1 **SUPPORTING STATEMENT ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY** 

**NSPS for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Electric Utility Generating Units** 

**(40 CFR part 6 0**  **, subpart TTTT**  **) Part A of the Supporting Statement**  **1. Identification of the Information Collection**  (a ) Title and Number of the Information Collection

“New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for Greenhouse Gas Emissions for New Electric Utility

Generating Units (40 CFR p art 6 0 , s ubpart TTTT ).” The EPA I CR tracking number is 2465.01 ; the OMB Control Number is 2060

-NEW. (b ) Short Characterization Pursuant to CAA section 111, the United States (U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing new source performance standards (NSPS) for emissions of CO 2 for new affected fossil fuel

- fired EGUs. For purposes of this rule, fossil fuel

- fired EGUs include fossil fuel

- fired boilers, IGCC units and stationary combined cycle turbine units that generate electricity for sale and are larger than 25 megawatts (MW)

. The EPA is proposing these requirements because CO 2 is a greenhouse gas (GHG) and fossil fuel

- fired power plants are the country ’s largest stationary source emitters of GHGs. The EPA in 2009 found that by causing or contributing to climate change, GHGs endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations. The proposed standards would establish standards of performance for carbon dioxide ( CO 2 ) emissions from electric utility generating units ( EGUs ) currentl y in the 40 CFR part 60, Da and KKKK source categories under a new subpart TTTT. Subpart Da currentl y regulates utility boilers , and subpart KKKK currentl y regulates stationary combined cycle units ( stationary turbine combustion sy stem s where heat from the turbine exhaust gases is recovered b y a heat recovery steam generating unit) and integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) units

. The proposed requirements for new sources would require new fossil fuel

- fired EGUs greater than 25 megawatt electric (MWe) to meet an output

- based s tandard of 1,000 pounds of CO 2 per megawatt

- hour (lb CO 2 /MWh), based on the performance of widely used natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) technology . Reflecting the economics of the energy sector, NGCC is likely to be the predominant choice for new fossil f uel

- fired generation even absent this rule. New coal

- fired units could meet the standard either by employing carbon capture and storage (CCS) 1 of approximately

50% of the CO 2 in the exhaust gas at startup, or through later application of more effective CCS to meet the standard on average over a 30

- ye ar period. The 30

- ye ar averaging option could also provide flexibility for owners and operators of coal units implementing CCS at the outset of the unit’s operation that were designed and operated to emit

1 Carbon capture and storage or CCS means the use of a technology for separating and capturing CO 2 from the flue gas or sy ngas stream with subsequent compression and transportation to a suitable location for long term storage and monitoring.2

at le ss than 1,000 lb CO 2 /MWh to address startup concerns or short term interruptions in their ability to sequester captured CO 2 . The EPA is not proposing standards of performance for existing EGUs whose CO 2 emissions increase as a result of installation of pol lution controls for conventional pollutants (modified EGUs) , for reconstructed EGUs, or for proposed EGUs, which are referred to here as transitional sources, that have acquired a complete preconstruction permit by the time of this proposal and that commence construction within 12 months of this proposal. As a result, those sources would not be subject to the standards of performance proposed in this rule. At a future date, the EPA intends to promulgate emission guidelines for states to develop plans reducing CO 2 emissions from existing fossil fuel

- fired EGUs. In general, all CAA section 111 standards require notifications, reports, and records that are essential in determining compliance, and are required of all sources subject to the standards

. This proposed action would impose minimal new information collection burden on affected sources beyond what those sources would already be subject to under the authorities of CAA parts 75 and 98. OMB has previously approved the information collection requirements contained in the existing part 75 and 98 regulations (40 CFR part 75 and 40 CFR part 98) under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act , 44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq . and has assigned OMB control numbers 2060

- 0626 and 2060

- 0629, respectively

. Apart from c ertain reporting costs based on requirements in the NSPS General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), which are mandatory

for all owners/operators subject to CAA section 111 national emission standards, there are no new information collection costs, as the information required by this proposed rule is already collected and reported by other regulatory

programs. Potential respondents are owners and operators of new fossil fuel

- fired EGUs greater than 25 MWe

. The proposed rule would regulate emissions of CO 2 and would require that CO 2 mass rate CEMS and the associated automatic data acquisition and handling sy stem be installed and operated

