INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 1 of 25

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Air and Radiation

Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards

Air Quality Policy Division

Geographic Strategies Group

INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST

SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR

EPA ICR NUMBER 1813.08,

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE 

REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

EPA

EPA # 1813.08
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 2 of 25

This ICR, EPA Form 1813.08, is an update of the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB) Control Number 2060-0421; EPA Form 1813.07 which 

expires on October 31, 2012. The current approved collection is for 859 

respondents, 31,841 hours per year, and $2,563,000 per year. This renewal 

requests approval for 53 respondents (52 state agencies, and 1 group of 

Federal Land Managers (FLMs)), 6,048 hours per year, and $293,631 per 

year. Table E.1 summarizes the total annual respondent burden for this 

renewal. Tribes are not required to submit regional haze plans, so there are 

no burden estimates for Tribal governments.

The change in burden reflects changes in labor rates, changes in the 

activities conducted due to the normal progression of the program, and the 

fact that the majority of regional haze state implementation plans (SIPs) for 

the first 10-year implementation period (including best available retrofit 

technology (BART) determinations) will have been acted on by the EPA by 

November 2012. After EPA’s action on the SIPs for the first 

implementation period, the states will be shifting their primary focus to 

development of interim progress reports required by the regional haze rule

and to assessing whether revisions to the SIPs will be needed in 2018. A 

few states will be required to submit SIP revisions by June 2014 to remedy

EPA disapproval of their current plans. 

Table E-1 Estimated State and FLM Respondent Burden to Implement 

Requirements

Task Element

States FLMs

Average Annual 

Hours

Average Annual 

Cost ($) Average 

Annual 

Hours

Average Annual 

Cost ($)

Total Burden by 

Respondent

5,021 243,770 1,027 49,861

Total for 

Respondent 

Universe

6,048 hours; $293,631

Executive Summary
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 3 of 25

This document fulfills the Agency's requirements under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act (PRA) with regards to determining the regulatory burden 

associated with the 

implementation of the 

regional haze program (40 

CFR 51.308) and 

requirements related to the 

Grand Canyon Visibility

Transport Commission (40 

CFR 51.309). It has been 

assigned EPA tracking 

number 1813.08. The title of 

this Information Collection 

Request (ICR) is “Information Collection Request Supporting Statement 

for EPA ICR Number 1813.08, Renewal of The ICR for the Regional Haze 

Rule.”

Subpart P of 40 CFR 51, Protection of Visibility, also known as the 

regional haze rule, is the subject of this clearance request. In the next three 

years, activities conducted by the states, Federal Land Managers (FLMs), 

and the EPA will focus on reporting requirements in the rule to address the 

progress of regional haze implementation plans. During the next three 

years, six states (Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Louisiana, Mississippi, and 

North Carolina) will also be responsible for submitting SIP revisions to 

remedy EPA’s disapproval of specific elements of their regional haze 

programs. 40 CFR 51.308 (g) requires states to develop periodic reports 

evaluating progress towards the reasonable progress goals for improving 

visibility in Class I areas inside the state and in neighboring states. There 

are similar reporting requirements under 40 CFR 51.309, a section of the 

regional haze rule in which three states (Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico) 

elected to submit their SIPs. Under section 309, these states adopted 

regional haze strategies for the period from 2003 to 2018 for sulfur dioxide 

emissions. These strategies are based on recommendations from the Grand 

Canyon Visibility Transport Commission (GCVTC) for protecting the 16 

Class I areas in the Colorado Plateau area. 

On June 15, 2005, the EPA finalized amendments to the July 1999 regional 

haze rule. These amendments apply to the provisions of the regional haze 

rule that require emission controls known as best available retrofit 

technology, or BART, for industrial facilities emitting air pollutants that 

reduce visibility by causing or contributing to regional haze. The pollutants 

that reduce visibility include fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and 

compounds which contribute to PM2.5 formation, such as nitrogen oxides 

(NOX), sulfur dioxides (SO2), and under certain conditions volatile organic 

compounds (VOC), and ammonia. 

1 Identification of the Information Collection

1.1 Title

OMD1.2

Description

EPA TRACKING NUMBER: 

1813.08

E-TRACKING NUMBER:

OMB-2060-0421

1.2 Description
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 4 of 25

The BART requirements of the regional haze rule apply to facilities built 

between 1962 and 1977 that have the potential to emit more than 250 tons 

per year of visibility-impairing pollution. Those facilities fall into 26 

categories, including utility and industrial boilers, and large industrial 

plants such as pulp mills, refineries and smelters. Many of these facilities 

have not been previously subject to federal pollution control requirements 

for these pollutants.

Under the 1999 regional haze rule, states are required to set periodic goals 

for improving visibility in the 156 Mandatory Class I Federal Areas. As 

states work to reach these goals, they must develop regional haze 

implementation plans that contain enforceable measures and strategies for 

reducing visibility-impairing pollution. The 2005 amendments include 

guidelines, known as BART guidelines, for states to use in determining 

which facilities must install controls and the type of controls the facilities 

must use. States were required to develop their implementation plans by

December, 2007. As part of those plans, states were required identify the 

facilities that are subject to BART and conduct appropriate BART 

determinations in accordance with the regional haze rule and BART 

guidelines.

