standards require the respondents to maintain all records, including reports and notifications for at least five years. This is consistent with the General Provisions as applied to the standards. EPA believes that the five

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

- ye ar statute of limitations on which the permit program is based. The retention of records for fiv e ye ars 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 five ye ars. In addition, EPA would be prevented from pursuing the violators due to the destruction or nonexistence of essential records. **3(f) Confidentiality** Any information submitted to the Agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in Title 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B

- Confidentiality of Business Information (CBI) (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979). **3(g) Sensitive Questions** The reporting or recordkeeping requirements in the standard do not include sensitive questions.

**4. The Respondents and the Information Requested** 5

**4(a) Respondents/SIC Codes** The respondents to the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are lime manufacturing facilities. The United States Standard Industrial Classification (SI C) code for the respo ndents affected b y the standard is SI C 3274, which corresponds to the North American Industry Cla ssification System (NAI CS) code 327410 for the Lime Manufacturing

. **4(b) Information Requested (i) Data Items**  In this ICR, all the data that is recorded or reported is required b y the NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR P art 63, S ubpart AAAAA). A source must make the following reports:

**Notifications** Applicability 63.9(b), 63.7130(a) Anticipated startup 63.9(b)(4), 63.7130(a) Commencement of construction 63.9(b)(4), 63.7130(a) Actual startup 63.9(b)(4), 63.7130(a) Intention to construct/reconstruct 63.9(b)(4)

- (5), 63.7130(a) Compliance dates/extension 63.9(c), 63.7130(a) Performance test/opacity observations 63.9(e), 63.7130(a) Compliance status 63.9(g), 63.7130(a)
**Reports** Operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan 63.7100(d) Startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan 63.6(e)(3), 63.10(d)(5), 63.7100(e) Semiannual compliance report 63.10(d)(2), 63.7131(b) Emergency

SSM reports, including where procedures were not followed 63.6(e)(3), 63.10(d)(5), 63.7131(b) A source must keep the following records: **Recordkeeping**6 **Recordkeeping** Notifications and reports 63.10(b)(2)(xiv), 63.7132(a)(1) Startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan/events 63.6(e)(3)(iii)

- (v), 63.7132(a)(2) Performance tests and opacity observations 63.10(b)(2)(viii), 63.7132(a)(3) Records required to demonstrate continuous compliance 63.10(b)(2)(vii), 63.7132(c) Visual observations 63.6(h)(6), 63.7132(b) Records are required to be retained for five years 63.10(b)(1) 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 sy stems to transmit data electronically . However, electronic reporting s ys tems are still not widely used. At this time, it is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents use electronic reporting.

**(ii) Respondent Activities**

**Respondent Activities** Read instructions. Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate CMS for opacity , or for pressure drop and liquid supply pressure for control device. Perform initial performance test, Reference Method 9 test, and repeat performance tests if necessary
. Write the notifications and reports listed above. Enter information required to be recorded above. Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and sy stems for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information.7 **Respondent Activities** Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and sy stems for the purpose of processing and maintaining information. Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and sy stems for the purpose of disclosing and providing information. Train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information. Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information. Currently sources are using monitoring and reporting equipment that provide parameter data in an automated way ( e.g., continuous parameter monitoring s ys tem) . Although personnel at the source still need to evaluate the data, this ty pe of monitoring equipment has significantl y reduced the burden associated with monitoring and recordkeeping. **5. The Information Collected: Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and**  **Information Management 5(a) Agency Activities**  EPA conducts the following activities in connection with the acquisition, analysis, storage, and distribution of the required information.
**Agency Activities** Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests if necessary

. Review notifications and reports, including performance test reports, and excess emissions reports, required to be submitted by industry

. Audit facility

records. Input, anal yz e, and maintain data in the Online Tracking Information System (OTI S). **5(b) Collection Methodology and Management** Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority could inspect the source to determine whether the pollution control devices are properl y installed and operated. Performance test reports are used b y the Agency to discern a source’s initial capability to compl y with the emission standard. Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published for use in compliance and enforcement programs. The semiannual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations.8