. T he initial performance test would consist of collection of hourl y CO 2 average concentration, mass flow rate recorded with the certified CO 2 concentration and flow rate CEMS and the corresponding electrical power generation data for all of the hours of operation for the first calendar ye ar beginning on the first day of the f irst month following completion of the CEMS installation and certification. Compliance with the applicable average CO 2 mass emissions rate (lb/MWh) would be calculated as a 12

- month rolling average, updated monthly , using the reported hourl y CO 2 average co ncentration and flow rate values from the certified CEMS data collected for the previous month’s process operating day s along with generation data tracked b y the facility

for the unit. In this rulemaking, the EPA propos es that the owner or operator of a new unit would be required to comply with the notification and recordkeeping requirements in the section 111 regulatory general provisions, 40 CFR part 60, subpart A, and would need to report results of performance testing and excess emissions; as well as re cord and maintain hourly

average CO 2 emissions concentration, hourly average flow rate, and hourly useful electrical generation. As part of an Agency

- wide effort to facilitate reporting of environmental data and reports, the proposal would require that owners and operators subject to this regulation must electronically submit excess emissions, continuous monitoring s ys tems performance and

- or summary reports. Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this proposed sub part would be require d to keep each record for 5 years except those records required to demonstrate compliance3

with the emissions limits in section 60.5520(b) of the proposed standards. Each record must be kept on site for at least 2 years and may be kept off site for the remaining years. The EPA proposes that records of the reports that have been subm itted to EPA’s WebFIRE database ( excess emissions, continuous monitoring s ys tems performance and

- or summary reports ) would not need to be maintained. The EPA believes that electric power companies will choose to build new EGUs that comply with the regulatory

requirements of this proposal because of existing and expected market conditions. The EPA does not project any new coal

- fired EGUs that commence construction after this propos al to commence operation over the 3

- ye ar period covered b y this ICR. We estimate that 17 new affected NGCC units would commence operation during that time period. As a result of this proposal, those units would be required to prepare a summary report, whic h includes reporting of excess emissions and downtime, every 6 months.
**2. Need for and Use of the Collection**  (a ) Need/Authority for the Collection The EPA is charged under section 111 of the CAA to establish standards of performance for new stationary

sources that reflect:

**. . .** application of the best sy stem of emission reduction which (taking into account the cost of achieving such reduction and any non - air quality health and environmental imp act and energy requirements) the Administrator determines has been adequatel y demonstrated. Section 111(a)(l).
The EPA refers to this charge as selecting the best demonstrated technology (BDT). Section 111 also requires that the Administrator review and, if appropriate, revise such standards every eight ye ars. In addition, CAA section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require any

owner or operator subject to any requirement of this Act to:

(A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in accordance with section 114 (a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the Administrator may reasonabl y require. As previously

stated, the EPA in 2009 found that by causing or contributing to climate change, GHGs endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations . F ossil fuel

- fired power plants are the country’s largest stationary source4

emitters of GHGs

. Therefore, NSPS for emissions of CO 2 are being proposed for this category of source s at 40 CFR part 60, subpart TTTT. Certain records an d reports are necessary for the Administrator to: 1) identify new EGUs subject to the standards, 2) ensure that the NSPS is being properly applied; 3 ) identify those facilities that should be inspected; 4 ) identify those facilities that may benefit from compliance assistance activities; and 5 ) ensure that process and emission s control/monitoring equipment are being properly operated and maintained on a continuous basis

. (b ) Use/Users of the Data The requir ed information w ould be used b y a gency enforcement personnel to ensure that the emission limitations are being achieved. Based on review of the recorded information at the site and the reported information, the EPA can identify facilities that may

not be i n compliance and decide which plants, records, or processes should be inspected.
**3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria**  (a ) Nonduplication As previously

stated, this proposed action would impose minimal new information collection b urden on affected sources beyond what those sources would already be subject to under the authorities of CAA parts 75 and 98. Apart from certain reporting requirements which are mandatory

for all owners/operators subject to CAA section 111 national emission standards, there are no new information collection costs, as the information required by this proposed rule is already collected and reported by other regulatory

pro grams. The proposed rule would require that affected owners or operators follow the applicable reporting requirements and submit reports as required b y the other regulatory programs. The additional reporting requirements proposed (the excess emissions and continuous monitoring sy stems performance reports and