The majority of the states did not submit their SIPs on time, and the EPA is 

currently subject to several consent decrees that have established schedules

for final actions on the SIPs, or promulgation of FIPs. These consent 

decrees, that in the aggregate, require the agency to complete the majority 

of the remaining unfinished actions on the initial regional haze 

implementation plans by November 2012. Since that date aligns closely 

with the expiration of the currently approved ICR (October 31, 2012) and 

the majority of the effort required to complete the actions on the initial SIPs

will have occurred, the primary focus for estimating burden for this 3 year 

renewal period (October 31, 2012 – October 30, 2015) will apply to the 

next program milestone which is the 5-year periodic progress report (see 40 

CFR 51.308(g)). The due date for states to submit the progress reports is 5

years from their initial regional haze SIP submittal, and for many states, 

that due date falls within the date range of this ICR renewal. In the 5-year 

progress report, the states are required to describe the status of the 

implementation of measures needed to achieve reasonable progress goals, 

report on the emissions reductions achieved, assess visibility changes, and 

evaluate whether the current implementation plan is sufficient to meet all 

established reasonable progress goals.
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 5 of 25

Section 169A of the Clean Air Act (CAA) sets forth a national goal for 

visibility. The goal is the “prevention of any future, and the remedying of 

any existing, impairment in visibility in mandatory Class I Federal areas 

which impairment results from man-made air pollution.” This section of the 

CAA also calls for EPA regulations to assure that states provide for 

reasonable progress toward meeting the national goal. The original 

regulations on protection of visibility in mandatory Class I Federal areas, 

developed in 1980, addressed visibility that is “reasonably attributable” to a 

single source or small group of sources. The regional haze rule, 

promulgated in 1999, added new sections to the code of federal 

environmental regulations. These included sections 40 CFR 51.308 and 40 

CFR 51.309. This ICR renewal request provides for continued 

implementation of the regional raze rule. During this clearance period, we 

anticipate that the reporting requirements under 40 CFR 51.308(g) will be 

the major program focus and the similar reporting requirements (see 40 

CFR 51.309(d)(10)) for the three states that submitted regional haze SIPs 

under 40 CFR 51.309. Six states will be required to conduct additional 

analyses and submit approvable SIP revisions to remedy EPA’s disapproval 

of specific elements of their current regional haze plan. We also anticipate 

that a small subset of states (13) may submit minor SIP revisions to adopt 

the requirements of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) as a 

BART alternative, to replace a Federal Implementation Plan (FIP).

 

The data collected from respondents include revised state implementation 

plans. These data confirm progress in assessing visibility impairment and 

source contribution, and provide the foundation for the establishment of the 

reasonable progress goals, control strategies, and BART requirements. 

The information in this ICR is based upon the best data available to the 

Agency at this time. However, incomplete data and sampling limitations 

imposed necessitated a certain amount of extrapolation and “best-guess” 

estimates. Consequently, the reader should not consider the conclusions to 

be an exact representation of the level of burden or cost that will occur. 

Instead, this ICR should be considered a directionally correct assessment of 

the impact the programmatic changes included in this rulemaking may have 

over the next 3 years. 

Throughout this ICR, the reader will observe estimated values that show 

accuracy to the single hour or dollar. However, reporting values at the 

single unit level can be misleading. In most situations, the proper way to 

present estimated data would be to determine an appropriate level of 

precision and truncate values accordingly, usually in terms of thousands or 

2 Need and Use of the Collection

2.1 Need / Authority 

for the Collection

2.2 Practical Utility / 

Users of the Data

2.3 Caveats and 

Considerations
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 6 of 25

millions of units. For instance, a spreadsheet generated estimation of 

$5,456,295 could be presented in the text as $5.5 (millions) or $5,456 

(thousands). One problem with such an approach is the loss of data richness 

when the report contains a mixture of very large and very small numbers. 

Consequently, to avoid the loss of information through rounding, this ICR 

reports all values at the single unit level and reminds the reader that there is 

no implied precision inherent in this style of reporting.
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 7 of 25

This information collection renewal request is related to provisions in 40 

CFR 51.308(g) and 40 CFR 51.309(d)(10) which require periodic reports 

describing progress towards the reasonable progress goals. Each state must 

submit an implementation plan revision evaluating whether improvement 

in visibility is made towards the reasonable progress goal for each 

mandatory Class 1 Federal area located within the state and in each 

mandatory Class 1 Federal area located outside the state which may be 

affected by emissions from within the state. These implementation plans 

are due 5 years from the submittal of the initial regional haze plan. The 

reasonable progress implementation plans required by the regional haze 

rule are unique and do not duplicate other implementation plan 

requirements.

In compliance with the PRA, this draft ICR must solicit public comments 

for a 60-day period prior to submission to OMB. 

The ICR for the regional haze rule was revised last in August 2009. We 

solicited public comments on this ICR prior to submitting it to OMB. We 

issued a Federal Register notice requesting comments on the ICR renewal 

on April 26, 2012 (77 FR 24952). The EPA received one comment in 

response to the public notice that was published in the Federal Register.

