### SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

NESHAP for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology

Standards (Revised)

1. Identification of the Information Collection

1(a) Title of the Information Collection

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Source Categories:

Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY)

(Revised), EPA ICR Number 187 1.07, OMB Control Number 2060

- 0420.

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

The amendments to this ICR are a result of the review of the existing NESHAP for Source

Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards (40 CFR part 63,

Subpart YY) as required by the Clean Air Act. The NESHAP published at 40 CFR part 63, subpart

YY were proposed on October 14, 1998, promulgated on June 29, 1999, and amended on:

November 22, 1999, November 2, 2001, June 7, 2002, and July 7, 2002. These regulation s apply

to existing facilities and new facilities of the following four categories: Polycarbonates (PC)

Production, Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF), Acetal Resins (AR) Production, and Hydrogen

Fluoride (HF) Production. The current proposed rulemaking a pplies to hazardous air pollutant

(HAP) emissions from facilities in the PC and AMF source categories. This information is being

collected to assure compliance with 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY. Organic HAP emissions are the

pollutants regulated under this s ubpart.

In general, all NESHAP standards require initial notifications, performance tests, and

periodic reports by the owners/operators of the affected facilities. These notifications, reports, and

records are essential in determining compliance, and are r equired of all affected facilities subject to

NESHAP. Semiannual summary reports are also required.

The proposed rulemaking would amend title 40, chapter I, part 63 subpart YY to include

### 2

emission sources for which standards were not previously developed f or the AMF source category.

For the PC and AMF source categories, it also revises the requirements for leak detection and

repair (LDAR) to allow only one of the previously available compliance options, although

monitoring of connectors will not be required . For both source categories, the proposed

amendments also add requirements to monitor each pressure relief device (PRD) that releases to

the atmosphere using a device or system that is capable of identifying and recording the time and

duration of each pr essure release and of notifying operators that a release has occurred

.

Information related to these new provisions is required to be submitted in the semi

- annual reports

required by the existing NESHAP. The proposed amendments also add provisions for facil ity

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

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

used, the owner or operator is required to meet cert ain criteria during the malfunction, notify the

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

submit a report for the malfunction to the Administrator. We believe that the number of affected

facilities under th is subpart will remain constant for these source categories. Burden changes

associated with these proposed amendments would result from new recordkeeping and reporting

requirements associated with the PRD monitoring requirements and affirmative defense

pro visions for all facilities subject to the AMF and PC MACT standards. The overall change in

burden found in this ICR reflect the provision changes, an update in the cost of labor, and

corrections to the number of affected facilities found in EPA ICR number 1871.07.

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

any “Terms of Clearance.” The overall change in burden found in this ICR reflect the provision

changes, an update in the cost of labor, and corrections to the numb er of affected facilities found in

EPA ICR number 1871.07.

The period considered in this ICR and throughout this supporting statement is the first

three years following the promulgation of the amended NESHAP for Source Categories: Generic

Maximum Achievabl e Control Technology Standards (40 CFR part 63, Subpart YY) for the AMF

and PC source categories . The estimates of the size of the regulated universe are based on data

from the National Emissions Inventory (NEI) database, and information from the industrie s.

There is an annual average of 4 PC Production facilities and 1 AMF Production facility that will be

### 3

subject to the regulations. Due to the nature of the industries, it is estimated that no additional

sources will become subject to the standard over the next three years.

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 sourc es and area sources of

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data

w hen direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit

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

(G) provide such other information as the Administrator may

reasonably require.

In the Administrator's judgment, HAP emissions from the manufacture of amino/phenolic

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

health or welfare . Therefore, the NESHAP standards were promulgated for the AMF and PC

source categories at 40 CFR pa rt 63, subpart YY.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

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

### 4

applicable regulations which were promulgated in accordance with the Clean Air Act. In addition,

the collected information is used for targeting inspections and as evidence in legal proceedings.

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

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

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

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

compliance in place of a continuous emission monito r.

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

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

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

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

met. The performance test may also be observed.

The required semiannual reports are used to determine periods of excess emissions,

identify problems at the facility, verify operation/maintenance procedures, and for compliance

determinations.

