1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT FOR

EPA INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST NUMBER 2130.04

TRANSPORTATION CONFORMITY DETERMINATIONS FOR FEDERALLY

FUNDED AND APPROVED TRANSPORTATION PLANS, PROGRAMS AND

PROJECTS

February 7 , 20112 

### Table of Contents

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLEC TION

................................ ........ 3

1(a) Title of the Information Collection

................................ ................................ ...................... 3

1(b) Short Characterization/Abstract

................................ ................................ ........................... 3

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

................................ ............................... 4

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

................................ ................................ ....................... 4

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

................................ ................................ ....................... 5

3. NON

- DUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA 5

3(a) Non

- Duplication

................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 5

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

................................ ................. 6

3(c) Consultations

................................ ................................ ................................ ........................ 6

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

................................ ................................ ..................... 7

3(e) General Guidelines

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 8

3(f) Confidentiality

................................ ................................ ................................ ..................... 8

3(g) Sensitive Questions

................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 8

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

................................ . 8

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

.................. 8

4(b) Information Requested

................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 9

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED

– AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

................................ .................. 12

5(a) Agency Activities

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 12

5(b) Colle ction Methodology and Management

................................ ................................ ........ 13

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 13

5(d) Collection Schedule

................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 13

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

........................... 13

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

................................ ................. 13

6(b) Estimating State and Local Respondent Costs

................................ ................................ ... 29

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs

................................ ................................ ............... 30

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

................................ ... 39

6(e) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost Tables

................................ ................................ ..... 39

6(f) Reasons for Change in Burden

................................ ................................ .......................... 41

6(g) Burden Statement

................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 42

Appendix A: Conformity

- Related Research Considered for This ICR

................................ ........ 433 

### 1. **IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION**

**1 (a)**  **Title of the Information Collection**

This information collection request (ICR) is entitled "Transportation Conformity Determinations for Federally Funded and Approved Transportation Plans, Programs and Projects,” ICR number 2130.04. This ICR includes transportation conformity burden anticipated for calendar year s 2011

- 2014.



### 1(b) **Short Characterization/Abstract**

Transportation conformity is required under Clean Air Act section 176(c) [42 U.S.C. 7506(c)] to ensure that federally supported transportation activities are consistent with (“conform to”) the purpose of the state air quality implementation plan (SIP). Transportation activities include transportation plans

, transportation improvement pro grams (TIPs), and federally funded or approved highway or transit projects. Conformity to the purpose of the SIP means that transportation activities will not cause new air quality violations, worsen existing violations, or delay timely attainment of the relevant national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS or “standards”).

Transportation conformity applies under EPA’s conformity regulations at 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A, to areas that are designated nonattainment, and those re

- designated to attainment after 1990 (“maintenance areas” with plans developed under Clean Air Act section 175A) for the following transportation

- related criteria pollutants: ozone, particulate matter (PM 2.5 and PM 10 ), carbon monoxide (CO), and nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ).

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published the original transportation conformity rule on November 24, 1993 (58 FR 62188), and subsequently published several revisions. EPA develops the conformity regulations in coordination with the Federal High way Administration (FHWA) and Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

Transportation conformity determinations are required before federal approval or funding is given to certain types of transportation planning documents as well as non

- exempt highway

an d transit projects. 1 In metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, conformity determinations are required for transportation plan and TIP updates and amendments. A metropolitan transportation plan is at least a 20

- year planning document that desc ribes the policies, strategies and facilities that are proposed by state and local decision

- makers for future implementation in a metropolitan area. The TIP prioritizes and programs capital highway and

1 Projects that are exempt from all or certain conformity requirements include projects listed in 40 CFR 93.126 (e.g., safety projects, maintenance of current roads), projects that do not impact regional emissions in 40 CFR 93.127, and traffic signal synchro nization projects listed

in 40 CFR 93.128.4 transit projects for implementation in a metropolitan area over a four

- year period, consistent with the transportation plan.

To meet the Clean Air Act’s conformity requirements, once a SIP is established for a given pollutant and NAAQS, projected regional emissions from a nonattainment or maintenance

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

for on

- road mobile sources in the area’s SIP. Prior to EPA finding a budget adequate 2 or approving a SIP, the conformity rule provides emissions tests that ensure t hat Clean Air Act requirements are met in the interim.

EPA considered the following in developing this ICR:

• B urden estimates for transportation conformity determinations in current nonattainment

and maintenance areas for the ozo ne, PM 2.5, PM 10 , CO, and NO 2 NAAQS ;

• F ederal burden associated with EPA’s adequacy review process for submitted SIP budgets that are to be used in conformity determinations ;

• New start

- up burden associated with learning to perform quantitative hot

- spot analyses;

• New burden asso ciated with the transition from MOBILE6.2 to MOVES ;

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

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

isolated rural areas.

This ICR does not include burden associated with the general development of transportation planning and air quality planning documents for meeting other federal requirements. There are other ICRs that capture associated burdens for these additional non

conformity planning requirements a nd are prepared by other organizations within EPA and DOT.



### 2. **NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION**

**2 (a)**  **Need/Authority for the Collection**

The Clean Air Act gives EPA the statutory authority to establish the criteria and procedures for determining whether transportation activities conform to the SIP. EPA

2 Per the transportation conformity rule, submitted SIP budgets are appropriate to use prior to EPA’s approval of the SIP when EPA declares them adequate for transportation conformity purposes (40 CFR 93.118(e) and (f))

.5 promulgated the transportation conformity regulations under the authority of Clean Air A ct section 176(c). The federal government needs information collected under these regulations to ensure that metropolitan planning organization (MPO) 3 and federal transportation actions are consistent with state air quality goals.



### 2(b) **Practical Utility/U sers of the Data** 

Federal, state, and local transportation agencies use information collected under the conformity regulation to ensure that federally funded or approved transportation actions conform to SIPs for attaining and maintaining clean air. Speci fically, transportation agencies use information they collect to demonstrate that:

• Regional emissions and/or project

- level analysis requirements are satisfied;

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

manner;

• State, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies consult and resolve issues related to conformity determinations; and,

• Public comments are considered and responses to comments are documented prior to conformity actions.



### 3. **NON**

**- DUPLICATIO**  **N, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION**

**CRITERIA**

**3(a) Non** 

**- Duplication** 

EPA wrote the transportation conformity regulation and subsequent revisions, in coordination with FHWA and FTA, to avoid duplicating the collection efforts required by other regulatory programs. The conformity regulation works with existing transportation and air quality planning requirements from the Clean Air Act, Title 23 of United States Code and other federal highway laws, Federal Transit Laws, and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

The conformity regulation relies on but does not duplicate DOT’s transportation planning regulations for developing transportation plans, TIPs, and projects. Many nonattainment and maintenance areas can rely on travel, economic, or other forecasts that are already available for other planning purposes to complete regional conformity analyses. In addition, the conformity

3 MPO means the policy board of an organization created and designated to carry out the metropolitan transportation planning process.6 regulation does not create any new fiscal constraint or public participation requirements. The regulation simply relies upon existing transportation planning requirements.

Localized air quality analyses (or “hot

- spot” analyses) are generated for certain project

level conformity determinations for certain criteria pollutants. When project

- level analyses are required fo r both conformity approvals and NEPA, project sponsors may rely on the same analysis, assuming that it meets all necessary air quality requirements. Finally, although transportation actions are compared to SIP budgets for conformity determinations when th ey are available, SIPs are required to be submitted for other Clean Air Act purposes, and are not required by the conformity provisions.



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

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

non

- rule related ICR must solicit public comments for a 60

- day period prior to submitting the ICR to OMB. These comments, which are used partly to determine realistic burde n estimates for respondents, must be considered when completing the final Supporting Statement that is

submitted to OMB.

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

the Federal Register under Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- O AR

- 2007

- 0269

. 4



### 3(c) **Consultations**

To prepare this ICR, EPA relied upon the previous ICR for information on the number of hours required to complete the following:

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

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

• Performing regional and hot

- spot analyses;

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

• Conducting other miscellaneous activities (e.g., reviewing conformity docum ents, responding to conformity

- related public comments, etc.); and,

• Training new state and local government staff to perform conformity

- related duties (for

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

t he original docket number and date from the previous ICR continue to be used. For this renewal, a new Phase of the original docket number has been opened.7 those nonattainment areas without previous conformity experience).