- or summary report s) are not currentl y required from owners or operators of EGUs that would be regulated under proposed 40 CFR part 60, subpart TTTT. Therefore, no duplication exists. (b ) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB EPA will provide public notice by means of a Federal Register Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. (c) Consultations The EPA has been engaged in extensive interactions with many different stakeholders on the subjects of climate change, source contributions, and potential emission reduction opportunities. These stakeholders have included industries, environmental organizations, and many regional, State, and local air quality management agencies that have been actively enga ged in efforts to address GHG emissions over a period of several years. In addition to these conversations, as part of developing this proposed rule, the EPA held f our listening sessions in February and March 2011 to obtain additional information and input from key stakeholders and the public. Each of the sessions had a particular target audience: the electric power industry , environmental and environmental justice organizations, States and Tribes, and coalition groups. Each session lasted two hours and featured a facilitated round table discussion among5

stakeholder representatives who were identified and selected for their expertise in the CAA standard

- setting process. The EPA accepted comments from the public at the end of each session and via the electronic docket sy stem. Comments submitted via the electronic docket s ys tem are available at www.regulations.gov (docket number EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2011

- 0090).
The EPA’s consultatio n activities with governmental entities and tribal leaders as described below regarded planned actions for new and existing sources, but only new sources would be affected b y this proposed action. In light of the interest in this proposed rule among gover nmental entities, the EPA initiated consultations with governmental entities. The EPA invited the following 10 national organizations representing state and local elected officials to a meeting held on April 12, 2011, in Washington DC: 1) National Governor s Association; 2) National Conference of State Legislatures, 3) Council of State Governments, 4) National League of Cities, 5) U.S. Conference of Mayors, 6) National Association of Counties, 7) International City /County Management Association, 8) National Association of Towns and Townships, 9) County Executives of America, and 10) Environmental Council of States. These 10 organizations representing elected state and local officials have been identified b y the EPA as the “Big 10” organizations appropriate to contact for purpose of consultation with elected officials. The purposes of the consultation were to provide general background on the proposal, answer questions, and solicit input from s tate/local governments.
Because the EPA is aware of Tribal interest in this proposed rule, the EPA offered consultation with tribal officials earl y in the process of developing this proposed regulation to permit them to have meaningful and timel y input into its development

. Consultation letters were sent to 584 tribal leaders. The letters provided information regarding the EPA’s development of NSPS and emission guidelines for EGUs and offered consultation. A consultation/outreach meeting was held on May 23, 2011, with the Forest County Potawatomi Community, the Fond du L ac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa Reservation, and the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe. Other tribes participated in the call for information gathering purposes. In this meeting, the EPA provided background information on the GHG emission standards to be developed and a summary of issues being explored by the Agency . In addition, tribes participated in the listening session on February

17, 2011 with the state agencies, as well as in a separate session with tribes on April 20, 2011.
The EPA will also hold additional meetings with tribal environmental staff to inform them of the content of this proposal as well as provide additional consultation with tribal elected officials where it is appropriate. (d ) Effects of Less Frequent Collection If the relevant information were collected less frequently , the EPA would not be reasonabl y assured that a plant is in compliance with the standards. (e) General Guidelines None of the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5 are being exceeded.6

(f ) Confidentiality All information submitted to the agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the agency policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, part 2, subpart B

–Confidentiality

of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902 , September 01, 1976; amended b y 43 FR 39999, September 28, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979). (g ) Sensitive Questions This section is not applicable because this ICR does not involve matters of a sensitive nature. **4. The**  **Respondents and the Information Requested** (a ) Respondents/NAICS C odes R espondents are owners or operators of new fossil fuel

- fired EGUs

. It is estimated that 17 new EGUs would commence operation during the 3

- ye ar period of this I CR

. All respondents w ould b e subject to the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. The applicable NAI CS code s are 2211 12 , Fossil fuel electric power generating units (covers owners/operators of industry or federal, state or local government establishments) , and 92115 0 , Fossil fuel electric power generating units in Indian Country

. (b ) Information Requested (i ) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements. Apart from certain reporting costs based on requirements in the NSPS General Provisions (40 CFR part 60, subpart A), which are mandatory for all owners/operators subject to CAA section 111 national emission standards, there are no new information collectio n costs, as the information required b y this proposed rule is already collected and reported by other regulatory programs (CAA parts 75 and 98). The EPA does not project any new coal