The information generated by the monitoring, recordkeeping and reporting requirements

described in this ICR is used by the Agency to ensure tha t facilities affected by the NESHAP

continues to operate the control equipment in compliance with the regulation.

3. Non

- duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

3(a) Non

- duplication

A search of EPA’s existing standards and ongoing ICR’s revealed no duplication of

information gathering efforts. However, certain reports required by State or local agencies may

duplicate information required by this NESHAP. In these cases, a copy of the report submitted to

the State or local agency can be s ent to the Administrator in lieu of the report required by the

Federal standards. Therefore, no duplication exists.

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

### 5

This ICR is related to proposed amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY for th e AMF

and PC source categories. Comments will be solicited on the proposal package and the proposed

ICR.

3(c) Consultations

Over the next three years, an average of 4 PC Production facilities and 1 AMF Production

facility will be subject to the standard and are affected by the amendments to 40 CFR part 63,

subpart YY. In estimating the affected number of sources and the growth rate of these source

categories subject to this standard, we referenced the most recent ICR, and used other resources to

obtain th e most recent data available. We reviewed information available from the Online

Tracking Information System (OTIS) which is the primary source of information regarding the

number of existing sources. OTIS data was used in conjunction with industry consulta tion to verify

the number of sources and the industry growth rate.

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 fo r information gathering and recordkeeping

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

emission limitations are met. If the information required by these standards was collected less

frequently, the proper operation and maintenance of control equipment and the possibility of

detecting violations would be less likely.

3(e) General Guidelines

These reporting or recordkeeping requirements are consistent with the regulations

established by OMB at 5 CFR part 132 0, section 1320.5.

These standards require the respondents to maintain all records, including reports and

notifications for at least five years. This is consistent with the General Provisions as applied to the

standards. EPA believes that the five

- year rec ords retention requirement is consistent with the Part

70 permit program and the five

- year statute of limitations on which the permit program is based.

The retention of records for five years allows EPA to establish the compliance history of a source,

any pattern of non

- compliance, and to determine the appropriate level of enforcement action. EPA

### 6

has found that the most flagrant violators have violations extending beyond the five years. Without

the five

- year record retention, EPA would be prevented from pu rsuing 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 t itle 40, chapter 1, part 2, subpart B

-

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

amended by 43 FR 40000, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 20, 1978; 44 FR 17674,

March 23, 1979).

3(g) Sensitive Questions

None of the reporting or recordkeeping requirements contain sensitive questions.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested

4(a) Respondents

The respondents affected by the amendments to 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY are facilities

that produce p olycarbonates and acrylic and modacrylic fibers . The United States Standard

Industrial Classification (SIC) codes, which correspond to the North American Industry

Classification System (NAICS) codes, could be found in the following table:

Standard (40 CFR part 63, subpart YY) SIC Codes NAICS

Codes

Polycarbonates (PC) Production (Synthetic Rubber

Manufacturing 2822 325211

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) Production (Manmade

Organic Fibers, Except Cellulosic) 2824 325220

4(b) Information Requested

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

### 7

established by OMB at 5 CFR part 1320, section 1320.5.

(i) Data Items

All data in this ICR that is recorded and/or reported is required by National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable

Control Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY)

.

A source must make the following reports:

Notifications for 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY

Application for approval of construction/reconstruction 63.5(d), 63.1110(a)

Notification of initial startup 63.1110(b)

Notification of initial applicability 63.9(b), 63.1110(a),

63.1110(c)

Notification of compliance status 63.9(h), 63.1110(d),

63.1110(a)

Notification and report of performance test and results 63.7(b), 63.9(e),

63.10(d)(2), 63.1110(d),

63.1110(a)

Rescheduled initial performance test 63.7(b)(2)

Demonstration of continuous monitoring system 63.9(g)

Notification of physical or operational change 63.8(a)

Opacity or visible emissions 63.10(d)(3)

Develop startup, shutdown, malfunction plan and periodic reports 63.10(d)(5)(i), 63.1110(b),

63.1111

Excess emissions and continuous parameter monitoring systems

(CPMS) performance reports 63.1110(a)

