INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SUPPORTING STATEMENT EPA ICR No. 2411 . 01 OMB Control Number 2060
-NEW NEW SOURCE PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (NSPS) AND NATIONAL EMISSION STANDARDS FOR HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANTS (NESHAP FOR PETROLEUM REFINERY SECTOR) RESIDUAL RISK AND TECHNOLOGY REVIEW (RTR)

Sector Policies and Programs Division U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, North Carolina 27711

January 1 4 , 2010Part A of the Supporting Statement

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

“New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) and National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) for Petroleum Refinery Sector Residual Risk and Technology

Review (RTR) .” This is a new information collection request (EPA I CR Number 2411.01 and OMB Control Number 2060

-NEW)

. (b ) Short Characterization This information collection is being conducted b y EPA ’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) to assist the EPA Administrator, as required by section s 111(b), 112(d) , and 112(f)(6) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) , as amended, to reevaluate emission standard s for this source category

. The information will also be used to develop greenhouse gas regulations for petroleum refinery sources under CAA section s 111 (b) and 111(d). The non - confidential information from this information collection request ( IC R) would also be made available to th e public. This is a one

- time information collection. Currently , information necessary to identify petroleum refineries is available from the Department of Energy ’s (DOE) Energy Information Administration’s (EIA) Refinery Capacity Report , the Oil and Gas J ournal, and E PA’s National Emissions Inventory
. However, these sources of information do not contain all of the details (unit

- specific operating capacity, emission source design, emissions collection and control systems, regulatory

alternatives used, and emission s test data) necessary to completely characterize petroleum refinery affected sources for purposes of NSPS and NESHAP regulatory anal ys es. Although some of the needed information may be included in title V or State air emission s permits, many

permits do not contain all of the detail needed and are not readil y available from any single source

. Furthermore, there are no readil y available sources for previously

conducted emissions test results (since the mid

- 1990s ) that will provide data for emissions of the variety of pollutants under consideration

. EPA is soliciting this information with a survey, under the authority of CAA section 114 , from all potentially

affected units. The Agency intends to administer the survey in electronic format. The survey

will be s ent to all petroleum refineries in the EIA 2009 Refinery Capacity Report

. The information collection will contain four components: (i) a questionnaire to becompleted b y all petroleum refineries ; (ii) an emissions inventory to be developed by all

petroleum refineries ; (iii) distillation feed sampling and anal ys is to be conducted by all petroleum refineries ; and ( iv) emissions testing to be completed in accordance with an EPA

approved protocol for 9 6 petroleum refinery emissio ns sources at 81 different refineries

. Component 1 (the questionnaire) will require the owner/operator of each petroleum refinery to complete a survey about their facility and process information, submit cost data , and provide copies of recent emissions t est report s and CEMS/CMS data

. Emissions sources to be tested according to Component 4 were selected to ensure that representative data are collected for emissions sources/pollutants for which EPA has little to no existing information or for which additio nal information is needed in order to reevaluate emission standard s for this source category
. The proposed list of the 96 petroleum refinery emissions sources selected for emissions testing is available in Part B of this document as well as the docket for this I CR (Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2010

- 0682). The Agency estimates the total cost to industry of the electronic information collection ( gathering, entering, and performing quality assur ance/quality control ( QA/QC ) checks of data submitted in response to the survey for 15 2 respondents and emissions testing for 81 respondents ) will be 6 9 ,000 hours and $ 3 1 million , which includes $ 912 in operation and maintenance (O&M) costs for postage for mailing hard cop y test reports and confidential survey responses to EPA

. The average burden per respondent is 45 6 hours and $ 20 3 , 0 0 0. The owner/operator of each petroleum refinery will be required to enter all data through the website data collection tool, enter these data using proper unit terminology , and to QA/QC the data entered into the website. The owner/operator of each petroleum refinery will be required to keep records: i) documenting that distillation feed samples were obtained in accordance with an approved sampling protocol; ii) establishing proper chain of custody for each distillation feed sample; iii) describing the QA/QC procedures followed in preparing each distillation feed sample for anal ys is and performing the required anal ys is; and iv) setting forth the results of the analyses perf ormed on each distillation feed sample. The owner/operator of each petroleum refinery emissions source required to conduct emissions testing will be required to keep records: i) documenting that each emissions test was conducted in accordance with an app roved testing protocol; and i i) setting forth the results of each emissions test.All records required under the proposed information collection must be retained for