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

Individuals/staff consulted:

• Cecilia Ho, (202) 366

- 9862, Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration; and,

• Andrea Martin, (202) 366

- 3040, Department of Transportati on, Federal Transit Administration, Off ice of Planning and Environment.

EPA also requested information from EPA Regional Offices.

Finally, EPA relied upon existing research completed on the transportation conformity process that indicated the number of hours associated with doing conformity determinations in

isolated rural areas

. 5 See Appendix A

– Conformity R elated Research Considered for T his ICR.



### 3(d) **Effects of Less Frequent Collection**

The Clean Air Act requires conformity for transportation pl ans and TIPs to be determined every four years in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. This statutory requirement is typically satisfied when an area updates its long

- range transportation plan to meet

the four

- year planning requirement for DO T’s transportation planning regulations. The Clean Air Act and DOT’s transportation planning regulations require TIPs to be updated every four years, and as a result, conformity determinations are also done for TIPs every four years. 6 The

Clean Air Act a lso requires conformity for transportation plans and TIPs within two years of a new SIP motor vehicle emission budget being established

. 7

Conformity determinations are required in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas only when a new project needs federal funding or approval. The Clean Air Act’s minimum

four

- year frequency requirement for transportation plans and TIPs and two y ear SIP

- related conformity requirements do not apply in these areas. Therefore, these areas are not required to demonstrate conformity on a regular basis as in metropolitan areas. Conformity determinations

5 Isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas are areas that do not contain or are

not part o f any metropolitan planning areas as designated under the transportation planning regulations. Isolated rural areas do not have Federally required metropolitan transportation plans or TIPs and do not have projects that are part of the emissions analysis o f any MPO’s metropolitan transportation plan or TIP. Projects in such areas are instead included in statewide transportation improvement programs. These areas are not donut areas (40 CFR 93.101)

. 6 Additional plan/TIP amendments are completed on a volunt ary basis beyond the required plan/TIP update cycles. These are not addressed in this ICR.

7 EPA assumed that conformity determinations occur infrequently for this scenario and

therefore no burden was included in this ICR.8 before project approvals are made in isolated r ural areas and are necessary to meet the goals of

the Clean Air Act.

Less frequent collection was provided for isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas, as these areas do not have as many large transportation projects as metropolitan areas.

Ho wever, because of the statutory language, the periodic collection of information for metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas cannot be reduced, as these minimum periodic reporting requirements were established to achieve and maintain clean air.



### 3 **(e) General Guidelines** 

This ICR adheres to the guidelines stated in the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act, OMB’s implementing regulations, and EPA’s Information Collection Request Handbook. None

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

OMB in 5 CFR 1320.5.



### 3(f) **Confidentiality**

Respondents for the transportation conformity regulation do not submit confidential information for approval. All info rmation collected and submitted in a conformity determination is already publicly available, pursuant to 40 CFR 93.105(e) of the conformity regulation and 23 CFR 450.316(a) of the transportation planning regulations.



### 3(g) **Sensitive Questions**

No questions of a sensitive nature are included in any of the information collection requirements for the transportation conformity regulation. Examples of sensitive information include information concerning sexuality or religious beliefs.



### 4. **THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED** 

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

In the transportation conformity process, the respondent is either a state or local agency. Depending upon the type of conformity determination an d the type of area involved, the state or local agency may vary. For instance, in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, MPOs are the primary local respondent for transportation plan and TIP conformity

determinations. Clean Air Act section 176 (c)(1) states that “ ... No metropolitan planning organization designated under section 134 of Title 23, shall give its approval to any project, program, or plan which does not conform to an implementation plan approved or promulgated9 under section 7410 of this title....”

In metropolitan areas, each MPO must formally make a conformity determination on its transportation plan and TIP prior to submitting them to DOT for an independent review and a conformity determination. State or local air agencies also p rovide technical assistance in supplying air quality data or performing emissions factor modeling for transportation plan and TIP regional conformity analyses.

State and local respondents for conformity determinations for projects within metropolitan are as can vary depending upon who the project sponsor is. A project sponsor within a metropolitan area may be the state department of transportation, local transit agency, or other state or local agency, depending upon the individual project. Developing con formity determinations for projects outside metropolitan boundaries is also typically the responsibility of the project sponsor, which is usually the state department of transportation.

The transportation conformity rule also requires that state, local a nd federal transportation and air quality agencies develop interagency consultation procedures for discussing and resolving issues related to conformity determinations. Such agencies include the MPO, local transit agency, state department of transportatio n, state and local air agencies, EPA, FHWA, and FTA. Federal respondents for conformity determinations are discussed further in Section 5 of

this ICR.

The following is a representative list of North American Industry Classification System NAICS codes for the government agencies that would be affected by the transportation conformity regulation:

485111 Mixed Mode Transit System

485210 Interurban and Rural Bus Transportation

488490 Other Support Activities for Road Transportation

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

925120 Administration of Urban Planning and Community and Rural Development

926120 Regula tion and Administration of Transportation Programs



### 4(b) **Information Requested**

(i) Data Items, Including Record Keeping Requirements

Section 4(b)( ii) describes the information requested for and roles conducted by state and local respondents for conformity determinations. Some of the information used in conformity determinations is also used for other transportation and air quality planning purposes . Specific roles of state and local agencies will vary from area to area.

(ii) Respondent Activities10 Metropolitan Planning Organizations

MPOs are the lead agency in making transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations in metropolitan nonatt ainment and maintenance areas. The level of information collection requirements for completing such determinations will vary with the size of the area and complexity of the air quality problem. The following list includes MPO activities for transportatio n plan and TIP conformity determinations:

• Conduct regional emissions analyses using the latest planning assumptions and models to determine whether the emissions from the proposed transportation system are consistent with state air quality goals;

• Ensure timely implementation of TCMs in approved SIPs;

• Consult with other state, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies throughout the conformity process;

• Circulate draft plan/TIP conformity determinations for interagency review and public comment and respond to any comments on plan/TIP conformity determinations; and,

• Provide travel activity or other data for hot

- spot analyses.

State Departments of Transportation

State departments of transportation are typically the lead agency in devel oping conformity determinations for projects in isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas. They can also be the lead agency for project

- level conformity determinations in metropolitan areas. The following list includes state transportation activi ties for conformity determinations:

• Assist the MPOs or conduct the regional emissions analyses for the MPO, using the latest assumptions and models to determine whether the emissions from the proposed transportation system change is consistent with state air quality goals;

• Conduct regional emissions analyses on projects in isolated rural areas and donut areas 8
using the latest assumptions and models to determine whether the emissions from the proposed transportation system change is consistent with state air quality goals;

• Ensure timely implementation of TCMs in approved SIPs;

• Conduct hot

- spot analyses for projects when required;

8 Donut a reas are geographic are as outside a metropolitan planning area boundary, but inside the boundary of a nonattainment or maintenance area that contains any part of a metropolitan area(s). These areas are not isolated rural nonattainment and maintenance areas (40 CFR 93.101).11 • Comment on draft plan and TIP conformity determinations;

• Consult with other state, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies throughout the conformity process; and

• Circulate draft project conformity determinations for interagency review and public comment and respond to any comments as appropriate.

Local Transit Agencies

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

- level conformity determinations for transit projects in metropolitan areas. The following list includes local transit agency activities for project

- level conformity

determinations:

• Co nduct hot

- spot analyses for transit projects when required;

• Comment on draft plan and TIP conformity determinations;

• Consult with other state, local, and federal transportation and air quality agencies throughout the conformity process; and,

• Circulate d raft project conformity determinations for interagency review and public comment and respond to any comments as appropriate.

State and Local Air Quality Agencies

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

age ncies in the development of conformity determinations. The following list includes possible state and local air agency activities for conformity determinations:

• Provide air quality data or perform emissions factor modeling for regional emissions analyses for transportation plans and TIPs in metropolitan areas and projects in isolated rural areas;

• Provide similar assistance for hot

- spot analyses for projects as a ppropriate;

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

• Comment on draft conformity determinations.12 

### 5. **THE INFORMATION COLLECTED**

**– AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION** 

**M ETHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT** 

**5(a) Age**  **ncy Activities**

(i) FHWA and FTA Activities

The FHWA Division Office and the FTA Regional Office are involved in several aspects of the transportation conformity process:

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

• Reviewing the relevant materials that are submitted to support the conformity determinations including the travel, emissions, or air quality modeling performed to support a conformity determination and comments submitted by the EPA Regional Office; and

,

• Issuing a letter to the appropriate MPO, state department of transportation, or other project sponsor indicating that they have made a conformity determination.