This comment suggested that the EPA underestimated the annual reporting 

burden of implementing the regulation haze regulations by focusing solely 

on the five year progress report. The EPA has addressed these issues in this 

final ICR. The comment can be found in Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR2003-0162-0012, which is available for online viewing at 

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

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

Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, D.C.

The EPA consulted with the EPA Region 5 Office for comment, review, 

and suggestions on this ICR renewal. The point of contact for the regional 

office is John Summerhays, regional haze coordinator for EPA Region 5, 

(312) 886-6067. Mr. Summerhays had no comments. 

We also contacted the state of Virginia Department of Environmental 

Quality (DEQ), explained the requirements of the ICR renewal, and 

solicited comment. The point of contact is Mr. Michael Kiss, Director, 

Office of Air Quality Assessments, Richmond, VA, (804) 698-4460. Mr. 

Kiss had no comments. 

The EPA contacted the state of Alaska Department of Environmental 

Conservation to explain the requirements of the ICR, the comment 

submitted on the proposed ICR, and the changes to the ICR after 

considering the comment. The point of contact is Karin Landsberg, 

3 Non-Duplication, Consultation, and Other Collection Criteria

3.1 Non-Duplication

3.2 Public Notice 

Requirements

3.3 Consultations
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 8 of 25

Environmental Program Manager, Air Quality Division, Juneau, AK, (904) 

269-4913.

The information collection requested under this ICR is necessary to ensure 

implementation of the 40 CFR 51.308 and 40 CFR 51.309 requirements. 

OMB's general guidelines for information collections must be adhered to 

by all federal agencies for approval of any rulemaking's collection 

methodology. In accordance with the requirements of 5 CFR 1320.5, the 

Agency believes:

1. The regional haze regulations do not require periodic reporting 

more frequently than every 5 years.

2. The regional haze regulations do not require respondents to 

participate in any statistical survey.

3. Written responses to Agency inquiries are not required to be 

submitted in less than 30 days.

4. Respondents do not receive remuneration for the preparation of 

reports required by the Act or part 51.

5. To the greatest extent possible, the Agency has taken advantage of 

automated methods of reporting.

The recordkeeping and reporting requirements contained in the current 

regional haze program and the changes proposed in this rulemaking do not 

exceed any of the Paperwork Reduction Act guidelines contained in 5 CFR 

1320.5, except for the guideline which limits retention of records by 

respondents to 3 years. The Act requires both respondents and state or local 

agencies to retain records for a period of 5 years. The justification for this 

exception is found in 28 U.S.C. 2462, which specifies 5 years as the 

general statute of limitations for federal claims in response to violations by

regulated entities. The decision in U.S. v. Conoco, Inc., No. 83-1916-E 

(W.D. Okla., January 23, 1984) found that the 5-year general statute of 

limitations applied to the CAA.

Confidentiality is not an issue for this rulemaking. In accordance with the 

Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, any monitoring information to be 

submitted by sources is a matter of public record. To the extent that the 

information required is proprietary, confidential, or of a nature that could 

impair the ability of the source to maintain its market position, that 

information is collected and handled subject to the requirements of §503(e) 

and §114(c) of the Act. Information received and identified by owners or 

operators as confidential business information (CBI) and approved as CBI 

by EPA, in accordance with Title 40, Chapter 1, Part 2, Subpart B, shall be 

maintained appropriately (see 40 CFR 2; 41 FR 36902, September 1, 1976; 

3.4 Less Frequent

Collection

3.5 General

Guidelines

3.6 Confidentiality
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 9 of 25

amended by 43 FR 39999, September 8, 1978; 43 FR 42251, September 

28, 1978; 44 FR 17674, March 23, 1979).

The consideration of sensitive questions, (i.e., sexual, religious, personal or 

other private matters), is not applicable to this rulemaking. The information 

gathered to develop an implementation plan does not include personal data 

on any owner or operator.

Because the regional haze program operates nationwide and across 

numerous industry classifications, the Agency does not believe there are

disproportionate environmental justice impacts in implementing in the 

regional haze program. 

3.7 Sensitive 

Questions

3.8 Environmental 

Justice 

Considerations
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 10 of 25

The major categories of respondents directly affected during this ICR 

period of October 31, 2012 through October 15, 2015 include the states and 

FLMs. The states are developing implementation plans under 40 CFR 

51.308(g) and 40 CFR 51.309(d)(10) evaluating progress towards the 

reasonable progress goal for each mandatory Class I Federal area located 

within the state and in each mandatory Class I Federal area located outside 

the state which may be affected by emissions from within the state. Six 

states will be required to make additional revisions to their current regional 

haze plan to meet program requirements. Up to 12 states may, but are not 

required to, make minor revisions to their SIP to adopt the requirements of 

CSAPR as a BART alternative, to replace a FIP.

The FLMs will review the 5-year progress reports and provide comments to 

the states. The states are required to provide sufficient review time for the 

FLMs and explain how they address the FLMs comments in the 

documentation for their progress report.