3 ye ars. 2. Nee d for and Use of the Collection (a ) Ne ed/Authority for the Collection Petroleum refineries are facilities engaged in refining and producing products made from crude oil or unfinished petroleum derivatives . This category includes petroleum refinery

- specific process units, such as fluid catal ytic cracking units and catal ytic reforming units, as well as units and processes found at other manufacturing facilities, such as storage vessels and wastewater treatment plants. The federal emission standards that are the primary subject of this information collection include:

-- Nati onal Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants from Petroleum Refineries (40 CFR part 63, subpart CC), and

-- National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for P etroleum Refineries : C ataly tic C racking Units , C ataly tic Reforming Units , an d S ulfur Recovery Units (40 CFR part 63, subpart UUU).

-- Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries (40 CFR part 60, subpart J),

-- Standards of Performance for Petroleum Refineries for Which Construction, Reconstruction, or Modification Commenced After May 14, 2007 (40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja), The NESHAP subpart CC (Refinery MACT 1) regulates hazardous air pollutant (HAP ) emissions from miscellaneous process vents, storage vessels, wastewater, equipment leaks, gasoline loading racks, marine tank vessel loading, and heat exchange systems at petroleum refineries. The NESHAP subpart UUU (Refinery MACT 2) regulates HAP from sulfur recovery units and from catal ys t regeneration in catal ytic cracking units and catal ytic reforming units. The NSPS subparts J and Ja regulate criteria pollutant emissions, including particulate matter (PM ) , sulfur dioxide ( SO 2 ) , nitrogen oxides (NO X) , and carbon mo noxide ( CO ) , from fluid catal ytic cracking unit catalyst regenerators, fuel gas combustion devices, and sulfur recovery plants . The NSPS subpart Ja also regulates criteria pollutant emissions from fluid coking units and delayed coking unit s. Standards fo r greenhouse gases (GHG) will also be developed as part of the NSPS. Section 112(f)(2) of the CAA directs EPA to conduct risk assessments on each source category subject to maximum achievable control technology (MACT) standards and determine if additional standards are needed to reduce residual risks. The CAA section 112(f)(2) residual riskreview is to be done once, within 8 years of promulgation of the MACT standard

.

Section 112(d)(6) of the CAA requires EPA to review and revise the MACT standards, as necessary , taking into account developments in practices, processes, and control technologies. The CAA section 112(d)(6) technology review is to be done every 8 years. Refinery MACT 1 was promulgated in 1995 and is due for review under CAA sections 112(f )(2) and 112(d)(6). Likewise, Refinery

MACT 2 was promulgated in 2002 and is also due for review. Section 111(b)(1)(B) of the CAA mandates that EPA review and, if appropriate, revise existing NSPS every 8 years. The NSPS for petroleum refineries (40 CFR part 60, subpart J) were promulgated in 197 4, amended in 1976, and reviewed in 2008 ; as part of the 2008 review, EPA promulgated amendments to the existing standards of performance and developed separate standards of performance for new process units (40 CFR part 60, subpart Ja). However, the Agency received and granted a number of petitions for reconsideration related to those standards. In addition, the Agency entered into a settlement agreement with the States of New York, California, Connecticut, Del aware, Maine, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the District of Columbia, and the City of New York (collectivel y “ State Petitioners ” ) and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC ), Sierra Club, and Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) (collectively “ Environmental Petitioners ” ) . As part of that settlement, the Agency agreed to develop standards for GHG under CAA sections 111(b) and 111(d). The data used as the basis for the originall y promulgated Refinery MACT 1 are over 15 ye ars old, and the data used as the basis for the originall y promulgated Refinery MACT 2 are
over 1 0 years old. In addition, while efforts were made during the recent NSPS review process to update the NSPS dat a set developed in 1978, some data for some typ es of processes and technologies remains unavailable. The Agency is aware that significant changes have been made in the intervening ye ars in the number of affected facilities, in industry ownership practices , and in emission s collection and control configurations. The Agency has not previously collected data for the purposes of develop ing regulations for GHG. In light of the statutory requirements for reviewing and developing emission standards under CAA sections 111(b), 111(d), 112(f)(2) , and 112(d)(6) , EPA has concluded that obtaining updated information will be crucial to informing its decisions on the NSPS review and the NESHAP risk and technology review ( RTR) for petroleum refineries