- fired EGUs that commence construction after this proposal to commence ope ration over the 3

- ye ar period covered b y this ICR. We estimate that 17 new affected NGCC units would commence operation during that time period. As a result of this proposal, those units would be required to prepare a summary report, which includes reporting of excess emissions and downtime, every 6 months. The EPA is including in this I CR , an estimate of the burden associated with performing an affirmative defense. The EPA is providing this as an illustrative example of the potential additional administrative burden a source may incur to assert in an Affirmative Defense in response to an action to enforce the standards set forth in the applicable subpart. This illustrative estimate is not considered a duplicate estimate of cost under the General Duty to Mi nimize Emissions clause under 63.6(e)(1)(i), which states: “At all times, the owner and operator must operate and maintain any affected source, including associated air pollution control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with safe ty and good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. Determining whether such operation and maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to the Administrator which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, review of operation7

and maintenance procedures, review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the source.” To provide the public with an estimate of the relative magnitude of the burden associated with an assertion of the af firmative defense position adopted by a source, the EPA provides an administrative adjustment to this I CR that estimates the costs of the notification, recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with the assertion of the affirmative defense. The E PA’s estimate for the required notification, reports and records, including the root cause anal ys is, associated with a single incident totals approximately $3,141 and is based on the time and effort required of a source to review relevant data, interview p lant employees, and document the events surrounding a malfunction that has caused an exceedance of an emission limit. The estimate also includes time to produce and retain the records and reports for submission to the EPA. The EPA provides this illustrativ e estimate of this burden because these costs are only incurred if there has been a violation and a source chooses to take advantage of the affirmative defense. Of the number of excess emission events reported by source operators, onl y a small number wo uld be expected to result from a malfunction, and only a subset of excess emissions caused b y malfunctions would result in the source choosing to assert the affirmative defense. Thus we believe the number of instances in which source operators might be expected to avail themselves of the affirmative de fense will be extremely small. In fact, we estimate that there would be no such occurrences for new EGUs subject to this proposed rule over the 3

- ye ar period covered b y this ICR. We expect to gather information on such events in the future and will revise this estimate as better information becomes available. (ii) Respondent Activities. The respondent activities that would be required by the proposed NSPS are introduced in section 6(a). While multip le coal

- fired EGUs have recently commenced operation and several are presentl y under construction, no new coal

- fired power plants have commenced construction in either 2009 or 2010

. In addition, forecasts of new generation capacity from both the Energy In f ormation Administration and the Edison Electric Institute do not project any new coal

- fired power plants will be constructed in the short term

. Thus, th e EPA does not project any new coal

fired EGUs that commence construction after this proposal to commenc e operation over the 3

- ye ar period covered by

this I CR. B ecause of fuel supply availability

and cost considerations, we also do not project that any new oil

- fired electric utility steam generating units will be built during the 3

- year ICR period

. We estimate that 17 new affected NGCC units would commence operation during that time period. (iii) Electronic Reporting. The proposal would require that owners and operators subject to this regulation must electronically

submit excess emissions, continuous monitoring sy stems performance and

- or summary reports. Owners and operators would need to submit these reports to the EPA’s WebFIRE by

using the C ompliance and Emissions Data Reporting Interface (CEDRI) that is accessed in the Central Data Exchange (CDX). The CDX is the EPA’s portal for submitting and managing electronic environmental data and reports and is accessed at www.epa.gov/cdx. The CDX is n eeded to meet the EPA standards for electronic reporting set by the Cross

- Media Electronic Reporting Rule. For more information, please s ee http://www.epa.gov/cromerr/.8

**5. The Information Collected: Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and**  **Informatio n Management**  (a ) Agency Activities There would be no EPA burden associated with the reporting requirements of the proposed standards. As a result of this proposal, th e 17 new affected NGCC units that we estimate w ill commence operation during the 3

- ye ar period of the ICR would be required to electronically

submit a summary

report, which includes reporting of excess emissions and downtime, every

6 months. The fees for upkeep of this electronic database are already funded through other rul es. Thus, there would be no burden to the agency associated with these reporting requirements