FHWA and FTA field offices will also participate in the interagency consultation process for nonattainment and maintenance areas. The interagency consultation process is used to discuss and resolve issues during the development of transportation plan, TIP, and project conformity determinations. The frequency of meetings varies from area to area . FHWA Resource Centers and FHWA/FTA Headquarters provide technical assistance as needed.

(ii) EPA Activities

The EPA Headquarters and Regional Offices are involved in several aspects of the transportation conformity process:

• Participating in the interagency consultation process in nonattainment and maintenance

areas;

• Reviewing and commenting on conformity determinations for transportation plans, TIPs and projects, including the travel, emissions, or air quality modeling per formed to support a conformity determination;

• Making adequacy findings for submitted SIP motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA’s adequacy review is separate from EPA’s review of the S IP for completeness or approval; and,

• EPA Headquarters provide technic al assistance as needed.13 

### 5(b) **Collection Methodology and Management**

Federal agencies review conformity determinations in accordance with the Clean Air Act Section 176(c) and 40 CFR Part 93, Subpart A. The interagency consultation process is

used to disc uss any outstanding issues on the accuracy or quality of data used in conformity analyses and determinations. The general public reviews MPO conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs, and federal agencies review MPO responses to these co mments. The federal agencies will need to maintain records of their actions, in accordance with other federal record retention requirements. No special machines or processing technologies are employed in reviewing conformity determinations.



### 5(c) **Small Entity Flexibility** 

A regulatory flexibility analysis is not required because the rule does not affect a significant number of small entities. However, the rule does affect some isolated rural

nonattainment and maintenance areas which are considered to be small entities because they have populations less than 50,000. EPA has taken steps in the conformity rule to reduce the burden placed on these areas. For example, isolated rural areas are required to demonstrate conformity only when they have a new no n

- exempt federally funded or approved highway or transit project. In contrast, metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas are required to demonstrate conformity at least every four years.



### 5(d) **Collection Schedule**

The information collections descri bed in this ICR must be completed before a transportation plan, TIP or project conformity determination is made. DOT’s planning regulations require that transportation plans and TIPs be updated at least every four years, and the Clean Air Act, requires th at a conformity determination on the transportation plan and TIP in metropolitan areas be completed at least every four years

. 9 Conformity determinations on projects in metropolitan and isolated rural areas are required on an as

- needed basis, as previously described in Section 4, The Respondents and the Information Requested.



### 6. **ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION**

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

(i) Overview

9 Th ese are minimum requirements are reflected in the ICR, additional plan/TIP amendments that are done on a voluntary basis beyond the required plan/TIP update cycles are

not addressed in this ICR.14 This section of the ICR includes background information on the number of nonattainment and maintenance areas that are subject to transportation conformity regulations. For these areas, EPA has estimated potential burden for the following:

• Transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations for nonattainment an d maintenance areas;

• Project

- level conformity determinations for nonattainment and maintenance areas, including new burden associated with quantitative (instead of qualitative) PM hot

- spot analyses;

• New start

- up burden associated with technical analyses for quantitative PM and CO hot

spot analyses; and,

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

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

amount of burden to the above categories so they will apply during that time period. Further specifics are addressed as each are discussed below. Please refer to section 6(b) for additional assumptions used in estimating respondent cost.

EPA proposed a more stringent new ozone NAAQS on Janua ry 19, 2010 (75 FR 2938), however a decision on the revised NAAQS, designations, and implementation rule was not final when this ICR was prepared and therefore EPA has not included any burden with conformity determinations for areas designated nonattainmen t for new ozone NAAQS at this time.

Designations for the 2010 1

- hour NO 2 NAAQS have not been made yet and no burden is included in this ICR renewal for conformity determinations for this NAAQS.

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

Maintenance Areas

Background on Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

As stated earlier, this ICR includes the burden associated with implementing conformity requirements with respect to n onattainment and maintenance areas for transportation

- related criteria pollutants: ozone, CO, PM 10 , PM 2.5 , and NO 2 . The following table illustrates the number of areas currently subject to transportation conformity requirements, using data from EPA’s

Gree n Book for the number of nonattainment and maintenance areas: 10

10 http://www.epa.gov/air/oaqps/greenbk/index.html15 Table 1 : Number of A reas Subject to Transportation Conformity Requirements

Pollutant/NAAQS Number of Metropolitan

Nonattainment/Maintenance

Areas Number of Isolated Rural

Nonattainment/Maintenance

Areas

1997 ozone 11 91 22

CO 76 2

PM 10 50 38

1997 PM 2.5 12 38 1

2006 PM 2.5 13 29 2

NO 2 14 1 0

This ICR reflects the burden associated with determining conformity for all of these pollutants /NAAQS ; however, EPA’s estimates reflect efficiencies realized when metropolitan areas are nonattainment or maintenance for two or more pollutants/NAAQS since there is often an overlap of time spent in consultation, regional emissions analysis and other miscella neous activities for these areas in determining conformity for two or more pollutants.

As discussed further below, EPA also has identified the number of MPOs that are subject to transportation conformity for one or more pollutants/NAAQS, since many

me tropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas have more than one MPO (and consequently, more than one transportation plan or TIP conformity determination). The number of MPOs estimated in the following tables is based upon information collected from EPA Regional

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

11 The ozone areas referred to in this row were designated nonattainment for the 1997 ozone NAAQS on April 30, 2004 (69 FR 23858).

12 The PM 2.5 areas referred to in this row were designated nonattainment for the 1997

PM 2.5 air quality standards on January 5 , 2005 (70 FR 944).

13 The PM 2.5 areas referred to in this row were designated nonattainment for the 2006

PM 2.5 air quality standard on November 13, 2009 (74 FR 58688).

14 This entry is for the annual NO 2 NAAQS. Designations for the 2010 1

- hour NO 2 NAAQ S have not been made and will not affect the burden estimates for this ICR.

15 Federal R egister Vol. 67, No. 84, May 1, 2002, Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Qualifying Urban Areas for Census 2000 and Federal Register Vol. 67, No. 130, July 8, 2002, Department of Transportation , Federal Transit Administration/Federal Highway Administration Designation of Transportation Management Areas.16 Finally, EPA assumes that the conformity resource burden will differ among:

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

• Smaller metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas (urbanized area populations between 50,000

- 200,000); and,

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

Since conformity requirements, complexity of air quality issues an d geographic size can vary depending on an area’s population, number of MPOs, and number of pollutants involved, EPA believes it is appropriate to account for these differences in calculating the conformity

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

included in the MPO burden estimates.

Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and

Maintenance Areas

EPA is relying on information from several sources for this ICR’s estimated state and local burden hours for conformity determinations:

• First, as described in Section 3(c), EPA requested burden information from EPA and DOT

field offices that regularly w ork with state and local organizations responsible for doing conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs ;

• Second, EPA has reviewed the conformity burden hour estimates for previous ICRs for the transportation conformity program and the b urden hours assumed in DOT’s ICR for the transportation planning regulations; and,

• Finally, EPA reviewed existing conformity research studies for conformity burden in

current rural nonattainment and maintenance areas. These research studies are listed in Appendix A of this ICR.

The following paragraphs describe estimated state and local burden hours for conformity determinations in experienced metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. The ICR assumes that all conformity determination work is completed by state and local employees, although in practice some work may be completed by consultants. EPA again notes that transportation plan and TIP burden hour estimates are based on demonstrating conformity for 4

- year transportation plan and TIP upd ates as required by statute and regulation, rather than more frequent, plan and TIP revisions or amendments which are not required by the Act. This ICR captures the burden associated with meeting the minimum transportation conformity requirements.17 EPA has calculated the burden associated with transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations by considering the number of MPOs that are subject to conformity, the size of these MPOs, and the number of pollutants that apply. To estimate burden hours t ha t MPOs

incur to determine conformi ty for just one pollutant/NAAQS, EPA and DOT field offices were asked for estimated state and local respondent burden for the various tasks involved in a transportation plan or TIP conformity determination. For burden hour s associated with each additional pollutant, EPA relied on data from ICR 2130.03 for incremental burden hours associated with performing transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations for each additional pollutant /NAAQS, which was based on federal s urvey responses.