The information required under this ICR renewal provides for a 

continuation of the process initiated with previous ICRs for the regional 

haze rule. In this stage of the process, the states are mainly focusing on

revising their SIPs to report on progress made towards reaching their long 

term visibility goals. For 34 states, the progress reports will be due during

the October 31, 2012 to October 30, 2015 ICR period. In response to the 

public comment received, EPA has adjusted the ICR to account for other

actions that states may undertake during the ICR period which include 

corrections or updates to initial regional haze SIPs, developing SIPs to 

replace any FIP, and any early efforts the states may undertake in 

preparation for the required regional haze SIP revision due by July 31, 

2018.

The information that is requested under this renewal period under the 

regional haze rule requirements includes:

Requirements for Periodic Report Describing Progress towards the 

Reasonable Progress Goals

 Description of status of control measures

 Summary of emission reductions

 Calculation of visibility conditions and changes

 Calculation of 5 year progress

 Assessment of contributing emissions 

 Assessment of reasonable progress goals 

 Review monitoring strategy and note changes

 Submit 5 year progress report

4 The Respondents and the Information Requested

4.1 Respondents/

4.2 Information

Requested
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 11 of 25

 Determine degree of visibility improvement

 Consult with FLMs

 Interstate consultation with states

The first progress report must be in the form of an implementation plan 

revision that complies with procedural requirements of 40 CFR 51.102 and 

40 CFR 51.103. The report is due five years after the initial regional haze 

plan submission.

Develop and Submit Substantive Revisions to Regional Haze SIPs to 

Remedy EPA Disapprovals (may include the following):

 Conduct BART determinations

 Identify reasonable progress goals 

 Develop long term strategies

 Submit monitoring strategy

Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas are required to develop and submit 

substantive SIP revisions by June 2014. 

Revised SIPs to Remedy EPA’s Limited/Partial Disapproval of State 

Plans

The EPA published a final rule on June 7, 2012 (77 FR 33642), revising 

rules that pertain to how states can meet specific requirements of the 

regional haze program. This final rule allows states participating in the 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule to use that program in place of sourcespecific BART for sulfur dioxide and/or nitrogen oxide emissions from 

power plants that are subject to the regional haze rule. The EPA also 

finalized limited disapprovals of regional haze SIPs that have been 

submitted by: Alabama, Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, 

Mississippi, Missouri, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, 

Virginia, and Texas. The EPA also finalized FIPs to replace reliance on 

CAIR with reliance on CSAPR in the regional haze SIPs of: Georgia, 

Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South 

Carolina, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia.

We assume that 12 states could elect to prepare and submit a SIP revision 

consisting of one paragraph to substitute a state plan in place of EPA’s FIP 

related to the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule as an alternative to BART. 

Two states (Alabama and North Carolina) will be required to submit minor 

SIP revisions by June 2014.

Early Efforts for the 2018 Regional Haze SIP
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 12 of 25

After the EPA’s action on the initial regional haze SIPs, the states will be 

shifting their focus to development of interim progress reports required by 

the regional haze rule and to assessing whether revisions to the SIPs will be 

needed in 2018. Although, the EPA believes that most states will be 

working on their 5 year progress reports during the period of this ICR some 

states may elect to begin developing data sets and analyses to support the 

regional haze SIP revision due July 31, 2018.
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 13 of 25

EPA. Each EPA regional office is responsible for reviewing and approving 

the SIPs and developing and promulgating FIPs when necessary. For this 

ICR renewal period, the EPA will primarily be reviewing the SIP revisions 

required under CFR 51.308(g) and 51.309(d)(10), which are the periodic 

progress reports. The ten EPA regional offices and the EPA headquarters 

offices will provide direction and facilitate resolution of major issues, and 

deliver data, tools, and training to the states as needed. Each regional office 

must address public comments before approving the SIPs or promulgating 

FIPs.

FLMs. The FLMs will be reviewing the 5-year progress report, the 

substantive regional haze SIP revisions, and offering comments to the 

states in fulfillment of the requirement under CFR 51.308 (i)(4) for the 

states to coordinate their regional haze efforts with the FLMs. 

This section discusses the development of burden estimates and their 

conversion into costs, which are separated into burden costs and capital and 

O&M costs. Capital and O&M costs display the cost of any new capital 

equipment the respondent may have to purchase solely for information 

collection, assimilation, and storage purposes. For example, if a source had 

to purchase a new mini-computer to store and manipulate data, that 

computer would be a cost of administration subject to reporting in the ICR. 

In addition, the latest guidance instructs the Agency to differentiate the 

burden associated with a source’s labor and that which it hires through 

outside contractors. To the extent a source contracts out for administrative 

purposes (e.g., employing consultants to perform visibility modeling), the 

burden associated with those contracted tasks are not a burden to the source 

- but they still remain a cost. The reader should read this section with the 

following considerations in mind:

 The Agency believes the time necessary to perform a task is 

independent of the origins of its labor. For example, if a source 

would employ 20 hours of burden to fully perform a function, then 

a contractor hired by the source would also take 20 hours to 

perform that same task. Furthermore, the Agency assumes no 

economies or diseconomies of scale. The linear combination of any

amount of contractor and source effort will also sum to 20 hours. 