In formation contained in the reports is entered into OTI S which is operated and maintained by

EPA's Office of Compliance. OTIS is EPA’s database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance data for approximately 125,000 industrial and government

- owned facilities. EPA uses the OTI S for tracking air po llution compliance and enforcement b y local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional offices and EPA headquarters. The EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve and anal yz e the data. The records required b y this regulation must be r etained by the owner/operator for five ye ars. **5(c) Small Entity Flexibility** The impact on small entities (i.e., small businesses) was taken into consideration during the development of the regulation. In the final rulemaking notice, EPA prepared a regulatory flexibility anal ys is (FRFA) which examined the impact of the final rule on small entities (See 69 FR 411, January

5, 2004). The EPA identified 19 of the se 45 companies owning potentiall yaffected facilities as small businesses. Eight of these 45 companies manufacture beet sugar (which will not be subject to the final NESHAP) , three of which are small firms. Further, an additional 3 of the 19 small companies will not be subject to the final NESHAP because they do not manufacture lime in a kiln (e.g., they are onl y depot or hydration facilities), and/ or we do not expect them to be major sources. Therefore, i t is expected that 13 of the 34 companies subject to the final NESHAP will be small businesses, representing 38 percent of the affected companies. This percentage was applied to the total number of lime manufacturing plants affected b y this regulation. For this three

- ye ar IC R period, which includes calendar years 201 4 , 201 5 , and 201 6, it is estimated that there will be an average of 6 5 lime manufacturing plants

. EPA estimates that 25 of these 6 5 plants (38 percent) are o wned b y s mall entities. Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the types of control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same for both small and large entities. The Agency considers the se to be the minimum requirements needed to ensure compliance and, therefore, cannot reduce them further for small entities. To the extent that larger businesses can use economies of scale to reduce their burden, the overall burden will be reduced. **5(d) Collection Schedule**  The specific frequency

for each information collection activity within this request is shown below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAAA) (Renewal).
**6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection**  Table 1 documents the computation of individual burdens for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart included in this I CR. The9

individual burdens are expresse d under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of “burden ” under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Wherever appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified. Responses to this information collection are mandatory. The Agency

may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information , unless it displays a currently valid OMB Control Number. **6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden** The average annual burden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping and reporting requirements is estimated to be 1 5,424 hours ( Total Labor Hours from Table 1 below). 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. **6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs (i) Estimating Labor Costs**  This I CR uses the following labor rates: Managerial $123.04 ($58.59+ 110%) Technical $101.22 ($48.20 + 110%) Clerical $51.18 ($24.37 + 110%) These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, March 2013, “Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group.” The rates are from column 1, “Total compensation.” The rates have been increased b y 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry

. **(ii) Estimating Capital/Startup and Operation and Maintenance Costs** The ty pe of industry

c osts associated with the information collection activities in the subject standard s are both labor costs , which are addressed elsewhere in this I CR , and the costs associated with continuous monitoring. The capital/startup costs are one - time costs when a facility becomes subject to the regulation s
. Each new respondent must conduct two initial Method 5 performance tests, for the new kiln and for new material handling. The annual operation and maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to hire third

- party contractors to conduct repeat Method 5 testing, the annualized cost of the bag leak detector, and other costs such as photocopying and postage. Itis assumed that for each kiln control device, a bag leak detector will be installed.10 **(iii) Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs** 
**Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs** (A) Continuous Monitoring Device (B)

Capital/Startup Cost for One Respondent (C)

Number of New Respondents (D)

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

Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent (F)

Number of Respondents with O&M (G)

Total O&M, (E X F)
Bag leak detector a $0 1 $0 $1,434 65 $93,210 Performance Test for New Kilns b $ 10,000 1 $ 10,000 $ 7,75 0 12.8 $ 99,200

Performance Test for New Material Handling c $ 1 0 ,000 1 $ 1 0 ,000 $ 7,75 0 12.8 $ 99,20 0