Reports for 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY

Periodic reports (Semiannual or according to the schedule for

Title V) with information on excess emissions and on the

implementation of leak detection and repair standard provisions 63.1110(e), 63.1108(a),

63.1109

Startup, shutdown and malfunction reports 63.1110(a), 63.1111(b)

A source must keep the following records:

Recordkeeping for 40 CFR part 63, subpart YY

### 8

Maintain records of startup, shutdown, malfunctions periods

when excess emissions have occurred during the reporting period 63.10(b)(2), 63.1109(a)

Maintain records of performance test and performance evaluation

results 63.1109(a)

Maintain records of all reports and notifications 63.10(b), 63.1109(a)

Maintain record of applicability 63.10(b)(3), 63.1109(d)

Maintain records of initial and compliance status notifications 63.1416(e)

Records of CPMS operation adjustments, calibration checks, and

maintenance 63.10(b)(2)(vii),

63.1109(a)

Records of implementation of leak detection and repair (LDAR)

standards provision 63.1107

Records are required to be retained for five years 63.10(b)(2)

Electronic Reporting

Currently, sources are using monitoring equipment that provides parameter data in an

automated way, e.g., leaks and spills of mercury. Although person nel at the source still need to

evaluate the data, this type of monitoring equipment has significantly reduced the burden

associated with monitoring and recordkeeping. However for this rule, we are only proposing

electronic reporting of performance tests f or the PC and AMF source categories.

(ii) Respondent Activities

Respondent Activities

Read instructions.

Install, calibrate, maintain, and operate CMS for opacity, or for pressure drop and liquid

supply pressure for CPMS.

Perform initial performance test, and repeat performance tests if necessary.

Write the notifications and reports listed above

Enter information required to be recorded above

Submit the required reports developing, acquiring, installing, and utilizing technology and systems

for the purpose of collecting, validating, and verifying information

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

maintaining information

Develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the pu rpose of disclosing and

providing information

### 9

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

Transmit, or otherwise disclose the information

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

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

affirmative defense reports, and quality control plan for CMS required to be submitted by

industry.

Audit facility records.

Maintain data in the CDX

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

Information contained in the reports will be required to submit records electronically to

EPA’s Central DATA Exchange (CDX) using the Electronic Reporting Tool. The Central Data

Exchange (CDX) enables fast, efficient and more accurate environmental data su bmissions from

state and local governments, industry and tribes to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

and participating program offices. EPA's CDX is the point of entry on the Environmental

Information Exchange Network (Exchange Network) for enviro nmental data submissions to the

Agency. CDX works with both EPA program offices looking for a way to better manage incoming

data, and stakeholders looking for a way to reduce burden from reporting requirements.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

The impact on small entities was taken into consideration during the development of the

regulation. Due to technical considerations involving the process operations and the type of

control equipment employed, the recordkeeping and reporting requirements are the same fo r both

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

### 10

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

5(d) Collection Schedule

The specific frequency for each information collect ion activity within this request is shown

below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Reporting and Recordkeeping

Requirements for the Proposed NESHAP for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable

Control Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63 , Subpart YY) (Revised).

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 industries for the subparts included in this ICR. The

individual burdens are expressed 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 infor mation 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 b urden to industry over the next three years from these recordkeeping

and reporting requirements is estimated to be 314 (Total Labor Hours from Table 1). These hours

are based on Agency studies and background documents from the development of the regulatio n,

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 ICR uses the following labor rates: $54.66 per hour for technical labor , $115.96 per

hour for management labor, and $38.14 for clerical labor. The rates have already been increased by

110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.

### 11

These rates are from the May 2012 National Occ upational Employment and Wage Estimates

United States for Production Occupations ( http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#51

- 0000 ).

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

The type of industry costs associated with the information collection activities in the

subject standard are labor costs which are addressed elsewhere in this ICR and the costs associated

with continuous monitoring. The capital/startup costs are one

- time costs when a facility becomes

subject to the regulation. The annual operation and maintenance costs are the ongoing costs to

maintain the monitor and other costs such as photocopying and postage.