Therefore, the burden estimates in this ICR act as an accurate 

assessment of the total burden to respondents.

 For some burden categories, the Agency believes the hours assigned 

to them will be divided between the source and outside contractors. 

For these categories, the Agency established a composite cost per 

hour by developing a weighted average of the source and contractor 

wages, with the weight defined by the percentage of total effort 

each burden source applied. Consequently, the cost developed in 

5 The Information Collected - Agency Activities, Collection Methodologies, and 

Information Management

5.2 Collection 

Methodology

and

Management

5.1 Agency

Activities
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 14 of 25

this ICR should be interpreted as an upper bound on the actual cost 

of administration by the source. The methodology for determining 

cost per hour can be found in greater detail in section 6.2, below.

 While this ICR renewal estimates burden to federal and state 

agencies, it does not include costs estimates to the industrial 

sources. This is because the effort for this ICR renewal period, 

October 31, 2012 through October 31, 2015 mainly involves 

preparation and review of the progress reports required under CFR 

51.308(g) and 51.309(d)(10) of the regional haze rule. Sources, for 

the most part, will not be involved in preparation of these reports.

The implementation plan revisions prepared by the states are periodic 

progress reports which are due five years after the state submits its 

comprehensive regional haze SIP. The plans must at a minimum include 

the following elements:

 A description of the status of all measures included in the regional 

haze implementation plan for achieving reasonable progress.

 A summary of the emissions reductions achieved throughout the 

state through implementation of the measures.

 An assessment of the following visibility conditions and changes 

for each mandatory Class 1 Federal area within the state with values 

for most impaired and least impaired days expressed in terms of 5-

year averages of the annual values: current visibility conditions for 

the most impaired and least impaired days; the difference between 

current visibility conditions for the most impaired and least 

impaired days and baseline visibility conditions; and the change in 

visibility impairment for the most impaired and least impaired days 

over the past 5 years.

 An analysis tracking the change over the past 5 years in emissions 

of pollutants contributing to visibility impairment from all sources 

and activities within the state.

 An assessment of any significant changes in anthropogenic 

emissions within or outside the state that have occurred over the 

past 5 years that have limited or impeded progress in reducing 

pollutant emissions and improving visibility.

 An assessment of whether the current regional haze implementation 

plan elements and strategies are sufficient to enable the state, or 

other states with mandatory Class 1 Federal areas affected by

emissions from the state, to meet all established reasonable progress 

goals.

 A review of the state’s visibility monitoring strategy and any

modifications to the strategy as necessary.

 Other elements, including reporting, record keeping, and other 

measures, necessary to assess and report on visibility.
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 15 of 25

The Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) requires regulatory agencies, upon 

regulatory action, to assess that action’s potential impact on small entities 

(businesses, governments, and small non-governmental organizations) and 

report the results of the assessments in (1) an Initial Regulatory Flexibility

Analysis (IRFA), (2) a Final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis (FRFA), and 

(3) a Certification. For ICR approval, the Agency must demonstrate that it 

"has taken all practicable steps to develop separate and simplified 

requirements for small businesses and other small entities" (5 CFR 

1320.6(h)). In addition, the agencies must assure through various 

mechanisms that small entities are given an opportunity to participate in the 

rulemaking process. 

The EPA determined that it was not necessary to prepare a regulatory

flexibility analysis in connection with the regional haze rule (July 6, 2005, 

70 FR 39104) because the rule did not have a significant economic impact 

on a substantial number of small entities. Similarly, this ICR renewal will 

not impose any direct requirements on small entities and will apply

primarily to states which are developing the SIP revisions.

States are required to submit their periodic progress reports, in the form of 

a SIP revision, five years after the initial regional haze plan submission.

Table 5.1 shows when these reports are due for each of the states. Note that 

some states have reports which are due outside of this renewal period, 

beyond October 31, 2012. Accordingly, we have estimated burden only for 

the 34 states with due dates that fall in 2015 or earlier.

Table 5.1 Due Dates for the 5 Year Progress Reports1

Initial Regional Haze 

Submittal Year

5 Year Progress Report 

Due Date

State

2007 2012 NC, SC

2008 2013 AL, AR, DE, KY, LA, 

MS, MO, TN, UT, 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo 

County NM2

2009 2014 CA, CT, KS, MN, NV, 

NJ, RI, TX, VT

 

1 The EPA is developing FIPs for Hawaii, Montana, and the Virgin Islands and due dates 

for the progress reports will be based on the dates of the FIP promulgation

2 Albuquerque/Bernalillo County in New Mexico must also submit a regional haze SIP to 

completely satisfy the requirements of section 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(II) of the CAA for the 

entire State of New Mexico under the New Mexico Air Quality Control Act (section 74-2-

4).

5.4 Collection

Schedule

5.3 Small Entity

Flexibility
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 16 of 25

2010 2015 District of Columbia, 

FL, GA, ID, ME, MI, 

NH, NY, ND, OK, OR, 

PA, VA

2011 2016 AK, AZ, CO, IN, NE, 

NM, OH, SD, WA, 

WY

2012 2017 MA, MD

Three states (Louisiana, Mississippi, and Arkansas) will be required to 

develop and submit substantive SIP revisions by June 2014. The EPA 

believes that Florida and Mississippi will develop and submit SIPs before 

the ICR renewal period.