Total $ 2 0 ,000 $ 291,610

a The cost of a bag leak detection monitor is $10,000. The bag leak detector has a life span of 10 years. The capital cost associated with the bag leak detector was annualized assuming a seven percent interest rate and 10

- year life (i.e., capital recovery factor [CRF] of 0.1434). To calculate annualized costs, the CRF was multiplied by the capital cost of the detector, or $1,434 per respondent. Each of the 65 respondents is expected to have at least one kiln with a bag leak detection monitor installed

. We assume that the bag leak detector is replaced every 10 years and includes this as an O&M cost.

b

. Each n ew respondent is assumed to conduct an initial Method 5 performance test. It is a ssumed that there will be a total of three new kilns in production over the three year period of the ICR, which will average out to one unit per year. The cost fo r an initial Method 5 test is $10,000 per new unit

. It is also assumed that each existing plant would conduct a Method 5 performance test every 5 years

. The cost of a repeat Method 5 test is approximately $7,750. We assume 12.8 respondents will need to conduct repeat performance test per year (64 / 5 = 12.8).

c Each new respondent is assumed to have a material handling operation that would conduct an initial Method 5 performance test. It is assumed that there will be a total of three new kilns in production over th e three year period of the ICR, which will average out to one unit per year. The cost of the initial test is $10,000 per new unit. It is a ssumed that each existing plant has a material handling operation that would conduct a Method 5 performance test every 5 years. The cost of a repeat Method 5 test is approximately $7,750. We assume 12.8 existing respondents per year will conduct repeat test. The total capital/startup costs for this I CR are $ 2 0,000. This is the total of column D in the above table. The total operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for this I CR are $ 291,610 . This is the total of column G. The average annual cost for capital/startup and operation and maintenance costs to industry over the next three years of the IC R is estimat e d to be $ 3 11 , 6 10

. These are the recordkeeping costs. **6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost** The only costs to the Agency

are those costs associated with anal ys is of the reported11

information. EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program includes activities such as the examination of records maintained by the respondents, periodic inspection of sources of emissions, and the publication and distribution of collected information. The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $59,349. This cost is based on the average hourl y labor rate as follows: Managerial $62.27 (GS

- 13, Step 5, $38.92 + 60%) Technical $46.21 (GS

- 12, Step 1, $28.88 + 60%) Clerical $25.01 (GS

- 6, Step 3, $15.63 + 60%) These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 2013 General Schedule, which excludes locality , rates of pay . The rates have been increased by 60 percent to account for the benefit pac kages available to government employees. Details upon which this estimate is based appear below in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAAA) (Renewal). **6(d) Estimating the Respondent Univ erse and Total Burden and Costs**  Based on our research for this I CR, on average over the next three ye ars, approximately 64 existing respondents will be subject to the se standard s . It is estimated that one additional respondent per year will become subjec t. The overall average number of respondents, as shown in the table below, is 65 per year. The number of respondents is calculated using the following table that addresses the three ye ars covered b y this ICR.
**Number of Respondents**

Year (A)

Number of New Respondents 1 (B)

Number of Existing Respondents (C)

Number of Existing Respondents that keep records but do not submit reports (D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Are Also New Respondents (E)

Number of Respondents (E=A+B+C

- D)

1 1 63 0 0 64
2 1 64 0 0 65
3 1 65 0 0 66 Average 1 64 0 0 65

1 New respondent include sources with constructed, reconstructed and modified affected facilities. In this standard existing respondents submit initial notifications.12

Column D is subtracted to avoid double

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

- ye ar period of this ICR is 65. The total number of annual responses per ye ar is calculated using the following table:
**Total Annual Responses**  (A) Information Collection Activity (B) Number of Respondents (C)

Number of Responses (D)

Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Reports (E) Total Annual Responses E=(BxC)+D Notification of applicability 1 1 0 1 Notification of construction/ reconstruction 1 1 0 1 Notification of anticipated startup 1 1 0 1 Notification of actual startup 1 1 0 1 Notification of special compliance requirements N/A Compliance extension request 1 1 0 1 Notification of performance tests 13.8 1 0 13.8 Notification of opacity/VE observations 65 1 0 65 Operation, maintenance, and monitoring plans 1 1 0 1 Startup, shutdown, and malfunction (SSM) plans 1 1 0 1 Site

- specific test plan 1 1 0 1 Notification of compliance status 1 1 0 1 Waiver application N/A Semiannual compliance reports 65 2 0 130 Emergency SSM reports 3.25 1 0 3.25 **Total 221.**  **05** The number of Total Annual Responses is 221 (rounded)

. The total annual labor costs are $1, 508 , 72 8 (rounded)

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

– NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAAA) (Renewal). **6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables** The detailed bottom line burden h ours and cost calculations for the respondents and the Agency are shown in Tables 1 and 2 below, respectively , and summarized below. **(i) Respondent Tally** The total annual labor hours are 1 5 , 424 hours at a cost of $1,508,72 8 . Details regarding these estimates may

be found below in Table 1 : Annual Respondent Burden and Cost

–13

NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAAA ) (Renewal). Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 70 hours (rounded) per response. The total annual capital/startup and O&M costs to the regulated entity are $ 311 , 6 10. The cost c alculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(iii), Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs.

**(ii) The Agency Tally** The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is estimated to be 1,317 labor hours at a cost of $59,349. See below Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost

– NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAAA) (Renewal). **6( f) Reasons for Change in Burden**  There is an adjustment increase in the respondent and Agency burden from the most recentl y- approved IC R due to an increase in the number of new or modified sources. This ICR assumes an industry

growth rate of one responde nt per year, which results in an average increase of three respondents since the last I CR renewal period. The burden increase also occurred due to a correction on burden calculation

. Inthe previous I CR, the hours required for acquisition, installation, and utilization of technology and s ys tems; reading instructions, and required activities were omitted. There is also an increase in capital and O&M costs . The previous ICR used annualized costs which underestimated the initial costs associated with a performance test. This I CR uses the actual costs associated with a Method 5 performance test. **6(g) Burden Statement** The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 70 hours per response. “ Burden ” means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended b y persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information either to or for a Federal agency . This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and s ys tems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing way s to compl y with any previously

appl icable 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 condu ct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a valid OMB Control Number. The OMB Control Numbers for EPA regulations are listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.14

To comment on the Agency' s need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this I CR under Docket ID Number EPA

- HQ

- OECA

- 2013

- 03 42 . An electronic version of the public docket is available at http://www.regulations.gov/ which may be used to obtain a copy

of the draft collection of information, submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically . When in the sy stem , select “search,” then key in the docket ID number identified in this document. The documents are also available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), WJC 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 holiday s. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566

- 1744, and the te lephone number for the docket center is (202) 566

- 17 52 . Also, you can send comments to the Office of In formation and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA

- HQ

- OECA

- 2013

- 03 42 and OMB Control Number 2060

- 0 544 in any correspondence. **Part B of the Supporting Statement** This part is not applicable because no statistical methods were used in collecting this information.15

**Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost**

**– NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAA** **A )**  **(Renewal)**

**Burden Item (A)**  **Persons h**  **ours per o**  **ccurrence (B)** 

**Number of o**  **ccurrences per**  **r espondent**  **per Year**

**(C) Person**  **h ours per**  **r espondent**  **per y**  **ear (C=A x B)**  **(D)**

**Number of r**  **espondents per**  **Year a**  **(E)**

**Technical person**  **h ours per**  **y ear**  **(E=C x D) (F)** 

**Managem ent**  **person hours**  **per y**  **ear (**  **E x 0.05) (G)** 

**Clerical person**  **h ours per**  **y ear**  **(E x 0.1) (H)** 

**Total Costs per Year** 

1. Applications N/A 2. Surveys and studies N/A 3. Acquisition, installation, and utilization of technology and systems b 40 1 40 1 40 2 4 $4,499.60 4. Reporting requirements A

