1

SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR

EPA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST NUMBER 2130.04

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY DETERMINATIONS FOR FEDERALLY 

FUNDED AND APPROVED TRANSPORTATION PLANS, PROGRAMS AND 

PROJECTS 

May 5, 2011
2

Table of Contents

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION........................................ 3

1(a) Title of the Information Collection...................................................................................... 3

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract........................................................................................... 3

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION............................................................... 4

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection ....................................................................................... 4

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data ....................................................................................... 5

3. NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA5

3(a) Non-Duplication .................................................................................................................. 5

3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB ................................................. 6

3(c) Consultations........................................................................................................................ 8

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection..................................................................................... 9

3(e) General Guidelines............................................................................................................... 9

3(f) Confidentiality ..................................................................................................................... 9

3(g) Sensitive Questions............................................................................................................ 10

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED............................... 10

4(a) State and Local Respondents/North American Industry Classification System................ 10

4(b) Information Requested....................................................................................................... 11

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED–AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION 

METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT.................................................. 13

5(a) Agency Activities............................................................................................................... 13

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management........................................................................ 14

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility...................................................................................................... 14

5(d) Collection Schedule ........................................................................................................... 14

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION........................... 15

6(a) Estimating State and Local Respondent Burden and Cost................................................. 15

6(b) Estimating State and Local Respondent Costs................................................................... 33

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs ............................................................................... 34

6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs ................................... 42

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables..................................................................... 42

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden .......................................................................................... 44

6(g) Burden Statement............................................................................................................... 45

Appendix A: Conformity-Related Research Considered for This ICR ........................................ 46
3

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a) Title of the Information Collection

This information collection request (ICR) is entitled "Transportation Conformity

Determinations for Federally Funded and Approved Transportation Plans, Programs and 

Projects,” ICR number 2130.04. This ICR includes transportation conformity burden anticipated 

for calendar years 2011-2014. 

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

Transportation conformity is required under Clean Air Act section 176(c) [42 U.S.C. 

7506(c)] to ensure that federally supported transportation activities are consistent with (“conform 

to”) the purpose of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). Transportation activities 

include transportation plans, transportation improvement programs (TIPs), and federally funded 

or approved highway or transit projects. Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that 

transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or 

delay timely attainment of the relevant national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or 

“standards”) or interim milestones. 

Transportation conformity applies under EPA’s conformity regulations at 40 CFR Part 

93, Subpart A, to areas that are designated nonattainment, and those re-designated to attainment 

after 1990 (“maintenance areas” with plans developed under Clean Air Act section 175A) for the 

following transportation-related criteria pollutants: ozone, particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), 

carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen dioxide (NO2). 

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the original transportation 

conformity rule on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and subsequently published several 

revisions. EPA develops the conformity regulations in coordination with the Federal Highway

Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). 

Transportation conformity determinations are required before federal approval or funding 

is given to certain types of transportation planning documents as well as non-exempt highway

and transit projects.1 In metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, conformity

determinations are required for transportation plan and TIP updates and amendments. A 

metropolitan transportation plan is at least a 20-year planning document that describes the 

policies, strategies and facilities that are proposed by state and local decision-makers for future 

implementation in a metropolitan area. The TIP prioritizes and programs capital highway and 

 

1

Projects that are exempt from all or certain conformity requirements include projects 

listed in 40 CFR 93.126 (e.g., safety projects, maintenance of current roads), projects that do not 

impact regional emissions in 40 CFR 93.127, and traffic signal synchronization projects listed 

in 40 CFR 93.128. 
4

transit projects for implementation in a metropolitan area over a four-year period, consistent with 

the transportation plan. 

To meet the Clean Air Act’s conformity requirements, once a SIP is established for a 

given pollutant and NAAQS, projected regional emissions from a nonattainment or maintenance 

area’s transportation system must be at or below the motor vehicle emissions level or “budget” 

for on-road mobile sources in the area’s SIP. Prior to EPA finding a budget adequate2or 

approving a SIP, the conformity rule provides emissions tests that ensure that Clean Air Act 

requirements are met in the interim.

EPA considered the following in developing this ICR:

 Burden estimates for transportation conformity determinations in current nonattainment 

and maintenance areas for the ozone, PM2.5, PM10, CO, and NO2 NAAQS;

 Federal burden associated with EPA’s adequacy review process for submitted SIP 

budgets that are to be used in conformity determinations; 

 New start-up burden associated with learning to perform quantitative hot-spot analyses;

 New burden associated with the transition from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES;

 Efficiencies in areas doing conformity for multiple NAAQS; and,

 Differences in conformity resource needs in large and small metropolitan areas and 

isolated rural areas.

This ICR does not include burden associated with the general development of 

transportation planning and air quality planning documents for meeting other federal 

requirements. There are other ICRs that capture associated burdens for these additional nonconformity planning requirements and are prepared by other organizations within EPA and DOT. 

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

The Clean Air Act gives EPA the statutory authority to establish the criteria and 

procedures for determining whether transportation activities conform to the SIP. EPA 

 

2

Per the transportation conformity rule, submitted SIP budgets are appropriate to use 

prior to EPA’s approval of the SIP when EPA declares them adequate for transportation 

conformity purposes (40 CFR 93.118(e) and (f)).
5

promulgated the transportation conformity regulations under the authority of Clean Air Act 

section 176(c). The federal government needs information collected under these regulations to 

ensure that metropolitan planning organization (MPO)3and federal transportation actions are 

consistent with state air quality goals.

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

Federal, state, and local transportation agencies use information collected under the 

conformity regulation to ensure that federally funded or approved transportation actions conform 

to SIPs for attaining and maintaining clean air. Specifically, transportation agencies use 

information they collect to demonstrate that:

 Regional emissions and/or project-level analysis requirements are satisfied; 

 Transportation control measures (TCMs) in approved SIPs are implemented in a timely

manner;

 State, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies consult and resolve issues 

related to conformity determinations; and,

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

conformity actions.

3. NON-DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION 

CRITERIA

3(a) Non-Duplication

EPA wrote the transportation conformity regulation and subsequent revisions, in 

coordination with FHWA and FTA, to avoid duplicating the collection efforts required by other 

regulatory programs. The conformity regulation works with existing transportation and air 

quality planning requirements from the Clean Air Act, Title 23 of United States Code and other 

federal highway laws, Federal Transit Laws, and the National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA). 

The conformity regulation relies on but does not duplicate DOT’s transportation planning 

regulations for developing transportation plans, TIPs, and projects. Many nonattainment and 

maintenance areas can rely on travel, economic, or other forecasts that are already available for 

other planning purposes to complete regional conformity analyses. In addition, the conformity

 

3 MPO means the policy board of an organization created and designated to carry out the 

metropolitan transportation planning process.
6

regulation does not create any new fiscal constraint or public participation requirements. The 

regulation simply relies upon existing transportation planning requirements. 

Localized air quality analyses (or “hot-spot” analyses) are generated for certain projectlevel conformity determinations for certain criteria pollutants. When project-level analyses are 

required for both conformity approvals and NEPA, project sponsors may rely on the same 

analysis, assuming that it meets all necessary air quality requirements. Finally, although 

transportation actions are compared to SIP budgets for conformity determinations when they are 

available, SIPs are required to be submitted for other Clean Air Act purposes, and are not 

required by the conformity provisions.

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

In compliance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), any agency developing a 

non-rule related ICR must solicit public comments for a 60-day period prior to submitting the 

ICR to OMB. These comments, which are used partly to determine realistic burden estimates for 

respondents, must be considered when completing the final Supporting Statement that is 

submitted to OMB. 

The announcement of a public comment period for this renewal ICR has been made in 

the Federal Register on February 10, 2011 under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0269.

4

 

The comment period closed on April 11, 2011 with EPA receiving four sets of comments. 

Below is a brief summary of the comments and how EPA addressed the comments in this 

Supporting Statement.

First, several comments were considered and used to revise this Supporting Statement in the 

following manner:

 Increased the frequency of transportation plan conformity determinations for MPOs 

(50,000-200,000 population) with 3 or more pollutants/NAAQS from 1 per 4 years to 1 

per 3 years to account for additional conformity determinations for new SIP budgets and 

24 month clocks associated with 40 CFR 93.104(e);

 Increased the frequency of transportation plan/TIP conformity determinations for MPOs 

(greater than 200,000 population) with 3 or more pollutants from 1 per 4 years to 1 per 3 

years to account for additional conformity determinations for new SIP budgets and 24 

month clocks associated with 40 CFR 93.104(e);Increased the burden of state and local 

interagency consultation;

 Increased the burden for the transition to MOVES for regional conformity analyses to 

account for additional staff training and transition time;

 Increased consultation and modeling time for quantitative PM hot-spot analyses;

 

4

To maintain the integrity of the ICR docket and all the associated ICR renewal records, 

the original docket number and date from the previous ICR continue to be used. For this 

renewal, a new Phase of the original docket number has been opened.
7

 Increased the burden for transition and implementation of quantitative PM and CO hotspot analyses; and 

 Increased the burden for consultation by Federal agencies to account for the additional 

time State and Local agencies are consulting.

Second, the comments that were considered but ultimately not addressed in the Supporting 

Statement are summarized below.