Twelve states (Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, 

Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, and 

Virginia) may elect, but are not required, to replace EPA’s FIP with a 

minor SIP revision at any time. Two states (Alabama and North Carolina) 

will be required to submit minor SIP revisions by June 2014. For the 

purposes of this ICR, we assume that each of these states will choose to 

submit a minor SIP revision (consisting of one paragraph) within the three 

year period of this ICR renewal.
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 17 of 25

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 ways to comply with any previously applicable 

instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a 

collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the 

information. The burden estimate should be composed of (1) the total 

capital and start-up cost component annualized over its useful life; (2) the 

total operation, maintenance and purchases of services component. Each 

component should be divided into burden borne directly by the respondent 

and any services that are contracted out.

This ICR renewal will apply to 50 states the District of Columbia and the 

U.S. Virgin Islands which are primarily developing 5-year progress reports 

in the form of SIP revisions to satisfy the requirements of the regional haze 

rule. Table 5.1 above shows when these reports are due for each of the 

states and the estimated due date for the SIPs. The FLMs will review and 

comment on those plans. For this renewal period, the burden for industrial 

sources will be negligible as the reports are required from the states.

For three states (Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico) which submitted their 

regional haze SIPs under section 309 of the regional haze rule, there are 

also 5-year periodic reporting requirements that are essentially the same as 

the requirements under section 308(g). Table 6.1 summarizes the results for 

each of the major categories of respondents with details discussed in the 

narrative below.

We account for the requirement that three states (Louisiana, Mississippi,

and Arkansas) will need to submit a new substantive SIP to remedy EPA’s 

disapproval of specific elements of these SIPs.

We assume that 12 states could elect to prepare and submit a SIP revision 

consisting of one paragraph to substitute a state plan in place of EPA’s FIP 

related to the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule as an alternative to BART. 

Additionally, two states (Alabama and North Carolina) will be required to 

submit minor SIP revisions by June 2014.

Develop and Submit 5-Year Progress Reports as required under the 

Regional Haze Rule. Based on the elements that are required for the 

report, which are described in section 5.2 above, we believe that an 

estimate of 280 hours per state to complete the 5-year progress report is 

reasonable. Much of the analysis for the report will entail the states 

6 Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

6.1 Estimating 

Respondent 

Burden
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 18 of 25

assessing changes in their emission inventories for the reporting period and 

reporting on changes in visibility based on available monitoring data. This 

burden estimate does not include any hours for preparation and finalization 

of the emission inventories because it is assumed that the EPA will provide 

an approved inventory, with appropriate forward projections of future 

visibility conditions, which the states may use for their analyses. For each 

individual state, we believe that approximately 160 hours on average is 

needed to analyze, evaluate, and summarize changes in the inventory and 

monitoring data over the reporting period, and another 80 hours is 

sufficient to prepare the report in the form of a SIP revision. These 

estimates are based on informal conversations with state and the EPA’s

technical staff. Finally, we assumed that states would need approximately

40 additional hours to address and respond to any public comments 

received on its SIP revision.

We assumed the FLMs would spend 80 hours, on average, reviewing and 

formally commenting on each of the 5-year progress report SIP revisions.

Develop and Submit Substantive Revisions to Regional Haze SIPs to 

Remedy EPA Disapproval. Based on a review of the previous ICR we 

believe that an estimate of 300 hours per state to complete substantive 

revisions to the regional haze SIP is reasonable. Based on discussion with 

EPA and RPO staff, we believe that the majority of the SIP development 

effort will be complete by the time this collection period takes effect. 

We assume the FLMs will spend 80 hours, on average, reviewing and 

formally commenting on each of the substantive regional haze SIP 

revisions.

Develop and Submit Minor Revisions for Regional Haze SIPs to 

Replace EPA FIP. We assume that 12 states could elect to prepare and 

submit a SIP revision consisting of one paragraph to substitute a state plan 

in place of EPA’s FIP related to the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule as an 

alternative to BART. Two states (Alabama and North Carolina) will be 

required to submit minor SIP revisions by June 2014. Although the SIP 

may consist of one paragraph, states must submit the SIP to EPA after 

reasonable notice and public hearings. This SIP will not be reviewed by the 

FLMs. The EPA assumes that states would need no more than 21 hours to 

prepare and finalize the SIP including public notice and response to 

comments.

Early Efforts for the 2018 Regional Haze SIP. We assume that 50 states 

the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands may elect to begin 

developing information for the regional haze SIP required in 2018. The 
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 19 of 25

EPA estimates that states will use 50 hours per year beginning in late 2013

to develop the 2018 SIP.

Table 6.1. Estimated Respondent Burden to Implement Requirements

Task Element Hours/State Hours/Source FLM –

hours/state 

SIP

Year 

Incurred

Develop and submit 

§308(g) or 309(d)(10) 

Implementation Plan – 5-

year periodic reports

240 0 80 2012 - 2015

Develop and submit 

substantive revisions to the 

regional haze SIP

300 0 80 2012 - 2014

Develop and submit minor 

revisions adopting CSAPR 

as BART alternative.