. Read Instructions b 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $224.98 B

. Required Activities Repeat performance tests c 40 1 40 12.8 512 25.6 51.2 $57,594.88 Visible emission (VE) report for material handling d 8 1 8 65 520 26 52 $58,494.80 Annual inspection of capture, collection, and transport system e 8 1 8 65 520 26 52 $58,494.80 Inspection and maintenance of affected sources, control devices, and monitoring systems according to operation, maintenance, and mo nitoring plan f 4 1 4 65 260 13 26 $29,247.40

C

. Create Information See 4B D

. Gather Existing Information See 4B E

. Write Report Notification of applicability b 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $224.98 Notification of c onstruction/r econstruction b 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $224.98 Notification of anticipated s tartup b 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $224.98 Notification of a ctual s tartup b 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $224.98 Notification of special c om pliance r equirements N/A Com pliance e xtension r equest b 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $224.98 Notification of p erformance t est 2 1 2 13.8 27.6 1.38 2.76 $3,104.72 Notification of o pacity/VE o bservations 2 1 2 65 130 6.5 13 $14,623.70 Operation, maintenance, and monitoring p lan b 40 1 40 1 40 2 4 $4,499.60 Startup, shutdown, and malfunction p lan b 40 1 40 1 40 2 4 $4,499.60 Site

- Specific t est p lan b 40 1 40 1 40 2 4 $4,499.60 Notification of c om

pliance s tatus b 8 1 8 1 8 0.4 0.8 $899.92 Waiver application N/A16

**Burden Item (A)**  **Persons h**  **ours per o**  **ccurrence (B)** 

**Number of o**  **ccurrences per**  **r espondent**  **per Year**

**(C) Person**  **h ours per**  **r espondent**  **per y**  **ear (C=A x B)**  **(D)**

**Number of r**  **espondents per**  **Year a**  **(E)**

**Technical person**  **h ours per**  **y ear**  **(E=C x D) (F)** 

**Managem ent**  **person hours**  **per y**  **ear (**  **E x 0.05) (G)** 

**Clerical person**  **h ours per**  **y ear**  **(E x 0.1) (H)** 

**Total Costs per Year** 

Semiannual c om

pliance r eports g 8 2 16 65 1 , 040 52 104 $116,989.60 Emergency s tartup, s hutdown, and malfunction r eports h , i 8 1 8 3.25 26 1.3 2.6 $2,924.74 **Subtotal for Reporting Requirements 3,69**  **7.74 $361,723**  **.84** 5. Recordkeeping requirements A

. Read Instructions See 4A B

. Plan Activities 3 1 3 1 3 0.15 0.3 $337.47 C

. Im plement Activities j 12 1 12 1 12 0.6 1.2 $1,349.88 D

. Develop Record System 3 1 3 1 3 0.15 0.3 $337.47 E

. Time to Enter Information Record of all information r equired by s tandards k 3 52 156 65 10,140 507 1 , 014 $1,140,648.60 F

. Train p ersonnel l 3 1 3 1 3 0.15 0.3 $337.47 G

. Time to a djust e xisting was to c om ply with p reviously applicable r equirements m 3 1 3 1 3 0.15 0.3 $337.47 H

. Time to transmit or disclose information n 0.25 2 0.50 65 33 1.625 3.25 $3,655.93 I

. Time for Audits N/A **Subtotal for Recordkeeping Requirements 11,726.47**  **$1,147,004.29 TOTAL**  **LABOR BURDEN AND COST (rounded)**  **15,424 $1,508,72**  **8**
**Assu mptions**  **:** a Assumed that the average number of respondent that will be subject to the rule will be 64 existing respondents. There will be one additional new source per year that will become subject to the rule over the three

