1

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Coal- and Oil-fired 

Electric Utility Steam Generating Units

(40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU) 

December 2011

Part A of the Supporting Statement

1. Identification of the Information Collection

(a) Title and Number of the Information Collection

“Recordkeeping and Reporting Requirements for Coal- and Oil-fired Electric Utility

Steam Generating Units (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart UUUUU).” The Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB) previously approved the information collection requirements for the Clean Air 

Mercury Rule (CAMR) in 2005. However, the ICR was discontinued because CAMR was 

vacated by the United States (U.S.) Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. 

Circuit Court) on February 8, 2008. Because that information collection was developed 

explicitly to determine compliance with CAMR, it was no longer needed. Thus, a new 

information collection request (ICR) was prepared in support of the national emission standards 

for hazardous air pollutants from coal- and oil-fired EGUs that were proposed earlier in 2011 (76 

FR 24976, May 3, 2011). This ICR is in support of the standards being promulgated. The OMB

control number is 2060-0567. The EPA ICR tracking number is 2137.06.

(b) Short Characterization

On May 3, 2011, under authority of Clean Air Act (CAA) section 112, the EPA proposed 

national emission standards for hazardous air pollutants (NESHAP) from coal- and oil-fired 

electric utility steam generating units (EGUs) (76 FR 24976). After consideration of public 

comments, the EPA is finalizing the rule in this action.

Pursuant to CAA section 112, the EPA is establishing NESHAP that will require coaland oil-fired EGUs to meet hazardous air pollutant (HAP) standards reflecting the application of 

the maximum achievable control technology. This rule protects air quality and promotes public 

health by reducing emissions of the HAP listed in CAA section 112(b)(1).

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

periodic reports. These notifications, reports, and records are essential in determining 

compliance, and are required of all sources subject to the NESHAP.

Any owner or operator subject to the provisions of this part shall maintain a file of these 

measurements, and retain the file for at least 5 years following the date of such measurements, 

maintenance reports, and records. All reports are sent to the delegated state or local authority. In 

the event that there is no such delegated authority, the reports are sent directly to the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regional office.

Potential respondents are owners and operators of coal- and oil-fired EGUs. The final 

rule regulates HCl, filterable PM, Hg, and organic HAP from coal-fired EGUs. For oil-fired 
2

EGUs, the final rule regulates HCl, HF, filterable PM, and organic HAP. Following initial 

performance tests, owners/operators of EGUs will be required to demonstrate compliance with

emission limits through continuously monitoring PM, Hg, HCl, and HF (oil-fired EGUs) 

emissions. The final rule includes a work practice standard for organic HAP; the work practice 

standard requires the implementation of periodic burner tune-up procedures. Respondents will be 

required to notify the EPA of performance tests and CEMS demonstrations, and to maintain 

records demonstrating compliance with each emission limit and work practice standard. These 

requirements are listed in Table 1.

Approximately 1,244 electric generating units are currently subject to the regulation, and 

it is estimated that 2 new electric generating units will be built each year.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) approved the currently active Information 

Collection Request (ICR) without any “Terms of Clearance.”

2. Need for and Use of the Collection

(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

Section 112 of the CAA requires that the EPA establish MACT standards for new or 

existing major or area sources according to the requirements in section 112(d). Certain records 

and reports are necessary for the Administrator to: (1) confirm the compliance status of major 

sources, identify any non-major sources not subject to the standards, and identify new or 

reconstructed sources subject to the standards; and (2) ensure that the MACT standards are being 

achieved on a continuous basis. These recordkeeping and reporting requirements are specifically 

authorized by section 114 of the CAA (42 U.S.C. 7414) and set out in the General Provisions for 

NESHAP in 40 CFR part 63, subpart A.

(b) Use/Users of the Data

The additional information will be used by agency enforcement personnel to ensure that 

the emission limitations are being achieved. Based on review of the recorded information at the 

site and the reported information, the EPA can identify facilities that may not be in compliance 

and decide which plants, records, or processes should be inspected.

3. Nonduplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria

(a) Nonduplication

No other regulation currently requires the same information requested under this ICR 

from owners/operators of coal- and oil-fired EGUs. In the event that certain reports required by

state or local agencies may duplicate information required by the proposed requirements, a copy

of the report submitted to the state or local agency can be provided to the Administrator in lieu of 

the information that would be required in the semi-annual compliance report. Therefore, no 

duplication exists. 

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

This section is not applicable because this is a rule-related ICR.
3

(c) Consultations

The EPA met with 10 national organizations representing state and local elected officials 

to provide general background on the proposal, answer questions, and solicit input from 

state/local governments. The EPA also consulted with Tribal officials early in the process of 

developing the proposed rule to permit them to have meaningful and timely input into its 

development. Consultation letters were sent to 584 Tribal leaders. The letters provided 

information regarding the EPA’s development of NESHAP for EGUs and offered consultation. 

Three consultation meetings were requested and held. We conducted outreach and information 

sharing with tribal environmental staff through the monthly National Tribal Air Association 

calls, at the National Tribal Forum, and a webinar targeting tribal environmental professionals on 

the content of the proposal. Because of concerns raised by several tribes, and in order to help us 

better understand their concerns, we also participated in a face-to-face meeting with tribes in 

Arizona who were concerned about the potential impact of this rule on their income and water 

rights. Following that meeting, we held an additional technical meeting on how the EPA’s 

integrated planning model (IPM) is used in the regulatory impact analysis (RIA) and provided 

one-on-one consultation with the Navajo Nation, Gila River Indian Community and the Ak-Chin 

Indian Community. 

(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

If the relevant information were collected less frequently, the EPA would not be 

reasonably assured that a plant is in compliance with the standards.

(e) General Guidelines

None of the guidelines in 5 CFR 1320.5 are being exceeded.

(f) Confidentiality

All information submitted to the agency for which a claim of confidentiality is made will 

be safeguarded according to the agency policies set forth in Title 40, Chapter 1, part 2, subpart 

B–Confidentiality of Business Information (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 01, 1976; 

amended by 43 FR 39999, September 28, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 28, 1978; 44 FR 

17674, March 23, 1979).

(g) Sensitive Questions

This section is not applicable because this ICR does not involve matters of a sensitive 

nature.

4. The Respondents and the Information Requested

(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes

In the amendments, respondents are 1,244 owners or operators of existing electric 

generating units. It is estimated that 2 new electric generating units will be built each year. All 

respondents will be subject to the monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements. The 

NAICS code for this industry is 221100, Electric Power Generation, Transmission and 

Distribution.
4

(b) Information Requested

(i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements. 

Table 1 summarizes the final recordkeeping and reporting requirements.

The EPA is including in Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c, an estimate of the burden 

associated with performing an affirmative defense. The EPA is providing this as an illustrative 

example of the potential additional administrative burden a source may incur to assert in an 

Affirmative Defense in response to an action to enforce the standards set forth in the applicable 

subpart. 