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

- related activities. This ICR does not include burden for the general development of transportation plans, TIPs, projects, or motor vehicl e emissions budgets, since these documents are developed to meet other requirements. EPA is assuming that some data collection for transportation planning or SIP purposes could also be used in conformity without additional conformity

- related burden.

The following tables illustrate the burden hours and cost associated with meeting the conformity requirements for a transportation plan and TIP update in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas that are designated for one or more pollutants/NAAQS . These MPOs and metropolitan areas have experience with the conformity process, have established interagency consultation procedures and have developed models for conducting plan and TIP conformity determinations.

While transportation plan and T IP updates are now able to be done with the same frequency (at least every 4 years), EPA estimates that it is only those MPOs serving smaller populations (50,000

- 200,000 populations) which will perform conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs at the same time, thus leading to efficiencies in burden hours and cost. In contrast, MPOs in larger areas may chose not to align transportation plan and TIP update conformity determinations as regularly, since these areas are expected to have more complex transportation planning considerations.

Therefore, for purposes of this analysis, EPA assumes that conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs will always occur at different times in large metropolitan areas ( Tables 2 through 5) and that conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs will occur at the same time in small metropolitan areas (see Table s 6 and 7).

The burden hours for consultation, regional emissions analyses, and project level conformity determination s have been increased over the last ICR to account for the addition al

burden with the release of EPA’s new emissions model, MOVES

, in December of 2009. 16 The

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

ICR by approximately 10% and rounded to the nearest $ 5 and $10 amounts.

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

more information.18 Table 2: State and Local Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan Conformity Determination by MPO

– Population of 200,000 or More

MPO Demonstrating Conformity For Consultation Regional

Emissions Analysis 17 Other Activities Total

Burden

Hours

One Pollutant/NAAQS 50 310 45 405

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 65 415 60 540

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 8 0 510 75 66 5

Table 3: State and Local Annual Cost Transportation Plan Conformity Determinations by MPO

– Population of 200,000 or More

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Burden

Hours No. of

MPOs Frequency

of Action Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost

Per

Hour Total

Annual

Cost

One Pollutant/NAAQS 405 40 4 years 4,050 $58.81 18 $ 238,181

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 540 31 4 years 4,185 $ 58.81 $ 246,120

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 66 5 40 4 years 6,650 $ 58.81 $ 391,086

Total for All Transportation Plan Actions: 14,885 hours /year x $ 58.81 /hour = $ 87 5,387 /year

17 The burden for regional emissions analyses is framed in this ICR as an MPO responsibility but we recognize that some State DOTs or other agencies may also perform the analyses , i n cooperation with or instead of the MPO

. 18 See Section 6(b) Estimating State and Local Respondent Costs , for a description of how the Cost per Hour was calculated.19 Table 4: State and Local Burden Hours

Each TIP Conformity Determination by MPO

– Population of 200,000 or More

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Consultation Regional

Emissions Analysis Other Activities Total

Burden

Hours

One Pollutant/NAAQS 40 310 45 395

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 50 415 60 525

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 60 510 75 645

Table 5: State and Local Annual Cost TIP Conformity Determinations by MPO

– Population of 200,000 or More

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Burden

Hours No. of

MPOs Frequency

of Action Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost

Per

Hour Total

Annual

Cost

One Pollutant/NAAQS 395 40 4 years 3,950 $58.81 $ 232,300

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 525 31 4 years 4,069 $58.81 $ 239,297

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 645 40 4 years 6,450 $58.81 $ 379,325

Total for All TIP Actions: 14,469 hours/year x $ 58.81 /hour = $ 850,922 /year

Table 6: State and Local Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determination by MPO

– Population Between 50,000

- 200,000

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Consultation Regional

Emissions Analysis Other Activities Total

Burden

Hours

One Pollutant/NAAQS 45 130 30 205

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 55 175 40 270

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 70 220 50 34020 Table 7: State and Local Annual Cost Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations by MPO

– Population Between 50,000

- 200,000

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Burden

Hours No. of

MPOs Frequency

of Action Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost

Per

Hour Total

Annual

Cost

One Pollutant/NAAQS 205 40 4 years 2,050 $58.81 $ 120,560

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 270 13 4 years 877 $58.81 $ 51,576

Three or More Pollutants/NAAQS 340 10 4 years 850 $58.81 $ 49,989

Total for All Transportation Plan and TIP Actions: 3,777 hours/year x $ 58.81 /hour = $ 222,125 /year

In addition, EPA has also estimated the State and Local start

- up burden associated with the transition to EPA’s new emissions model, MOVES. The estimate includes training/workshops plus additional time to transition from MOBILE6 .2 to MOVES. The transition started in December 2009 with the release of MOVES. For this ICR, EPA has assumed that half of the MPOs have already taken a MOVES training class and have begun working with MOVES. This start up burden is shown in Tables 8 an d 9

.

Table 8 : State and Local Burden Hours

One

- time Start

- up For Transition to MOVES for Regional Emissions Analyses

Action Burden Hours Total Burden Hour

Formal Training 15 15

Transition 45 45

Total burden hours for State and Local Respondents for Start

- up of MOVES Analysis: 6 0 hours

Table 9 : State and Local Costs

One

- time Start

- up
For Transition to MOVES for Regional Emissions Analyses

Training /Transition

Hours No. of MPOs Total Burden

Hours Cost Per Hour Total Cost

6 0 87 5,220 $58.81 $ 306,988

Total cost for State and Local Respondents for Start

- up of Quantitative Analysis: 5,220 hours x $58.81/hour=

$ 306,98821 Project

- Level Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance

Areas

Tables 10 and 11 estimate the burden and cost associated with doing conformity determinations for projects in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. These tables are intended to illustrate burden associated with a typical pro ject

- level conformity

determination.

To calculate burden for state and local agencies in preparing project

- level conformity determinations for these areas, EPA polled its regional offices and DOT which typically work with state and local agencies in pro ject

- level conformity determinations. EPA headquarters estimated the time necessary to conduct the hot

- spot analyses based on the guidance documents for these analyses and professional experience. State and local burden hours for consultation

and conducti ng the hot

- spot analyses in Table 10 reflect averages of the responses received. EPA calculated the average number of annual actions based upon survey responses from EPA Regional Office s and DOT offices that are responsible for work ing with state and local respondents in making project

- level conformity determinations

.

Conformity determinations for projects in metropolitan ozone and NO 2 nonattainment and maintenance areas are fairly straightforward, because projects only need to com e from a conforming transportation plan and TIP to meet all conformity requirements. A hot

- spot analysis is not required for project determinations in these nonattainment and maintenance areas. Alternatively, conformity determinations for all non

- exempt federal projects in CO areas must include either a qualitative or quantitative hot

- spot analysis (depending on the type of project)

. 19 In PM 2.5 and PM 10 areas, project

- level conformity determinations must include a

hot

- spot analysis if the project is of lo cal air quality concern. 20 At present, PM 2.5 and PM 10 (PM) hot

- spot analyses, when required, are done qualitatively. 21

19 See the conformity rule (40 CFR 93.123(a)) for the types of projects that require qualitative versus quantitative CO hot

- spot analyses.

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

include: “ (i) n ew or expanded highway projects that have a significant number of or significant increase in diesel vehicles; (ii) p rojects affecting intersections that are at Level

- of

- Service D, E, or F because of increased traffic volumes from a significant number of diesel vehicles related to the project ; (iii) n ew bus and rail terminals and transfer points that have a significant number of diesel vehicles congregating at a single location; (iv) e xpanded bus and rail terminals and transfer points that significantly increase the number of diesel vehicles c ongregating at a single location; and, (v) p rojects in or affecting locations, areas, or categories of sites which are

identified in the PM 10 or PM 2.5 applicable SIP or SIP submission as appropriate, as sites of violation or possible violation. ”

21 EPA and FHWA have provided guidance for those areas required to do qualitative hot

spot analyses for PM 2.5 and PM 10 nonattainment and maintenance areas : “Transportation Conformity Guidance for Qualitative Hot

- spot Analyses in PM 2.5 and PM 10 Nonattainment and

Mai ntenance Areas

, ” EPA420

- B

- 06

- 922

.22 Quantitative PM hot

- spot analyses will be required after the end of the conformity grace period (December 20 , 2012 ) 22 for applying motor vehicle emissions models for such analyses.