.The Agency has already begun assembling data for a preliminary residual risk assessment for the petroleum refinery NESHAP. A d ata set derived from the EPA’s 2005 National Scale Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) National Emissions Inventory (NE I) and supplemented with data supplied by

about 20 individual refineries were used for a previous residual risk assessment for Refinery MACT 1 . However, there remain a number of petroleum refineries for which substantial updates of emissions release points and emissions estimates are important in order for EPA to accuratel y consider residual risk for the petroleum refinery NESHAP. In addition, there
are some petroleum refineries for which no Refinery MACT 1 and/or Refinery MACT 2 data are currentl y available in the NEI

. Preliminary

risk anal ys is results for the petroleum refinery sector (based on the 2005 NATA NEI data sets) indicate that some refineries are projected to present risk above the thresholds for further consideration under the residual risk proce ss. However, inconsistency in reporting methodologies make s it difficult to draw proper conclusions when different emissions estimates and performance levels are identified. Addition al refinery

- specific information would allow EPA to better characterize emission s sources, to refine the risk anal ysis, and to address any residual risk to ensure the public is protected with an ample margin of safety . An update of the 2005 NATA NEI data sets and more specific information needed for rulemaking regulatory anal ys es would be derived from the ICR. Information collected directl y from petroleum refineries will have the greatest practical utility for purposes of performing the NSPS review and RTR , as information from the affected industry will contain the most up

- to
- date, accurate, and reliable equipment and operational data for each refinery

. The Agency is also providing a protocol document to provide guidance to the industry when estimating emissions that are not directly monitored. This will ensure that the data collected are consistent and will allow direct comparisons and minimize uncertainty caused by different estimation techniques. The ICR will request that new information be supplied for a 20 1 0 base year , and therefore, will not suffer from the considerable “lag time” that can be associated with different inventory and permit review cycles ( e.g. , where the currentl y available inventory does not yet reflect recent changes in control devices ). 1

1 There is a “lag time” associated with compiling large State or national emission inventories. For example, an updated version of the NEI database is compiled every three years , but the information contained in the NEI may be based on prior years if states do not submit current data

. There can also be a “lag time” associated with posting of recent permits to State websites (particularly if permits are only posted every 5 years as they are reviewed).CAA section 114(a) states that the Administrator may require any

owner or operator
subject to any

requirement of the Act to: (A) Establish and maintain such records; (B) make such reports; (C) install, use, and maintain such monitoring equipment, and use such audit procedures, or methods; (D) sample such emissions (in accordance with such procedures or methods, at such locations, at such intervals, during such periods, and in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe); (E) keep records on control equipment parameters, production variables or other indirect data when direct monitoring of emissions is impractical; (F) submit compliance certifications in ac cordance with section 114(a)(3); and (G) provide such other information as the Administrator may

reasonably

require. (b ) Use/Users of the Data As mentioned previously, the data used for the originall y promulgated NSPS and NESHAP are outdated and do not re flect the significant changes in emissions collection and control configurations that have occurred since promulgation of the standard s. The MACT standards contain a number of compliance alternatives that allow for a variety of control devices and process changes to be used to meet the emission standards

. At present, EPA does not have a full data base reflecting the post

- MACT configuration s of petroleum refinery emission units and air pollution control systems and techniques

. It is essential fo r EPA to have updated information to use in the regulatory

analyses required under CAA sections 112(d) and 112(f)(2). In addition, this updated information will be used to complete the final steps in the NSPS review required under CAA section 111(b) and to develop GHG standards under CAA sections 111(b) and 111(d)

. By

conducting all of the CAA

- required reviews ( i.e. , conducting the subpart CC and UUU RTR reviews and completing the subpart J NSPS review) at the same time as the development of standards for GHG , EPA can make use of a single collection of information to consider control strategies that are the most effective for both HAP , which are regulated under section 112, criteria air pollutants (such as PM, SO 2 , and NO X) , which are regulated under section 111 , and GHG