As part of the proposed amendments to t he AMF and PC NESHAP, facility owners or

operators are required to monitor each PRD that releases to the atmosphere using a device or

system that is capable of identifying and recording the time and duration of each pressure release

and of notifying operat ors that a release has occurred. For purposes of estimating the costs of this

requirement, we assumed that operators would install electronic indicators on each PRD in organic

HAP service that vents to the atmosphere. The cost of each monitoring system dep ends on the

number of PRDs at the facilities. The cost for this system for the one facility in the AMF source

category is expected to be $37,063, and the total cost for these capital expenditures for the 4

facilities in the PC source category is estimated to be $50,596. For equipment leaks, facility

owners or operators would also be required to follow the leak detection and repair (LDAR)

requirements of part 63, subpart UU, rather than part 63 subpart TT under the proposed

amendments to the AMF and PC NESH AP, with the exception of the connector monitoring

requirements. The capital costs associated with this requirement are estimated to be $1,428 for the

AMF source category and $15,596 for the PC source category.

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

cost. The capital recovery factor is 0.1098 based on an interest rate of 7 percent and an assumed

equipment life of 15 years. The total annualized capital cost for th e PRD and LDAR requirements

for the AMF source category is $5,500 and is $9,380 for the PC source category.

### 12

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

and other costs such as photocopying and postage. Base d on a previous ICR for the Pesticide

Active Ingredient source category, which estimated the annual O&M costs to be $1,450 per source

in 2011 dollars, inflating this number from 2011 dollars to 2013 dollars gives $1,505 per source.

The total annual O&M cos t for the AMF source category is $1,505 and for the PC source category

it is $6,020.

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

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

(A)

Source Category and

Cost Type (B)

Capital/

Startup Cost

for One

Respondent (C)

Number of

Respondents (D)

Total

Capital/

Startup Cost

(B X C) (E)

Annual Costs

for One

Respondent (F)

Number of

Respondents (G)

Total

Annual

Cost

(E X F)

PC (O&M) $0 0 $0 $1,505 4 $6,020

PC (PRD) $12,649 4 $50,596 $1,804 4 $7,216

PC (LDAR) $3,899 4 $15,596 $541 4 $2,164

AMF (O&M) $0 0 $0 $1,505 1 $1,505

AMF (PRD) $37,063 1 $37,063 $5,277 1 $5,277

AMF (LDAR) $1,428 1 $1,428 $223 1 $223

Total $104,683 $22,405



### The total capital/startup costs for this ICR are $104,683. This is the total of column D in

the above table. The total annualized capital costs and operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for

this ICR are $22,405 and are shown in column G.

(iv) Affirmative Defense/Root Cause Analysis/Ma lfunction Costs.

The EPA’s estimate for an affirmative defense and root cause analysis in the table below is

based on general experience to calculate the time and effort required of a source to review relevant

data, interview plant employees, and reconstru ct the events prior to a malfunction in order to

determine primary and contributing causes. The level of effort also includes time to produce and

### 13

retain the report in document form so that the source will have it available should EPA or state

enforcement a gencies ever request to review it.

The labor rates used to estimate the costs for preparing an affirmative defense have been

increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by

private industry. These rates are from the May 2012 National Occupational Employment and

Wage Estimates United States for Production Occupations

( http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#51

- 0000).

Personnel Number of

Personnel Time

Requirement

(hours) Total

Hours Hourly Rate

($/hr) Total

Technical Personnel 3 6 18 $54.66 $984

Managerial Personnel 2 6 12 $115.96 $1,392

Total 5 30 $2,375



### 6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

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

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

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

emissions; and the publication and distribution of collected information.

The average annual Agency cost during the three years of the ICR is estimated to be $4,249

This cost is based on the average hourly 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, St ep 3, $15.63 + 60%)

These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 2013 General Schedule,

which excludes locality rates of pay

(http://www.opm.gov/policy

- data

- oversight/pay

- leave/salaries

- wages/2013/general

- schedule/201

3

- gs

- hourlyovertime

- r ates

- by

- grade

- and

- step/). The rates have been increased by 60 percent to

### 14

account for the benefit packages available to government employees. Details upon which this

estimate is based appear below in Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden for the Proposed

NES HAP for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards

(40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY) (Revised)

.

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

The number of respondents was updated based on the NEI database, which was used

during the analysis to determine the MACT and information from the industry. The number of

respondents is calculated using the following table which addresses the 3 years cover ed by this

ICR. Over the three year period of this ICR, we expect 5 existing facilities to be respondents.

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

YEAR (A) (B) (C) (D) (E)

Number of New

Respondents Number

Existing

Respondents Number of

Existing

Respondents

That Keep

Records But Do

Not Submit

Reports Number of

Existing

Respondents

That Are Also

New

Respondents Number of

Respondents

(E=A+B+C

- D)

1 0 5 0 0 5

2 0 5 0 0 5

3 0 5 0 0 5

Avg 0 5 0 0 5



### To avoid double

- counting respondents, column D is subtracted. As shown above, the average

Number of Respondents over the three

- year period of this ICR is 5.

### 15

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

Total Annual Responses

(A)

Information Collection Activity (B)

Number of

Respondents (C)

Number of

Responses (D)

Number of

Existing

Respondents That

Keep Records But

Do Not Submit

Reports (E)

Total

Annual

Responses

E=(BxC)

Initial requirements for PC Production 0 1 N/A 0

Initial requirements for AMF Production 0 1 N/A 0

Excess emission reports for PC Production 4 1 N/A 4

Excess emission reports for AMF

Production 1 1 N/A 1

Periodic reports for PC Production 4 2 N/A 8

Periodic reports for AMF Production 1 2 N/A 2

LDAR reports for PC Production 4 2 N/A 8

LDAR reports for AMF Production 1 2 N/A 2

Affirmative Defense 1 1 N/A 1

Total Number of Annual Responses 26



### The number of Total Annual Responses is 26.

The total annual labor costs are $18,251 for 314 labor hours. Details regarding these

estimates may be found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Reporting and

Recordkeeping Requirements for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable Control

Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63, Subp art YY) (Revised)

.

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The detailed bottom line burden hours and cost calculations for the respondents and the

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

(i) Respondent Tally

The total annual labor hours are 314 for the proposed requirements. Details regarding

these estimates may be found below in Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Reporting

and Recordkeeping Requirements for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable Control

### 16

Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY) (Revised)

.

Furthermore, the annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of

information is estimated to average 12 hours per response.

The total annual capital/st artup and Operation and Maintenance (O&M) costs to the

regulated entity are $22,405. The cost calculations are detailed in Section 6(b)(ii).

(ii) The Agency Tally

The average annual Agency burden and cost over next three years is estimated to be 94

labor hours at a cost of $4,249. See below Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden for the Proposed

NESHAP for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards

(40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY)

.

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

The propos ed rulemaking would amend title 40, chapter I, part 63 subpart YY to include

emission sources for which standards were not previously developed for the AMF source category,

revisions to the LDAR requirements for the PC and AMF source categories, and requir ements to

monitor PRDs. The number of affected facilities under this subpart is not expected to increase. At

this time, none of the proposed amendments will affect area sources. The overall change in burden

found in this ICR reflect the provision changes , an update in the cost of labor, and corrections to

errors found in EPA ICR number 1871.07.

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

recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with the assertion of the affirmative defense.

The EPA’s estimate for the required notification, reports and r ecords, including the root cause

analysis, associated with a single incident totals approximately $2,375 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 malf unction 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 the

purpose of estimating the annual burden, the EPA is attributing a total of 3 instan ces of affirmative

### 17

defense over a 3 year period across all sources in each source category. The EPA is using this

frequency of 3 events in 3 years, because of the number of excess emission events reported by

source operators, only a small number would be e xpected to result from a malfunction, and only a

subset of excess emissions caused by malfunctions would result in the source choosing to assert

the affirmative defense. Thus we believe the number of instances in which source operators might

be expected to avail themselves of the affirmative defense will be extremely small.

6(g) Burden Statement

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

estimated to average 12 hours per response. Burden means the total ti me, effort, or financial

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

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

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

information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information;

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

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

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

information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, an d 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’s regulations are listed at 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.