EPA has approve d MOVES and EMFAC (in California) for use in project

- level transportation conformity determinations, including PM hot

- spot analyses. EPA establish ed a two

- year grace period before MOVES is requir ed in quantitative PM and CO hot

- spot analyses, and a two

- year grace period before EMFAC is required for quantitative PM hot

- spot analyses. EPA has issued policy guidance on the use of these models will be required for PM hot

- spot analyses and other

purpos es

. 23

The total burden estimates for project

- level conformity determinations represent 50% of total state and local burden for a quantitative PM hot

- spot analysis. We are assuming that the analysis would also be used for satisfying NEPA requirements, so only half of the burden would be included in the conformity ICR. These number s include scoping the project analysis, MOVES modeling, air quality modeling , determining background concentrations, calculating design values, quality assurance, and preparing the final documentation.

T he grace period was effective on December 10, 20 10. For purposes of this supporting statement and burden calculations, the effective date was set as January 1, 2011 through January 2013 (2 years). This period overlaps with the ICR by one and a half years, which is the mid

point of the 3

- year time peri od covered by the ICR. During the first half of the ICR period (June 2011 to January 2013), it is assumed that all PM hot

- spot analyses will be qualitative as this is still within the quantitative analysis grace period. However, during the second half of the ICR period (January 2013 to May 2014) it is assumed quantitative hot

- spot analyses are done as required. There is a different burden associated with qualitative versus quantitative analyses. To reflect the burden over the course of the ICR period, the hours for qualitative and quantitative PM hot

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

calculate CO hot

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

- hot

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

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

and CO hot

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

annual actions based on pa st experience and input given by the EPA Regional Office s and DOT

O ffices that are responsible for work ing with state and local respondents in making project

- level conformity determinations

.

Consultation with other state and local agencies is an importan t activity for these analyses and EPA estimates that on average seven state and local agencies participate in one consultation meeting on each transportation project. EPA is assuming that conformity

- related

22 Notice of Availability : Official Release of the MOVES2010a and EMFFAC2007 Motor Vehicle Emissions Models for Transportation conformity H ot

- Spot Analyses and Availability of Modeling Guidance , 75 FR 79370 (December 2010).

23 “Policy Guidance on the Use of MOVES2010 for S tate Implementation Plan Development, Transportation Conformity, and Other Purposes

, ” EPA

- 420

- B

- 09

- 046 (December 2009)

.23 consultation would be one of many issues discuss ed through consultation meetings as a project proceeds through the NEPA process.

EPA assumes that the total burden hours for project

- level conformity determinations would be approximately the same for larger and smaller metropolitan areas because requirements for project

- level conformity determinations do not differ based upon populati on size served by an MPO. Requirements for project

- level conformity determinations are the same for large and small metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas.

Many CO project

- level analyses are currently used to fulfill both transportation

confo rmity and NEPA requirements. Therefore, EPA is assuming that the estimated burden associated with consultation and preparation of hot

- spot analyses would be divided equally between these programs. Accordingly, the burden estimates in Table s 10 and 11 reflect only the share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requirements for hot

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

- spot analyses).

Table 10 : State and Local Burden Hours Each Project

- level C onformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Pollutant Type of Hot

- spot Analysis Consultation Hot

- spot Analysis Total

Burden Hours

Ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 24 None 0.5 N/A 0.5

PM 2.5 or PM 10 Qualitative 6 22 28 50 Quantitative 12 59 71

CO Quantitative 6 14 20

CO Qualitative 3 2 5

24 Most projects in PM 10 and PM 2.5 areas do not require a qualitative or quantitat ive hot

spot analysis. In contrast, all non

- exempt CO projects in CO areas require some type of hot

- spot analysis.24 Table 11 : State and Local Annual Cost Project

- level Conformity Determinations Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Metropolitan

Area/Pollutant Burden

Hours

Per

Action Average

No. of Actions/year No. of

MPOs Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost Per

Hour Total

Annual

Cost

Project level conformity

determination

- No Hotspot

Analysis

– ozone, NO 2 ,

PM 2.5 and

PM 10 Pop. 200,000+ 0.5 65 111 3,60 8 $58.81 $212,128

Pop. 50,000

- 200,000 0.5 15 63 47 2 $58.81 $27,817

1997 and 2006 PM 2.5 - Hot

spot Analyses 50 3 74 11,100 $58.81 $652,791

PM 10 –

Hot

- spot Analyses 50 1 41 2,050 $58.81 $120,560

CO

- Quantitative Hot

- spot Analyses 20 5 76 7,600 $58.81 $ 446,956

CO

– Qualitative Hot

- Spot Analyses 5 0.5 76 190 $58.81 $11,174

Total for All Project

- level Actions: 25,020 /year x $ 58.81 /hour= $ 1,471,426 /year25 State and Local Start

- up Burden Associated with New Project Level Requirements

EPA has also estimated the state and local start

- up costs associated with the transition from qualitative to quantitative PM hot

- spot analyses in this ICR. Training will include learning new quantitative PM hot

- spot modeling guidance as well as training for emissions and air quali ty modeling. 25 At this time, a definitive schedule and method of training opportunities is still in the planning phase. EPA anticipates offering on

- site training, as well as webinars. For burden estimates, we are anticipating utilizing webinars to presen t the final quantitative PM hot

spot guidance, advanced topics via webinars, and training for the use of emissions and air quality models.

The start

- up cost of transitioning from qualitative to quantitative PM hot

- spot analysis is determined by factors including time spent attending training sessions and number of staff anticipated to attend training.

We have also included a one

- time start

- up burden for learning to use MOVES for quantitative CO hot

- spot analyses in CO nonattainment and maintenance are as. The burden hours per action is anticipated to be less than those in PM nonattainment and maintenance areas as the CO areas already perform quantitative analysis and therefore the start

- up burden only includes training time for MOVES, rather than other aspects of CO hot

- spot analyses (e.g., current air quality modeling practices will continue to be applicable with the MOVES model).

The burden estimates in Table s 1 2 and 1 3 reflect only the share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation c onformity requirements for hot

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

Table 1 2 : State and Local Burden Hours

One

- time Start

- up
For Quantitative Hot

- Spot Analysis

Action Burden Hours per Action

PM Training 30

CO Training 10

Total burden hours for State and Local Respondents for Start

- up of Quantitative Analysis: 4 0 hours

25 EPA has provided guidance for those areas required to do quantitative hot

- spot analysis

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

Guidance for Quantitative Hot

- spot Analyses in PM2.5 and PM10 Nonattainment and

Maintenance Areas ”

, EPA

- 420

- F

- 10

- 052 and “Using MOVES in Project

- Level Carbon Monoxide Analyses”, EPA

- 420

- B

- 10

- 041

.26 Table 1 3 : State and Local Costs

One

- time Start

- up
For Quantitative Hot

- Spot Analysis

Pollutant Training Hours No. of

Areas Total

Burden

Hours Cost Per

Hour Total Cost

PM 30 93 2,790 $58.81 $164,080

CO 10 42 420 $58.81 $24,700

Total cost for State and Local Respondents for Start

- up of Quantitative Analysis: 3,210 hours x $58.81/hour=

$ 188,780

The number of PM areas in Table 1 3 includes both metropolitan and isolated rural areas. Of the 93 PM nonattainment and maintenance areas, 22 MPOs are nonattainment or

maintenance for both a PM 2.5 and PM 10 NAAQS and 16 are located in California (where MOVES is not used) . We believe that t here will be efficiencies gained for these areas which are not captured in the burden estimates. For example, the same MOVES modeling can be used for meeting both a PM 10 and PM 2.5 NAAQS, rather than conduct emissions modeling twice. However, we have not reflected these efficiencies in the ICR; we have kept the burden estimates separate for PM 2.5 and PM 10 for these areas.

The number of CO areas in Table 1 3 includes both metropolitan and isolated rural areas.

Of the 78 CO nonattainment and maintenance are as, 25 are also nonattainment or maintenance for PM and 11 are located in California (where MOVES is not used), which reduces the total

number of nonattainment and maintenance areas to 42.

Project

- Level Conformity Determinations in Isolated Rural Nonattai nment and Maintenance

Areas

Table s 1 4 through 1 6 includes the state and local government burden estimated with performing regional emissions analysis and project

- level conformity determinations in ozone, CO, PM 2.5 and PM 10 isolated rural areas

. 26

EPA co nsidered several factors in developing these estimates. EPA assumed that state departments of transportation will continue to be the lead agency in preparing project

- level conformity determinations in all isolated rural areas. Some state air quality agen cies may also provide emissions modeling assistance to isolated rural areas, as is now done in some areas.