. The data would also allow EPA to evaluate compliance options for startup and shutdown periods and to consider ways to consolidate monitoring, reporting, and recordkeeping requirements among the different rules under review. The data may also help EPA conduct reviews of other rules specific to petroleum refineries, including Standards of Performance for Equipment Leaks of VOC in Petroleum Refineries (40 CFR part 6 0 , subpart GGG) , S tandards of P erformance for VOC Emissions from P etroleum Refinery W astewaterS ys tems (40 CFR part 6 0 , subpart QQQ ) , and National Emission Standard for Benzene Waste

Operations (40 CFR part 6 1 , subpart FF )

. The data collected will be used to update and augment facility and emissions source information already available to the Agency , develop new estimates of the population of affected units, and identify

the control measures and alternative emission limits being used for compliance with the existing rules that are under review . This information, along with exi sting emission limits , will be used to establish the baseline emissions and control levels for purposes of the regulatory

reviews. The emissions test data (test reports , continuous emissions monitoring systems (CEMS) data , and continuous monitoring sy stem s (CMS) data) collected will be used to
assess the effectiveness of existing control measures, examine variability in emissions, evaluate the stringency

of existing emission limits, identify the most effective control measures considered for purposes of re ducing residual risk , and provide a basis for estimating nationwide emissions from emissions sources for which EPA has little information

. Emissions data will also be used , along with process and emission unit details , to consider options for best demonstrated technology

(BDT) under the NSPS review, to consider subcategories for further regulation , and to estimate the environmental and cost impacts associated with any regulatory options considered. In addition to informing the CAA

- required NSPS an d RTR regulatory analyses for the petroleum refinery sector , it is EPA’s intent to include the information supplied through this information collection in future versions of the NEI and its successor, the Emissions Inventory System (EIS). Including this information in the NEIis one method of making the data available to the States and the public . More information about the NEI can be found at http://www.epa.gov/air/data/neidb.html

. The non

- confidential information collected through this ICR would also be available to the public, including petroleum refinery industry trade groups that may

find the information useful for their ongoing data gathering, anal ys es, and publications. Inaddition, such trade groups may

wish to use the data collected to review and verify EPA’s regulatory

conclusions. 3. Non - duplication, Consultations, and Other Collection Criteria (a ) Non

- duplication The Agency

recognizes that some of the information requested in the information collection effort may

already be included in the submittals made by individual companies,pursuant to S tate and national emission s inventories, operating permits applications, initial

notification forms , and compliance reports

. However, the complete extent of the data fields requested under this survey is not available in any

consistent or usable format

. Additionally , these sources do not provide detailed emissions test data. As mentioned previou sly , there is a lag time associated with State and national emission s inventories, and permit review cycles. There is also a lag time associated with obtaining emission s test reports from State agencies ( i.e. , agencies may be reluctant to release emission s test results they have not yet processed). The A gency ’s proposed information collection seeks up

- to
- date operational and control technique data for the 20 1 0 operating year, and thus avoids the effec ts of any such lag time o n data availability

. Although some S tate permits are provided to the public as searchable portable document format files (pdfs ) , many S tates do not provide electronic versions of their issued t itle V permits

. Even when the permit is available, the unit

- specific operating data are often not contained within the permit

. Some of the initial notifications , compliance reports , and emissions test reports submitted are available in hard

- cop y onl y, whereas only the facility

- level information (facility name, location, contact) is available in an electronic format

. Such variation in the level of detail of permits , notifications, and reports means that it would be extremely time

- consuming for EPA to extract the level of process detail needed for regulatory anal ys es from existing documents (a ssuming that these documents were readil y available to EPA) , and that significant data gaps would remain even after data from existing documents were compiled

. To summarize, the information requested relevant to the current (post

- MACT) emissions
source ope ration , regulatory alternatives, emissions data, and the effectiveness of various control systems at removing HAP is not readily available from other sources . In the absence of an industry data collection, EPA would be forced to try to obtain permits, compliance reports, and emissions test reports from States; extract information from these reports (which vary in detail and method of reporting ); and then attempt to fill data gaps where information is not available from the reports obtain ed. This process of acquiring and extracting data from existing reports would require more time than an industry data collection, and ultimately would be expected to yi eld incomplete and inconsistent information. Th e robust and uniform information being collected directly from petroleum refineries would provide the most timely and complete data set with the greatest practical utility for purposes of performing the NSPS review , RTR , and GHGstandards development that are due to be completed under CAA secti ons 111(b), 111(d), 112(d),

and (f)(2). (b ) Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB This I CR is being submitted to the Office of Management and Budget ( OMB ) as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (PRA) and the subsequent rule issued by the OMB on August 29, 1995 (60 FR 44978)