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

burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use

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

ID Number EPA

- HQ

- OE CA

- 2009

- 0388. 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, acces s the index listing of the content of the docket,

and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. When in the

### 18

system, select “search” than key in the docket ID number identified in this document. The

documents are al so available for public viewing at the Enforcement and Compliance Docket and

Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301

Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is

open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The

telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566

- 1744, and the telephone number for the

Enforcement and Compliance Docket and Information Center Docket is (202) 566

- 1752

. Also

,

you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of

Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, N.W., Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Officer

for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID Number EPA

- HQ

- OECA

- 2009

- 0388 and O MB

Control Number 2060

- 0417 in any correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

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

information.

### Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Source Categories: Generic

Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY) (Revised)

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H)

Person

- No. of Person

- hours Respondents Technical Management Clerical Cost,$ (d)

Burden Item hours per occurrences per source per year (c) person

- hours person

- hours person

- hours

occurrence per source per year per year per year per year

(a) per year (b) (C=AxB) (E=CxD) (Ex0.05) (Ex0.1)

1. Applications N/A

2. Survey and Studies N/A

3. Reporting Requirements

A. Read instructions N/A

B. Required Activities N/A

C. Create Information N/A

D. Gather Information N/A

E. Write report

Initial notification requirements (e)(f)

Polycarbonates (PC) 4 1 4 4 16 0.8 1.6 $1,028

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 4 1 4 1 4 0.2 0.4 $257

Malfunction and SSM Reports N/A

Periodic reports (g)

Polycarbonates (PC) 5.5 2 11 4 44 2.2 4.4 $2,828

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 7.5 2 15 1 15 0.75 1.5 $964

Leak detection and repair reporting (e)(h)

Polycarbonates (PC) 4 2 8 4 32 1.6 3.2 $2,057

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 4 2 8 1 8 0.4 0.8 $514

Affirmative defense (i) 30 1 30 1 18 12 0 $2,375

REPORTING SUBTOTAL (Rounded) 167 $10,024

4. Recordkeeping Requirements

A. Read instructions N/A

B. Plan activities N/A

C. Implementation activities

### 20

Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Source Categories: Generic

Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY) (Revised) (Continued)

(A)

Person

hours per

occurrence

(a) (B)

No. of

occurrences

per source

per year (b) (C)

Person

- hours

per source

per year

(C=AxB) (D)

Respondents

per year (c) (E)

Technical

person

- hours

per year

(E=CxD) (F)

Management

person

- hours

per year

(Ex0.05) (G)

Clerical

person

- hours

per year

(Ex0.1) (H)

Cost,$ (d)

Burden Item

Material determinations N/A

Control equipment inspections N/A

Control equipment leak monitoring N/A

Control devices N/A

Pressure relief devices

Polycarbonates (PC) 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 $514

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $129

Leak detection and repair program

a. Initial requirements: Identify all

affected streams

Polycarbonates (PC) 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 $514

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $129

b. Perform monitoring/repairs N/A

D. Develop Record System

Develop SSM Plan N/A

Control equipment N/A

Spinning Lines (AMF) 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 $514

Pressure relief devices

Polycarbonates (PC) 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 $514

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $129

Leak detection and repair program

Polycarbonates (PC) 4 1 4 4 16 0.8 1.6 $1,028

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 4 1 4 1 4 0.2 0.4 $257

E. Record All Information Required by

Standards

### Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements for Source Categories: Generic

Maximum Achievable Control Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY) (Revised) (Continued)

(A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H)

Person

- No. of Person

- hours Respondents Technical Management Clerical Cost,$ (d)

Burden Item hours per occurrences per source per year (c) person

- hours person

- hours person

- hours

occurrence per source per year per year per year per year

(a) per year (b) (C= AxB) (E=CxD) (Ex0.05) (Ex0.1)

Initial requirements N/A

Control equipment inspections N/A

Control equipment monitoring N/A

Control device CMS N/A

Pressure relief devices

Polycarbonates (PC) 2 1 2 4 8 0.4 0.8 $514

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $129

Leak detection and repair program

Polycarbonates (PC) 4 1 4 4 16 0.8 1.6 $1,028

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 4 1 4 1 4 0.2 0.4 $257

F. Time to Train Personnel

Leak detection and repair program (j)

Polycarbonates (PC) 8 1 8 4 32 1.6 3.2 $2,057

Acrylic and Modacrylic Fibers (AMF) 8 1 8 1 8 0.4 0.8 $514

RECORDKEEPING SUBTOTAL (Rounded) 147 $8,227

TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST (Rounded) 314 $18,251

N/A = Not Applicable.