This illustrative estimate is not considered a duplicate estimate of cost under the General 

Duty to Minimize Emissions clause under 63.6(e)(1)(i), which states: “At all times, the owner 

and operator must operate and maintain any affected source, including associated air pollution 

control equipment and monitoring equipment, in a manner consistent with safety and good air 

pollution control practices for minimizing emissions. Determining whether such operation and 

maintenance procedures are being used will be based on information available to the 

Administrator which may include, but is not limited to, monitoring results, review of operation 

and maintenance procedures, review of operation and maintenance records, and inspection of the 

source.” 

To provide the public with an estimate of the relative magnitude of the burden associated 

with an assertion of the affirmative defense position adopted by a source, the EPA provides an 

administrative adjustment to this ICR that estimates the costs of the notification, recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements associated with the assertion of the affirmative defense. The EPA’s 

estimate for the required notification, reports and records, including the root cause analysis, 

associated with a single incident totals approximately $3,141 and is based on the time and effort 

required of a source to review relevant data, interview plant employees, and document the events 

surrounding a malfunction that has caused an exceedance of an emission limit. The estimate also 

includes time to produce and retain the records and reports for submission to the EPA. The EPA 

provides this illustrative estimate of this burden because these costs are only incurred if there has 

been a violation and a source chooses to take advantage of the affirmative defense. 

Of the number of excess emission events reported by source operators, only a small 

number would be expected to result from a malfunction, and only a subset of excess emissions 

caused by malfunctions would result in the source choosing to assert the affirmative defense. 

Thus we believe the number of instances in which source operators might be expected to avail 

themselves of the affirmative defense will be extremely small. For this reason, we estimate no 

more than 2 or 3 such occurrences for all sources within a given category over the 3-year period 

covered by this ICR. For the purpose of this estimate, we are adding two (2) instances of 

affirmative defense. We expect to gather information on such events in the future and will revise 

this estimate as better information becomes available.

Table 1. Source Data and Information Requirements

Requirement Regulation Citation

Notifications

Notification of Demonstration of CEMS 63.10030

Notification of Initial Performance Test 63.10030

Quality Assurance Program Notification 63.10030
5

Notification of Compliance Status 63.10030

Request to use alternative monitoring procedure 63.10030

Initial notification 63.10030

Reports

Report of Performance Test 63.10031

Startup, shutdown, and malfunction Report 63.10031

Semi-Annual Compliance Report 63.10031

Site-specific performance evaluation test plan 63.10031

Recordkeeping

Existing Sources - Records of CEMS malfunctions 63.10032

Existing Sources - Records of Startups, 

Shutdowns, malfunctions, etc

63.10032

Existing Sources - Records of monthly fuel use 63.10032

(ii) Respondent Activities. 

The respondent activities required by the final NESHAP are introduced in section 6(a).

While multiple coal-fired EGUs have recently commenced operation and several are 

presently under construction, no new coal-fired power plants have commenced construction in 

either 2009 or 2010. In addition, forecasts of new generation capacity from both the Energy

Information Administration and the Edison Electric Institute do not project any new coal-fired 

power plants will be constructed in the short term. This is an indication that in the near term few 

new coal-fired EGUs will be subject to the NESHAP. For the electric utility sector, the EPA used 

the IPM to project the number of new coal-fired power plants that will be installed in the next 

decade. The current version of IPM used for the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and the 

EGU NESHAP rules predicts 2,000 MW of new near term (i.e., by 2015) coal-fired capacity

additions. All of this capacity is assumed to include carbon capture and storage that is funded by

some government mechanism. Although none of this capacity is specifically identified, to be 

consistent with the various regulations impacting the utility sector we project that two new 500 

MW coal-fired facilities will be subject to the standards for new EGUs.. We used engineering 

judgment to predict that these new units are likely to be one pulverized coal bituminous coalfired unit and one pulverized coal subbituminous coal-fired unit. Because of fuel supply

availability and cost considerations, we assumed that no new oil-fired electric utility steam 

generating units will be built during the next 5 years.

(iii) Electronic Reporting. 

Utility units have the option of submitting to an EPA electronic database an electronic 

copy of their required stack test. This electronic database should become available as of 

December 31, 2011. Currently, sources are using monitoring equipment that provides automated 

parameter data (e.g., continuous opacity monitoring). Although personnel at the affected facility

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

associated with monitoring and recordkeeping. In addition, some regulatory agencies are setting 

up electronic reporting systems to allow sources to report such data electronically which also 

reduces the reporting burden. It is estimated that approximately 10 percent of the respondents 

currently use electronic reporting.
6

5. The Information Collected: Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and 

Information Management

(a) Agency Activities

The EPA conducts the activities in Table 2 in connection with the acquisition, analysis, 

storage, and distribution of the required information.

Table 2. Agency Activities

Observe initial performance tests and repeat performance tests, if necessary.

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

required to be submitted by industry.

Audit plant records.

Input, analyze, and maintain data in the AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS) database.

(b) Collection Methodology and Management

Following notification of startup, the reviewing authority might inspect the source to 

determine whether the pollution control devices are properly installed and operated. Performance 

test reports are used by the agency to discern a source’s initial capability to comply with the 

emission standard. Data and records maintained by the respondents are tabulated and published 

for use in compliance and enforcement programs. The semi-annual reports are used for problem 

identification, as a check on source operation and maintenance, and for compliance 

determinations.

The information obtained is then entered into the AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS) which 

is operated and maintained by the EPA’s Office of Compliance. AFS is the EPA’s database for 

the collection, maintenance, and retrieval of compliance and annual emission inventory data for 

over 125,000 industrial and government owned facilities. The EPA uses the AFS for tracking air 

pollution compliance and enforcement by local and state regulatory agencies, EPA regional 

offices and EPA headquarters. The EPA and its delegated Authorities can edit, store, retrieve, 

and analyze the data.

The records required by this regulation must be retained by the owner or operator for five 

years.

(c) Small Entity Flexibility

During this rulemaking, we conducted outreach to small entities and convened a Small 

Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel to obtain advice and recommendations from

representatives of the small entities that potentially would be subject to the requirements of this 

rule. As part of the SBAR Panel process we conducted outreach with representatives from 

various small entities that would be affected by this proposed rule. We met with these small 

entity representatives (SERs) to discuss the potential rulemaking approaches and potential 

options to decrease the impact of the rulemaking on their industries/sectors. We distributed 

outreach materials to the SERs; these materials included background, project history, CAA 

section 112 overview, constraints on rulemaking, affected facilities, data, rulemaking options 

under consideration, potential control technologies and estimated costs, applicable small entity

definitions, small entities potentially subject to regulation, and questions for SERs. We met with 

SERs that will be impacted directly by this proposed rule to discuss the outreach materials and 
7

receive feedback on the approaches and alternatives detailed in the outreach packet. The SBAR 

Panel received written comments from the SERs in response to discussions at the meeting and 

the questions posed to the SERs by the Agency. The SERs were specifically asked to provide 

comment on regulatory alternatives that could help to minimize the rule’s impact on small 

businesses.