. The Agency previously submitted the draft I CR for public review , and the ICR being submitted to the OMB includes revisions to address the public comments received during that review period

. (c) Consultations Initial feedback was received from the affected industry regarding the procedures for developing their RTR emissions inventory , and their comments have been considered. In addition, as noted previously , the public was given an opportunity to provide detailed comment s on the draft ICR, and EPA has considered and addressed those comments. (d ) Effe cts of Less Frequent Collection This I CR will require the owner/operator of each petroleum refinery to provide a full emissions inventory to be used for regul atory purposes under CAA sections 111 and 112

. In addition, refineries will be asked to complete an electronic survey of general facility

information (production processes and capacities) , equipment details, permit limits, emission control
measures , and emissions test data ( for previousl y conducted tests). Some refineries will be asked to complete emissions testing on a specific emissions source

. The Agency expects the information requested in this survey to be a one

- time effort. (e) General Guide lines This I CR will adhere to the guidelines for Federal data requestors, as provided at 5 CFR 1320. 6

. (f ) Confidentiality Respondents will be required to respond under the authority of CAA section 114. If a respondent believes that disclosure of certain information requested would compromise a trade secret, it should be clearly identified as such and will be treated as confidential until and unless it is determined in accordance with established EPA procedure as set forth in 40 CFR Part 2 not to be entitl ed to confidential treatment

. All information submitted to the Agency for which a claimof confidentiality is made will be safeguarded according to the Agency policies set forth in

40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B , entitled “ Confidentiality of Business Informatio n .” Any information subsequently

determined to constitute a trade secret will be protected under 18 U.S.C. 1905

. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the information when it is received by EPA, it may

be made available to the public without further notice (40 CFR 2. 203)

. Because CAA section 114(c) exempts emission s data from claims of confidentiality, the emission s data provided may

be made available to the public

. Therefore, emissions data should not be marked confidential

. A definition of what EPA considers emissions data is provided in 40 CFR 2.301(a)(2)(i). (g ) Sensitive questions This section is not applicable because this ICR will not involve matter s of a sensitive nature
. 4. The Respondents and the Information Requested (a ) Respondents/NAICS Codes. Respondents affected b y this action are owners/operators of petroleum refineries , all of which are expected to have the potential to be subject to one of the regulatory standards being reviewed or developed by EPA

. Based on the Energy Informati on Administration’s Refinery Capacity Report 2009 , there are 15 2 operable petroleum refineries in the United States (U.S.) and the U.S. territories. Petroleum refineries are located in 35 States, as well as Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The No rth American Industry Classification S ys tem (NAICS) code for respondents affected b y the information collection is 32411

. (b ) Information Collected (i ) Data Items

. The proposed data

- gathering effort has four components: i) a questionnaire to be completed by all 152 petroleum refineries ; (ii) an emissions inventory to be developed by all petroleum refineries ; (iii) distillation feed sampling and analysis to be conducted by all petroleum refineries ; and ( iv) emissions testing to be completed in accordance with an EPA

- approved protocol for 9 6 selected emissions sources

. The following paragraphs provide additional details about the components of the survey and the testing requirements contained in those components
.Component 1 wil l require the owner/operator of each petroleum refinery to complete a

survey about their facility and process information, submit cost data , and provide copies of recent emissions test report s and CEMS/CMS data

. The survey will be administered electronically ; a hard copy is provided in Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2010

- 0682 at this time solely for the purposes of soliciting comments. Some questions about particular emissions
sources will not be applicable to petroleum refineries that do not have th ose ty pes of sources . The survey

will require each facility to provide information to EPA by May 31, 2011

. Component 2 will require the owner/operator of each petroleum refinery to develop and provide a facility

- wide emissions inventory in accordance with the Emission Estimation Protocol for Petroleum Refineries (Refinery Emissions Protocol), which is available in the Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2010