 Increase the hourly rate for the burden calculations: The GS-13 hourly rate reflects an 

average hourly rate for degreed mid-career professionals. Also, while cost calculation is 

provided in the Supporting Statement, the actual burden calculations that are reviewed 

and approved by OMB are expressed in terms of hours per response and are thus cost 

neutral;

 Add burden to managing travel demand models, economic forecasts, census data and 

travel surveys: These activities were not included in this Supporting Statement because 

these activities are not specifically required by the CAA and the transportation 

conformity regulations and are completed for other purposes.

 Add burden for a future ozone NAAQS: This burden was not included in this Supporting 

Statement, as described in Section 6(a)(i), because the relevant NAAQS were not 

finalized in time to be included in this Supporting Statement;

 Consult with stakeholders during development of the Supporting Statement: EPA did not 

consult with stakeholders, as requested, because this activity would also require an ICR. 

The ICR process includes public comment periods to address stakeholder concerns;

 Reorganize the MPOs into Small, Medium, and Large categories by population with the

Large category having a population greater than 1,000,000: EPA will consider this 

suggestion for the next ICR renewal;

 Include burden for the coordination, development and revisions of SIP budgets: This 

burden is required by the CAA for SIP development;

 Increase burden for transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations done in 

between regular updates: This supporting statement reflects the annual burden of 

minimum conformity requirements. Additional conformity determinations are not 

required by the CAA or conformity regulations. However, EPA recognizes for MPOs 

with 3 or more NAAQS that these areas may be conducting more frequent conformity

determinations to support multiple 24 month clocks for SIP budgets under 40 CFR 

93.104(e) and we have therefore increased the frequency for these actions;

 Increase split between transportation conformity project-level burden and NEPA: EPA 

assumed that the burden hours for quantitative PM hot-spot analyses would also be used 

to satisfy NEPA requirements, so only half of the burden is included in this conformity

ICR. The comments provided did not support the change to a greater percentage of 

burden for the conformity portion;

 Increase TIP update frequency to account for state requirements: The increased

frequency is not required by federal law and therefore not included in this burden 

statement; and,

 Include the burden for conformity regulatory training: The cost of providing such

training to staff was not included in this Supporting Statement since there is no 
8

signification transition during the timeframe of the ICR for brand new areas that would 

require such training. 

3(c) Consultations

To prepare this ICR, EPA relied upon the previous ICR for information on the number of 

hours required to complete the following:

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

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

 Performing regional and hot-spot analyses;

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

 Conducting other miscellaneous activities (e.g., reviewing conformity documents, 

responding to conformity-related public comments, etc.); and,

 Training new state and local government staff to perform conformity-related duties (for 

those nonattainment areas without previous conformity experience).

EPA also consulted with FHWA and FTA headquarters and field offices. 

Individuals/staff consulted: 

 Cecilia Ho, (202) 366-9862, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway

Administration; and, 

 Andrea Martin, (202) 366-3040, Department of Transportation, Federal Transit 

Administration, Office of Planning and Environment.

EPA also requested information from EPA Regional Offices. 

Finally, EPA relied upon existing research completed on the transportation conformity

process that indicated the number of hours associated with doing conformity determinations in 

isolated rural areas.

5

 See Appendix A – Conformity Related Research Considered for this ICR.

 

5

Isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas are areas that do not contain nor are 

part of any metropolitan planning areas as designated under the transportation planning 

regulations. Isolated rural areas do not have Federally required metropolitan transportation plans 

or TIPs and do not have projects that are part of the emissions analysis of any MPO’s 

metropolitan transportation plan or TIP. Projects in such areas are instead included in statewide 

transportation improvement programs. These areas are distinct from donut areas (40 CFR 

93.101).
9

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

The Clean Air Act requires conformity for transportation plans and TIPs to be determined 

every four years in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. This statutory

requirement is typically satisfied when an area updates its long-range transportation plan to meet 

the four-year planning requirement for DOT’s transportation planning regulations. The Clean 

Air Act and DOT’s transportation planning regulations require TIPs to be updated every four 

years, and as a result, conformity determinations are also done for TIPs every four years.6 The 

Clean Air Act also requires conformity for transportation plans and TIPs within two years of a 

new SIP motor vehicle emission budget being established.

7

Conformity determinations are required in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance 

areas only when a new project needs federal funding or approval. The Clean Air Act’s minimum 

four-year frequency requirement for transportation plans and TIPs and two year SIP- related 

conformity requirements do not apply in these areas. Therefore, these areas are not required to 

demonstrate conformity on a regular basis as in metropolitan areas. Conformity determinations 

before project approvals are made in isolated rural areas and are necessary to meet the goals of 

the Clean Air Act.

Less frequent collection was provided for isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance 

areas, as these areas do not have as many large transportation projects as metropolitan areas. 

However, because of the statutory language, the periodic collection of information for 

metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas cannot be reduced, as these minimum 

periodic reporting requirements were established to achieve and maintain clean air. 

3(e) General Guidelines

This ICR adheres to the guidelines stated in the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act,

OMB’s implementing regulations, and EPA’s Information Collection Request Handbook. None

of these reporting or record keeping requirements violate any of the regulations established by

OMB in 5 CFR 1320.5.

3(f) Confidentiality

Respondents for the transportation conformity regulation do not submit confidential 

information for approval. All information collected and submitted in a conformity determination 

is already publicly available, pursuant to 40 CFR 93.105(e) of the conformity regulation and 23 

CFR 450.316(a) of the transportation planning regulations.

 

6 Additional plan/TIP amendments are completed on a voluntary basis beyond the 

required plan/TIP update cycles. These are not addressed in this ICR.

7

EPA assumed that conformity determinations occur infrequently for this scenario and 

therefore no burden was included in this ICR.
10

3(g) Sensitive Questions

No questions of a sensitive nature are included in any of the information collection 

requirements for the transportation conformity regulation. Examples of sensitive information 

include information concerning sexuality or religious beliefs. 

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4(a) State and Local Respondents/North American Industry 

Classification System 

In the transportation conformity process, the respondent is either a state or local agency. 

Depending upon the type of conformity determination and the type of area involved, the state or 

local agency may vary. For instance, in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, 

MPOs are the primary local respondent for transportation plan and TIP conformity

determinations. Clean Air Act section 176(c)(1) states that “... No metropolitan planning 

organization designated under section 134 of Title 23, shall give its approval to any project, 

program, or plan which does not conform to an implementation plan approved or promulgated 

under section 7410 of this title....”

In metropolitan areas, each MPO must formally make a conformity determination on its 

transportation plan and TIP prior to submitting them to DOT for an independent review and a 

conformity determination. State or local air agencies also provide technical assistance in 

supplying air quality data or performing emissions factor modeling for transportation plan and 

TIP regional conformity analyses.

State and local respondents for conformity determinations for projects within 

metropolitan areas can vary depending upon who the project sponsor is. A project sponsor 

within a metropolitan area may be the state department of transportation, local transit agency, or 

other state or local agency, depending upon the individual project. Developing conformity

determinations for projects outside metropolitan boundaries is also typically the responsibility of 

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

The transportation conformity rule also requires that state, local and federal transportation 

and air quality agencies develop interagency consultation procedures for discussing and 

resolving issues related to conformity determinations. Such agencies include the MPO, local 

transit agency, state department of transportation, state and local air agencies, EPA, FHWA, and 

FTA. Federal respondents for conformity determinations are discussed further in Section 5 of 

this ICR.

The following is a representative list of North American Industry Classification System 

NAICS codes for the government agencies that would be affected by the transportation 

conformity regulation: 
11

485111 Mixed Mode Transit System

485210 Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation

488490 Other Support Activities for Road Transportation

924110 Administration of Air and Water Resources and Solid Waste Management Programs

925120 Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Rural Development

926120 Regulation and Administration of Transportation Programs

4(b) Information Requested

(i) Data Items, Including Record Keeping Requirements

Section 4(b)(ii) describes the information requested for and roles conducted by state and 

local respondents for conformity determinations. Some of the information used in conformity

determinations is also used for other transportation and air quality planning purposes. Specific 

roles of state and local agencies will vary from area to area. 

(ii) Respondent Activities

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

MPOs are the lead agency in making transportation plan and TIP conformity

determinations in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. The level of information 

collection requirements for completing such determinations will vary with the size of the area 

and complexity of the air quality problem. The following list includes MPO activities for 

transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations:

 Conduct regional emissions analyses using the latest planning assumptions and models to 

determine whether the emissions from the proposed transportation system are consistent 

with state air quality goals; 

 Ensure timely implementation of TCMs in approved SIPs;

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

the conformity process; 

 Circulate draft plan/TIP conformity determinations for interagency review and public 

comment and respond to any comments on plan/TIP conformity determinations; and,

 Provide travel activity or other data for hot-spot analyses.

State Departments of Transportation

State departments of transportation are typically the lead agency in developing 

conformity determinations for projects in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas. 
12

They can also be the lead agency for project-level conformity determinations in metropolitan 

areas. The following list includes state transportation activities for conformity determinations:

 Assist the MPOs or conduct the regional emissions analyses for the MPO, using the 

latest assumptions and models to determine whether the emissions from the proposed 

transportation system change is consistent with state air quality goals;

 Conduct regional emissions analyses on projects in isolated rural areas and donut areas8

using the latest assumptions and models to determine whether the emissions from the 

proposed transportation system change is consistent with state air quality goals;

 Ensure timely implementation of TCMs in approved SIPs;

 Conduct hot-spot analyses for projects when required;

 Comment on draft plan and TIP conformity determinations;

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

throughout the conformity process; and

 Circulate draft project conformity determinations for interagency review and public 

comment and respond to any comments as appropriate.