(d) Collection Schedule

The specific frequencies for each information collection activity within this request are

shown in Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c: Respondent Burden of Reporting and 

Recordkeeping Requirements, NESHAP for Coal- and Oil-fired Electric Utility Steam 

Generating Units (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart UUUUU) for the first 3 years after promulgation, 

respectively.

6. Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c document the computation of individual burdens 

for the recordkeeping and reporting requirements applicable to the industry for the subpart 

included in this ICR for each of the first 3 years. Table 3 contains a summary of the respondent 

burden hours and costs detailed in Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c.

Table 3. Summary of Respondent Burden

Year Total Annual Labor Burden (hours) Total Annual Labor Costs ($)

1 699,511 49,063,227

2 700,296 49,118,248

3 701,080 49,173,269

Total 2,100,887 147,354,744

3-Year Average 700,296 49,118,248

The individual burdens are expressed under standardized headings believed to be 

consistent with the concept of burden under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Where appropriate, 

specific tasks and major assumptions have been identified; responses to this information

collection are mandatory.

The agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a 

collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

The average annual burden to industry over the next 3 years from these recordkeeping 

and reporting requirements is estimated to be 700,296 hours per year (detailed in Exhibit 1a, 

Exhibit 1b, and Exhibit 1c). These hours are based on agency studies and background documents 

from the development of the regulation, agency knowledge, and experience with the NESHAP 

program, the previously approved ICR, and any comments received.

(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

Respondent costs are divided into three categories. These categories include labor costs, 

operations and maintenance costs, and annualized capital costs. The total respondent costs of 
8

$207,563,774 were calculated as the sum of the annualized capital costs of $81,906,079

(including startup and the capitol recovery factor costs), the average annual labor costs of 

$49,118,248 and the annual operation and maintenance costs of $76,539,446.

(i) Estimating Labor Costs

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

Technical, management, and clerical average hourly rates for private industry workers were 

based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2007

National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates. The approximate 

labor rates are $34.31 per hour for technical, $48.14 per hour for managerial, and $16.91 per 

hour for clerical. These rates represent salaries plus fringe benefits and do not include the cost of 

overhead. An overhead rate of 110 percent is used to account for these costs. The fully-burdened 

hourly wage rates used to represent respondent labor costs are: technical at $72.05, management 

at $101.09, and clerical at $35.51. 

(ii) Estimating Annualized Capital Costs

The annualized capital costs associated with the information collection requirements will 

include the costs to conduct performance tests and startup costs for CEMS. The rule will require 

an initial performance test for each electric generating unit. Table 4 shows the methods used for 

performance tests and the CEMS that are expected to be installed.

Table 4. Performance Test Methods and CEMS Equipment by Pollutant

Pollutant Performance Test Method CEMS

PM EPA Method 5

EPA Method 202

Method 29 New beta gauge PM CEMS

HCl Method 320 New FTIR CEMS

Hg Method 30B New Hg CEMS

The costs related to PM and HCl CEMS were estimated using the CEMS Cost Model, which is 

located here: http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/cem/cems.xls. The costs related to Hg CEMS were 

estimated using a report developed by Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management

(NESCAUM). The document is titled “Technologies for Control and Measurement of Mercury

Emissions from Coal-Fired Power Plants in the United States: A 2010 Status Report” and is 

located in the docket for this rulemaking.

The annualized total capital (including startup) costs for CEMS that will be used to 

monitor PM, Hg, and HCl is $81,906,079 per year. The costs will be incurred for each year of 

the three-year period. Note that these costs are considered “annualized” as they include the cost 

recovery factor costs in their individual CEMs costs. The specific costs are shown in Table 5 and 

Table 6.

Table 5. Annual Capital Costs for Performance Testing

EPA Test Method Cost per test Number of Tests Total
9

Method 29 $ 16,800 1,244 $ 20,899,200

Method 320 $ 20,444 255 $ 5,213,287

Method 5 and 202 $ 15,522 1,244 $ 19,309,376

Method 30B $ 20,006 1,095 $ 21,906,570

Total (for 3-year period of ICR) $ 67,328,433

Totals Per Year $ 22,442,811

Table 6. Other Capital Costs of Installing CEMS (Other Direct Costs and Labor)

CEMS Type Cost per technology Number of installations Total

PM $ 65,388 1,244 81,342,762

HCl $ 111,045 255 28,316,375

Hg $ 174,002 395 68,730,668

Total (for 3-year period of ICR) $178,389,805

Totals Per Year 59,463,268

The continuous monitoring costs that are included in this section consist only of those 

capital costs that a source incurs as a result of the standard. Some continuous monitoring costs 

may not be included in this section. For instance, if a particular industry typically utilizes a 

control device that must have a continuous monitor (e.g., temperature, pressure drop, etc.) to 

function properly, and the recordation of additional measurements beyond the minimum are 

required by the standard, then there is no capital cost; but, there is a labor cost to record the 

additional readings. Such a cost would not appear in this section, but in the industry burden 

Section 6(d) below.

Performance testing is usually conducted by a contractor such that the cost of the 

emissions testing is a capital cost. It is anticipated that existing electric generating units will use 

continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS) for compliance with the proposed PM, Hg, and

HCl emission limits. Initial CEMS testing is usually conducted by an installation contractor such 

that the cost of the emissions testing is a capital cost. The total costs for performance testing 

were calculated for this industry sector. The number of existing and new sources in this sector 

combined with the number of tests required for each type of model plant resulted in a total 

annualized capital cost of approximately $81,906,079 per year for CEMS testing over the next 

three years.

(iii) Estimating Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

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

monitors and other costs such as photocopying and postage. The total annual operations and 

maintenance costs for CEMS that will be used to monitor PM, Hg, and HCl is $84,182,920 per 

year.
10

The continuous monitoring costs that are included in this section consist only of those 

O&M costs that a source incurs as a result of the standard. Some continuous monitoring costs 

may not be included in this section. For instance, if a particular industry typically utilizes a 

control device that must have a continuous monitor (e.g., temperature, pressure drop, etc.) to 

function properly, and the recordation of additional measurements beyond the minimum are 

required by the standard, then there is O&M cost, but there is a labor cost to record the additional 

readings. Such a cost would not appear in this section, but in the industry burden Section 6(d) 

below.