- 0682

. The information will be c ollected electronically ; a hard cop y is provided in the docket at this time solely for the purposes of soliciting comments. E ach facility will be required to provide information to EPA by June 30, 2011

. Component 3 will require the owner/operator of each petroleum refinery to conduct distillation feed sampling and anal ys is three times , each time approximately 30 days from the last

. The results of these anal ys es will be collected electronically ; a hard copy of the instructions and response template is provided in Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2010

- 0682 at this time solely for the purposes of soliciting comments. E ach facility will be required to provide information to EPA by

August 31, 2011

. Component 4 provides instructions and guidance for emissions te sting for those petroleum refinery emissions sources that are selected to complete emissions testing. This testing will be done on one occasion. The results of each series of tests and anal ys es will be required to be reported to EPA by using a specified standardized electronic format by August 31, 2011 . Specified QA/QC procedures will be required for each part of the emissions data collection effort. For this effort, EPA believes it is highl y advisable for each emissions source subject to emissions testing under Component 4 of the I CR to devise a quality assurance test plan that is specific to each facility . Such a plan could include the project elements as enumerated in chapter 3 of the EPA quality assurance document. The existence of such a plan woul d provide a means to verify

that the quality

assurance protocols as contained in the various test methods are met. Note, however, that these quality assurance test plans will not be reviewed or approved b y EPA.Although a large amount of information is n eeded for regulatory reviews under sections

111 and 112 of the CAA , EPA has designed the information collection in a way to minimize the burden associated with supplying and processing this information. The survey will collect information to supply

multip le regulatory

actions in order to minimize the burden associated with multiple collections. A table containing onl y the relevant and current source classification codes (SCC) will be provided to ensure that valid codes are used and to reduce respondent time associated with locating codes on the NEI website. The electronic survey files will be provided to refineries through a website, and respondents can use that same website to upload their non

confidential survey

responses . The electronic format will allow EPA to import the responses into database software , eliminating the time required for EPA to key

- enter data. The burden associated with collection of emissions test data has be en reduced in several ways: ( 1 ) Respondents are required to submit ex i sting emissions test reports in order for EPA (or EPA contractor personnel) familiar with extracting test data from test reports to enter the data in a manner that ensures consistent and reliable treatment of the data ( e.g. , with respect to data averaging and non

- detects). ( 2 ) Respondents may

provide electronic or hard copy versions of existing emissions test reports, whichever they

find to be less burdensome. ( 3 ) Not all refineries will be required to conduct new emissions testing, and EPA has spread the required testing over as many refineries as possible to minimize the burden to any one refinery. Finally , EPA has minimized the collection of control measure cost information by focusing the collection of cost information on air pollution controls and process changes of particular interest for purposes of the NSPS review or RTR. The A gency expects cost information obtained from the industry to be some of the most reliable and valid information available since the cost data would be specific to petroleum refinery applications. In addition, collection of cost information from the industry (as opposed to a separate collection from other sources such as vendors) would accelerate EPA’s ability to anal yz e the cost impacts of regulatory

options. ( ii ) Respondent Activities

. The activities a respondent must undertake to fulfill the requirements of the information collection are presented in Attachment 1

. These include: i) read instructions; ii) provide information on each affected source through electronic survey ; iii) submit hard or electronic copies of previous emission s test reports and available CEMS or C MS data ; and iv) conduct distillation feed sampling and anal ys is. If one of the refinery ’s emissionssources was selected for emissions testing, the respondent must additionally : i) review the

emissions testing plan and procure a testing contractor; ii ) monitor/supervise emissions testing; i ii) review emissions sampling data for accuracy and completeness; and iv) submit emissions sampling data and test reports

. 5. The Information Collected

– Agency Activities, Collection Methodology, and Information Management (a ) Agency Activities A list of activities required of the Agency is provided in Attachment 2

. These include: i) develop electronic questionnaire and packages for mailout; i i) determine which emissions sources will be required to complete emissions testing; ii i ) develop and deploy a website for data entry from facilities; iv) answer respondent questions; v) review and anal yze responses and emissions data; v i ) anal yze requests for confidentiality ; v i i ) review emissions test data for accuracy and completeness; and viii ) analyze emissions test data

. (b ) Collection Methodology and Management In collecting and anal yz ing the information associated with this I CR, EPA will use personal computers and applicable spreadsheet and database software

. To better facilitate uniformity

in the format of the requested data, and, thus, increase the ease of database entry , standardized survey

questions and electronic forms will be distributed to respondents. The Agency will ensure the accuracy and completeness of the collected information by reviewing each submittal

. The Agency may place follow

- up calls to re fineries should questions remain after reviewing all materials submitted. Following QA/QC of each submittal, the information from each refinery

will be uploaded into a database for further anal ys is. Survey responses claimed as confidential business infor mation ( CBI ) will be housed in a separate database from the non

- CBI survey

responses. In addition, a copy of the emissions inventories submitted will be routed for inclusion in EPA’s residual risk input database , and it is EPA’s intent for this informatio n to be included in future versions of the NEI and its successor, the EI S. Existing
emissions test report data will be entered into a database by EPA (or EPA contractor personnel) familiar with extracting test data from test reports. In addition , CEMS data would be uploaded in
a database for anal ys is of emissions variability

. Petroleum refineries asked to complete emissions testing will be instructed to provide their results through the Electronic Reporting Tool(ERT), and EPA will review those responses. The resulting database s will be checked for

QA/QC prior to and as part of regulatory analyses. (c) Small Entity Flexibility The Agency expects that a small percentage of the respondents may be small entities. These s mall entities are likely to have simpler refining operations and fewer petroleum refining processes, so they

would likely

have fewer portions of the survey to complete. The Agency also plans to use an electro nic format of the questionnaire in order to reduce the burden and improve the data accuracy

from all respondents, including small entities

. Inaddition, the survey will contain a question to determine the small entity status of a facility . This question will help to identify , quantify , and consider ways to minimize the burden o n small entities during the NESHAP and NSPS review and rulemaking process es . (d ) Collection Schedule The Agency

anticipates issuing the CAA section 114 letters in the first quarter of 201 1

. These CAA section 114 letters would require the owner/operator of each petroleum refinery to complete the petroleum refinery sector survey (including submitting cost data and providing copies of recent emissions test report s and CEMS/CMS data) within 90 days of receipt of the survey . The CAA section 114 letters would require the owner/operator of each petroleum refinery to provide an updated emissions inventory within 120 days of receipt of the survey . The CAA section 114 letters would require the owner/operator of each petroleum refinery to conduct distillation feed s ampling and anal ys is within 6 months of receipt of the survey

. The Agency will compile and anal yz e survey response data

. The owner/operator of each of the refinery emissions sources selected to conduct emission s testing will, in the same letter, be required to: i) submit to EPA a schedule for completing the required emissions testing, along with any reques t to use a test method not supplied in the EPA

- approved protocol ; ii ) commence emissions testing by the date specified in the EPA

- approved facility

- specific schedule; and iii) complete emissions testing within 6 months of receipt of the CAA section 114 letter. The Agency will compile and analyze emissions testing data upon receipt

.6 . Estimating the Burden and Cost of the Collection

( a ) Estimating Respondent Burden and Costs Attachment 1 presents estimated costs for the required data collection activities

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

. Technical, management, and clerical average hourl y rates for private industry workers were taken from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, September 2010 , “Table 2. Civilian Workers, by

occupational and industry group,” available at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t02.htm

. T otal compensatio n for three occupational groups are used as the basis for the lab or rates as shown below:

Labor type Occupational group Total compensation ($ per hour worked) Technical Professional and related 46. 82 Managerial Management, business, and financial 55. 4 6 Clerical Office and administrative support 23. 41
These rates represent salaries plus fringe benefits but do not include the cost of overhead

. An overhead rate of 110 percent is used to account for these costs

. The full y- burdened hourl y wage rates used to represent respondent labor costs are: technical at $9 8

. 3 2 , management at $11 6

. 47 , and clerical at $4 9

. 16

. These estimates represent the one

- time burden that will be incurred by the respondent s . ( b ) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs The costs the Federal Government would incur are presented in Attachment 2

. The Agency labor rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) 201 1 General Schedule which excludes locality

rates of pay

. These rates can b e obtained from Salary Table 201 1

- GS, available on the OPM website at http://www.opm.gov/oca/1 1 tables/html/gs_h.asp