Local Transit Agencies

Local transit agencies in metropolitan areas are typically the lead agency in developing 

project-level conformity determinations for transit projects in metropolitan areas. The 

following list includes local transit agency activities for project-level conformity

determinations:

 Conduct hot-spot analyses for transit projects when required;

 Comment on draft plan and TIP conformity determinations;

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

throughout the conformity process; and,

 Circulate draft project conformity determinations for interagency review and public 

comment and respond to any comments as appropriate.

 

8 Donut areas are geographic areas outside a metropolitan planning area boundary, but 

inside the boundary of a nonattainment or maintenance area that contains any part of a 

metropolitan area(s). These areas are not isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas (40 

CFR 93.101).
13

State and Local Air Quality Agencies

State and local air quality agencies may provide technical assistance to transportation 

agencies in the development of conformity determinations. The following list includes possible 

state and local air agency activities for conformity determinations:

 Provide air quality data or perform emissions factor modeling for regional emissions 

analyses for transportation plans and TIPs in metropolitan areas and projects in isolated 

rural areas; 

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

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

 Comment on draft conformity determinations. 

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED–AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION 

METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5(a) Agency Activities

(i) FHWA and FTA Activities

The FHWA Division Office and the FTA Regional Office are involved in several 

aspects of the transportation conformity process:

 Making conformity determinations for transportation plans, TIPs, and projects;

 Reviewing the relevant materials that are submitted to support the conformity

determinations including the travel, emissions, or air quality modeling performed to 

support a conformity determination and comments submitted by the EPA Regional 

Office; and,

 Issuing a letter to the appropriate MPO, state department of transportation, or other 

project sponsor indicating that they have made a conformity determination.

FHWA and FTA field offices will also participate in the interagency consultation 

process for nonattainment and maintenance areas. The interagency consultation process is used 

to discuss and resolve issues during the development of transportation plan, TIP, and project 

conformity determinations. The frequency of meetings varies from area to area. FHWA 

Resource Centers and FHWA/FTA Headquarters provide technical assistance as needed.
14

(ii) EPA Activities

The EPA Headquarters and Regional Offices are involved in several aspects of the 

transportation conformity process:

 Participating in the interagency consultation process in nonattainment and maintenance 

areas; 

 Reviewing and commenting on conformity determinations for transportation plans, TIPs 

and projects, including the travel, emissions, or air quality modeling performed to support a 

conformity determination; 

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

adequacy review is separate from EPA’s review of the SIP for completeness or approval; 

and,

 EPA Headquarters provide technical assistance as needed.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

Federal agencies review conformity determinations in accordance with the Clean Air 

Act Section 176(c) and 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A. The interagency consultation process is 

used to discuss any outstanding issues on the accuracy or quality of data used in conformity 

analyses and determinations. The general public reviews MPO conformity determinations for 

transportation plans and TIPs, and federal agencies review MPO responses to these comments. 

The federal agencies will need to maintain records of their actions, in accordance with other 

federal record retention requirements. No special machines or processing technologies are 

employed in reviewing conformity determinations. 

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required because the rule does not affect a 

significant number of small entities. However, the rule does affect some isolated rural 

nonattainment and maintenance areas which are considered to be small entities because they

have populations less than 50,000. EPA has taken steps in the conformity rule to reduce the 

burden placed on these areas. For example, isolated rural areas are required to demonstrate 

conformity only when they have a new non-exempt federally funded or approved highway or 

transit project. In contrast, metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas are required to 

demonstrate conformity at least every four years.

5(d) Collection Schedule
15

The information collections described in this ICR must be completed before a 

transportation plan, TIP or project conformity determination is made. DOT’s planning 

regulations require that transportation plans and TIPs be updated at least every four years, and 

the Clean Air Act, requires that a conformity determination on the transportation plan and TIP 

in metropolitan areas be completed at least every four years.

9 Conformity determinations on 

projects in metropolitan and isolated rural areas are required on an as-needed basis, as 

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

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

6(a) Estimating State and Local Respondent Burden and Cost

(i) Overview

This section of the ICR includes background information on the number of 

nonattainment and maintenance areas that are subject to transportation conformity regulations. 

For these areas, EPA has estimated potential burden for the following:

 Transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations for nonattainment and 

maintenance areas;

 Project-level conformity determinations for nonattainment and maintenance areas, 

including new burden associated with quantitative (instead of qualitative) PM hot-spot 

analyses;

 New start-up burden associated with technical analyses for quantitative PM and CO hotspot analyses; and,

 New burden associated with the transition from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES.

This ICR covers only the time period of 2011 to 2014, and EPA has attributed the 

amount of burden to the above categories so they will apply during that time period. Further 

specifics are addressed as each are discussed below. Please refer to section 6(b) for additional 

assumptions used in estimating respondent cost.

EPA proposed a more stringent new ozone NAAQS on January 19, 2010 (75 FR 2938), 

however a decision on the revised NAAQS, designations, and implementation rule was not final 

when this ICR was prepared and therefore EPA has not included any burden with conformity

determinations for areas designated nonattainment for new ozone NAAQS at this time.

 

9 These are minimum requirements are reflected in the ICR, additional plan/TIP 

amendments that are done on a voluntary basis beyond the required plan/TIP update cycles are 

not addressed in this ICR.
16

Designations for the 2010 1-hour NO2 NAAQS have not been made yet and no burden is 

included in this ICR renewal for conformity determinations for this NAAQS. 

(ii) State and Local Respondent Burden and Costs for Nonattainment and 

Maintenance Areas 

Background on Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

As stated earlier, this ICR includes the burden associated with implementing conformity

requirements with respect to nonattainment and maintenance areas for transportation-related 

criteria pollutants: ozone, CO, PM10, PM2.5, and NO2. The following table illustrates the number 

of areas currently subject to transportation conformity requirements, using data from EPA’s 

Green Book for the number of nonattainment and maintenance areas:10

Table 1:

Number of Areas Subject to Transportation Conformity Requirements

Pollutant/NAAQS

Number of Metropolitan 

Nonattainment/Maintenance 

Areas

Number of Isolated Rural 

Nonattainment/Maintenance 

Areas

1997 ozone11 91 22

CO 76 2

PM10 50 38

1997 PM2.5

12 38 1

2006 PM2.5

13 29 2

NO2

14 1 0

 

10 http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/index.html

11 The ozone areas referred to in this row were designated nonattainment for the 1997 

ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858). 

12

 The PM2.5 areas referred to in this row were designated nonattainment for the 1997 

PM2.5 NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944). 

13 The PM2.5 areas referred to in this row were designated nonattainment for the 2006 

PM2.5 NAAQS on November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688). 

14 This entry is for the annual NO2 NAAQS. Designations for the 2010 1-hour NO2 

NAAQS have not been made and will not affect the burden estimates for this ICR. 
17

This ICR reflects the burden associated with determining conformity for all of these 

pollutants/NAAQS; however, EPA’s estimates reflect efficiencies realized when metropolitan 

areas are nonattainment or maintenance for two or more pollutants/NAAQS since there is often 

an overlap of time spent in consultation, regional emissions analysis and other miscellaneous 

activities for these areas in determining conformity for two or more pollutants. 

As discussed further below, EPA also has identified the number of MPOs that are 

subject to transportation conformity for one or more pollutants/NAAQS, since many

metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas have more than one MPO (and consequently, 

more than one transportation plan or TIP conformity determination). The number of MPOs 

estimated in the following tables is based upon information collected from EPA Regional 

Offices, EPA’s Green Book, and from other sources.15

Finally, EPA assumes that the conformity resource burden will differ among:

 Larger metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas (urbanized area populations 

over 200,000);

 Smaller metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas (urbanized area populations 

between 50,000-200,000); and,

 Isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas (populations under 50,000). 

Since conformity requirements, complexity of air quality issues and geographic size can 

vary depending on an area’s population, number of MPOs, and number of pollutants involved, 

EPA believes it is appropriate to account for these differences in calculating the conformity 

burden in nonattainment and maintenance areas. For donut areas, the burden is assumed to be 

included in the MPO burden estimates. 

Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and 

Maintenance Areas

EPA is relying on information from several sources for this ICR’s estimated state and 

local burden hours for conformity determinations: 

 As described in Section 3(c), EPA requested burden information from EPA and DOT field 

offices that regularly work with state and local organizations responsible for doing 

conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs; 

 EPA has reviewed the conformity burden hour estimates for previous ICRs for the 

 

15 Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 84, May 1, 2002, Department of Commerce, Bureau of 

the Census, Qualifying Urban Areas for Census 2000 and Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 130, July

8, 2002, Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration/Federal Highway

Administration Designation of Transportation Management Areas. 
18

transportation conformity program and the burden hours assumed in DOT’s ICR for the 

transportation planning regulations; and,

 EPA reviewed existing conformity research studies for conformity burden in current rural 

nonattainment and maintenance areas. These research studies are listed in Appendix A of 

this ICR.