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

statement that isolated rural areas that are nonattainment or maintenance for more than one pollutant/NAAQS will have additional burden hours, because these areas may be required to

26 There are no current NO 2 nonattainment or maintenance areas in isolated rural areas

. See Table 1 for further information.27 conduct a regional emissions analysis for an additional year an d may have additional technical issues to resolve. Therefore, we included more burden hours for consultation, conducting regional emissions analysis, and performing other activities in these areas, as in previous ICRs.

Table 14 : State and Local Burden Hours Each Project

- level Conformity Determination Regional Emissions Analysis

For Isolated Rural Areas

– Population Less Than 50,000

MPO

Demonstrating Conformity For Consultation Regional

Emissions Analysis Other Misc.

Activities Total

Burden

Hours

One Pollutant/NAAQS 25 65 15 10 5

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 30 90 20 140

Table 15 : State and Local Annual Cost Each Project

- level Conformity Determination Regional Emissions Analysis

For Isolated Rural Areas

– Population Less than 50,000

Demonstrating Conformity For Burden

Hours No. of

Areas Frequency

of Action Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost

Per

Hour Total

Annual Cost

One Pollutant/NAAQS 10 5 57 5 1,197 $58.81 $ 70,395

Two Pollutants/NAAQS 140 3 5 84 $58.81 $ 4,940

Total for All Actions: 1,2 81 hours/year x $ 58.81 /hour = $ 75,335 /year

Table 1 5 reflects a frequency of project level conformity determination being done once every five years in each isolated rural area, which is less than MPOs in the previous burden calculations. MPOs are required by regulation to determine conformity once every four years. Our experience from previous ICRs and existing research (see Appendix A) is that isolated rural areas determine conformity less than once every four years.

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

involved than for projects in metropolitan areas, because a regional emissions analysis is also performed when a regionally significant project “not from a conforming transpor tation plan and TIP” is to receive federal funding or approval. 27

27 Isolated rural areas are not required by federal law to develop metropolitan transportation plans or TIPs.28 EPA notes that this ICR may overestimate burden associated with determining conformity for projects in isolated rural areas, since conformity determinations for non

regionally significant projects may not require that a new regional emissions analysis be completed every time.

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

- spot analysis. 28 Like metropolitan projects, EPA is also assuming that conformity

- related topics would be one of many issues discussed through consultation meetings as a project proceeds through the NEPA process.

Localized analyses are assumed to be used to meet both transportation conformity and NEPA requirements. Therefore, EPA is assuming that the estimated burden associated with consultation and preparation of these hot

- spot analyses would be divided equally between transportation conformity and NEPA. Accordingl y, the burden estimates in Table 1 6 reflect only the share of the burden attributable to fulfilling transportation conformity requirements for

hot

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

Table 16 : State and Local Burden Hours For Each Project

- Level Conformity Determination

Hot

- spot Analysis

Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Pollutant Type of Hot

- spot Analysis Consultation Hot

- spot Analysis Total

Burden Hours

PM 2.5 or PM 10 Qualitative 6 22 28

50 Quantitative 12 59 71

CO Quantitative 6 14 20

CO Qualitative 3 2 5

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

- level conformity determinations in ozone, CO, PM 2.5 and PM 10 isolated rural areas. These numbers are the same as projected for metropolitan areas.

To calculate the total burden hours for state and local agencies in isolated rural areas, EPA assumed that a conformity determination occurs once every five years, as in the previous ICR. Also, the transportation conformity regulation requires a hot

- spot analysis for every non

-

28 EPA estimates that four state and local age ncies would participate in one consultation meeting on each transportation project.29 exempt project in a CO nonattainment or maintenance area. Because there are two isolated

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

hot

- spot analyses in isolated rural areas over a five

- year period.

As stated earlier, the conformity regulation requires a hot

- spot analysis only for projects of local air quality concern in PM areas, rather than eve ry non

- exempt project. Given that projects of local air quality concern, which are generally projects that involve significant numbers of diesel vehicles, are unlikely to occur in isolated rural areas, we assumed there would be only one such project in th ese areas over a five

- year period. Based on these assumptions, we arrived at a total of 419 hours of burden per year for state and local agencies in isolated rural

areas.

Table 1 7 : State and Local Annual Cost Project

- Level Conformity Determinations

I solated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Metropolitan

Area Burden Hours per

Action No. of Areas Frequency of

Action Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost Per

Hour Total

Annual

Cost

PM 2.5 - Hot

- spot Analyses 50 3 5 years 30 $58.81 $1,764

PM 10 – Hot

- spot Analyses 50 38 5 years 380 $58.81 $22,348

CO

- Quantitative

Hot

- spot Analyses 20 2 5 years 8 $58.81 $ 470

CO

– Qualitative Hot

Spot Analyses 5 2 5 years 2 $58.81 $118

Total State and Local Respondent Burden for Project Level Conformity Determinations: 4 20 hours/year x

$ 58.81 /hour = $ 24, 700



### 6(b) **Estimating State and Local Respondent Costs**

The following paragraphs describe the assumptions used for estimating state and local respondent costs illustrated in section 6(a):

(i) Estimating Labor Costs

EPA assumed that each state and local burden hour associated with conformity determinations is completed by an experienced technical staff person at a state or local agency or contractor. In addition to salary costs, EPA is also including overhead costs a ssociated with30 employing an experienced technical staff person, such as paid leave, health insurance, retirement savings, office space, computers, and other business expenses.

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

exp erienced technical staff person being paid at a GS

- 13, Step 3 federal government employee salary of $7 6 ,45 2 /year. 29 EPA then divided the annual 20 1 0 GS

- 13, Step 3 salary rate by 2080 (the number of hours in a work year) and multiplied this number by the st andard government
overhead factor of 1.6. This calculation results in a state and local cost of $ 58.81 /burden hour.

(ii) Estimating Capital/Start

- up and Operations and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

In general, EPA is not expecting that additional compute rs, software, or other capital investments are needed to do conformity analyses. Planners should be able to adapt existing equipment and systems for conformity use.

The transportation conformity regulation does not contain any continuing record

keeping or reporting requirements that require additional capital or O&M costs for individual state or local respondent actions. Thus, no capital or O&M cost is included for record

- keeping and reporting actions.

(iii) Annualizing Capital Costs

EPA has assumed the following in annualizing estimates:

• Estimates for t ransportation plan and TIP conformity determinations are annualized over

a four

- year period, to correspond with Clean Air Act requirements that transportation plans and TIPs conform with a new conform ity determination and regional emissions analysis every four years. EPA included the cost associated with meeting the minimum requirements, and therefore assumed that only one transportation plan or TIP conformity

determination will be done for each MPO e very four years in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. For the purposes of this ICR, EPA is not considering additional burden from MPOs updating or revising transportation plans and TIPs voluntarily on a more frequent basis.



### 6(c) **Estimating Agency Burden and Costs** 

This section of the ICR shows federal agency burden and costs associated with carrying out transportation conformity regulations.

29 January 2010 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2010

- GS, 2010 General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/gs.asp31 (i) Estimating Federal Labor Costs

EPA estimates that each DOT and EPA federal burden hour associated with conformity determinations is completed by an experienced technical staff person. EPA is also including overhead costs associated with employing an experienced technical staff person, such as paid leave, health insurance, retirement savings , office space, computers, and other business

expenses.

EPA assum ed that federal burden hours w ould be completed by an experienced technical staff person being paid at a GS

- 13, Step 3 federal government employee salary of
$ 76,452 /year. 30 EPA then divided the annual 20 10 GS

- 13, Step 3 salary rate by 2080 (the number of hours in a work year) and multiplied this number by the standard government

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

Assuming $58.81 per federal burden hour, Table 2 7 shows the total federal annualized cost associated with making transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas.

Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan

Nonattainment/Maintenance Areas

– Federal Burden Hours and Cost

Table s 18 through 20 show estimated federal burden hours and cost associated with making conformity determinations for transportation plans and TI P s in metropolitan

nonattainment and maintenance areas. EPA assumes that federal burden in these areas is associated only with conformity

- related work prior to an MPO ’ s determination and for reviewing transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations and that MPOs have established interagency consultation procedures with regularly scheduled meetings for discussing conformity issues. Because MPOs serving smaller metropolitan areas (populations between 50,000

- 200,000) typically do conformity determinati ons for transportation plans and TIPs at the same time since they are typically on the same four

- year update cycle, EPA also assumes that federal burden associated with consulting on and reviewing transportation plan and TIP conformity determinations for t hese MPOs is done at the same time as well. Therefore, federal burden associated with transportation conformity requirements in smaller metropolitan areas (50,000

- 200,000) is half the burden associated with transportation plan and TIP conformity determina tions in large metropolitan areas.