Table 7. Operation and Maintenance Costs

CEMS Capital Costs per monitor Total Annual Costs (w/capital recovery) for all installations

Labor Testing ODC's Total Labor Testing ODC's Total

PM $13,907 $24,164 $51,481 $89,552 $5,766,652 $10,019,939 $21,347,602 $37,134,193

HCl $23,218 $23,356 $87,826 $134,400 $1,973,559 $1,985,220 $7,465,233 $11,424,011 

Hg $25,571 $38,514 $148,431 $212,516 $3,366,818 $5,071,019 $19,543,405 $27,981,242

TOTALS $62,696 $86,033 $287,739 $436,468 $11,107,029 $17,076,178 $48,356,239 $76,539,446

(iv) Affirmative Defense/Root Cause Analysis/Malfunction Costs. 

The EPA’s estimate for an affirmative defense and root cause analysis in Table 8 is based 

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

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

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

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

enforcement agencies ever request to review it.

The labor rates used for these costs are from the United States Department of Labor, 

Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2009, Table 2. Civilian Workers, by occupational and 

industry group. The rates are from column 1, Total compensation. The rates have been increased 

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

industry.

Table 8. Burden Associated with Performing an Affirmative Defense

Personnel 

Number of 

Personnel 

Time 

Requirement 

(hours)

Total 

Hours

Hourly Rate 

($/hr) Total

Technical Personnel 3 6 18 97.59 $ 1,757

Managerial Personnel 2 6 12 114.77 $ 1,377

Total 5 30 $ 3,134

(v) Annualizing Capital Costs

Under this memo, the annualized capital costs are included in the costs of the 

performance tests and CEMS (see explanation in Section 6(b)(ii)). The annualized capital costs 

total $81,906,079.
11

(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost

Because the information collection requirements were developed as an incidental part of 

standards development, no costs can be attributed to the development of the information 

collection requirements. Because reporting and recordkeeping requirements on the part of the 

respondents are required under the NESHAP General Provisions, no operational costs will be 

incurred by the Federal Government. Publication and distribution of the information are part of 

the Compliance Data System, with the result that no Federal costs can be directly attributed to 

the ICR. Examination of records to be maintained by the respondents will occur incidentally as 

part of the periodic inspection of sources that is part of EPA's overall compliance and 

enforcement program, and, therefore, is not attributable to the ICR. The only costs that the 

Federal government will incur are user costs associated with the analysis of the reported 

information, as presented in Exhibit 2a, Exhibit 2b, and Exhibit 2c. Table 8 contains a summary

of the agency burden costs and hours detailed in Exhibit 2a, Exhibit 2b, and Exhibit 2c. The 

average annual agency costs during the 3 years of the ICR is estimated to be $1,798,905.

Table 8. Summary of the Agency Burden

Year Total Annual Labor Burden (Hours) Total Annual Costs ($)

1 36,987 $1,798,905

2 36,987 $1,798,905

3 36,987 $1,798,905

Total 110,960 $5,396,714

3-Year Average 36,987 $1,798,905

The agency labor rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 2003 

General Schedule which excludes locality rates of pay. These rates can be obtained from Salary

Table 2011-GS available on the OPM website (http://www.opm.gov/oca/11tables/html/gs_h.asp). 

The government employee labor rates are $15.63/hour for clerical (GS-6, Step 3), $28.88 for 

technical (GS-12, Step 1), and $38.92/hr for management (GS-13, Step 5). These rates represent 

salaries plus fringe benefits and do not include the cost of overhead. An overhead rate of 60 

percent is used to account for these costs. The fully-burdened wage rates used to represent 

Agency labor costs are: clerical at $25.01; technical at $46.21, and management at $62.27.

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

Approximately 1,244 existing electric generating units are currently subject to the current 

regulation. It is estimated that an additional 2 new electric generating units per year will become 

subject to the regulation.

The total annual number of responses for the new monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting requirements in subpart UUUUU is 3,768 for the existing 1,244 electric generating 

units that will follow the amendments and the additional 2 newly constructed electric generating 

units per year.

The total annual labor costs are $49,118,248. Details appear in Exhibit 1a, Exhibit 1b, 

and Exhibit 1c.
12

(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

The bottom line burden hours and cost tables for both the agency and the respondents are 

attached. The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 186 hours per response. The total annual average burden for 

the rule will be 700,296 person hours with a total annualized capital/startup cost of $81,906,079 

and O&M costs of $76,530,446.

(f) Reasons for Change in Burden.

The increase in burden is due to the performance testing, monitoring, recordkeeping, and 

reporting costs attributable to the new standards for EGUs.

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

notification, recordkeeping and reporting requirements associated with the assertion of the 

affirmative defense. The EPA’s estimate for the required notification, reports and records, 

including the root cause analysis, associated with a single incident totals approximately $3,141

and is based on the time and effort required of a source to review relevant data, interview plant 

employees, and document the events surrounding a malfunction that has caused an exceedance of 

an emission limit. The estimate also includes time to produce and retain the records and reports 

for submission to the EPA. For the purpose of estimating the annual burden, the EPA is 

attributing a total of 2 instances of affirmative defense over a 3 year period across all sources in 

the category. The EPA is using this frequency of 2 events in 3 years, because of the number of 

excess emission events reported by source operators, only a small number would be expected to 

result from a malfunction, and only a subset of excess emissions caused by malfunctions would 

result in the source choosing to assert the affirmative defense. Thus we believe the number of 

instances in which source operators might be expected to avail themselves of the affirmative 

defense will be extremely small.

(g) Burden Statement

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

is estimated to average 186 hours per response. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial 

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

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

acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and 

verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing 

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

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

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

the information.

An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to a 

collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB 

control numbers for EPA’s regulations in 40 CFR part 63 are listed in 40 CFR part 9.

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

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

use of automated collection techniques, the EPA has established a public docket for this ICR 

under Docket ID Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234, which is available for online viewing at 

www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information 
13

Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution 

Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 

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

for the Reading Room is (202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation 

Docket and Information Center is (202) 566-1742. An electronic version of the public docket is 

available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, 

access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the 

public docket that are available electronically. When in the system, select “search,” then key in 

the Docket ID Number identified above. Also, you can send comments to the Office of 

Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, 

Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID 

Number EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234 in any correspondence.