21 0 0 2012 - 2015

Early efforts on 2018 SIP 50 0 0 2013 - 2015

This ICR uses the most recently available wage values with the wage rate 

methods established in the New Source Review (NSR) ICRs3. For this 

renewal period, the burden for industrial sources will be negligible as the 

reports are required from the states with review being done by the EPA and 

the FLMs. 

Consistent with methodologies for previous NSR ICRs, the labor rate used 

to calculate federal, state, and local respondents’ labor costs is 

approximated from the 2012 federal government pay schedule. Managerial 

rates are accounted for by multiplying the hourly rate by 9%; the clerical 

support rates are multiplied by 13%.4The hourly rate is $48.55, and the 

calculation is shown in Table 6.3

Table 6.3 Determination of Federal, State, and Local Wage Rates

Annual Salary of Technical Staff, GS 11 Step 3 (FY 12 Schedule)* $53,639.00

Annual Cost of Supervisory Staff, GS 13 Step 3 (FY 12 Schedule)* $76,452.00

Factor (1/11) 0.09

$6,880.68

Annual Cost of Support Staff, GS 6 Step 6 (FY 12 Schedule)*

Factor (1/8)

$35,672.00

0.13

$4,637.36

 

3

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 

INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR CHANGES TO PREVENTION OF 

SIGNIFICANT DETERIORATION AND NONATTAINMENT NEW SOURCE REVIEW: 

EMISSIONS TEST FOR ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, August 2006, p. 20

4

Ibid.

6.2 Estimating 

Respondent Costs
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 20 of 25

Annual Applicable Salary of Technical Staff $65,157.04

Benefits (at 16%) $10,425.13

Sick Leave / Vacation (at 10%) $6,515.70

General Overhead (at 29%) $18,895.54

Total Cost Per FTE $100,993.41

Total Hourly Cost (Total Per FTE divided by 2,080 hours per year) $48.55

* http://www.opm.gov/oca/12tables/html/gs.asp February 2012

Since the purchase of capital equipment is believed to be an insignificant 

factor in meeting the requirements associated with this ICR renewal, the 

EPA assumes the operation, maintenance, or services are negligible Most 

of the data and other guidance for estimating emissions and visibility

impacts are available in electronic form and any equipment needed to 

respond to requests will be part of the respondent’s operating inventory.

Typically annualized capital cost would be derived from a discounted net 

present value of the stream of costs that would occur over the life of the 

activity, or the ICR, whichever is shorter. However we do not anticipate 

these types of expenses will be incurred during this clearance period. 

For this ICR, we have assumed the following number of offices will be 

involved in implementing the Regional Haze requirements.

EPA Regional Offices. We assume that all 10 EPA Regional Offices will 

be responsible for reviewing implementation plans from the states in their

jurisdiction, responding to public comments, and preparing federal register

notices in taking final action on the SIPs. 

EPA Headquarters. The EPA Headquarters staff will provide oversight 

and review of the submittals.

Table 6.4 presents our estimate of the Agency burden in the ICR clearance 

period which is the average to review one state plan. In developing these 

estimates, we considered previous estimates for similar activities, 

particularly related to the time necessary to review SIPs and prepare federal 

register notices and respond to public comments. The SIP revisions for this 

renewal period are anticipated to be much abbreviated compared to the 

comprehensive regional haze SIP submittals which are required to be 

submitted every 10 years. This results in a reduced burden relative to the 

previous ICR renewals as there are no modeling, emission inventory, or 

control strategy analyses due during the 2012 – 2015 collection period.

Summing the total hours from Table 6.4 (520 hours) and multiplying by 37

total plans yields a total estimate of 19,240 hours. Using the calculated

labor rate of $48.55/hr, from Table 6.3, multiplied by the 19,240 hours 

6.2.3 Annualized

Capital Costs

6.3 Estimating 

Agency Burden 

and Cost
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 21 of 25

gives an estimated cost of $934,102, which when averaged over the 3 year 

collection period is about $311,367 per year as the Agency’s burden 

estimate.

Table 6.4. Estimated Agency Burden to Implement Requirements

Task Element Hours/EPA Regional 

Office

Hours/EPA

Headquarters

Year Incurred

Review Periodic Progress 

Reports from States

160 80 2012 - 2015

Respond to Public 

Comments and Prepare 

Federal Register Notices

120 40 2012 – 2015

Review substantive 

revisions to the regional 

haze SIP

100 20 2012 - 2014

TOTAL 380 140

For the purpose of estimating burden in this ICR, the respondent universe is 

determined as follows.

States. We assume that 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. 

Virgin Islands may elect to begin developing information for the regional 

haze SIP required in 2018. We assume that 34 states, including 

Albuquerque/Bernalillo County in New Mexico, will be affected by the 

regional haze rule 5-year progress reporting requirements. We assume that 

12 states could prepare and submit a SIP revision consisting of one 

paragraph to substitute a state plan in place of EPA’s FIP related to the 

Cross-State Air Pollution Rule as an alternative to BART. We assume that 

three states will need to submit a new substantive SIP to remedy EPA’s 

disapproval of specific elements of these SIPs. Additionally, two states 

submit minor SIP revisions by June 2014.