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

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

- GS, 2010 General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/gs.asp32 Table 18 : Federal Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan or TIP Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas Population of 200,000 or More

Metropolitan Planning Organization Activity FHWA FTA EPA Total

Per Conformity

Determination

(Includes all areas with populations of 200,000+) Attending Consultation Meetings 11 11 11 33

Conformity

- Related Work Prior to

MPO Submission 12 1 3 16

Reviewing Plan Conformity

Determination 13 2 7 22

Federal Hours Burden Hours for Each Plan or TIP Conformity Determination: 71

Table 19 : Federal Burden Hours Each Transportation Plan/TIP Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas Population of 50,000

- 200,000

Metropolitan Planning Organization Activity FHWA FTA EPA Total

Per Conformity

Determination

(Includes all areas with populations of 50,000

- 200,000) Attending Consultation Meetings 11 11 11 33

Conformity

- Related Work Prior to

MPO Determination 12 1 3

16

Reviewing Plan Conformity

Determination 13 2 7 22

Federal Hours Burden For Each Plan/ TIP Conformity Determination : 7133 Table 20 : Federal Annual Cost for MPOs Transportation Plan and TIP Conformity Determinations Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Action Metropolitan

Nonattainment Area Burden

Hours

Per

Action No. of

MPO’s Frequency

of Action Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost

Per

Hour Total

Annual

Cost

Plan Per Conformity

Determination

(Pop. 200,000+) 71 111 4 years 1,970 $58.81 $ 115,856

TIP Per Conformity

Determination

(Pop. 200,000+) 71 111 4 years 1,970 $58.81 $ 115,856

Plan/

TIP Per Conformity Determination (pop.

50,000

- 200,000) 71 63 4 years 1,118 $58.81 $ 65,7 49

Total Federal Burden for Plan and TIP Actions: 5,058 hours/year x $58.81/hour = $ 297 ,461

Project

- Level Conformity Determinations in Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance

Areas

– Federal Burden Hours and Cost

Table s 21 and 2 2 estimate the burden hours and cost that federal agencies incur associated with conformity determinations for projects in metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas. These tables are intended to illustrate burden associated with a typical project

- lev el conformity determination.

To calculate burden for federal agencies associated with consultation and reviewing project

- level conformity determinations for metropolitan nonattainment and maintenance areas, EPA polled its regional offices and DOT. The following tables show federal burden associated with consultation and reviewing project

- level conformity determinations prepared by state and local respondents. State and local respondents burden hours and cost associated with consultation, hot

- spot analys is and regional emissions analysis may be found in Table s 10 and

11

.34 Table 21 : Federal Burden Hours Each Project

- level Conformity Determination Metropolitan Nonattainment and

Maintenance Areas

Pollutant Type of Hot

spot Analysis Consultation Reviewing Project

level conformity

determinations Total

Burden

Hours

Ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 None 0.5 0.5 1

PM 2.5 , PM 10 Qualitative 2 6 8 12 Quantitative 5 11 16

CO Quantitative 1 2 3

CO Qualitative 0.25 1.25 1.5

Table 2 2 : Federal Annual Cost Project

- level Conformity Determinations Metropolitan Nonattainment and Maintenance

Areas

Type of Analysis Burden

Hours Per

Action Average

No. of

Actions/

Year No. of

MPOs Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost

Per

Hour Total

Annual

Cost

Project level conformity

determination

- No Hot

- spot

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

Pop. 50,000

- 200,000 1 15 63 945 $58.81 $ 55,575

PM 2.5 – Hot

- spot Analyses 12 3 74 2,664 $58.81 $156,670

PM 10 – Hot

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

CO

- Quantitative Hot

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

CO

– Qualitative Hot

- Spot Analyses 1.5 0.5 76 57 $58.81 $3,352

Total for All Project

- level Actions: 12, 513 hours/year x $ 58.81 /hour= $ 735,889 /year35 Project

- Level Conformity Determinations in Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance

Areas

– Federal Burden Hours and Cost

Table 2 3 shows federal burden associated with conformity determinations for a typical regionally significant project in an isolated rural nonattainment or maintenance area. Table 24 shows federal burden associated with interagency consultation and review of hot

- spot analyses in isolated rural CO, PM 2.5 and PM 10 nonattainment and maintenance areas. Table 25 shows federal annual cost associated with conformity determinations for project

- level conformity

determinations in isolated rural nonattainment and mainte nance areas.

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

involved than for metropolitan areas, since isolated rural areas also need to perform a regional emissions analysis when a regionally significant project is t o receive federal funding or approval.

Table 2 3 : Federal Burden Hours Each Project

- Level Conformity Determination

Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas Regional Emissions Analysis Component

Type of Project Activity FHWA FTA EPA Total

Projects in Isolated

Rural Area Attending Consultation Meetings 5 1 1 7

Conformity

- Related Work on Draft

Determination 6 1 2 9

Reviewing Project Conformity

Determination 10 1 5 16

Total for Each Isolated Rural Area Project Determination: 3 236 Table 24 : Federal Burden Hours Each Project

- Level Conformity Determination Isolated

Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Hot

- spot Analysis Component

Pollutant Type of Hot

spot Analysis Consultation Reviewing Project

level conformity

determinations Total

Burden

Hours

Ozone, NO 2 , PM 2.5 and PM 10 N/A 0.5 0.5 1

PM 2.5 or PM 10 Qualitative 2 6 8 12 Quantitative 5 11 16

CO Quantitative 1 2 3

CO Qualitative .25 1.25 1.5

Table 25 : Federal Agency Burden Cost For Project

- Level Conformity Determinations

Isolated Rural Nonattainment and Maintenance Areas

Type of Project Burden Hours per

Action No. of

Isolated

Rural Areas Frequency of

Action Total

Annual

burden hours Cost Per

Hour Total

Annual

Cost Projects in

Isolated Rural

Areas

– Regional Analysis 32 60 5 years 384 $58.81 $ 22,583

PM 2.5 – Hot

- spot Analyses 12 3 5 years 7 $58.81 $412

PM 10 – Hot

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

CO

– Quantitative

Hot

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

CO

– Qualitative

Hot

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

Total Federal Agency Burden for Project Level Conformity Determinations: 48 4 hours/year x $ 58.81 /hour =

$ 28,464

Adequacy Findings for SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

– Federal Burden H ours

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

role in making adequacy findings for SIPs with new motor vehicle emissions budgets. The conformity r egulation requires the motor vehicle emissions budget (s) from a subm itted SIP to be used as the measure of conformity once EPA finds such a budget (s) adequate (40 CFR 93.118(e)37 and (f)). 31 The total burden of the adequacy review process is completed by EPA. No other federal agencies are involved in the adequacy review pro cess. This ICR also does not account for any state or local work associated with developing the SIP because SIPs are developed to

meet other non

- conformity requirements.

EPA based burden hours associated with each adequacy review on t he average amount of EPA staff time needed per adequacy determination, EPA s taff time includes the time needed to notify the public that a SIP has been submitted and is under adequacy review , the adequacy

review of the SIP ’s budget(s) , respond ing to any public comments, an d publish ing a Federal Register notice with EPA’s finding.

Table 26 illustrates EPA’s burden hours for each adequacy finding. These estimates were drawn from a recent survey of EPA Regional Office s, as well as an estimate of the time spen t at headquarters.

Table 2 6 : Federal Burden Hours Adequacy Findings of SIP Motor Vehicle Emissions Budgets

Activity Hours to perform

Per Adequacy Finding Adequacy Review 17

Federal Register Notice Preparation and

Publication 19

Preparation for and Website Posting 3

Burden hours per Adequacy Finding: 39

Adequacy Findings

– Federal Costs

EPA estimates that each EPA federal burden hour associated with adequacy determinations is completed by an experienced technical staff person. We believe that this will result in a conservative cost estimate. EPA is also including overhead costs associat ed with employing an experienced technical staff person, such as paid leave, health insurance,

31 Per 40 CFR 93.118(e)(4), EPA will find a budget adequate if the following minimum criteria is met: (i)The submitted SIP is endorsed by the Governor or his/her designee and has

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

stated conce rns have been addressed; (iii) The budget is clearly identified and precisely quantified; (iv) The budget, when considered with all other emissions sources, is consistent with applicable SIP requirements; (v) The budget is consistent with and is clearly re lated to the emissions inventory and submitted SIP control measures; and, (vi) Revisions to a previously submitted SIP explain and document any changes to the previous budget and control measures, impacts on point and source emissions, and any changes to e stablished safety margins and reasons for those changes38 retirement savings, office space, computers, and other business expenses.