PART B

This section is not applicable because statistical methods are not used in data collection 

associated with the final amendments.
14

ATTACHMENTS

Exhibit 1a. Year 1 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, 

NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Exhibit 1b. Year 2 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, 

NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Exhibit 1c. Year 3 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, 

NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Exhibit 2a. Year 1 Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Exhibit 2b. Year 2 Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Exhibit 2c. Year 3 Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR 

part 63, subpart UUUUU)
15

Exhibit 1a Year 1 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, NESHAP for Electric Generating 

Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Year 1 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

1. APPLICATIONS (Not Applicable)

2. SURVEY AND STUDIES (Not Applicable)

3. ACQUISITION, INSTALLATION, AND 

UTILIZATION OF TECHNOLOGY AND SYSTEMS a160.6 1 160.6 631

 

101,392.1

 

5,069.6

 

10,139.2 $8,177,965

4. REPORT REQUIREMENTS

A. Read Instructions

Existing Sources 1 1 1 865

 

865

 

43.2

 

86.5 $69,741

New Sources 1 1 1 2

 

2.0 

 

0.1 

 

0.2 $161

B. Required Activities

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M5 and M202 27.8 1 27.8 415

 

11,527.7

 

576.4

 

1,152.8 $929,790

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M29 27.8 1 27.8 415

 

11,527.7

 

576.4

 

1,152.8 $929,790

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M320 26.4 1 26.4 85

 

2,244

 

112.2

 

224.4 $180,994

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M30B 27.8 1 27.8 365

 

10,147 .0

 

507.4 

 

1,014.7 $818,425

Existing Sources - Repeat M5 and M202 

performance test every year 27.8 1 27.8 415

 

11,527.7 

 

576.4 

 

1,152.8 $929,790

Existing Sources - Repeat M29 performance test 

every year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Repeat M320 Performance Test 

every year 26.4 1 26.4 85

 

2,244 

 

112.2 

 

224.4 $180,994

Existing Sources - Repeat M30B Performance Test 

every year 27.8 1 27.8 365

 

10,147 

 

507.4 

 

1,014.7 $818,425

Existing Sources - CEMS Quarterly Inspections 2.5 4 10 865

 

8,646.7

 

432.3

 

864.7 $697,412

Existing Sources - CEMS Daily Calibration Drift 

Tests 0.4 365 146 865

 

126,241

 

6,312.1

 

12,624.1 $10,182,222

Existing Sources - Daily monitoring (CEMS) 0.25 365 91.25 865

 

78,900.8

 

3,945

 

7,890.1 $6,363,889

Existing Sources -- All CEMS must follow 

appropriate performance specifications 14 1 14 865

 

12,105.3

 

605.3

 

1,210.5 $976,377
16

Year 1 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M5 

and M202 27.8 1 27.8 2

 

55.6

 

2.78

 

5.56 $4,485

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M29 27.8 1 27.8 2

 

55.6

 

2.78

 

5.56 $4,485

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M26A 26.4 1 26.4 2

 

52.8

 

2.6

 

5.3 $4,259

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M6A 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M5 and 202 performance 

test every year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M29 performance test every 

year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M26A Performance Test 

every year 26.4 1 26.4 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M6A Performance Test 

every year 27.8 0 0 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - CEMS Monitoring 0 1 0 2

 

-

 

-

 

- $0

New Sources - CEMS Quarterly Inspections 2.46 4 9.84 2

 

19.7

 

1

 

2 $1,587

New Sources - CEMS Daily Calibration Drift Tests 0.121 365 44.165 2

 

88.3

 

4.4

 

8.8 $7,124

New Sources - Daily monitoring (CEMS) 0 365 0 2

 

-

 

-

 

- $0

New Sources -- All CEMS must follow appropriate 

performance specifications 7.3 365 2,664.5 2

 

5,329

 

266.5

 

532.9 $429,820

C. Create Information (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

D. Gather Existing Information (Included in 4E)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

E. Write Report

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Notification of Demonstration of

CEMS 5 1 5 865

 

4,323.3

 

216.2

 

432.3 $348,706

Existing Sources - Report of Performance Test 

(included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Notification of Initial 

Performance Test 3 1 3 865

 

2,594

 

129.7

 

259.4 $209,224

Existing Sources - Quality Assurance Program 

Notification 4 1 4 865

 

3,458.7

 

172.9

 

345.9 $278,965

Existing Sources - Startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction Report b10 1 10 86.5

 

864.7

 

43.2

 

86.5 $69,741
17

Year 1 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

Existing Sources - Semi-Annual Compliance 

Report 75 2 150 865

 

129,700

 

6,485

 

12,970 $10,461,187

Existing Sources - Notification of Compliance 

Status 16.5 1 16.5 865

 

14,267

 

713.4

 

1,426.7 $1,150,731

Existing Sources - site-specific performance 

evaluation test plan 20 1 20 865

 

17,293

 

864.7

 

1,729.3 $1,394,825

Existing Sources - request to use alternative 

monitoring procedure 5 1 5 86.5

 

432.3

 

21.6

 

43.2 $34,871

New Sources - Initial notification 3 1 3 2

 

6

 

0.3

 

0.6 $484

New Sources - Notification of Demonstration of 

CEMS 5 1 5 2

 

10

 

0.5

 

1 $807

New Sources - Quality Assurance Program 

Notification 3 1 3 2

 

6

 

0.3

 

0.6 $484

New Sources - Notification of Initial Performance 

Test 4 1 4 2

 

8

 

0.4

 

0.8 $645

New Sources - Report of Performance Test 

(included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

Reportb10 1 10 0.2

 

2

 

0.1 

 

0.2 $161

New Sources - Semi-Annual Compliance Report 75 2 150 2

 

300

 

15

 

30 $24,197

New Sources - Notification of Compliance Status 16.5 1 16.5 2

 

33

 

1.7

 

3.3 $2,662

New Sources - site-specific performance evaluation 

test plan 20 1 20 2

 

40

 

2

 

4 $3,226

New Sources - request to use alternative monitoring 

procedure 5 1 5 0.2

 

1.0 

 

0.1 

 

0.1 $81

Affirmative Defense 30 1 30 2.0 36 24 - $6,268

5. RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

A. Read Instructions (Included in 4A)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

B. Plan Activities (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

C. Implement Activities (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

D. Record Data ( Not Applicable)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

E. Time to Transmit or Disclose Information

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Records of CEMS malfunctions 1 12 12 865

 

10,376

 

518.8

 

1,037.6 $836,895
18

Year 1 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

Existing Sources - Records of Startups, Shutdowns, 

malfunctions, etc 1 12 12 865

 

10,376

 

518.8

 

1,037.6 $836,895

Existing Sources - Records of monthly fuel use 2 12 24 865

 

20,752

 

1,037.6

 

2,075.2 $1,673,790

New Sources - Records of CEMS malfunctions 1 12 12 2

 

24

 

1.2 

 

2.4 $1,936

New Sources - Records of Startups, Shutdowns, 

malfunctions, etc 1 12 12 2

 

24

 

1.2 

 

2.4 $1,936

New Sources - Records of monthly fuel use 2 12 24 2

 

48

 

2.4

 

4.8 $3,872

F. Time to Train Personnel 80 1 80 2

 

160

 

8

 

16 $12,905

G. Time for Audits (Not Applicable)

TOTAL ANNUAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST 1,946 15,096

 

608,255

 

30,435

 

60,822 $49,063,227

 

699,511 Hours

ANNUALIZED CAPITAL COSTS

Performance tests $ 22,442,811

Other Capital Costs of Installation (ODC and Labor) $59,463,268

Total annual capital $81,906,079

TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS (O&M) $76,539,446

TOTAL ANNUALIZED COSTS (Annualized capital + 

O&M costs) $158,445,526

a There are 1,244 existing electric generating units. One third of those are assumed to be tested each year.