. (b ) Collection Methodology and Management Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect the source to determine whether the CO 2 CEMS and the associated automatic data acquisition and handling sy stem are properl y installed and operated

. Performance test reports are used by the a gency

to discern a source’s initial capability to comply

with the emission standard. Data and records maintaine d by

the respondents are use d in compliance and enforcement programs. The semi

annual reports are used for problem identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance determinations. The i nformation ob tained is then entered i nto the AIRS Facility Subsy stem (AFS) which is operated and maintained by the EPA’s Office of Compliance

. AFS is the EPA’s database for the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance and annual emission inventory data for over 125,000 industrial and government owned facilities

. The EPA uses the AFS for tracking air pollution 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. Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this proposed sub part would be required to keep each record for 5 years following the date of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective action, report, or record except those records required to demonstrate compliance with the emissions limits in section 60.5520(b) of the proposed stand ards. Records required to demonstrate compliance with the emissions limits in section 60.5520(b) must be kept for at least 40 ye ars following the date of initial startup of the affected EGU. Each record must be kept on site for at least 2 years after the d ate of each occurrence, measurement, maintenance, corrective action, report, or record. The records may be kept off site for the remaining ye ars. All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority . In the event that there is no such delegated a

uthority , the reports are sent directl y to the U.S. EPA regional office. The EPA proposes that records of the reports that have been submitted to EPA’s WebFIRE database as required in proposed section 60.5555(a)(1) ( excess emissions, continuous monitoring sy stems performance and

- or summary reports ) would not need to be maintained. (c) Small Entity Flexibility T he EPA is aware that there is substantial interest in this rule among small entities (municipal and rural electric cooperatives). In light of this i nterest, the EPA determined to seek earl y input from representatives of small entities while formulating the provisions of this9

proposed regulation. This process has enabled the EPA to hear directly from these representatives, at a very

preliminary

stage, about how it should approach the complex question of how to appl y s ection 111 of the CAA to the regulation of GHGs from these source s . The EPA’s outreach regarded planned actions for new and existing sources, but only new sources would be affected b y this proposed action. The EPA conducted an initial outreach meeting with small entity representatives on April 6, 2011. The purpose of the meeting was to provide an overview of recent EPA proposals impacting the power sector. Specificall y, overviews of the Transport Rule, the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, and the Clean Water Act 316(b) Rule proposals were presented. The EPA conducted outreach with representatives from 20 various small entities that potentially

would be affected by

this rule. The representatives included small entity municipalities, cooperatives, and private investors. We distributed outreach materials to the small entity representatives; these materials included background, an overview of affected sources and GHG emissions from the power se ctor, an overview of CAA section 111, an assessment of CO 2 emissions control technologies, potential impacts on small entities, and a summary of the listening sessions. We met with eight of the small entity representatives, as well as three participants from organizations representing power producers, on June 17, 2011, to discuss the outreach materials, potential requirements of the rule, and regulatory areas where the EPA has discretion and could potentially provide flexibility

. A second outreach meeting was conducted on July 13, 2011. We met with nine of the small entity

representatives, as well as three participants from organizations representing power producers. During the second outreach meeting, various small entity representatives and participants f

rom organizations representing power producers presented information regarding issues of concern with respect to development of standards for GHG emissions

. Several small entity representatives provided written comments in response to discussions at the me eting s and the questions posed to the small entity representatives by

the Agency

. (d ) Collection Schedule E ach i nformation collection activity within this request (Summary Report including excess emissions and downtime reporting) occurs on a semi

- annual basis.
**6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection** 
Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c document the computation of individual burdens for the reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart included in this I CR for each of the first 3 ye ars
. Table 1 contains a summary of the respondent burden hours and costs detailed in Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c.
**Table 1** 
**. Summary of Respondent Burden** 

**Year Total Annual Labor Burden (hours)**  **Total Annual Labor Costs ($)** 1 264 10,380 2 363 14,272 3 561 22,05710 Total 1188 46,709 3

- Year Average 396 15,570 The individual burdens are expressed under standardized headings believed to be consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Where appropriate, specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified; responses to this information collection are mandatory

. The a gency

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. (a ) Estimating Respondent Burden The average annual burden to industry over the 3