EPA assum ed that federal burden hours w ould be completed by an experienced staff

pers on being paid at a GS

- 13, Step 3 federal government employee salary of $7 6 ,45 2 /year. 32

EPA then divided the annual 2007 GS

- 13, Step 3 salary rate by 2080 (the number of hours in a work year) and multiplied this number by the standard government overhead fa ctor of 1.6. This

calculation result ed in a federal cost of $ 58.81 /burden hour.

Table 27A shows the total federal annualized cost associated with making adequacy determinations for SIP motor vehicle emissions budgets. EPA based the number of adequ acy reviews need each year based on t he historical average number of SIPs that EPA has processed for adequacy over the past seven years, and re sponses from EPA regions regarding the anticipated number of SIP s expected to process for adequacy in fiscal year 2007

.

Table 2 7 B show costs associated with Federal Register notices of adequacy findings. A Federal Register notice of EPA’s adequacy determination is always required, but often such notice is given with a proposed or final rulemaking action to approve the submitted SIP which is required due to other non

- conformity requirements

. Therefore, EPA included in the above table only the cost associated with Federal Register notices that were published separate from a proposed or final rulemaking action to approve the submitted SIP.

Table 2 7 A: Federal Annual Cost of Adequacy Findings

Action Average

Number of Actions per

Region No. of Regions Burden Hours per

Action Total

Annual

Burden

Hours Cost Per

Hour Total

Annual

Burden

Cost

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

Table 2 7 B: Federal Annual Cost of Federal Register Notices

Action Average

Number of

Actions No. of Regions Total Federal Register

Notice Publications Average
cost per

Publication Total

Annual

Burden

Cost

Federal Register Notice

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

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

32 January 2010 U.S. Office of Personal Management, Salary Table 2010

- GS, 2010 General Schedule, http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/html/gs.asp.39 

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

EPA estimates that 174 MPOs will be subject to conformity requirements during the period covered by this ICR and that EPA Regional Offices, the FHWA and FTA will be involved in interagency consultation, and review of any transportation

- related conformity determinations performed by MPOs during this process. EPA also estimates that similar consultation will occur for projects in isolated rural areas.



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

The bottom line annual burden for all State and local resp ondents is 68,282 hours with a

cost of $ 4,014,663

. The bottom line annual burden for Federal agency respondents is 20,005

hours with a cost of $ 1,197,143. 33

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

the 3

- year period covered by this ICR is estimated at 248,001 hours, with a cost of approximately $ 14,632,882

. This includes a one

- time start up cost of quantitative m odeling and

transition to MOVES

.

(i) State and Local Agency Tally

The bottom

- line annual burden for all State and local agencies in performing transportation conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs in nonattainment and

maintenance areas and isolated rural areas is 39,632 hours/year with a cost of $ 2,3 29,757 /year.

The bottom

- line annual burden for all State and local agencies in performing project level conformity determinations and, where applicable, hot

- spot analyses in metropolitan areas,

and isolated rural areas is 28,650 hours /year at a cost of $ 1,684,906 /year.

(ii) Federal Agency Tally

The bottom

- line annual burden for Agencies associated with transportation conformity determinations for transportation plans and TIPs in nonattainment areas and isolated rural areas

is 5058 hours / year at a cost of $ 297,461 /year.

The bottom

- line annual burden for Agencies associated with project level conformity determinations (including, where applicable, hot

- spot analysis) in metropolitan areas and isolated

rural areas is 12,997 hours/year at a cost of $ 764,353 /year.

33 To obtain bottom

- line annual Federal agency cost associ ated with conformity

determinations

, EPA m ultiplied the bottom

- line Federal agency annual burden hours by estimated hourly labor cost s of $5 8.81 and then added $20,650 in Federal Register notice publication costs from Table 27A and B to reach the bottom li ne Federal agency annual

estimated cost of $ 1,197,143.40 The bottom

- line annual burden for EPA burden associated with adequacy determinations for motor vehicle emission budgets associated with SIPs is 1,950 hours/year at a cost of

$ 135,329 /year

. 34

Tables 2 8 and 2 9 show the total annual e stimated burden hours and cost associated with transportation conformity determinations requirements incurred by state, local and federal respondents.

Table 2 8 : Total Annual Burden Hours Transportation Conformity Determinations

Type of Conformity

Determination Total Annual

State and Local

Burden Hours Total Annual Federal

Burden Hours Total Annual Conformity Burden

Hours

Transportation Plan/ TIP Conformity Determination 39,632 5,058 44,690

Project Conformity

Determination 28,650 12,997 41,647

Adequacy Finding N/A 1,950 1,950

Total 68,282 20,005 88,287

BOTTOM LINE ANNUAL BURDEN HOURS: 88

, 287 / year

Table 2 9 : Total Annual Costs Transportation Conformity Determinations

Type of Action Total Annual State and

Local Cost Total Annual Federal

Cost Total Annual Conformity Costs

Transportation Plan/ TIP Conformity Determination $ 2,329,757 $ 297,461 $ 2,627,218

Projects Conformity

Determination $ 1,684,906 $ 764,353 $ 2,449,259

Adequacy Finding

Determinations N/A $135,329 $135,329

Total $ 4,014,663 $ 1,197,143 $ 5,211,806

BOTTOM LINE ANNUAL COST: $ 5,211,806 35

34 To obtain bottom

- line annual cost associated with adequacy determinations for motor vehicle emission budgets , EPA m ultiplied the total burden hours in Table 27A and B by estimated hourly labor costs of $ 58.81 and then added $ 20,650 in Federal Register notice publication costs to reach the bottom line annual cost of $135,329.

35 To obtain bottom

- line costs associated with conformity determinations (Table 29 ),

EPA m ultipl ied the bottom

- line burden hours in Table 28 by estimated hourly labor costs of41 (iii) Variations in the Annual Bottom Line

EPA does not anticipate significant variations in the annual respondent reporting burden or cost over the course of the clearance period.



### 6(f) **Reasons for Change in Burden**

Increase in state and local respondent burden since the previous ICR was approv ed is approximately 19,043 hours :

(i) Adjustments associated with actual number of 2006 PM 2.5 NAAQS

nonattainment areas versus the estimated numbers in EPA ICR 2130.03

In the previous ICR 2130.03, EPA estimated a total of 25 new PM 2.5 nonattainment

areas f or the 2006 24

- hour PM 2.5 NAAQS. The calculation of the number of hypothetical brand

new nonattainment areas was based on 2004

- 2006 air quality data.

EPA’s PM 2.5 nonattainment designations went into effect on December 14, 2009, and conformity under th e new PM 2.5 NAAQS began to apply on December 14, 2010.

The actual number of nonattainment areas for the new PM 2.5 standard is 31, which

results in increased burden from ICR 2130.03.

Burden hour increase a ttributed to this adjustment: Approximately 1, 734 hours

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

hot

- spot analyses.

An additional burden was also projected for start

- up and implementation costs associated with the transition from qualitative to quantitative PM hot

- spot analyses. Start

- up burden is also included for quantitative CO hot

- spot analyses using MOVES.

Burden hour increase attributable to these changes: Approximately 3,210 hours

(ii) Adjustment for increased burden associated with the transition from the

M OBILE to MOVES model for regional emissions analyses

An additional burden was also projected for start

- up and implementation costs

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

consultation

.

$5 8.81 and then added $20,650 in Federal Register notice publication costs from Table 27A and

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

.42 Burden hour increase attributable to these changes: Approximately 14,099 hours



### 6(g) **Burden Statement**

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 7 hours per response. Burden means the t otal 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 techno logy 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 req uirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a

person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15.43 

### Appendix A: Conformity

**- Related Resea**  **rch Considered for This ICR**

The following is the conformity research studies that were considered for this ICR. EPA has cited in the ICR when these studies were utilized as appropriate.

• April 2003, “Transportation/Air Quality Issues in Rural Areas,” FHWA and Dye Management Group.

• October 2003, “Rural Conformity: A Survey of Practice,” NCHRP and ICF Consulting.