b

10% of sources are assumed to submit SSM report each year.
19

Exhibit 1b Year 2 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, NESHAP for Electric Generating 

Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Year 2 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

1. APPLICATIONS (Not Applicable)

2. SURVEY AND STUDIES (Not Applicable)

3. ACQUISITION, INSTALLATION, AND 

UTILIZATION OF TECHNOLOGY AND SYSTEMS a160.6 1 160.6 633

 

101,606

 

5,080

 

10,161 $8,195,236

4. REPORT REQUIREMENTS

A. Read Instructions

Existing Sources 1 1 1 865

 

865

 

43

 

86.5 $69,795

New Sources 1 1 1 2

 

2.0 

 

0.1 

 

0.2 $161

B. Required Activities

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M5 and M202 27.8 1 27.8 415

 

11,546

 

577.3

 

1,155 $931,285

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M29 27.8 1 27.8 415

 

11,546

 

577.3

 

1,155 $931,285

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M320 26.4 1 26.4 85

 

2,262

 

113.1

 

226 $182,413

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M30B 27.8 1 27.8 366

 

10,166

 

508.3 

 

1,017 $819,919

Existing Sources - Repeat M5 and M202 

performance test every year 27.8 1 27.8 415

 

11,546 

 

577.3 

 

1,155 $931,285

Existing Sources - Repeat M29 performance test 

every year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Repeat M320 Performance Test 

every year 26.4 1 26.4 85

 

2,262 

 

113.1 

 

226 $182,413

Existing Sources - Repeat M30B Performance Test 

every year 27.8 1 27.8 366

 

10,166 

 

508.3 

 

1,017 $819,919

Existing Sources - CEMS Quarterly Inspections 2.5 4 10 865

 

8,653

 

432.7

 

865 $697,950

Existing Sources - CEMS Daily Calibration Drift 

Tests 0.4 365 146 865

 

126,339

 

6,317

 

12,634 $10,190,073

Existing Sources - Daily monitoring (CEMS) 0.25 365 91.25 865

 

78,962

 

3,948.1

 

7,896 $6,368,795

Existing Sources -- All CEMS must follow 

appropriate performance specifications 14 1 14 865

 

12,115

 

606

 

1,212 $977,130
20

Year 2 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M5 

and M202 27.8 1 27.8 2

 

55.6

 

2.78

 

5.56 $4,485

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M29 27.8 1 27.8 2

 

55.6

 

2.78

 

5.56 $4,485

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M26A 26.4 1 26.4 2

 

52.8

 

2.6

 

5.3 $4,259

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M6A 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M5 and 202 performance 

test every year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M29 performance test every 

year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M26A Performance Test 

every year 26.4 1 26.4 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M6A Performance Test 

every year 27.8 0 0 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - CEMS Monitoring 0 1 0 2

 

-

 

-

 

- $0

New Sources - CEMS Quarterly Inspections 2.46 4 9.84 2

 

19.7

 

1

 

2 $1,587

New Sources - CEMS Daily Calibration Drift Tests 0.121 365 44.165 2

 

88.3

 

4.4

 

8.8 $7,124

New Sources - Daily monitoring (CEMS) 0 365 0 2

 

-

 

-

 

- $0

New Sources -- All CEMS must follow appropriate 

performance specifications 7.3 365 2,664.5 2

 

5,329

 

266.5

 

532.9 $429,820

C. Create Information (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

D. Gather Existing Information (Included in 4E)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

E. Write Report

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Notification of Demonstration of

CEMS 5 1 5 865

 

4,326

 

216

 

433 $348,975

Existing Sources - Report of Performance Test 

(included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Notification of Initial 

Performance Test 3 1 3 865

 

2,596

 

130

 

260 $209,385

Existing Sources - Quality Assurance Program 

Notification 4 1 4 865

 

3,461

 

173

 

346 $279,180

Existing Sources - Startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction Report b10 1 10 86.5

 

865

 

43

 

86.5 $69,795
21

Year 2 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

Existing Sources - Semi-Annual Compliance 

Report 75 2 150 865

 

129,800

 

6,490

 

12,980 $10,469,253

Existing Sources - Notification of Compliance 

Status 16.5 1 16.5 865

 

14,278

 

714

 

1,428 $1,151,618

Existing Sources - site-specific performance 

evaluation test plan 20 1 20 865

 

17,307

 

865

 

1,731 $1,395,900

Existing Sources - request to use alternative 

monitoring procedure 5 1 5 86.5

 

433

 

21.6

 

43 $34,898

New Sources - Initial notification 3 1 3 2

 

6

 

0.3

 

0.6 $484

New Sources - Notification of Demonstration of 

CEMS 5 1 5 2

 

10

 

0.5

 

1 $807

New Sources - Quality Assurance Program 

Notification 3 1 3 2

 

6

 

0.3

 

0.6 $484

New Sources - Notification of Initial Performance 

Test 4 1 4 2

 

8

 

0.4

 

0.8 $645

New Sources - Report of Performance Test 

(included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

Reportb10 1 10 0.2

 

2

 

0.1 

 

0.2 $161

New Sources - Semi-Annual Compliance Report 75 2 150 2

 

300

 

15

 

30 $24,197

New Sources - Notification of Compliance Status 16.5 1 16.5 2

 

33

 

1.7

 

3.3 $2,662

New Sources - site-specific performance evaluation 

test plan 20 1 20 2

 

40

 

2

 

4 $3,226

New Sources - request to use alternative monitoring 

procedure 5 1 5 0.2

 

1.0 

 

0.1 

 

0.1 $81

Affirmative Defense 30 1 30 2.0 36 24 - $6,268

5. RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

A. Read Instructions (Included in 4A)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

B. Plan Activities (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

C. Implement Activities (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

D. Record Data ( Not Applicable)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

E. Time to Transmit or Disclose Information

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Records of CEMS malfunctions 1 12 12 865

 

10,384

 

519

 

1,038 $837,540
22

Year 2 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

Existing Sources - Records of Startups, Shutdowns, 

malfunctions, etc 1 12 12 865

 

10,384

 

519

 

1,038 $837,540

Existing Sources - Records of monthly fuel use 2 12 24 865

 

20,768

 

1,038

 

2,077 $1,675,080

New Sources - Records of CEMS malfunctions 1 12 12 2

 

24

 

1.2 

 

2.4 $1,936

New Sources - Records of Startups, Shutdowns, 

malfunctions, etc 1 12 12 2

 

24

 

1.2 

 

2.4 $1,936

New Sources - Records of monthly fuel use 2 12 24 2

 

48

 

2.4

 

4.8 $3,872

F. Time to Train Personnel 80 1 80 2

 

160

 

8

 

16 $12,905

G. Time for Audits (Not Applicable)

TOTAL ANNUAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST 1,946 15,111

 

608,937

 

30,469

 