 EPA used information that was received during the public comment period. The 

announcement of a public comment period for this renewal ICR was made in the Federal 

Register on February 10, 2011 under Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2007-0269.

16

 The 

comment period closed on April 11, 2011 with EPA receiving four sets of comments. See 

Section 3(b) for the list of changes that were made in responding to comments.

The following paragraphs describe estimated state and local burden hours for conformity 

determinations in experienced metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. The ICR 

assumes that all conformity determination work is completed by state and local employees, 

although in practice some work may be completed by consultants. EPA again notes that 

transportation plan and TIP burden hour estimates are based on demonstrating conformity for 4-

year transportation plan and TIP updates as required by statute and regulation, rather than more 

frequent, plan and TIP revisions or amendments which are not required by the Act. This ICR 

captures the burden associated with meeting the minimum transportation conformity 

requirements.

EPA has calculated the burden associated with transportation plan and TIP conformity

determinations by considering the number of MPOs that are subject to conformity, the size of 

these MPOs, and the number of pollutants that apply. To estimate burden hours that MPOs 

incur to determine conformity for just one pollutant/NAAQS, EPA and DOT field offices were 

asked for estimated state and local respondent burden for the various tasks involved in a 

transportation plan or TIP conformity determination. For burden hours associated with each 

additional pollutant, EPA relied on data from ICR 2130.03 for incremental burden hours 

associated with performing transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations for each 

additional pollutant/NAAQS, which was based on federal survey responses.

For each burden hour estimated, EPA assumed that state and local agencies work only

on conformity-related activities. This ICR does not include burden for the general development 

of transportation plans, TIPs, projects, or motor vehicle emissions budgets, since these 

documents are developed to meet other requirements. EPA is assuming that some data 

collection for transportation planning or SIP purposes could also be used in conformity without 

additional conformity-related burden. 

The following tables illustrate the burden hours and cost associated with meeting the 

 

16To maintain the integrity of the ICR docket and all the associated ICR renewal records, 

the original docket number and date from the previous ICR continue to be used. For this 

renewal, a new Phase of the original docket number has been opened.
19

conformity requirements for a transportation plan and TIP update in metropolitan nonattainment 

and maintenance areas that are designated for one or more pollutants/NAAQS. These MPOs 

and metropolitan areas have experience with the conformity process, have established 

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

conformity determinations. 

While transportation plan and TIP updates are now able to be done with the same 

frequency (at least every 4 years), EPA estimates that it is only those MPOs serving smaller 

populations (50,000-200,000 populations) which will perform conformity determinations for 

transportation plans and TIPs at the same time, thus leading to efficiencies in burden hours and 

cost. In contrast, MPOs in larger areas may chose not to align transportation plan and TIP 

update conformity determinations as regularly, since these areas are expected to have more 

complex transportation planning considerations. 

Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, EPA assumes that conformity determinations 

for transportation plans and TIPs will always occur at different times in large metropolitan areas 

(Tables 2 through 5) and that conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs will 

occur at the same time in small metropolitan areas (see Tables 6 and 7). 

The burden hours for consultation, regional emissions analyses, and project level 

conformity determinations have been increased over the last ICR to account for the additional 

burden with the release of EPA’s new emissions model, MOVES, in December of 2009.17 The 

burden hours for consultation and regional emissions analysis were initially increased from the 

previous ICR by approximately 10%.

Commenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for consultation 

and the frequency of conformity determinations by MPOs with 3 or more NAAQS and EPA has 

adjusted the burden hours accordingly.

 

17 See the MOVES website at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/moves/index.htm for 

more information.
20

Table 2: State and Local Burden Hours 

Each Transportation Plan Conformity Determination

by MPO – Population of 200,000 or More 

MPO Demonstrating Conformity For Consultation

Regional 

Emissions 

Analysis18 Other Activities

Total 

Burden 

Hours

One Pollutant/NAAQS 55 310 45 410

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 72 415 60 547

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 88 510 75 673

Table 3: State and Local Annual Cost

Transportation Plan Conformity Determinations 

by MPO – Population of 200,000 or More

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For

Burden 

Hours 

No. of 

MPOs

Frequency 

of Action

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost 

Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual 

Cost

One Pollutant/NAAQS 410 40 4 years 4,100 $58.8119 $241,121

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 547 31 4 years 4,239 $58.81 $249,296

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 673 40 3 years 8,973 $58.81 $527,702

Total for All Transportation Plan Actions: 17,312 hours/year x $58.81/hour = $1,018,119/year

 

18 The burden for regional emissions analyses is framed in this ICR as an MPO

responsibility but we recognize that some State DOTs or other agencies may also perform the 

analyses, in cooperation with or instead of the MPO.

19 See Section 6(b) Estimating State and Local Respondent Costs, for a description of 

how the Cost per Hour was calculated.
21

Table 4: State and Local Burden Hours 

Each TIP Conformity Determination

by MPO – Population of 200,000 or More

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Consultation

Regional 

Emissions 

Analysis Other Activities

Total 

Burden 

Hours

One Pollutant/NAAQS 44 310 45 399

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 55 415 60 530

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 66 510 75 651

Table 5: State and Local Annual Cost

TIP Conformity Determinations 

by MPO – Population of 200,000 or More

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For

Burden 

Hours

No. of 

MPOs

Frequency 

of Action

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost 

Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual 

Cost

One Pollutant/NAAQS 399 40 4 years 3,990 $58.81 $234,652

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 530 31 4 years 4,107 $58.81 $241,533

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 651 40 4 years 6,510 $58.81 $382,853

Total for All TIP Actions: 14,607 hours/year x $ 58.81/hour = $859,038/year 
22

Table 6: State and Local Burden Hours 

Each Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determination

by MPO – Population Between 50,000-200,000

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Consultation

Regional 

Emissions 

Analysis Other Activities

Total 

Burden 

Hours

One Pollutant/NAAQS 50 130 30 210

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 61 175 40 276

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 77 220 50 347

Table 7: State and Local Annual Cost

Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations 

by MPO – Population Between 50,000-200,000

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For

Burden 

Hours 

No. of 

MPOs

Frequency 

of Action

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost 

Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual 

Cost

One Pollutant/NAAQS 210 40 4 years 2,100 $58.81 $123,501

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 276 13 4 years 897 $58.81 $52,753

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 347 10 3 years 1,1,57 $58.81 $68,043

Total for All Transportation Plan and TIP Actions: 4,154 hours/year x $58.81/hour = $244,297/year 

In addition, EPA has also estimated the State and Local start-up burden associated with 

the transition to EPA’s new emissions model, MOVES. The estimate includes 

training/workshops plus additional time to transition from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES. The 

transition started in December 2009 with the release of MOVES. For this ICR, EPA has 

assumed that half of the MPOs have already taken a MOVES training class and have begun 

working with MOVES. This start up burden is shown in Tables 8 and 9.

Commenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for the transition 

to MOVES for regional emissions analyses and EPA has adjusted the burden hours accordingly.
23

Table 8: State and Local Burden Hours

One-time Start-up 

For Transition to MOVES for Regional Emissions Analyses

Action Burden Hours Total Burden Hour

l Training 30 30

Transition 100 100

Total burden hours for State and Local Respondents for Start-up of MOVES Analysis: 130 hours

Table 9: State and Local Costs

One-time Start-up 

For Transition to MOVES for Regional Emissions Analyses

Training/Transition

Hours No. of MPOs

Total Burden 

Hours Cost Per Hour Total Cost

130 87 11,310 $58.81 $665,1414

Total cost for State and Local Respondents for Start-up of Quantitative Analysis: 11,310 hours x

$58.81/hour= $665,141

Project-Level Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance 

Areas

Tables 10 and 11 estimate the burden and cost associated with doing conformity

determinations for projects in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. These tables 

are intended to illustrate burden associated with a typical project-level conformity

determination.

To calculate burden for state and local agencies in preparing project-level conformity

determinations for these areas, EPA polled its regional offices and DOT which typically work 

with state and local agencies in project-level conformity determinations. EPA headquarters 

estimated the time necessary to conduct the hot-spot analyses based on the guidance documents 

for these analyses and professional experience. State and local burden hours for consultation 

and conducting the hot-spot analyses in Table 10 reflect averages of the responses received. 

EPA calculated the average number of annual actions based upon survey responses from EPA 

Regional Offices and DOT offices that are responsible for working with state and local 

respondents in making project-level conformity determinations.

Conformity determinations for projects in metropolitan ozone and NO2 nonattainment 

and maintenance areas are fairly straightforward, because projects only need to come from a 

conforming transportation plan and TIP to meet all conformity requirements. A hot-spot 

analysis is not required for project determinations in these nonattainment and maintenance 
24

areas. Alternatively, conformity determinations for all non-exempt federal projects in CO areas 

must include either a qualitative or quantitative hot-spot analysis (depending on the type of 

project).

20

 In PM2.5 and PM10 areas, project-level conformity determinations must include a 

hot-spot analysis if the project is of local air quality concern.21 At present, PM2.5 and PM10

(PM) hot-spot analyses, when required, are done qualitatively.

22

Quantitative PM hot-spot analyses will be required after the end of the conformity grace

period (December 20, 2012)

23 for applying motor vehicle emissions models for such analyses. 

EPA has approved MOVES and EMFAC (in California) for use in project-level transportation 

conformity determinations, including PM hot-spot analyses. EPA established a two-year grace 

period before MOVES is required in quantitative PM and CO hot-spot analyses, and a two-year 

grace period before EMFAC is required for quantitative PM hot-spot analyses. EPA has issued 

policy guidance on the use of these models will be required for PM hot-spot analyses and other 

purposes.

24

The total burden estimates for project-level conformity determinations represent 50% of 

total state and local burden for a quantitative PM hot-spot analysis. We are assuming that the 

analysis would also be used for satisfying NEPA requirements, so only half of the burden would 

be included in the conformity ICR. These numbers include scoping the project analysis, 

MOVES modeling, air quality modeling, determining background concentrations, calculating 

design values, quality assurance, and preparing the final documentation. 

 

20 See the conformity rule (40 CFR 93.123(a)) for the types of projects that require 

qualitative versus quantitative CO hot-spot analyses. 

21Per the conformity rule (40 CFR 93.123(b)(1)), projects of local air quality concern 

include: “(i) new or expanded highway projects that have a significant number of or significant 

increase in diesel vehicles; (ii) projects affecting intersections that are at Level-of-Service D, E, 

or F because of increased traffic volumes from a significant number of diesel vehicles related to 

the project; (iii) new bus and rail terminals and transfer points that have a significant number of 

diesel vehicles congregating at a single location; (iv) expanded bus and rail terminals and 

transfer points that significantly increase the number of diesel vehicles congregating at a single 

location; and, (v) projects in or affecting locations, areas, or categories of sites which are 

identified in the PM10 or PM2.5 applicable SIP or SIP submission as appropriate, as sites of 

violation or possible violation.” 

22 EPA and FHWA have provided guidance for those areas required to do qualitative hotspot analyses for PM2.5 and PM10 nonattainment and maintenance areas: “Transportation 

Conformity Guidance for Qualitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and 

Maintenance Areas,” EPA420-B-06-922.

23 Notice of Availability: Official Release of the MOVES2010a and EMFFAC2007 

Motor Vehicle Emissions Models for Transportation conformity Hot-Spot Analyses and 

Availability of Modeling Guidance, 75 FR 79370 (December 2010).

24 “Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for State Implementation Plan 

Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes,” EPA-420-B-09-046 (December 

2009).
25

The grace period was effective on December 10, 2010. For purposes of this supporting 

statement and burden calculations, the effective date was set as January 1, 2011 through January

2013 (2 years). This period overlaps with the ICR by one and a half years, which is the midpoint of the 3-year time period covered by the ICR. During the first half of the ICR period 

(June 2011 to January 2013), it is assumed that all PM hot-spot analyses will be qualitative as 

this is still within the quantitative analysis grace period. However, during the second half of the 

ICR period (January 2013 to May 2014) it is assumed quantitative hot-spot analyses are done as 

required. There is a different burden associated with qualitative versus quantitative analyses. 

To reflect the burden over the course of the ICR period, the hours for qualitative and 

quantitative PM hot-spot analysis were averaged together. In contrast, it is unnecessary to 

calculate CO hot-spot analyses in the same way since quantitative and qualitative CO-hot-spot 

analyses continue to be required by the conformity rule throughout the time frame of this ICR.

The state and local burden hours for completing both qualitative and quantitative PM 

and CO hot-spot analyses are shown in Table 10. EPA calculated the average number of 

annual actions based on past experience and input given by the EPA Regional Offices and DOT 

Offices that are responsible for working with state and local respondents in making project-level 

conformity determinations. EPA is assuming that some data for hot-spot analyses will already

be available because it is necessary for project development (e.g., traffic data). 

Consultation with other state and local agencies is an important activity for these 

analyses and EPA estimates that on average seven state and local agencies participate in one 

consultation meeting on each transportation project. EPA is assuming that conformity-related 

consultation would be one of many issues discussed through consultation meetings as a project 

proceeds through the NEPA process. 

EPA assumes that the total burden hours for project-level conformity determinations 

would be approximately the same for larger and smaller metropolitan areas because 

requirements for project-level conformity determinations do not differ based upon population 

size served by an MPO. Requirements for project-level conformity determinations are the same 

for large and small metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. 

Commenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for consultation 

and quantitative PM hot-spot analyses. EPA has adjusted the burden hours accordingly. EPA 

also added burden hours to account for Other Activities to account for time spent preparing the 

documentation for all project-level conformity determinations, similar to regional conformity 

determinations. 

Many CO project-level analyses are currently used to fulfill both transportation 

conformity and NEPA requirements. Therefore, EPA is assuming that the estimated burden 

associated with consultation and preparation of hot-spot analyses would be divided equally

between these programs. Accordingly, the burden estimates in Tables 10 and 11 reflect only the 

share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requirements for hot-spot 

analyses (i.e. half of the burden hours associated with hot-spot analyses). 
26

Table 10: State and Local Burden Hours

Each Project-level Conformity Determination

Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Pollutant

Type of Hotspot Analysis ConsultationHot-spot 

Analysis

Other 

Activities

Total

Burden 

Hours

Ozone, NO2, PM2.5 and 

PM10

25 None 0.5 N/A 0.5 1

PM 2.5 or PM10

Qualitative 6 22 2 30

61

Quantitative 18 71 3 92

CO Quantitative 6 14 222

CO Qualitative 3 2

1

6

 

25 Most projects in PM10 and PM2.5 areas do not require a qualitative or quantitative hotspot analysis. In contrast, all non-exempt CO projects in CO areas require some type of hot-spot 

analysis.
27

Table 11: State and Local Annual Cost

Project-level Conformity Determinations

Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Metropolitan 

Area/Pollutant

Burden 

Hours 

Per 

Action

Average

No. of 

Actions/year

No. of 

MPOs

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual

Cost

Project level 

conformity 

determination 

- No Hotspot 

Analysis –

ozone, NO2, 

PM2.5 and 

PM10

Pop. 

200,000+ 1 65 111 7,215 $58.81 $424,314

Pop. 

50,000-

200,000

1 15 63 945 $58.81 $55,575

1997 and 2006 PM2.5 - Hotspot Analyses 61 3 74 13,542 $58.81 $796,405

PM10 –

Hot-spot Analyses 61 1 41 2,501 $58.81 $147,084

CO -Quantitative Hot-spot 

Analyses 22 5 76 8,360 $58.81 $491,652

CO – Qualitative Hot-Spot 

Analyses 6 0.5 76 228 $58.81 $13,409

Total for All Project-level Actions: 32,791/year x $58.81/hour= $1,928,439/year

State and Local Start-up Burden Associated with New Project Level Requirements

EPA has also estimated the state and local start-up costs associated with the transition 

from qualitative to quantitative PM hot-spot analyses in this ICR. Training will include 

learning new quantitative PM hot-spot modeling guidance as well as training for emissions and 
28

air quality modeling.26 At this time, a definitive schedule and method of training opportunities 

is still in the planning phase. EPA anticipates offering on-site training, as well as webinars. For 

burden estimates, we are anticipating utilizing webinars to present the final quantitative PM hotspot guidance, advanced topics via webinars, and training for the use of emissions and air 

quality models. 

The start-up cost of transitioning from qualitative to quantitative PM hot-spot analysis is 

determined by factors including time spent attending training sessions and number of staff 

anticipated to attend training.

We have also included a one-time start-up burden for learning to use MOVES for 

quantitative CO hot-spot analyses in CO nonattainment and maintenance areas. The burden 

hours per action is anticipated to be less than those in PM nonattainment and maintenance areas 

as the CO areas already perform quantitative analysis and therefore the start-up burden only 

includes training time for MOVES, rather than other aspects of CO hot-spot analyses (e.g., 

current air quality modeling practices will continue to be applicable with the MOVES model).

The burden estimates in Tables 12 and 13 reflect only the share of the burden 

attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requirements for hot-spot analyses (i.e. half 

of the burden hours associated with analyses). 

Commenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for the training 

and transition from qualitative to quantitative hot-spot analyses. EPA has adjusted the burden 

hours accordingly.

Table 12: State and Local Burden Hours

One-time Start-up 

For Quantitative Hot-Spot Analysis 

Action Burden Hours per Action

PM Training and Start-up 60

CO Training and Start-up 20

Total burden hours for State and Local Respondents for Start-up of Quantitative Analysis: 80 hours

 

26 EPA has provided guidance for those areas required to do quantitative hot-spot analysis 

for PM2.5 and PM10 nonattainment and maintenance areas: “Transportation Conformity

Guidance for Quantitative Hot-spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and 

Maintenance Areas”, EPA-420-F-10-052 and “Using MOVES in Project-Level Carbon 

Monoxide Analyses”, EPA-420-B-10-041. 
29

Table 13: State and Local Costs

One-time Start-up 

For Quantitative Hot-Spot Analysis 

Pollutant Training Hours 

No. of 

Areas

Total 

Burden 

Hours

Cost Per 

Hour Total Cost

PM 60 93 5,580 $58.81 $328,160

CO 20 42 840 $58.81 $49,400

Total cost for State and Local Respondents for Start-up of Quantitative Analysis: 6,420 hours x $58.81/hour=

$377,560

The number of PM areas in Table 13 includes both metropolitan and isolated rural areas. 

Of the 93 PM nonattainment and maintenance areas, 22 MPOs are nonattainment or 

maintenance for both a PM2.5 and PM10 NAAQS and 16 are located in California (where 

MOVES is not used). We believe that there will be efficiencies gained for these areas which are 

not captured in the burden estimates. For example, the same MOVES modeling can be used for 

meeting both a PM10 and PM2.5 NAAQS, rather than conduct emissions modeling twice. 

However, we have not reflected these efficiencies in the ICR; we have kept the burden estimates 

separate for PM2.5 and PM10 for these areas.

The number of CO areas in Table 13 includes both metropolitan and isolated rural areas. 

Of the 78 CO nonattainment and maintenance areas, 25 are also nonattainment or maintenance 

for PM and 11 are located in California (where MOVES is not used), which reduces the total 

number of nonattainment and maintenance areas to 42.

Project-Level Conformity Determinations in Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance 

Areas

Tables 14 through 16 includes the state and local government burden estimated with 

performing regional emissions analysis and project-level conformity determinations in ozone, 

CO, PM2.5 and PM10 isolated rural areas.

27

EPA considered several factors in developing these estimates. EPA assumed that state 

departments of transportation will continue to be the lead agency in preparing project-level 

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

provide emissions modeling assistance to isolated rural areas, as is now done in some areas. 

We also retained the assumption made in the previous ICR (2130.03) supporting 

statement that isolated rural areas that are nonattainment or maintenance for more than one 

pollutant/NAAQS will have additional burden hours, because these areas may be required to 

 

27 There are no current NO2 nonattainment or maintenance areas in isolated rural areas. 

See Table 1 for further information.
30

conduct a regional emissions analysis for an additional year and may have additional technical 

issues to resolve. Therefore, we included more burden hours for consultation, conducting 

regional emissions analysis, and performing other activities in these areas, as in previous ICRs. 

Commenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for consultation in 

isolated rural areas. EPA has adjusted the burden hours accordingly.

Table 14: State and Local Burden Hours 

Each Project-level Conformity Determination

Regional Emissions Analysis

For Isolated Rural Areas – Population Less Than 50,000

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Consultation

Regional 

Emissions 

Analysis

Other Misc. 

Activities

Total 

Burden 

Hours

One Pollutant/NAAQS 28 65 15 108

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 33 90 20 143

Table 15: State and Local Annual Cost

Each Project-level Conformity Determination

Regional Emissions Analysis 

For Isolated Rural Areas – Population Less than 50,000

Demonstrating Conformity For

Burden 

Hours 

No. of 

Areas

Frequency 

of Action

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost 

Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual Cost

One Pollutant/NAAQS 108 57 5 1,231 $58.81 $72,395

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 143 3 5 86 $58.81 $5,058

Total for All Actions: 1,317 hours/year x $58.81/hour = $77,453/year 

Table 15 reflects a frequency of project level conformity determination being done once 

every five years in each isolated rural area, which is less than MPOs in the previous burden 

calculations. MPOs are required by regulation to determine conformity once every four years. 

Our experience from previous ICRs and existing research (see Appendix A) is that isolated rural 

areas determine conformity less than once every four years.

In general, conformity determinations for projects in isolated rural areas are more 

involved than for projects in metropolitan areas, because a regional emissions analysis is also 

performed when a regionally significant project “not from a conforming transportation plan and 
31

TIP” is to receive federal funding or approval.28

EPA notes that this ICR may overestimate burden associated with determining 

conformity for projects in isolated rural areas, since conformity determinations for nonregionally significant projects may not require that a new regional emissions analysis be 

completed every time. 

Consultation between state and local agencies would also occur for each project 

requiring a hot-spot analysis.29 Like metropolitan projects, EPA is also assuming that 

conformity-related topics would be one of many issues discussed through consultation meetings 

as a project proceeds through the NEPA process. 

Localized analyses are assumed to be used to meet both transportation conformity and 

NEPA requirements. Therefore, EPA is assuming that the estimated burden associated with 

consultation and preparation of these hot-spot analyses would be divided equally between 

transportation conformity and NEPA. Accordingly, the burden estimates in Table 16 reflect 

only the share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requirements for 

hot-spot analyses (i.e., half of the burden hours associated with the analyses). 

Commenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for consultation 

and analysis for project level determinations in isolated rural areas. EPA has adjusted the 

burden hours accordingly. 

Table 16: State and Local Burden Hours For

Each Project-Level Conformity Determination 

Hot-spot Analysis

Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas 

Pollutant

Type of Hotspot Analysis ConsultationHot-spot 

Analysis

Total Burden 

Hours

PM 2.5 or PM10

Qualitative 6 22 28

59

Quantitative 18 71 89

CO Quantitative 6 14 20

CO Qualitative 3 2 5

 

28Isolated rural areas are not required by federal law to develop metropolitan 

transportation plans or TIPs.

29EPA estimates that four state and local agencies would participate in one consultation 

meeting on each transportation project.
32

Table 17 shows state and local burden hours estimated for performing project-level 

conformity determinations in ozone, CO, PM2.5 and PM10 isolated rural areas. These numbers 

are the same as projected for metropolitan areas.

To calculate the total burden hours for state and local agencies in isolated rural areas, 

EPA assumed that a conformity determination occurs once every five years, as in the previous 

ICR. Also, the transportation conformity regulation requires a hot-spot analysis for every nonexempt project in a CO nonattainment or maintenance area. Because there are two isolated 

rural areas that are nonattainment or maintenance for CO, we assumed there would be two CO 

hot-spot analyses in isolated rural areas over a five-year period.

As stated earlier, the conformity regulation requires a hot-spot analysis only for projects 

of local air quality concern in PM areas, rather than every non-exempt project. Given that 

projects of local air quality concern, which are generally projects that involve significant 

numbers of diesel vehicles, are unlikely to occur in isolated rural areas, we assumed there would 

be only one such project in these areas over a five-year period. Based on these assumptions, we 

arrived at a total of 419 hours of burden per year for state and local agencies in isolated rural 

areas. 

Table 17: State and Local Annual Cost

Project-Level Conformity Determinations 

Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Metropolitan 

Area

Burden

Hours per 

Action No. of Areas

Frequency of 

Action

Total

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual 

Cost

PM2.5 - Hot-spot 

Analyses 59 3 5 years 35 $58.81 $2,058

PM10 –

Hot-spot 

Analyses

59 38 5 years 448 $58.81 $26,347

CO -

Quantitative 

Hot-spot 

Analyses

20 2 5 years 8 $58.81 $470

CO –

Qualitative HotSpot Analyses5 2 5 years 2 $58.81 $118

Total State and Local Respondent Burden for Project Level Conformity Determinations: 493hours/year x 

$58.81/hour = $28,993
33

6(b) Estimating State and Local Respondent Costs

The following paragraphs describe the assumptions used for estimating state and local 

respondent costs illustrated in section 6(a):

(i) Estimating Labor Costs

EPA assumed that each state and local burden hour associated with conformity

determinations is completed by an experienced technical staff person at a state or local agency

or contractor. In addition to salary costs, EPA is also including overhead costs associated with 

employing an experienced technical staff person, such as paid leave, health insurance, 

retirement savings, office space, computers, and other business expenses.

EPA is assuming that state and local burden hours would be completed by an 

experienced technical staff person being paid at a GS-13, Step 3 federal government employee 

salary of $76,452/year.30 EPA then divided the annual 2010 GS-13, Step 3 salary rate by 2080 

(the number of hours in a work year) and multiplied this number by the standard government 

overhead factor of 1.6. This calculation results in a state and local cost of $58.81/burden hour. 

(ii) Estimating Capital/Start-up and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

In general, EPA is not expecting that additional computers, software, or other capital 

investments are needed to do conformity analyses. Planners should be able to adapt existing 

equipment and systems for conformity use.

The transportation conformity regulation does not contain any continuing recordkeeping or reporting requirements that require additional capital or O&M costs for individual 

state or local respondent actions. Thus, no capital or O&M costs are included for recordkeeping and reporting actions.

(iii) Annualizing Capital Costs

EPA has assumed the following in annualizing estimates:

 Estimates for transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations are annualized over 

a four-year period, to correspond with Clean Air Act requirements that transportation 

plans and TIPs conform with a new conformity determination and regional emissions 

analysis every four years. EPA included the cost associated with meeting the minimum 

requirements, and therefore assumed that only one transportation plan or TIP conformity 

determination will be done for each MPO every four years in metropolitan nonattainment 

and maintenance areas, with one exception. For MPOs designated nonattainment or 

 

30 January 2010 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2010-GS, 2010 

General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/gs.asp
34

maintenance for 3 or more NAAQS, the frequency was increased to once every 3 years, 

in response to comments received during the public comment period. For the purposes of 

this ICR, EPA is not considering additional burden from MPOs updating or revising 

transportation plans and TIPs voluntarily, or as required by state regulations, on a more 

frequent basis.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs 

This section of the ICR shows federal agency burden and costs associated with carrying 

out transportation conformity regulations. 

(i) Estimating Federal Labor Costs

EPA estimates that each DOT and EPA federal burden hour associated with conformity

determinations and adequacy findings is completed by an experienced technical staff person. 

EPA is also including overhead costs associated with employing an experienced technical staff 

person, such as paid leave, health insurance, retirement savings, office space, computers, and 

other business expenses.

EPA assumed that federal burden hours would be completed by an experienced technical 

staff person being paid at a GS-13, Step 3 federal government employee salary of 

$76,452/year.31 EPA then divided the annual 2010 GS-13, Step 3 salary rate by 2080 (the 

number of hours in a work year) and multiplied this number by the standard government 

overhead factor of 1.6. This calculation resulted in a federal cost of $58.81/burden hour. 

Assuming $58.81 per federal burden hour, Table 27 shows the total federal annualized 

cost associated with making transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations in 

metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. 

Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan 

Nonattainment/Maintenance Areas – Federal Burden Hours and Cost

 

Tables 18 through 20 show estimated federal burden hours and cost associated with 

making conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs in metropolitan 

nonattainment and maintenance areas. EPA assumes that federal burden in these areas is 

associated only with conformity-related work prior to an MPO’s determination and for 

reviewing transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations and that MPOs have 

established interagency consultation procedures with regularly scheduled meetings for 

discussing conformity issues. Because MPOs serving smaller metropolitan areas (populations 

between 50,000-200,000) typically do conformity determinations for transportation plans and 

 

31 January 2010 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2010-GS, 2010 

General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/gs.asp
35

TIPs at the same time since they are typically on the same four-year update cycle, EPA also 

assumes that federal burden associated with consulting on and reviewing transportation plan and 

TIP conformity determinations for these MPOs is done at the same time as well. Therefore, 

federal burden associated with transportation conformity requirements in smaller metropolitan 

areas (50,000-200,000) is half the burden associated with transportation plan and TIP 

conformity determinations in large metropolitan areas.

EPA calculated estimated federal burden hours based upon survey responses from EPA 

Regional Offices and DOT offices that are responsible for work associated with making 

conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs. 

To account for additional burden hours spent by state and local agencies for 

consultation, the consultation for Federal agencies has also been increased to support additional 

consultation activities.

Table 18: Federal Burden Hours 

Each Transportation Plan or TIP Conformity Determination 

Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Population of 200,000 or More

Metropolitan

Planning Organization Activity FHWA FTA EPA Total

Per Conformity 

Determination

(Includes all areas with 

populations of 200,000+)

Attending Consultation Meetings 12 12 12 36

Conformity-Related Work Prior to 

MPO Submission 12 1 3 16

Reviewing Plan Conformity 

Determination 13 2 7 22

Federal Hours Burden Hours for Each Plan or TIP Conformity Determination: 74
36

Table 19: Federal Burden Hours

Each Transportation Plan/TIP Conformity Determination

Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Population of 50,000-200,000

Metropolitan

Planning Organization Activity FHWA FTA EPA Total

Per Conformity 

Determination

(Includes all areas with 

populations of 50,000-

200,000)

Attending Consultation Meetings 12 12 12 36

Conformity-Related Work Prior to 

MPO Determination 12 1 3

16

Reviewing Plan Conformity 

Determination 13 2 7 22

Federal Hours Burden For Each Plan/ TIP Conformity Determination: 74

Table 20: Federal Annual Cost for MPOs

Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations

Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Action

Metropolitan 

Nonattainment Area

Burden 

Hours 

Per 

Action

No. of 

MPO’s

Frequency 

of Action

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost 

Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual 

Cost

Plan

Per Conformity 

Determination

(Pop. 200,000+)

74 111 4 years 2,054 $58.81 $120,796

TIP

Per Conformity 

Determination

(Pop. 200,000+)

74 111 4 years 2054 $58.81 $120,796

Plan/

TIP

Per Conformity 

Determination (pop. 

50,000-200,000)

74 63 4 years 1,166 $58.81 $68,572

Total Federal Burden for Plan and TIP Actions: 5,274 hours/year x $58.81/hour = $310,164
37

Project-Level Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance 

Areas – Federal Burden Hours and Cost

Tables 21 and 22 estimate the burden hours and cost that federal agencies incur 

associated with conformity determinations for projects in metropolitan nonattainment and 

maintenance areas. These tables are intended to illustrate burden associated with a typical 

project-level conformity determination. 

To calculate burden for federal agencies associated with consultation and reviewing 

project-level conformity determinations for metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, 

EPA polled its regional offices and DOT. The following tables show federal burden associated 

with consultation and reviewing project-level conformity determinations prepared by state and 

local respondents. State and local respondents burden hours and cost associated with 

consultation, hot-spot analysis and regional emissions analysis may be found in Tables 10 and 

11.

Table 21: Federal Burden Hours 

Each Project-level Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and 

Maintenance Areas

Pollutant

Type of Hotspot Analysis Consultation

Reviewing Projectlevel conformity 

determinations

Total

Burden 

Hours

Ozone, NO2, PM2.5 and PM10 None 0.5 0.5 1

PM2.5 , PM10

Qualitative 2 6 8

12

Quantitative 5 11 16

CO Quantitative 1 2 3

CO Qualitative 0.25 1.25 1.5
38

Table 22: Federal Annual Cost 

Project-level Conformity Determinations Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance 

Areas

Type of Analysis

Burden 

Hours Per 

Action

Average

No. of 

Actions/

Year

No. of 

MPOs

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost 

Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual

Cost

Project level 

conformity 

determination 

- No Hot-spot 

Analysis

Pop. 

200,000+ 1 65 111 7,215 $58.81 $424,314

Pop. 

50,000-

200,000

1 15 63 945 $58.81 $55,575

PM2.5 – Hot-spot Analyses 12 3 74 2,664 $58.81 $156,670

PM10 – Hot-spot Analyses 12 1 41 492 $58.81 $28,935

CO -Quantitative Hot-spot 

Analyses 3 5 76 1,140 $58.81 $67,043

CO – Qualitative Hot-Spot 

Analyses

1.5 0.5 76 57 $58.81 $3,352

Total for All Project-level Actions: 12,513 hours/year x $58.81/hour= $735,889/year 

Project-Level Conformity Determinations in Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance 

Areas – Federal Burden Hours and Cost

Table 23 shows federal burden associated with conformity determinations for a typical 

regionally significant project in an isolated rural nonattainment or maintenance area. Table 24 

shows federal burden associated with interagency consultation and review of hot-spot analyses 

in isolated rural CO, PM2.5 and PM10 nonattainment and maintenance areas. Table 25 shows 

federal annual cost associated with conformity determinations for project-level conformity 

determinations in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas.

In general, conformity determinations for projects in isolated rural areas are more 

involved than for metropolitan areas, since isolated rural areas also need to perform a regional 

emissions analysis when a regionally significant project is to receive federal funding or 

approval. 

To account for additional burden hours spent by state and local agencies for 

consultation, the consultation for Federal agencies has also been increased to support additional 

meetings and activities.
39

Table 23: Federal Burden Hours 

Each Project-Level Conformity Determination 

Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Regional Emissions Analysis Component

Type of Project Activity FHWA FTA EPA Total

Projects in Isolated 

Rural Area

Attending Consultation Meetings 6 1 1 8

Conformity-Related Work on Draft 

Determination 6 1 2 9

Reviewing Project Conformity 

Determination 10 1 5 16

Total for Each Isolated Rural Area Project Determination: 33 

Table 24: Federal Burden Hours Each Project-Level Conformity Determination Isolated 

Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Hot-spot Analysis Component

Pollutant

Type of Hotspot Analysis Consultation

Reviewing Projectlevel conformity 

determinations

Total

Burden 

Hours

Ozone, NO2, PM2.5 and PM10 N/A 0.5 0.5 1

PM2.5 or PM10

Qualitative 2 6 8

12

Quantitative 5 11 16

CO Quantitative 1 2 3

CO Qualitative .25 1.25 1.5
40

Table 25: Federal Agency Burden Cost For

Project-Level Conformity Determinations 

Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Type of Project

Burden

Hours per 

Action

No. of 

Isolated 

Rural Areas

Frequency of 

Action

Total

Annual 

burden hours

Cost Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual 

Cost

Projects in 

Isolated Rural 

Areas – Regional 

Analysis

33 60 5 years 396 $58.81 $23,289

PM2.5 – Hot-spot 

Analyses 12 3 5 years 7 $58.81 $412

PM10 – Hot-spot 

Analyses 12 38 5 years 91 $58.81 $5,352

CO –Quantitative 

Hot-spot Analyses 3 1 5 years 1 $58.81 $59

CO –Qualitative 

Hot-spot Analyses 1.5 1 5 years 1 $58.51 $59

Total Federal Agency Burden for Project Level Conformity Determinations: 496hours/year x $58.81/hour = 

$29,170

Adequacy Findings for SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets – Federal Burden Hours

One component of the federal burden associated with transportation conformity is EPA’s 

role in making adequacy findings for SIPs with new motor vehicle emissions budgets. The 

conformity regulation requires the motor vehicle emissions budget(s) from a submitted SIP to be 

used as the measure of conformity once EPA finds such a budget(s) adequate (40 CFR 93.118(e) 

and (f)).32 The total burden of the adequacy review process is completed by EPA. No other 

federal agencies are involved in the adequacy review process. This ICR also does not account 

for any state or local work associated with developing the SIP because SIPs are developed to 

meet other non-conformity requirements. 

EPA based burden hours associated with each adequacy review on the average amount of 

EPA staff time needed per adequacy determination, EPA staff time includes the time needed to 

 

32 Per 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), EPA will find a budget adequate if the following minimum 

criteria is met: (i)The submitted SIP is endorsed by the Governor or his/her designee and has 

been subject to a state public hearing; (ii) Interagency consultation took place and any EPA 

stated concerns have been addressed; (iii) The budget is clearly identified and precisely 

quantified; (iv) The budget, when considered with all other emissions sources, is consistent with 

applicable SIP requirements; (v) The budget is consistent with and is clearly related to the 

emissions inventory and submitted SIP control measures; and, (vi) Revisions to a previously

submitted SIP explain and document any changes to the previous budget and control measures, 

impacts on point and source emissions, and any changes to established safety margins and 

reasons for those changes
41

notify the public that a SIP has been submitted and is under adequacy review, the adequacy

review of the SIP’s budget(s), responding to any public comments, and publishing a Federal 

Register notice with EPA’s finding. 

Table 26 illustrates EPA’s burden hours for each adequacy finding. These estimates were 

drawn from a recent survey of EPA Regional Offices, as well as an estimate of the time spent at 

headquarters. 

Table 26: Federal Burden Hours Adequacy Findings of

SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Activity Hours to perform

Per Adequacy Finding

Adequacy Review 17

Federal Register Notice Preparation and 

Publication 19

Preparation for and Website Posting 3

Burden hours per Adequacy Finding: 39

Adequacy Findings – Federal Costs

Table 27A shows the total federal annualized cost associated with making adequacy

determinations for SIP motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA based the number of adequacy

reviews need each year based on the historical average number of SIPs that EPA has processed 

for adequacy over the past seven years, and responses from EPA regions regarding the 

anticipated number of SIPs expected to process for adequacy in fiscal year 2007.

Table 27B show costs associated with Federal Register notices of adequacy findings. A

Federal Register notice of EPA’s adequacy determination is always required, but often such 

notice is given with a proposed or final rulemaking action to approve the submitted SIP which is 

required due to other non-conformity requirements. Therefore, EPA included in the above table 

only the cost associated with Federal Register notices that were published separate from a 

proposed or final rulemaking action to approve the submitted SIP. 

Table 27A: Federal Annual Cost of Adequacy Findings 

Action

Average

Number of 

Actions per 

Region

No. of 

Regions

Burden 

Hours per 

Action

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Hours

Cost Per 

Hour

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Cost

Adequacy Finding 5 10 39 1,950 $58.81 $114,679
42

Table 27B: Federal Annual Cost of Federal Register Notices

Action

Average

Number of 

Actions

No. of 

Regions 

Total Federal Register 

Notice Publications

Average 

cost per 

Publication

Total 

Annual 

Burden 

Cost 

Federal Register Notice 

– Publication Costs 5 10 50 $413 $20,650

Total Burden for Adequacy Findings: 1,950 hours/year x $58.81/hour =$114,679+ $20,650 = $135,329

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

EPA estimates that 174 MPOs will be subject to conformity requirements during the

period covered by this ICR and that EPA Regional Offices, the FHWA and FTA will be 

involved in interagency consultation, and review of any transportation-related conformity 

determinations performed by MPOs during this process. EPA also estimates that similar 

consultation will occur for projects in isolated rural areas. 

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The bottom line annual burden for all State and local respondents is 88,404 hours with a 

cost of $5,199,040. 

The bottom line annual burden for Federal agency respondents is 20,233 hours with a 

cost of $1,210,552.

33

Finally, the bottom line burden to all federal, state, and local agency respondents over 

the 3-year period covered by this ICR is estimated at 325,911 hours, with a cost of 

approximately $19,228,776. This includes a one-time start up cost of quantitative modeling and 

transition to MOVES.

(i) State and Local Agency Tally

The bottom-line annual burden for all State and local agencies in performing 

transportation conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs in nonattainment and 

maintenance areas and isolated rural areas is 48,700 hours/year with a cost of $2,864,048/year. 

 

33 To obtain bottom-line annual Federal agency cost associated with conformity

determinations, EPA multiplied the bottom-line Federal agency annual burden hours by

estimated hourly labor costs of $58.81 and then added $20,650 in Federal Register notice 

publication costs from Table 27A and B to reach the bottom line Federal agency annual 

estimated cost of $1,197,143.
43

The bottom-line annual burden for all State and local agencies in performing project 

level conformity determinations and, where applicable, hot-spot analyses in metropolitan areas, 

and isolated rural areas is 39,704 hours/year at a cost of $2,334,992/year. 

(ii) Federal Agency Tally

The bottom-line annual burden for Agencies associated with transportation conformity

determinations for transportation plans and TIPs in nonattainment areas and isolated rural areas 

is 5,274 hours/year at a cost of $310,164/year.

The bottom-line annual burden for Agencies associated with project level conformity

determinations (including, where applicable, hot-spot analysis) in metropolitan areas and isolated 

rural areas is 13,009 hours/year at a cost of $765,059/year.

The bottom-line annual burden for EPA burden associated with adequacy determinations 

for motor vehicle emission budgets associated with SIPs is 1,950 hours/year at a cost of 

$135,329/year.

34

Tables 28 and 29 show the total annual estimated burden hours and cost associated with 

transportation conformity determinations requirements incurred by state, local and federal 

respondents.

Table 28: Total Annual Burden Hours Transportation Conformity Determinations

Type of Conformity 

Determination

Total Annual

State and Local

Burden Hours

Total Annual Federal 

Burden Hours

Total Annual 

Conformity Burden 

Hours

Transportation Plan/ TIP 

Conformity Determination 48,700 5,274 53,974

Project Conformity 

Determination 39,704 13,009 52,713

Adequacy Finding N/A 1,950 1,950

Total 88,404 20,233 108,637

BOTTOM LINE ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS: 108,637/ year 

 

34 To obtain bottom-line annual cost associated with adequacy determinations for motor 

vehicle emission budgets, EPA multiplied the total burden hours in Table 27A and B by

estimated hourly labor costs of $58.81 and then added $20,650 in Federal Register notice 

publication costs to reach the bottom line annual cost of $135,329.
44

Table 29: Total Annual Costs 

Transportation Conformity Determinations 

Type of Action Total Annual State and 

Local Cost

Total Annual Federal 

Cost

Total Annual 

Conformity Costs

Transportation Plan/ TIP 

Conformity Determination $2,864,048 $310,164 $3,174,212

Projects Conformity 

Determination $2,334,992 $765,059 $3,100,051

Adequacy Finding

Determinations

N/A $135,329 $135,329

Total $5,199,040 $1,210,552 $6,409,592

 BOTTOM LINE ANNUAL COST: $6,409,592 35 

(iii) Variations in the Annual Bottom Line

EPA does not anticipate significant variations in the annual respondent reporting burden 

or cost over the course of the clearance period. 

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

Increase in state and local respondent burden since the previous ICR was approved is 

approximately 36,100:

(i) Adjustments associated with actual number of 2006 PM2.5 NAAQS nonattainment 

areas versus the estimated numbers in EPA ICR 2130.03

In the previous ICR 2130.03, EPA estimated a total of 25 new PM2.5 nonattainment 

areas for the 2006 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS. The calculation of the number of hypothetical brand 

new nonattainment areas was based on 2004-2006 air quality data.

 EPA’s PM2.5 nonattainment designations went into effect on December 14, 2009, and 

conformity under the new PM2.5 NAAQS began to apply on December 14, 2010. 

The actual number of nonattainment areas for the new PM2.5 standard is 31, which 

results in increased burden from ICR 2130.03.

 

35 To obtain bottom-line costs associated with conformity determinations (Table 29), 

EPA multiplied the bottom-line burden hours in Table 28 by estimated hourly labor costs of 

$58.81 and then added $20,650 in Federal Register notice publication costs from Table 27A and 

B to reach the bottom line annual cost of $5,211,806.
45

(ii) Adjustment for increased burden associated with quantitative PM and CO hot-spot 

analyses.

An additional burden was also projected for start-up and implementation costs 

associated with the transition from qualitative to quantitative PM hot-spot analyses. Start-up 

burden is also included for quantitative CO hot-spot analyses using MOVES.

(iii) Adjustment for increased burden associated with the transition from the MOBILE

to MOVES model for regional emissions analyses

An additional burden was also projected for start-up and implementation costs 

associated with the transition from the MOBILE to MOVES model for regional analyses and 

consultation. 

(iv) Adjustments for increased burden associated with interagency consultation

An additional burden was also projected for increased interagency consultation by 20% 

associated with the transition to quantitative hot-spot analyses and MOVES modeling for 

regional emissions analyses.

(v) Adjustments for increase burden associated with more frequent plan and TIP 

conformity determinations

An additional burden was also projected for increased frequency of plan and TIP 

conformity determinations for MPOs with 3 or more NAAQS.

6(g) Burden Statement

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

is estimated to average 8 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial 

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

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

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

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

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

instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of 

information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and 

transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a 

person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently

valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 

CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. 
46

Appendix A: Conformity-Related Research Considered for This ICR

The following is the conformity research studies that were considered for this ICR. EPA has 

cited in the ICR when these studies were utilized as appropriate. 

 April 2003, “Transportation/Air Quality Issues in Rural Areas,” FHWA and Dye 

Management Group.

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