- ye ar period of this I CR from these reporting requirements is estimated to be 396 hours per ye ar ( detailed in Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c). These hours are based on a gency studies and background documents from the development of the regulation, agency knowledge, and experience with the N SPS program. (b ) Estimating Respondent Costs Respondent costs are ty

pically divided into three categori es. These categories include labor costs, operations and maintenance costs, and annualized capital costs

. Labor costs are the only respondent costs associated with this IC R

. (i ) Estimating Labor Costs The average annual labor costs to industry over the 3

- year period of this I CR from these reporting requirements is estimated to be $15,570 per year ( detailed in Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c)

. Labor rates and associated costs are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics (BL S) data

. Technical, management, and clerical average hourly rates for private industry workers were based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employ ment Statistics, 20 1 0 National Industry

- Specific Occupational Employ ment and Wage Estimates . The approxim ate labor rates are $3 9 .3 7 per hour for technical, $61

. 75 per hour for managerial, and $ 22 .1 5 per hour for clerical. (ii) Estimating Annualized Capital Costs There are no annualized capital costs associated with th is I CR. (iii) Estimating Operations and Maintenance (O& M) Costs There are no annual operation and maintenance costs associated with this ICR

. (iv) Affirmative Defense/Root Cause Analysis/Malfunction Costs. The EPA’s estimate for an affirmative defense and root cause anal ys is in Table 2 is based on general experience to calculate the time and effort required of a source to review relevant data, interview plant employees, and reconstruct the events prior to a malfunction in order to determine primary

and contributing causes. The level of effo rt also includes time to produce and retain the report in document form so that the source will have it available should EPA or state enforcement agencies ever request to review it. For th is IC R , the EPA is estimating that there will no instances of affirmative defense over the 3

- ye ar IC R period.11

The labor rates used for these costs are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2009, Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group. The rates are from column 1, Total compensation. The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry

. **Table 2**  **. Burden Associated with Performing an Affirmative Defense**

**Personnel Number of**  **Personnel Time** 

**Requirement (hours)**  **Total**

**Hours Hourly Rate** 

**($/hr) Total**  Technical Personnel 3 6 18 97.59 $ 1,757 Managerial Personnel 2 6 12 114.77 $ 1,377 Total 5 30 $ 3,134
(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost Because the information collection requirements were developed as an incidental part of standards development, no costs can be attributed to the development of the information collection requirements

. Because reporting and recordkeeping requirements on the part of the respondents are required under the part 60 General Provisions, no operational costs will be incurred b y the Federal Government

. Publication and distribution of the information are part of the Compliance Data S ys tem, with the result that no Federal costs c an be directly attributed to the I CR

. Examination of records to be maintained by the respondents will occur incidentally as part of the periodic inspection of sources that is part of EPA's overall compliance and enforcement program, and, therefore, is not attributable to the I CR. The only costs that the Federal government could incur are user costs associated with the analy sis of the reported information . The Federal government would not incur those costs as a result of these proposed standards. (d ) Estim ating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs. The EPA estimate s that 17 new EGUs will become subject to the proposed regulation over the 3

- ye ar period of the I CR

. The total annual number of responses for the new monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements in proposed subpart TTTT over the 3

- ye ar IC R period is estimated to be 72. The average number of annual responses over the 3

- ye ar ICR period is 24 per year
. T he annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 16 .5 hours per response. The total annual labor burden over the 3

- year ICR period is estimated to be 1,188 person hours. The average annual labor burden for the rule is estimated to be 396 person hours per ye ar
. The total annual labor costs over the 3

- ye ar ICR period are estimated at $4 6 , 709

. T he average annual labor costs to industry over the 3

- year period of this I CR are estimated to be $15,570 p er ye ar.12

(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables There are no annualized capital costs or O&M costs associated with this I CR . The bottom line labor hours and costs burden for each ye ar of the 3

- year ICR period appear in Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c. (f ) Reasons for Change in Burden. The increase in burden is due to th is being a new ICR associated with a new subpart for new source performance standards (NSPS) for emissions of CO 2 for new affected fossil fuel

fired EGUs The EPA also provide s an estimate of the costs of the notification, recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with the assertion of the affirmative defense. The EPA’s estimate for the required notification, reports and records, including the root cause anal ys is, ass ociated with a single incident totals approximately $3,141 and is based on the time and effort required of a source to review relevant data, interview plant employees, and document the events surrounding a malfunction that has caused an exceedance of an emission limit. The estimate also includes time to produce and retain the records and reports for submission to the EPA. For th is ICR , the EPA is estimating that there will no instances of affirmative defense over the 3

- ye ar ICR period. The EPA is using this estimate of no events in 3 ye ars, because of the number of excess emission events reported b y source operators, only a small number would be expected to result from a malfunction, and only a subset of excess emissions caused by malfunctio ns would result in the source choosing to a ssert the affirmative defense. We estimate that 17 new affected NGCC units would commence operation during the 3

- year ICR period and believe that there would be no instances in which source operators might be expe cted to avail themselves of the affirmative defense. (g ) Burden Statement The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 7 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financi al 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 s ys tems for the purpo ses 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

applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency

may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number

. The OMB control numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR part 6 0 are listed in 40 CFR part 9. To comment on the a gency's need for this information, the accuracy of the prov ided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, the EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 20 11

- 0 660 , which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334 , 1301 Constitution13

Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. The EPA Docke t 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 telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is (202) 566

- 1742

. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov

. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronicall y
. When in the sy stem, select “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number identified above

. Also, you can send comments to the Office of In formation and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA

. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 20 11

- 0 660 and OMB Control Number 2060

-NEW in any correspondence.
**PART B** This section is not applicable because statistical methods are not used in data collection associated with the final amendments.14 ATTACHMENTS

Exhibit 1a. Year 1 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, N SPS for GHG Emissions for E GUs (40 CFR part 6 0 , subpart TTTT )
Exhibit 1b. Year 2 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, N SPS for GHG Emissions for E GUs (40 CFR part 6 0 , subpart TTTT )
Exhibit 1c. Year 3 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, N SPS for GHG Emissions for E GUs (40 CFR part 6 0 , subpart TTTT )15

**Exhibit 1a** 
**. Year 1 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements,**  **N SPS**  **for GHG Emissions for**  **E GUs**  **(40 CFR part 6 0**  **, subpart TTTT**  **)**

**Year 1** (A) Hours per Occurrence (B)

Occurrences/ Respondent/Year (C)

Hours/ Respondent/ Year (A x B) (D)

Respondents/ Year (E)

Technical Hours/Year (C x D x .79) (F)

Managerial Hours/Year (C x D x .09) (G)

Clerical Hours/Year (C x D x .12) (H)

Cost/ Year REPORT REQUIREMENTS Prepare/Submit Summary Report 16.5 2 33 8 208 24 32 $ 10,380 In cludes reporting of excess emissions & downtime

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL ANNUAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST 2 8 2 08 24 32 $ 10,380
264 Hours16

**Exhibit 1 b** 
**. Year**  **2 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, NSPS for GHG Emissions for EGUs**  **(40 CFR part 60, subpart TTTT)**

**Year 1** (A) Hours per Occurrence (B)

Occurrences/ Respondent/Year (C)

Hours/ Respondent/ Year (A x B) (D)

Respondents/ Year (E)

Technical Hours/Year (C x D x .79) (F)

Managerial Hours/Year (C x D x .09) (G)

Clerical Hours/Year (C x D x .12) (H)

Cost/ Year REPORT REQUIREMENTS Prepare/Submit Summary Report 16.5 2 33 11 2 87 3 3 43 $ 14,272 In cludes reporting of excess emissions & downtime

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL ANNUAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST 2 11 287 33 43 $ 14,272
3 6 3 Hours17

**Exhibit 1c** 
**. Year 3 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements,**  **N SPS**  **for GHG Emissions for**  **E GUs** 

**(40 CFR part 6 0**  **, subpart TTTT**  **)**

**Year 1** (A) Hours per Occurrence (B)

Occurrences/ Respondent/Year (C)

Hours/ Respondent/ Year (A x B) (D)

Respondents/ Year (E)

Technical Hours/Year (C x D x .79) (F)

Managerial Hours/Year (C x D x .09) (G)

Clerical Hours/Year (C x D x .12) (H)

Cost/ Year REPORT REQUIREMENTS Prepare/Submit Summary Report 16.5 2 33 17 443 5 1 67 $ 10,380 In cludes reporting of excess emissions & downtime

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

TOTAL ANNUAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST 2 8 443 5 1 67 $ 22 ,0 57
561 Hours