60,890 $49,118,248

 

700,296 Hours

ANNUALIZED CAPITAL COSTS

Performance tests $ 22,442,811

Other Capital Costs of Installation (ODC and Labor) $59,463,268

Total annual capital $81,906,079

TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS (O&M) $76,539,446

TOTAL ANNUALIZED COSTS (Annualized capital + 

O&M costs) $158,445,526

a There are 1,244 existing electric generating units. One third of those are assumed to be tested each year.

bThere are 2 additional existing electric generating units that were new sources in Year 1.

c

10% of sources are assumed to submit SSM report each year.
23

Exhibit 1c Year 3 Respondent Burden of Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements, NESHAP for Electric Generating 

Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Year 3 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

1. APPLICATIONS (Not Applicable)

2. SURVEY AND STUDIES (Not Applicable)

3. ACQUISITION, INSTALLATION, AND 

UTILIZATION OF TECHNOLOGY AND SYSTEMS a160.6 1 160.6 634

 

101,820

 

5,091

 

10,182 $8,212,508

4. REPORT REQUIREMENTS

A. Read Instructions

Existing Sources 1 1 1 866

 

866

 

43

 

87 $69,849

New Sources 1 1 1 2

 

2.0 

 

0.1 

 

0.2 $161

B. Required Activities

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M5 and M202 27.8 1 27.8 416

 

11,565

 

578

 

1,157 $932,780

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M29 27.8 1 27.8 416

 

11,565

 

578

 

1,157 $932,780

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M320 26.4 1 26.4 86

 

2,279

 

114

 

228 $183,833

Existing Sources- Initial Performance Test using 

M30B 27.8 1 27.8 366

 

10,184

 

509 

 

1,018 $821,414

Existing Sources - Repeat M5 and M202 

performance test every year 27.8 1 27.8 416

 

11,565 

 

578 

 

1,157 $932,780

Existing Sources - Repeat M29 performance test 

every year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Repeat M320 Performance Test 

every year 26.4 1 26.4 86

 

2,279 

 

114 

 

228 $183,833

Existing Sources - Repeat M30B Performance Test 

every year 27.8 1 27.8 366

 

10,184 

 

509 

 

1,018 $821,414

Existing Sources - CEMS Quarterly Inspections 2.5 4 10 866

 

8,660

 

433

 

866 $698,488

Existing Sources - CEMS Daily Calibration Drift 

Tests 0.4 365 146 866

 

126,436

 

6,322

 

12,644 $10,197,923

Existing Sources - Daily monitoring (CEMS) 0.25 365 91.25 866

 

79023

 

3,951

 

7,902 $6,373,702

Existing Sources -- All CEMS must follow 

appropriate performance specifications 14 1 14 866

 

12,124

 

606

 

1,212 $977,883

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M5 

and M202 27.8 1 27.8 2

 

55.6

 

2.8

 

5.6 $4,485
24

Year 3 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M29 27.8 1 27.8 2

 

55.6

 

2.8

 

5.6 $4,485

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M26A 26.4 1 26.4 2

 

52.8

 

2.6

 

5.3 $4,259

New Sources- Initial Performance Test using M6A 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M5 and 202 performance 

test every year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M29 performance test every 

year 27.8 1 27.8 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M26A Performance Test 

every year 26.4 1 26.4 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Repeat M6A Performance Test 

every year 27.8 0 0 0

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - CEMS Monitoring 0 1 0 2

 

-

 

-

 

- $0

New Sources - CEMS Quarterly Inspections 2.46 4 9.84 2

 

19.7

 

1

 

2 $1,587

New Sources - CEMS Daily Calibration Drift Tests 0.121 365 44.165 2

 

88.3

 

4.4

 

8.8 $7,124

New Sources - Daily monitoring (CEMS) 0 365 0 2

 

-

 

-

 

- $0

New Sources -- All CEMS must follow appropriate 

performance specifications 7.3 365 2,664.5 2

 

5,329

 

266.5

 

532.9 $429,820

C. Create Information (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

D. Gather Existing Information (Included in 4E)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

E. Write Report

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Notification of Demonstration of

CEMS 5 1 5 866

 

4,330

 

217

 

433 $349,244

Existing Sources - Report of Performance Test 

(included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Notification of Initial 

Performance Test 3 1 3 866

 

2,598

 

130

 

260 $209,546

Existing Sources - Quality Assurance Program 

Notification 4 1 4 866

 

3,464

 

173

 

346 $279,395

Existing Sources - Startup, shutdown, and 

malfunction Report b10 1 10 86.6

 

866

 

43

 

86.6 $69,849

Existing Sources - Semi-Annual Compliance 

Report 75 2 150 866

 

129,900

 

6,495

 

12,990 $10,477,318
25

Year 3 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

Existing Sources - Notification of Compliance 

Status 16.5 1 16.5 866

 

14,289

 

715

 

1,429 $1,152,505

Existing Sources - site-specific performance 

evaluation test plan 20 1 20 866

 

17,320

 

866

 

1,732 $1,396,976

Existing Sources - request to use alternative 

monitoring procedure 5 1 5 86.6

 

433

 

22

 

43 $34,924

New Sources - Initial notification 3 1 3 2

 

6

 

0.3

 

0.6 $484

New Sources - Notification of Demonstration of 

CEMS 5 1 5 2

 

10

 

0.5

 

1 $807

New Sources - Quality Assurance Program 

Notification 3 1 3 2

 

6

 

0.3

 

0.6 $484

New Sources - Notification of Initial Performance 

Test 4 1 4 2

 

8

 

0.4

 

0.8 $645

New Sources - Report of Performance Test 

(included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

New Sources - Startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

Reportb10 1 10 0.2

 

2

 

0.1 

 

0.2 $161

New Sources - Semi-Annual Compliance Report 75 2 150 2

 

300

 

15

 

30 $24,197

New Sources - Notification of Compliance Status 16.5 1 16.5 2

 

33

 

1.7

 

3.3 $2,662

New Sources - site-specific performance evaluation 

test plan 20 1 20 2

 

40

 

2

 

4 $3,226

New Sources - request to use alternative monitoring 

procedure 5 1 5 0.2

 

1.0 

 

0.1 

 

0.1 $81

Affirmative Defense 30 1 30 2.0 36 24 - $6,268

5. RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

A. Read Instructions (Included in 4A)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

B. Plan Activities (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

C. Implement Activities (Included in 4B)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

D. Record Data ( Not Applicable)

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

E. Time to Transmit or Disclose Information

 

- 

 

- 

 

- $0

Existing Sources - Records of CEMS malfunctions 1 12 12 866

 

10,392

 

520

 

1,039 $838,185

Existing Sources - Records of Startups, Shutdowns, 

malfunctions, etc 1 12 12 86

 

10,392

 

520

 

1,039 $838,185
26

Year 3 (A) Hours 

per 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Respondent/Year

(C) Hours/ 

Respondent/ 

Year (A x B)