(a) Estimate of burden for each activity, technical hours only.

(b) Estimate based on average facilities.

(c) We have assumed that there are 8 existing sources (4 PC, 1 AMF, 2 AR, and 1 HF) and that no additional new sources will b ecome subject to the rule over the next three years. It is also assumed that

affected facility owners and operators have already complied with the initial requirements including the installation of any required equipment. In addition, we have as sumed that two sources under this

category will hire contractors to comply with the monitoring and recordkeeping requirements of th e rule while reports are developed by the source personnel.

(d) Costs are rounded and based on the following hourly rates: Technical at $54.66, Management at $115.96, and Clerical at $ 38.14 from May 2012 National Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates

United States

- Production Occupations. Mean Hourly Rate (http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#51

- 0000).

(e) We have assumed that there will be no new sources over the next three years of this ICR. For PRDs located at PC and AMF, facili ties are required to submit a Notification of Compliance Status within 150

days after the first applicable compliance date for pressure relief device monitoring.

(f) Initial notification requirements include: initial notifications, initial compliance determination, and initial performance tests.

(g) The rules requires that all sources submit periodic reports (semiannually or according

to the schedule for Title V).

(h) The standards for equipment leak requires the submittal of an initial report and semiannual reports of leak detection and repair (LDAR) and any changes to the processes, monitoring freque ncy and

initiation of a quality improvement program. We have assumed that sources are submitting the required LDAR information wi th the periodic reports.

(i) Assumes 1 affirmative defense report for entire industry during each year of the 3

- year ICR period. For affirmative defense, hours required assumes 18 hours technical, 12 hours management, and 0

hours clerical for each instance of affirmative defense. Formulas not followed for person hours per year.

(j) We have assumed that there will be some labor hours associated with rule analysis and training per year.

### 22

Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden for the Proposed NESHAP for Source Categories: Generic Maximum Achievable

Control Technology Standards (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart YY)

(A)

EPA person

hours per

occurrence (B)

No. of

occurrences

per plant

per year (C)

EPA person

hours per

plant per

year

(C=AxB) (D)

Plants

per

year

(a) (E)

Technical

person

- ho

urs

per year

(E=CxD) (F)

Management

person

- hours

per year

(Ex0.05) (G)

Clerical

person

hours

per

year

(Ex0.1) (H)

Agency

Cost, $

(b) Burden Item

REPORT REVIEW

Initial Requirements

a. Initial notification (c) 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0

b. Performance test (c)(d) 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0

c. Compliance status (c) 4 1 4 5 20 1 2 $1,036

d. Performance test reports (c)(d) 4 1 4 0 0 0 0 $0

Periodic Requirements

a. Startup, shutdown, malfunction reports 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 $0

b. Periodic reports 3 2 6 5 30 1.5 3 $1,555

c. Leak detection and repair reports 3 2 6 5 30 1.5 3 $1,555

Affirmative defense (e) 2 1 2 1 2 0.1 0.2 $104

TOTAL ANNUAL EPA BURDEN AND COST

(Rounded) 94 $4,249

(a) Agency labor rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 2013 General Schedule which excludes locality rates of pay. Salary Table 2013

- GS.

Labor rates are inflated to reflect average locality pay increase from base rates. Availab le at

http://www.opm.gov/policy

- data

- oversight/pay

- leave/salaries

- wages/2013/general

- schedule/2013

- gs

- hourlyovertime

- rates

- by

- grade

- and

- step/

(b) We have assumed that there are 5 existing sources (4 PC, 1 AMF) and that no additional new sources will becom e subject to the rule

over the next three years.

(c) We have assumed that no new sources will be subject to the rule over the next three years, and the existing sources have already complied with

this one

- time activity.

(d) We have assumed that the Agency will not have additional burden from sources conducting performance tests due to a process change that may

or may not result in the source meeting additional requirements.

(e) Assumes 1 affirmative defense report for entire industry during each year of the 3

- year ICR period.