Tribes. No tribes have elected to develop and implement the regional haze 

plan.

Industry. The sole regional haze requirement for this reporting period is 

for the states to submit periodic progress reports, and thus there is no 

anticipated burden for industrial sources.

FLMs. The burden hours for FLMs are estimated for the group as a whole, 

and are estimated to be 80 hours for each SIP revision. For the 34 5-year 

progress report SIPs, the hours would be 2,720. Multiplying by the labor 

rate of $48.55/hr equates to a cost of $132,056, or $44,019 per year for 

each of the 3 years. For the 3 substantive regional haze SIP revisions, the 

hours will be 240. Multiplying by the labor rate of $48.55/hr equates to a 

cost of $11,652, or $5,826 per year for each of the 2 years.

6.4 Estimating the 

Respondent 

Universe
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 22 of 25

Tables 6.6 summarizes the total annual respondent burden to prepare and 

submit: the 5-year progress reports, substantive revisions to state SIPs to 

remedy EPA’s disapproval of regional haze plans, and minor revisions to 

state SIPs to adopt the requirements of CSAPR as a BART alternative, thus 

replacing EPA’s FIP. The total respondent burden is estimated to be 6,048

hours per year and $293,631 per year. As described in section 6.2.2 and 

6.2.3, there are no operation and maintenance costs or capital costs 

associated with activities to be conducted during this 3-year clearance 

period. The total number of respondents is 53 (52 state agencies and 1 

group of FLMs.)

6.5 Bottom Line 

Burden and Cost
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 23 of 25

Table 6.6 Estimated Annual Respondent Burden to Implement 

Requirements

Task Element

States FLMs

Average Annual 

Hours

Average 

Annual Cost 

($)

Average 

Annual Hours

Average 

Annual Cost 

($)

Develop and 

submit §308(g) or 

309(d)(10) 

Implementation 

Plan – 5-year 

periodic reports

3,173

Calculation:

(280 hours per 

plan x 34 plans)/3

years=

3,173 hr/yr

154,049

Calculation:

(3,173 hrs per 

yr x labor rate 

of $48.55)

0 0

Review and 

Comment on 

Reports

0 0 907

Calculation:

(80 hours per 

plan x 34 

plans)/3 years=

907 hr/yr

44,035

Calculation:

(907 hrs per yr 

x labor rate of 

$48.55)

Develop and 

submit §51.308

State 

Implementation 

Plan

450

Calculation:

(300 hours per 

plan x 3 plans)/2 

years=

3,173 hr/yr

21,848

(4500 hrs per yr 

x labor rate of 

$48.55)

0 0

Review and 

Comment on 

resubmitted SIPs

0 0 120

Calculation:

(80 hours per 

plan x 3

plans)/2 years=

907 hr/yr

5,826

Calculation:

(120 hrs per yr 

x labor rate of 

$48.55)

Submit minor SIP 

revision adopting 

CSAPR as BART 

alternative.

98

Calculation:

(21 hours per plan 

x 14 plans)/3 

years=

80 hr/yr

4,758 

(98 hrs per yr x 

labor rate of 

$48.55)

0 0

Early effort on 

2018 SIP

1,300

Calculation:

(50 hours per plan 

x 52

plans)/2years=

1,325 hr/yr

63,115

(1,325 hrs per 

yr x labor rate 

of $48.55)

0 0

Total Burden by

Respondent

5,021 243,770 1,027 49,861

Total for 

Respondent 

Universe

6,048 hours; $293,631
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 24 of 25

The burden estimates for this ICR renewal period cover different task 

elements than those for the previous renewal (1813.07). These differences 

reflect the requirements of the final regional haze rule with respect to the 

scheduled events and activities in the implementation process. The last 

collection request anticipated the program progressing from the planning 

stages to implementation. The change in burden reflects changes in labor 

rates, changes in the activities conducted due to the normal progression of 

the program, and the fact that the aggregate initial regional haze SIPs and 

best available retrofit technology (BART) determinations will be acted on 

by the EPA by November 2012 and the states will be evaluating reasonable 

progress and implementation stages for the goals in those SIPs. 

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of 

information is estimated to average 114 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; 

adjusting the existing ways to comply with any previously applicable 

instructions and requirements; training personnel to be able to respond to a 

collection of information; searching data sources; completing and 

reviewing the collection of information; and transmitting or otherwise 

disclosing the information. 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. The OMB control numbers 

for the EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 

15.

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

provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing 

respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection 

techniques, the EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under 

Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0162, that is available for public 

viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, in the 

EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution 

Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading 

Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, 

excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is 

(202) 566-1744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket 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 

6.6 Reasons for 

Change in 

Burden

6.7 Burden 

Statement
INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR EPA ICR 

RENEWAL OF THE ICR FOR THE REGIONAL HAZE RULE 

Page 25 of 25

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, N.W., Washington D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer 

for EPA. Please include EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2003-0162

and OMB Control Number 2060-0421 in any correspondence.