(D) 

Respondents/ 

Year

(E) 

Technical 

Hours/Year 

(C x D)

(F) 

Managerial 

Hours/Year (E 

x 0.05)

(G) Clerical 

Hours/Year 

(E x 0.10)

(H) Cost/ 

Year

Existing Sources - Records of monthly fuel use 2 12 24 866

 

20,784

 

1,039

 

2,078 $1,676,371

New Sources - Records of CEMS malfunctions 1 12 12 2

 

24

 

1.2 

 

2.4 $1,936

New Sources - Records of Startups, Shutdowns, 

malfunctions, etc 1 12 12 2

 

24

 

1.2 

 

2.4 $1,936

New Sources - Records of monthly fuel use 2 12 24 2

 

48

 

2.4

 

4.8 $3,872

F. Time to Train Personnel 80 1 80 2

 

160

 

8

 

16 $12,905

G. Time for Audits (Not Applicable)

TOTAL ANNUAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST 1,946 15,127

 

609,619

 

30,503

 

60,958 $49,173,269

 

701,080 Hours

ANNUALIZED CAPITAL COSTS

Performance tests $ 22,442,811

Other Capital Costs of Installation (ODC and Labor) $59,463,268

Total annual capital $81,906,079

TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS (O&M) $76,539,446

TOTAL ANNUALIZED COSTS (Annualized capital + 

O&M costs) $158,445,526

a There are 1,244 existing electric generating units. One third of those are assumed to be tested each year.

b There are 2 additional existing electric generating units that were new sources in Year 1.

c There are 2 additional existing electric generating units that were new sources in Year 2.

d

10% of sources are assumed to submit SSM report each year.
27

Exhibit 2a Year 1 Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Activity -- Year 1

(A) EPA 

Hours/ 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences

/ Plant/Year

(C) EPA 

Hours/ 

Plant/Year 

(A x B)

(D) 

Plants/ 

Year

(E) EPA 

Technical Hours/ 

Year (C x D)

(F) EPA Managerial 

Hours/Year

(G) EPA 

Clerical 

Hours/Year (H) Cost, $

Observe Initial Performance Tests 24 1 24 173.2 4,156.8 207.84 41.57 $ 206,060

Observe Repeat Performance Tests 24 0.2 4.8 173.2 831.36 41.57 8.31 $ 41,212

Review Notification of Demonstration of 

CEMS 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465

Review Quality Assurance Program 

Notification 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465

Review Startup, shutdown, and malfunction 

Report 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433

Review Notification of Compliance Status 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465

Review requests to use alternative monitoring 

procedure 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.5 4.33 $ 21,465

Review Initial Notifications 0.5 1 0.5 2.00 1 0.05 0.01 $ 50

Review Notification of performance test 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465

Review Test/CEMS Results 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433

Review site specific performance evaluation 

test plan 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433

Review Semi-Annual reports 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433

Total Annual Hours 34,866 1,743 348 $ 1,728,374

 36,958 Hours

Travel Expenses $ 69,200 

$ 1,797,574

EPA Officials are assumed to attend 20% of performance tests (0.20 * 866 = 173.2)

Travel Expenses = (1 person x 173 plants/year x 3 days/plant x $50 per diem) + ($250 round trip/plant x 173 plants/year) = $69,200/year

Assume visit 173 plants per year
28

Exhibit 2b Year 2 Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Activity -- Year 2

(A) EPA 

Hours/ 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Plant/Year

(C) EPA 

Hours/ 

Plant/Year 

(A x B)

(D) 

Plants/ 

Year

(E) EPA 

Technical 

Hours/ Year 

(C x D)

(F) EPA 

Managerial 

Hours/Year

(G) EPA 

Clerical 

Hours/Year (H) Cost, $

Observe Initial Performance Tests 24 1 24 84.13 2019.2 100.96 20.192 $ 100,095 

Observe Repeat Performance Tests 24 0.2 4.8 84.13 403.84 20.192 4.0384 $ 20,019 

Review Notification of Demonstration of CEMS 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465 

Review Quality Assurance Program Notification 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465 

Review Startup, shutdown, and malfunction Report 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433 

Review Notification of Compliance Status 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465 

Review requests to use alternative monitoring 

procedure 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.5 4.33 $ 21,465 

Review Initial Notifications 0.5 1 0.5 2.00 1 0.05 0.01 $ 50 

Review Notification of performance test 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465

Review Test/CEMS Results 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433 

Review site specific performance evaluation test plan 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433 

Review Semi-Annual reports 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433

Total Annual Hours 32,301 1,615 323 $ 1,601,217

 34,239.1 Hours

Travel Expenses $ 69,200 

$ 1,670,417 

EPA Officials are assumed to attend 20% of performance tests (0.20 * 866 = 173.2)

Travel Expenses = (1 person x 173 plants/year x 3 days/plant x $50 per diem) + ($250 round trip/plant x 173 plants/year) = $69,200/year

Assume visit 173 plants per year
29

Exhibit 2c Year 3 Agency Burden and Cost, NESHAP for Electric Generating Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUUUU)

Activity -- Year 3

(A) EPA 

Hours/ 

Occurrence

(B) 

Occurrences/ 

Plant/Year

(C) EPA 

Hours/ 

Plant/Year 

(A x B)

(D) 

Plants/ 

Year

(E) EPA 

Technical 

Hours/ Year (C 

x D)

(F) EPA Managerial 

Hours/Year

(G) EPA 

Clerical 

Hours/Year (H) Cost, $

Observe Initial Performance Tests 24 1 24 84.13 2019.2 100.96 20.192 $ 100,095 

Observe Repeat Performance Tests 24 0.2 4.8 84.13 403.84 20.192 4.0384 $ 20,019 

Review Notification of Demonstration of CEMS 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465 

Review Quality Assurance Program Notification 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465 

Review Startup, shutdown, and malfunction Report 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433 

Review Notification of Compliance Status 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465 

Review requests to use alternative monitoring 

procedure 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.5 4.33 $ 21,465 

Review Initial Notifications 0.5 1 0.5 2.00 1 0.05 0.01 $ 50 

Review Notification of performance test 0.5 1 0.5 866 433 21.65 4.33 $ 21,465

Review Test/CEMS Results 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433 

Review site specific performance evaluation test plan 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433 

Review Semi-Annual reports 8 1 8 866 6,928 346.4 69.28 $ 343,433

Total Annual Hours 32,301 1,615 323 $ 1,601,217

 34,239.1 Hours

Travel Expenses $ 69,200 

$ 1,670,417 

EPA Officials are assumed to attend 20% of performance tests (0.20 * 866 = 173.2)

Travel Expenses = (1 person x 173 plants/year x 3 days/plant x $50 per diem) + ($250 round trip/plant x 173 plants/year) = $69,200/year

Assume visit 173 plants per year