- year period of this ICR. b This is a one

- time only activity.
c To demonstrate continuous compliance, p lants must conduct performance tests every 5 years. The number of respondents to repeat performance test is 12.8 performance tests per year (64 existing respondents/5years). The cost to conduct a repeat Method 5 performance test is $5,000

. d Assumed that each respondent will take 8 hours to complete the annual visible emission (VE) tests for material handling.
e Assumed that each respondent will take 8 hours to complete the annual inspection of the capture, collection, and transport system. f Assumed that each respondent will take 4 hours to complete the inspection and maintenance of affected sources, control devices, and monito ring systems according to operation, maintenance, and monitoring plan. g Assumed that it will take 8 hours each and two times per year to complete semiannual compliance reports. h Assumed that it will take 8 hours once a year to w rite the emergency startup, shutdown, or malfunction reports. i Assumed that 5 percent of respondents will have to complete the emergency startup, shutdow n, or malfunction reports. j Assumed that it will take 12 hours to record activities implemented. k Assumed that all respondents will take 3 hours each to enter records of all the required information 52 times a year. l Assumed that it will take 3 hours to train each personnel.17

m Assumed that it will take 3 hours for each respondent to adjust existing ways to comply with previously applicable requirements. n Assumed that respondents are required to transmit/disclose information twice per year.18

**Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost**

**– NESHAP for Lime Manufacturing (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart AAAA** **A )**  **(Renewal)**

**Burden Item (A)**  **EPA person**  **hours per occurrence**  **(B)**

**Number of Occurrences**  **per p**  **lant per y**  **ear (C)** 

**EPA Hours per**  **respondent per y**  **ear (C=A x B)**  **(D)**

**Plants per Year** 
**a (E)**  **Technical h**  **ours per h**  **ear (E=C x D)**  **(F)**

**Managem ent**  **h ours per**  **h ear**  **(E x 0.05) (G)** 

**Clerical h**  **ours per h**  **ear ( E x 0.1)**  **(H)**

**Total Costs per**  **y ear** 

Initial performance tests 40 1 40 1 40 2 4 $2,072.98 Retesting preparation for repeat performance tests b 2 1 2 12.8 25.6 1.28 2.56 $1,326.71 Repeat performance tests b, c 40 1 40 12.8 512 25.6 51.2 $26,534.14 Report Review Notification of applicability 1 1 1 1 1 0.05 0.1 $51.82 Notification of c onstruction/ r econstruction 1 1 1 1 1 0.05 0.1 $51.82 Notification of anticipated s tartup 1 1 1 1 1 0.05 0.1 $51.82 Notification of a ctual s tartup 1 1 1 1 1 0.05 0.1 $51.82 Notification of special c om pliance r equirements N/A Notification of i nitial p erformance t ests 1 1 1 1 1 0.05 0.1 $51.82 Notification of c om

pliance s tatus 4 1 4 1 4 0.2 0.4 $207.30 Revie w of r epeat p erformance t est r eport b, d 2 1 2 12.8 25.6 1.28 2.56 $1,326.71 Revie w of s emiannual c om pliance r eport 4 2 8 65 520 26 52 $26,948.74 Revie w of waiver application N/A Revie w of e mer gency s tartup, s hutdown, and m alfunction r eport e 4 1 4 3.25 13 0.65 1.3 $673.72 **TOTAL LABOR**  **BURDEN AND COST**  **(rounded) 1,317**  **$59,349**
**Assu mptions:** 
a Assumed that the average number of respondents that will be subject to the rule will be 64 existing respondents. There will b e one additional new source per year that will become subject to the rule over the three

- year period of this ICR for an average of 65 existing and new respondents per year. b To demonstrate continuous compliance, plants must conduct repeat performance tests every 5 years. The number of respondents to repeat performance test is 12.8 test/year (64 existing respondents/5years = 12.8 performance tests per year) starting in the se cond year of this ICR.
c Assumed that it will take 40 hours for respondents to repeat performance tests. d Assumed that it will take 2 hours for respondents to review repeat performance test report.
e Assumed five percent of sources will need to submit eme rgency startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports.