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, 20112



### Table of Contents 1. ID ENTIFICATION 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/Authorit y for the Collection
................................ ................................ ....................... 4 2(b) Practical Utility

/Users of the Data
................................ ................................ ....................... 5 3. NON
- DUPLICATION, CONSUL TAT IONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRI TERIA 5 3(a) Non - Duplication
................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 5 3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to I CR Submission to OMB
................................ ................. 6 3(c) Consultations
................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 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 L ocal Respondents/North American Industry Classification S ys tem ................ 10 4(b) In formation Requested
................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 11 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED

–AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTI ON 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 L ine 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
................................ ........ 463



### 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 I CR includes transportation conformity burden anticipated for calendar ye ar s 2011 - 2014. 

### 1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract Transportation confo rmity is required under Clean Air Act section 176(c) [42 U.S.C. 7506(c)] to ensure that federall y supported transportation activities are consistent with (“conform to”) the purpose of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). Transportation activit ies 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 (PM 2.5 and PM 10 ), carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the original transportation conformity

rule on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and subsequentl y published several revisions. EPA develops the conformity regulations in coordination with the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA). Transportation conformity determinations are required before federal approval or funding is given to certain t ypes of transportation planning documents as well as non
- exempt highway an d transit projects. 1 Inmetropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, conformity determinations are required for transportation plan and TIP updates and amendments. A metropolitan transportation plan is at least a 20
- ye ar planning document that desc ribes 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 s ynchro nization projects listed in 40 CFR 93.128.4

transit projects for implementation in a metropolitan area over a four
- ye ar 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 sy stem must be at or below the motor vehicle emissions level or “budget” for on
- road mobile sources in the area’s SIP. Prior to EPA finding a budget adequate 2 or approving a SIP, the conformity rule provides emissions tests that ensure that Clean Air Act requirements are met in the interim. EPA considered the following in developing this ICR:

 B urden estimates for transportation conformity determinations in current nonattainment and maintenance areas for the ozo ne, PM 2.5, PM 10 , CO, and NO 2 NAAQS ;
 F ederal burden associated with EPA’s adequacy review process for submitted SIP budgets that are to be used in conformity determinations ;
 New start - up burden associated with learning to perform quantitative hot
- spot analy ses;
 New burden asso ciated 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 I CR does not include burden associated with the general development of transportation planning and air quality planning documents for meeting other federal requirements. There are other I CRs that capture associated burdens for these additional non
co nformity

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 p rocedures 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 authorit y of Clean Air Act section 176(c). The federal government needs information collected under these regulations to ensure that metropolitan planning organization (MPO) 3 and federal transportation actions are consistent with state air quality goals. 

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

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

collect to demonstr ate that:

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

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

determinations; and,

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

actions. 

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

programs. The conformit y regulation works with existing transportation and air quality 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 conformit y regulation relies on but does not dupli cate 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 anal ys es. 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 an y new fiscal constraint or public participation requirements. The regulation simply

relies upon existing transportation planning requirements. Localized air quality

analy ses (or “hot
- spot” anal yses) are generated for certain project
level conformit y determinations for certain criteria pollutants. When project
- level analy ses are required for both conformity approvals and NEPA, project sponsors may rely on the same anal ys is, 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 b y the conformity provisions. 

### 3(b) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB In compliance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), an y agency developing a non - rule related ICR must solicit public comments for a 60
- day period prior to submitting the ICR to OMB. These comments, which are used partly to determine realistic burde n estimates for respondents, must be considered when completing the final Supporting Statement that is submitted to OMB. The announcement of a public comment period for this renewal ICR has been made in the Federal Register on February 10, 2011 under D ocket 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 th is Supporting Statement in the following manner :
 In crease d the frequency of transportation p lan 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 SI P budget s and 24 month clocks associated with 40 CFR 93.104(e) ;  In crease d the frequency of transportation plan/TIP conformity determinations for MPOs (greater than 200,000 popu lation) with 3 or more pollutants from 1 per 4 years to 1 per 3 ye ars to account for additional conformity determinations for new SI P budgets and 24 month clocks associated with 40 CFR 93.104(e) ; Increased the burden of s tate and l ocal interagency

consultat ion;  In crease d the burden for the transition to MOVES for regional conformit y anal ys es to account for additional staff training and transition time ;  In creased consultation and modeling time for quantitative PM hot
- spot analyses;
4 To maintain the integrity of the I CR docket and all the associated ICR renewal records, the original docket number and date from the previous I CR continue to be used. For this renewal, a new Phase of the original docket number has been opened.7

 In crease d the burden for transition and implementation of quantitative PM and CO hot
spot analy ses ; and  In creased the burden for consultation by Federal agencies to account for the additional time State and L ocal agencies are consulting. Second, the comments that were considere d but ultimately not addressed in the Supporting Statement are summarized below.

 In crease the hourly

rate for the burden calculations : The GS
- 13 hourly rate reflects an average hourl y 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 b y 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 survey s : These activities were not included in this Supporting Statement because the se activities are not specificall y required b y the CAA and the transportation conformity

regulations and are completed for other purposes.  Add b urden for a future oz one NAAQS : This burden was not included in this Supporting Statement , as described in Section 6(a)(i) , because the relevant N AAQS were not finalized in time to be included in this Supporting Statement;  Consult with stakeholders during development of the Supporting Statement : EPA did not con sult with stakeholders , as requested, because this activity would also require an ICR. T he I CR process includes public comment periods to address stakeholder concerns ;  Reorganiz e the MPOs into Small, Medium, and L arge categories b y population with the Large category having a population greater than 1,000,000 : EPA will consider this suggestion for the next ICR renewal ;  In clude b urden for the coordination, development and revisions of SIP budgets : This burden is r equired by

the CAA for SIP development ;  In crease burden for transportation plan and TIP conformity determination s done in between regular updates : This supporting statement reflects the annual burden of minimum conformity requirements. Additional conformity determinations are not required b y 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 a ctions ;  In crease sp lit between transportation conformity project
- level burden and NEPA : EPA assumed that the burden hours for quantitative PM hot
- spot analy ses would also be used to satisfy NEPA requirements, so only half of the burden is included in this conformity ICR. T he comments provided did not support the change to a greater percentage of burden for the conformity portion ;  In crease TIP update frequency to account for state requirements : The increase d frequency is not required by

federal law and therefore not include d in this burden statement ; and ,  In clude the burden for conformity regulatory training : The cost of providing such training to staff was not included in this S upporting S tatement s ince there is no8

signification transition during the timeframe of the I CR for brand new areas that would require such training. 

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

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

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

 Performing regional and hot
- spot analy ses;
 Documenting that TCMs in approved SIPs are implemented on time;

 Conducting other miscellaneous activ ities (e.g., reviewing conformit y documents, responding to conformit y - related public comments, etc.); and,

 Training new state and local government staff to perform conformity
- related duties (for those nonattainment areas without previous conformity experi ence). 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, Off

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

– Conformity R elated Research Considered for this ICR.

5 Is olated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas are areas that do not contain n or are part of an y 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 analy sis 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 transp ortation plans and TIPs to be determined every four years in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. This statutory requirement is t ypicall y s atisfied when an area updates its long
- range transportation plan to meet the four
- ye ar planning require ment for DOT’s transportation planning regulations. The Clean Air Act and DOT’s transportation planning regulations require TIPs to be updated every four ye ars, and as a result, conformity determinations are also done for TIPs every four ye ars. 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 onl y when a new project needs federal funding or approval. The Clean Air Act’s minimum four
- ye ar frequency

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

requirements do not apply in these areas. Therefore, these areas are not req uired 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 provi ded for isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas, as these areas do not have as man y large transportation projects as metropolitan areas. However, because of the statutory language, the periodic collection of information for metropolitan nonatta inment 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 I CR 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 transpo rtation conformity regulation do not submit confidential information for approval. All information collected and submitted in a conformity determination is already publicl y available, pursuant to 40 CFR 93.105(e) of the conformity regulation and 23 CFR 450 .316(a) of the transportation planning regulations.

6 Additional plan/TIP amendments are completed on a voluntary basis beyond the required plan/TIP update cycles. These are not addressed in this I CR.

7 EPA assumed that conformity determinations occur infrequentl y for this scenario and therefore no burden was included in this I CR.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 RESP ONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED 4(a) State and Local Respondents/North American Industry Classification System In the transportation conformity process, the respondent is either a state or local agency
. Depending upon the type of conformit y dete rmination and the ty pe of area involved, the state or local agency

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

local respondent for transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations. Clean Air Act section 176(c)(1) states that “ ... No metropolitan planning organization designated under section 134 of Title 23, shall give its approval to any project, program, or plan which does not conform to an implementation plan approved or promulgated under sect ion 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 age ncies also provide technical assistance in supplying air qualit y data or performing emissions factor modeling for transportation plan and TIP regional conformity

anal ys es. 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. De veloping conformity determinations for projects outside metropolitan boundaries is also ty pically the responsibility

of the project sponsor, which is usually the state department of transportation. The transportation conformity rule also requires that st ate, local and federal transportation and air qualit y agencies develop interagency consultation procedures for discussing and resolving issues related to conformity determinations. Such agencies include the MPO, local transit agency , state department of transportation, state and local air agencies, EPA, FHWA, and FTA. Federal respondents for conformit y determinations are discussed further in Section 5 of this I CR. The following is a representative list of North American Industry Classification Sy stem NAI CS codes for the government agencies that would be affected by the transportation conformity

regulation:11

485111 Mixed Mode Transit Sy stem 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 analy ses using the latest planning assumptions and models to determine whether the emissions from the proposed transportation s ys tem are consistent with state air quality

goals;

 Ensure timely

implementation of TCMs in approved SIPs;

 Consult with other state, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies throughout the conformit y process;
 Circulate draft plan/TIP conformity determinations for interagency review and public comment and respond to any comments on plan/TIP conformity determinations; and,

 Provide travel activity or other data for hot
- spot analy ses. State Departments of Transportation State departments of transportation are typicall y the lead agency in develo ping 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 activit ies for conformity determinations:

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

 Conduct regional emissions analy ses on projects in isolated rural areas and donut areas 8 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 analy ses for projects when required;

 Comment on draft plan and TIP conformity determinations;

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

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

 Co nduct hot
- spot analy ses 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 ge ographic 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 9 3.101).13

State and Local Air Quality Agencies State and local air quality agencies may provide technical assistance to transportation age ncies in the development of conformit y determinations. The following list includes possible state and local air agency activities for conformity determinations:

 Provide air quality

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

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

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

 Comment on draft conformity determinations. 

### 5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED – AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION M ETHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT 5(a) Age ncy 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 conformit y 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 per formed 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 S IP for completeness or approval; and,

 EPA Headquarters provide technic al 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 disc uss any

outstanding issues on the accuracy or quality

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

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

flexibility

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

onl y when they

have a new no n - exempt federally funded or approved highway or transit project. In contrast, metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas are required to demonstrate conformity

at least every

four ye ars. 

### 5(d) Collection Schedule15

The information collections described in this I CR must be completed before a transportation plan, TIP or project conformity determination is made. DOT’s planning regulations require that transportation plans and TIPs be updated at least every four ye ars, and the Clean Air Act, requires th at 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 an d maintenance areas;

 Project
- level conformity determinations for nonattainment and maintenance areas, including new burden associated with quantitative (instead of qualitative) PM hot
- spot anal ys es;
 New start - up burden associated with technical analy ses for quantitative PM and CO hot
spot analy ses; and,

 New burden associated with the transition from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES. This I CR 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 (7 5 FR 2938), however a decision on the revised NAAQS, designations, and implementation rule was not final when this I CR was prepared and therefore EPA has not included any burden with conformity determinations for areas designated nonattainment for new ozon e NAAQS at this time.

9 These are minimum requirements are reflected in the I CR, additional plan/TIP amendments that are done on a voluntary basis beyond the required plan/TIP update cycles are not addressed in this I CR.16

Designations for the 2010 1
- hour NO 2 NAAQS have not been made yet and no burden is included in this I CR 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 I CR includes the burden associated with implementing conformity requirements with respect to n onattainment and maintenance areas for transportation
- related criteria pollutants: ozone, CO, PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and NO 2 . The following table illustrates the number of areas currentl y subject to transportation conformity requirements, using data from EPA’s Gree n Book for the number of nonattainment and maintenance areas: 10 Table 1 : Number of A reas Subject to Transportation Conformity Requirements
Pollutant/NAAQS Number of Metropolitan Nonattainment/Maintenance

Areas Number of Isolated Rural

Nonattainment/Maintenance

Areas 1997 ozone 11 91 22 CO 76 2 PM 10 50 38 1997 PM 2.5 12 38 1 2006 PM 2.5 13 29 2 NO 2 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 PM 2.5 areas referred to in this row were designated nonattainment for the 1997 PM 2.5 NAAQS on January 5, 2005 (70 FR 944).

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

14 This entry

is for the annual NO 2 NAAQS. Designations for the 2010 1
- hour NO 2 NAAQS have not been made and will not affect the burden estimates for this I CR.17

This I CR reflects the burden associated with determining conformity for all of these pollutants /NAAQS ; however, EPA’s estimates reflect efficiencies realized when metropolitan areas are nonattainment or maintenance for two or more pollutants/NAAQS since there is often an overlap of time spent in consultation, regional emissions analy sis and other miscellaneous activities for these areas in determining conformity for two or more pollutants. As discussed further below, EPA also has identified the number of MPOs that are subject to transportation conformity for one or more pollutants/NAAQS, since many me tropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas have more than one MPO (and consequentl y, 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 conformit y resource burden will differ among:

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

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

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

issues an d 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 conformit y burden in nonattainment and maintenance areas. For donut areas, the burden is assumed to be included in the MPO burden estimates. Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas EPA is relying on information from several sources for this I CR’s estimated state and local burden hours for conformity determinations:

 A s described in Section 3(c), EPA requested burden information from EPA and DOT field offices that regularl y 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 R egister 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 as sumed in DOT’s I CR 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 I CR .
 EPA used information that was received during the public comment period. The announcement of a public comment period for this renewal I CR 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 confo rmit y 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 ag ain notes that transportation plan and TIP burden hour estimates are based on demonstrating conformity for 4
- ye ar transportation plan and TIP updates as required by statute and regulation, rather than more frequent, plan and TIP revisions or amendments whi ch are not required b y the Act. This ICR captures the burden associated with meeting the minimum transportation conformity requirements. EPA has calculated the burden associated with transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations by

considering the number of MPOs that are subject to conformity , the size of these MPOs, and the number of pollutants that apply
. To estimate burden hours that MPOs incur to determine conformi ty for just one pollutant/NAAQS, EPA and DOT field offices were asked for est imated 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 a ssociated 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 conf ormity
- related activities. This I CR does not include burden for the general development of transportation plans, TIPs, projects, or motor vehicle emissions budgets, since these documents are developed to meet other requirements. EPA is assuming that some data collection for transportation planning or SIP purposes could also be used in conformity without additional conformity
- related burden. The following tables illustrate the burden hours and cost associated with meeting the
16 To maintain the integrity of the I CR docket and all the associated ICR renewal records, the origina l docket number and date from the previous I CR 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 o nly 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 are as may chose not to align transportation plan and TIP update conformity

determinations as regularl y, since these areas are expected to have more complex transportation planning considerations. Therefore, for purposes of this analy sis, EPA assumes that conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs will alway s occur at different times in large metropolitan areas ( Tables 2 through 5) and that conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs will occur at the same time in small metropolitan areas (see Table s 6 and 7). The burden hours for consultation, regional emissions analy ses, and project level conformity

determination s have been increased over the last ICR to account for the addition al burden with the release of EPA’s new em issions model, MOVES , in December of 2009. 17 The burden hours for consultation and regional emissions analy sis were initially increased from the previous I CR by

approximately 10%. C ommenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for co nsultation and the frequency

of conformity

determinations by

MPOs with 3 or more NAAQS and EPA has adjusted the burden hours accordingl y.

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

MP O Dem onstrating Conformity For Consultation Regional Emissions Analysis 18 Other Activities Total Burden Hours One Pollutant/NAAQS 5 5 310 45 4 10 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 7 2 415 60 54 7 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 88 510 75 67 3
Table 3: State and Local Annual Cost Transportation Plan Conformity Determinations by MPO
– Population of 200,000 or More

MP O Dem onstrating Conformity For Burden Hours No. of

MP Os Frequency

of Action Total

Annual Burden Hours Cost

Per Hour Total

Annual Cost One Pollutant/NAAQS 4 10 40 4 years 4, 100 $58.81 19 $ 241,121 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 54 7 31 4 years 4,2 39 $ 58.81 $ 249,29 6 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 67 3 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 analy ses is framed in this I CR as an MPO responsibility but we recognize that some State DOTs or other agencies may also perform the anal ys es , in coope ration 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
MP O Dem onstrating Conformity For Consultation Regional Emissions Analysis Other Activities Total Burden Hours One Pollutant/NAAQS 4 4 310 45 39 9 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 5 5 415 60 5 30 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 6 6 510 75 65 1
Table 5: State and Local Annual Cost TIP Conformity Determinations by MPO
– Population of 200,000 or More

MP O Dem onstrating Conformity For Burden Hours No. of

MP Os Frequency

of Action Total

Annual Burden Hours Cost

Per Hour Total

Annual Cost One Pollutant/NAAQS 39 9 40 4 years 3,990 $58.81 $ 234,652 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 5 30 31 4 years 4,10 7 $58.81 $ 241,533 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 65 1 40 4 years 6,510 $58.81 $ 382,853 Total for All TIP Actions: 14,607 hours/year x $ 58.81 /hour = $ 859,038 /year22 Table 6: State and Local Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determination by MPO
– Population Between 50,000 - 200,000
MP O Dem onstrating Conformity For Consultation Regional Emissions Analysis Other Activities Total Burden Hours One Pollutant/NAAQS 50 130 30 2 10 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 6 1 175 40 27 6 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 7 7 220 50 3 4 7
Table 7: State and Local Annual Cost Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations by MPO
– Population Between 50,000 - 200,000

MP O Dem onstrating Conformity For Burden Hours No. of

MP Os Frequency

of Action Total

Annual Burden Hours Cost

Per Hour Total

Annual Cost One Pollutant/NAAQS 2 10 40 4 years 2, 100 $58.81 $ 123,501 Two Pollutants/NAAQS 27 6 13 4 years 897 $58.81 $ 52,753 Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 3 4 7 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 transitio n 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 . C ommenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for the transition to MOVES for regional emissions analy ses and EPA h as adjusted the burden hours accordingl y.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 $ 665,141 4 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 ty pical project
- level conformity determination. To calculate burden for state and local agencies in preparing project
- level conformity determinations for these areas, EPA polled its regional offices and DOT which typically work with state and local agencies in project
- level conformity determinations . EPA headquarters estimated the time necessary to conduct the hot
- spot analy ses based on the guidance documents for these anal ys es and professional experience. State and local burden hours for consultation and conducting the hot
- spot analy ses in Table 10 reflect averages of the responses received. EPA calculated the average number of annual actions based upon survey responses from EPA Regional Office s and DOT offices that are responsible for working with state and local respondents in making project
- lev el conformity determinations
. Conformity

determinations for projects in metropolitan ozone and NO 2 nonattainment and maintenance areas are fairl y straightforward, because projects onl y need to come from a conforming transportation plan and TIP to meet al l conformity requirements. A hot
- spot anal ys is is not required for project determinations in these nonattainment and maintenance24

areas. Alternativel y, conformity determinations for all non
- exempt federal projects in CO areas must include either a qualitative or quantitative hot
- spot analy sis (depending on the t ype of project)
. 20 InPM 2.5 and PM 10 areas, project
- level conformity determinations must include a hot
- spot analy sis if the project is of local air quality concern. 21 At present, PM 2.5 and PM 10 (PM) hot
- spot anal ys es, when required, are done qualitatively
. 22 Quantitative PM hot
- spot anal ys es will be required after the end of the conformity grace period (December 20 , 2012 ) 23 for appl yi ng motor vehicle emissions models for such analy ses. EPA has approve d MOVES and EMFAC (in California) for use in project
- level transportation conformity

determinations, including PM hot
- spot analy ses. EPA establish ed a two - ye ar grace period before MOVES is required in quantitative PM and CO hot
- spot analyses, and a two - ye ar 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 anal ys es 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 analy sis. We are assuming that the anal ys is would also be used for satisfying NEPA requirements, so only half of the burden would be included in the co nformity I CR. These numbers include scoping the project anal ys is, 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 ty pes of projects that require qualitative v ersus quantitative CO hot
- spot anal ys es.

21 Per the conformit y rule ( 40 CFR 93.123(b)(1)), projects of local air quality concern include: “ (i) n ew or expanded highway projects that have a significant number of or significant increase in diesel vehicles; (ii) p rojects affecting intersections that are at Level
- of
- Service D, E, or F because of increased traffic volumes from a significant number of di esel vehicles related to the project; (iii) n ew bus and rail terminals and transfer points that have a significant number of diesel vehicles congregating at a single location; (iv) e xpanded bus and rail terminals and transfer points that significantly incr ease the number of diesel vehicles congregating at a single location; and, (v) p rojects in or affecting locations, areas, or categories of sites which are identified in the PM 10 or PM 2.5 applicable SIP or SIP submission as appropriate, as sites of violatio n or possible violation. ”

22 EPA and FHWA have provided guidance for those areas required to do qualitative hot
spot analy ses for PM 2.5 and PM 10 nonattainment and maintenance areas : “Transportation Conformity

Guidance for Qualitative Hot
- spot Analy ses in PM 2.5 and PM 10 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 H ot - Spot Analy ses and Availability

of Modeling Guidance , 75 FR 79370 (December 2010). 24 “Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for S tate Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity , and Other Purposes , ” EPA
- 420 - B - 09 - 046 (December 2009)
.25

T he grace period was e ffective 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 mid
po int of the 3
- ye ar time period covered b y the ICR. During the first half of the I CR period (June 2011 to January

2013), it is assumed that all PM hot
- spot analy ses will be qualitative as this is still within the quantitative analy sis grace period. However , during the second half of the ICR period (January

2013 to May

2014) it is assumed quantitative hot
- spot analy ses are done as required . There is a different burden associated with qualitative versus quantitative analy ses. To reflect the burden over the course of the ICR period, the hours for qualitative and quantitative PM hot
- spot anal ys is were averaged together. In contrast, it is unnecessary to calculate CO hot
- spot analy ses in the same way since quantitative and qualitative CO
- hot
- spot anal ys es cont inue to be required by the conformity

rule throughout the time frame of this I CR. The state and local burden hours for completing both qualitative and quantitative PM and CO hot
- spot anal ys es are shown in Table 10 . EPA calculated the average number of annual actions based on past experience and input given b y the EPA Regional Office s and DOT O ffices that are responsible for working with state and local respondents in making project
- level conformity

determinations
. EPA is assuming that some data for hot
- spot analy ses will already be available because it is necessary for project development (e.g., traffic data). Consultation with other state and local agencies is an important activity for these anal ys es and EPA estimates that on average seven state an d local agencies participate in one consultation meeting on each transportation project. EPA is assuming that conformity
- related consultation would be one of man y issues discussed through consultation meetings as a project proceeds through the NEPA proces s. 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 conformit y determinations do not differ based upon populati on size served by

an MPO. Requirements for project
- level conformity determinations are the same for large and small metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. C ommenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for consultation and quantitative PM hot
- spot analy ses. EPA has adjusted the burden hours accordingl y. EPA also add ed burden hours to account for Other Activities to account for time spent preparing the documentation for all project
- level conformity determination s , similar to regional conformity determinations. Many CO project
- level analy ses are currently used to fulfill both transportation conformity

and NEPA requirements. Therefore, EPA is assuming that the estimated burden associated with consultation and preparati on of hot
- spot analy ses would be divided equally between these programs. Accordingl y, the burden estimates in Table s 10 and 11 reflect only the share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requirements for hot
- spot anal ys es (i. e. half of the burden hours associated with hot
- spot analy ses).26 Table 10 : State and Local Burden Hours Each Project - level Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Pollutant Type of Hot spot Analysis Consultation Hot - spot Analysis Other

Activities Total

Burden Hours Ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 25 None 0.5 N/A 0.5 1
PM 2.5 or PM 10 Qualitative 6 22 2 30 61 Quantitative 18 71 3 92 CO Quantitative 6 14 2 22 CO Qualitative 3 2 1 6

25 Most projects in PM 10 and PM 2.5 areas do not require a qualitative or quantitative hot
spot analy sis. In contrast, all non
- exempt CO projects in CO areas require some ty pe of hot
- spot anal ys is.27 Table 11 : State and Local Annual Cost Project - level Conformity Determinations Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Me tropolitan Area/Pollutant Burden Hours Per Action Average

No. of Actions/year No. of

MP Os Total

Annual Burden Hours Cost Per

Hour Total

Annual Cost Project level conformity determination

- No Hotspot Analysis

– ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 Pop.

200,000+ 1 65 111 7,215 $58.81 $ 424,314 Pop. 50,000 - 200,000 1 15 63 945 $58.81 $ 55,57 5
1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 - Hot spot Analyses 61 3 74 13,542 $58.81 $ 796,405

PM 10 – 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 I CR. Training will include learning new quantitative PM hot
- spot modeling guidance as well as training f or emissions and28

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 ut ilizing webinars to present the final quantitative PM hot
spot 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 analysi s is determined b y 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 anal ys es in CO nonatta inment 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 anal ysis and therefore the start
- up burden onl y includes training time fo r MOVES, rather than other aspects of CO hot
- spot anal ys es (e.g., current air quality

modeling practices will continue to be applicable with the MOVES model). The burden estimates in Table s 1 2 and 1 3 reflect only the share of the burden attributable to f

ulfilling transportation conformity requirements for hot
- spot anal ys es (i.e. half of the burden hours associated with anal ys es). C ommenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for the training and transition from qualitative to quantitative hot
- spot analy ses. EPA has adjusted the burden hours accordingly
. Table 1 2 : 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: 8 0 hours

26 EPA has provided guidance for those areas required to do quantitative hot
- spot analy sis f or PM2.5 and PM10 nonattainment and maintenance areas: “Transportation Conformity Guidance for Quantitative Hot
- spot Anal ys es in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas ” , EPA
- 420 - F - 10 - 052 and “Using MOVES in Project
- Level Carbon Monoxide Analys es”, EPA
- 420 - B - 10 - 041 .29 Table 1 3 : 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 1 3 includes both metropolitan and isolated rural areas. Of the 93 PM nonattainment and maintenance areas, 22 MPOs are nonattainment or maintenance for both a PM 2.5 and PM 10 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 PM 10 and PM 2.5 NAAQS, rather than conduct emissions modeling twice. However, we have not reflected these efficiencies in the I CR; we have kept the burden estimates separate for PM 2.5 and PM 10 for these areas. The number of CO areas in Table 1 3 includes both metropolitan and isolated rural areas. Of the 78 CO nonattainment and maintenance ar eas, 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 Table s 1 4 through 1 6 includes the state and local government burden estimated with performing regional emissions analy sis and project
- level conformit y determinations in ozone, CO, PM 2.5 and PM 10 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

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

also provide emissions modeling assistance to isolated rural areas, as is now done in some areas. We also retained the assumption made in the previous I CR ( 2130.03 ) supporting s tatement 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 NO 2 nonattainment or maintenance areas in isolated rural areas
. See Table 1 for further information.30

conduct a regional emissions analy sis for an additional year and may have a dditional technical issues to resolve. Therefore, we included more burden hours for consultation, conducting regional emissions anal ysis, and performing other activities in these areas, as in previous ICRs. C ommenters provided data to support an increa se 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
MP O Dem onstrating 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

Dem onstrating 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 = $ 7 7 ,453 /year Table 1 5 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 b y regulation to determine conformity once every f our ye ars. Our experience from previous I CRs and existing research (see Appendix A) is that isolated rural areas determine conformity less than once every

four 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 and31

TIP” is to receive federal funding or approval. 28 EPA notes that this I CR may overestimate burden associated with determining conformity

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

significant projects may

not require that a new regional emissions analy sis be completed every time. Consultation between state and local agencies would also occur for each project requiring a hot
- spot analy sis. 29 Li ke metropolitan projects, EPA is also assuming that conformity
- related topics would be one of man y issues discussed through cons ultation meetings as a project proceeds through the NEPA process. Localized anal ys es are assumed to be used to meet both transportation conformity and NEPA requirements. Therefore, EPA is assuming that the estimated burden associated with consultation and preparation of these hot
- spot analy ses would be divided equally between transportation conformity and NEPA. Accordingly , the burden estimates in Table 1 6 reflect only the share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requir ements for hot
- spot analy ses (i.e., half of the burden hours associated with the analy ses). C ommenters provided data to support an increase in the burden hours for consultation and anal ys is for project level determinations in isolated rural areas. EPA has adjusted the burden hours accordingl y.

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 Hot spot Analysis Consultation Hot - spot Analysis Total Burden

Hours PM 2.5 or PM 10 Qualitative 6 22 28 59 Quantitative 18 71 89 CO Quantitative 6 14 20 CO Qualitative 3 2 5

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

29 EPA 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, PM 2.5 and PM 10 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 analy sis for every non exempt project in a CO nonattainment or maintenance area. Because there are two isolated rural areas that are nonattainment or maintenance for CO, we assumed there would be two CO hot
- spot analy ses in isolated rural areas over a five
- ye ar period. As stated earlier, the conformity regulation requires a hot
- spot anal ys is 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 generall y projects that invol ve significant numbers of diesel vehicles, are unlikel y to occur in isolated rural areas, we assumed there would be only one such project in these areas over a five
- ye ar period. Based on these assumptions, we arrived at a total of 419 hours of burden per ye ar for state and local agencies in isolated rural areas. Table 1 7 : State and Local Annual Cost Project - Level Conformity Determinations Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Me tropolitan Area Burden

Hours per Action No. of Areas Frequency of Action Total

Annual Burden Hours Cost Per

Hour Total

Annual Cost PM 2.5 - Hot - spot Analyses 59 3 5 years 35 $58.81 $ 2,058 PM 10 – 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 Hot
Spot Analyses 5 2 5 years 2 $58.81 $118 Total State and Local Respondent Burden for Project Level Conformity Determinations: 493 hours/year x $ 58.81 /hour = $ 28,99333



### 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, ret irement savings, office space, computers, and other business expenses. EPA is assuming that state and local burden hours would be completed b y an experienced technical staff person being paid at a GS
- 13, Step 3 federal government employee salary of $7 6 ,4 5 2 /year. 30 EPA then divided the annual 20 1 0 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 /b urden 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 anal ys es. Planners should be able to adapt existing equipment and sy stems for conformit y use. The transportation conformity regulation does not contain any continuing record
keeping or reporting requirements that require additional capital or O&M costs for individual state or local resp ondent actions. Thus, no capital or O&M cost s are included for record
keeping and reporting actions. (iii) Annualizing Capital Costs EPA has assumed the following in annualizing estimates:

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

four years. EPA included the cost associated w ith meeting the minimum requirements, and therefore assumed that onl y one transportation plan or TIP conformity determination will be done for each MPO every four years in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas , with one exception
. For MPOs desi gnated nonattainment or

30 January

2010 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2010
- GS, 2010 General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/oca/1 0tables/html/gs.asp34

maintenance for 3 or more NAAQS, the frequency was increased to once every 3 years, in response to comment s received during the public comment period. For the purposes of this I CR, EPA is not considering additional burden from MPOs updating or revising transportation plans and TIPs voluntaril y , 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 determi nations 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 spa ce, computers, and other business expenses. EPA assum ed that federal burden hours w ould 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 20 10 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 result ed in a federal cost of $ 58.81 /burden hour. Assuming $58.81 per federal burden hour, Table 2 7 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 Table s 18 through 20 show estimated federal burden hours and cost associated with making conformity

determinations for transportation plans and TI P s in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. EPA assumes that federal burden in these areas is associated onl y 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 regularl y scheduled meetings for discussing conformity

issues. Because MPOs serving smaller metropolitan areas (populations between 50,000
- 200,000) ty pically do conformit y determinati ons 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.asp35

TIPs at the same time since they are t ypicall y on the same four
- ye ar update cycle, EPA also assumes that federal burden associated with consulting on and reviewing transportation plan and TIP conformity

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

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

determinations for transportation plans and TIPs. T o account for additional burden hours spent b y s tate and l ocal 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 Me tropolitan Planning Organization Activity FHWA FTA EPA Total Per Conformity Determination (Includes all areas with populations of 200,000+) Attending Consultation Meetings 12 12 12 36 Conformity
- Related Work Prior to MPO Submission 12 1 3 16
Revie wing Plan Conformity Determination 13 2 7 22 Federal Hours Burden Hours for Each Plan or TIP Conformity Determination: 7436 Table 19 : Federal Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan/TIP Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

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

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

Action Me tropolitan

Nonattainm ent Area Burden Hours Per Action No. of

MP O’s Frequency

of Action Total

Annual Burden Hours Cost

Per Hour Total

Annual Cost Plan Per Conformity

Determination (Pop. 200,000+) 74 111 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 = $ 310,16437

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

Pollutant Type of Hot spot Analysis Consultation Reviewing Project level conformity determinations Total

Burden Hours Ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 None 0.5 0.5 1 PM 2.5 , PM 10 Qualitative 2 6 8 12 Quantitative 5 11 16 CO Quantitative 1 2 3 CO Qualitative 0.25 1.25 1.538 Table 2 2 : Federal Annual Cost Project - level Conformity Determinations Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Type of Analysis Burden Hours Per Action Average

No. of Actions/ Year No. of

MP Os Total

Annual Burden Hours Cost

Per Hour Total

Annual Cost Project level conformity determination

- No Hot - spot Analysis Pop.

200,000+ 1 65 111 7,215 $58.81 $ 424,314 Pop. 50,000 - 200,000 1 15 63 945 $58.81 $ 55,575 PM 2.5 – Hot - spot Analyses 12 3 74 2,664 $58.81 $156,670 PM 10 – 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 2 3 shows federal burden associated with conformity determinations for a typical regionally

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

determinations for projects in isolated rural areas are more involved than for metropolitan areas, since isolated rural areas also need to perform a regional emissions analy sis when a regionall y significant project is to rec eive federal funding or approval. To account for additional burden hours spent b y state and local agencies for consultation, the consultation for Federal agencies has also been increased t o support additional meetings and activities.39 Table 2 3 : 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
Revie wing 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 Hot spot Analysis Consultation Reviewing Project level conformity determinations Total

Burden Hours Ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 N/A 0.5 0.5 1 PM 2.5 or PM 10 Qualitative 2 6 8 12 Quantitative 5 11 16 CO Quantitative 1 2 3 CO Qualitative .25 1.25 1.540 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 PM 2.5 – Hot - spot Analyses 12 3 5 years 7 $58.81 $412 PM 10 – 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: 496 hours/year x $ 58.81 /hour = $ 29,170 Adequacy Findings for SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets
– Federal Burden H ours One component of the federal burden associated with transportation conformity is EPA’s role in making adequacy

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

r egulation requires the motor vehicle emissions budget (s) from a submitted SIP to be used as the measure of conformity on ce EPA finds such a budget (s) adequate (40 CFR 93.118(e) and (f)). 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 I CR also does not account for an y state or local work associated with developing the SIP because SIPs are developed to meet other non
- conformity requirements. EPA based burden hours associated with each adequacy review on the average amount of E PA staff time needed per adequacy determination, EPA s taff 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 clearl y 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 an y changes to established safety margins and reasons for those changes41

notify the public that a SIP has been submitted and is under adequacy review , the adequacy review of the SIP ’s budget(s) , respond ing to an y public comments, and pub lish ing 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 Office s, as well as an estimate of the time spent at headquarters. Table 2 6 : 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 ye ar based on the historical average number of SIPs that EPA has processed for adequacy

over the past seven years, and re sponses from EPA regions regarding the anticipated number of SIP s expected to process for adequacy in fiscal ye ar 2007 . Table 2 7 B show costs associated with Federal Register notices of adequacy findings. A Federal Register notice of EPA’s adequacy determination is alway s required, but often such notice is given with a proposed or final rulemaking action to approve the submitted SIP which is required due to other non
- conformit y requirements
. Therefore, EPA i ncluded in the above table only the cost associated with Federal Register notices that were published separate from a proposed or final rulemaking action to approve the submitted SIP.

Table 2 7 A: Federal Annual Cost of Adequacy Findings

Action Average

Number of Actions per Region No. of

Regions Burden

Hours per Action Total

Annual Burden Hours Cost Per

Hour Total

Annual Burden Cost Adequacy Finding 5 10 39 1,950 $58.81 $114,67942 Table 2 7 B: Federal Annual Cost of Federal Register Notices

Action Average Number of Actions No. of

Regions Total Federal Register

Notice Publications Average cost per Publication Total

Annual Burden Cost Federal Register Notice

– Publication Costs 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 b y this I CR and that EPA Regional Offices, the FHWA and FTA will be involved in interagency

consultation, and review of any transportation
- related conformit y determinations performed by MPOs during this process. EPA also estimates that sim ilar 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
- ye ar period covered by this ICR is estimated at 325,91 1 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 $ 2,8 64,048 /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 cost s of $5 8.81 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 o f $ 1,197,143.43

The bottom
- line annual burden for all State and local agencies in performing project level conformit y determinations and, where applicable, hot
- spot anal ys es 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 /ye ar 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 analy sis) 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 2 8 and 2 9 show the total annual estimated burden hours and cost associated with transportation conformity determinations requirements incurred by state, local and federal respondents. Table 2 8 : Total Annual Burden Hours Transportation Conformity Determinations Type of 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 ANNUALBURDEN 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 Fede ral Register notice publication costs to reach the bottom line annual cost of $135,329.44 Table 2 9 : 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 In crease in state and local respondent burden since the previous ICR was approv ed is approximately 36,100 : (i) Adjustments associated with actual number of 2006 PM 2.5 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 PM 2.5 nonattainment areas for the 2006 24
- hour PM 2.5 NAAQS. The calculation of the number of hypothetical brand new nonattainment areas was based on 2004
- 2006 air quality data. EPA’s PM 2.5 nonattainment designations went into effect on December 14, 2009, a nd conformity

under the new PM 2.5 NAAQS began to apply on December 14, 2010. The actual number of nonattainment areas for the new PM 2.5 standard is 31, which results in increased burden from I CR 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 $5 8.81 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 analy ses. Start
- up burden is also included for quant itative CO hot
- spot analy ses using MOVES. (iii) Adjustment for increased burden associated with the transition from the M OBILE 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 M OBILE to MOVES model for regional anal ys es 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 anal yses. (v) Adjustments for increase burden associated with mo re 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 es timated to average 8 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended b y persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a federal agency. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develo p, acquire, install, and utilize technology and s ys tems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing way s to comply with an y pre viously

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 m ay not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it display s 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 I CR. EPA has cited in the I CR when these studies were utilized as appropriate.

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

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