. The government emplo yee labor rates used in this analysis are shown below:

Labor type Grade Step Hourly rate ($ per hour worked) Technical 13 1 34.34 Managerial 15 1 47.74 Clerical 7 1 16.28These rates were increased by 60 percent to include fringe benefits and overhead

. The full yburdened wage rates used to represent Agency labor costs are: clerical at $ 26.05 , technical at $ 54.9 4 , and managerial at $ 76.38

. ( c ) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs The potential respondent universe consists of an estimated 152 petroleum refineries

. A ll 152 of these refineries will be re quired to complete the first three component s of the I CR ( i.e. , the survey , submittal of existing test reports, emissions inventory , and distillation feed sampling). The fourth component ( i.e. , the required emission s testing) will have 81 respondents

. ( d ) Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs Tables (i ) Respondent tally

. The bottom line industry burden hours and costs, presented in Attachment 1 , are calculated by summing the pers on - hours column and b y summing the cost column

. The total burden and cost to the industry for 152 respondents is 6 9 ,000 hours and $ 3 1 million

. No capital or annualized costs are applicable because this is a one

- time submittal. The O&M costs of $ 912 are estimated for postage to mail hard cop y test reports and confidential survey response s to EPA. (ii) Agency tally

. The bottom line Agency burden and cost, presented in Attachment 2 is calculated in the same manner as the industry burden and cost

. The estimated burden and cost for 152 respondents is 21 , 6 00 hours and $ 1.2 million , which includes $ 3,500 in O&M costs to send certified CAA s ection 114 letters to all respondents with electronic return receipt , printing costs for the CAA section 114 letters and enclosures , costs to maintain a website to provide electronic copies of the questionnaire, and computer storage of data received

. (iii) The co mplex collection

. This I CR is a simple collection; therefore , this section does not apply

. (iv) Variations in the annual bottom line

. This section does not apply as this is a one

time collection. ( e ) Reasons for Change in Burden This is the initial estimation of burden for this information collection; therefore, this section does not appl y.(

f ) Burden Statement The total cost burden for the petroleum refineries data gathering effort is estimated to be 69,000 hours and $31 million (456 hours and $ 203,000 per respondent for 152 respondents). The O&M costs of $ 912 ($ 6 per respondent) are estimated for postage to mail hard copy test reports and confidential survey responses to EPA. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended b y persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency

. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing way s to comply with any previously

applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and transmit or otherwise disclose the information

. An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a collection of information unless it displays a currently

valid OMB control number

. The OMB control numbers for EPA’ s regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. To comment on EPA ’s need for this information, the accuracy of the provide d burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a docket for this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2010

- 0682 , which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov , or in hard cop y at EPA Docket, EPA/DC, EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC

. The EPA/DC Public Reading Room is open from 8 :30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday , excluding legal holidays . The telephone number for the Reading Room is 202

- 566

- 1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket Center is 202

- 566

- 1742. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov

. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically

. When in the system, select “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number identified above

. Also, you can send comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503,Attention: Desk Office for EPA

. Please include EPA Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2010

- 0682

and OMB C ontrol Number 2060

-NEW in any correspondence

.List of Attachments

1

. Industry

Burden and Costs for Responding to the Questionnaire 2

. Agency

Burden and Costs1

- 1 Attachment 1 . Industry Burden and Costs for Responding to the Questionnaire

Respondent Activity (A) Hours per Occurrence (B)

Occurrences/ Respondent/ Year (C) Hours/

Respondent/ Year (A x B) (D)

Respondents/ Year 1 (E)

Technical Hours/Year (C x D) (F)

Managerial Hours/Year (E x 0.05) (G) Clerical

Hours/Year (E x 0.10) (H) Cost/ Year 1. APPLICATIONS (Not Applicable) 2. SURVEY AND STUDIES (Not Applicable) 3. ACQUISITION, INSTALLATION, AND UTILIZATION OF TECHNOLOGY AND SYSTEMS (Not Applicable) 4. REPORT REQUIREMENTS A. Read In structions 12 1 12 152 1 , 824 91 182 $ 198 , 925 B. Required Activities a. Component 1: Complete and submit survey Part I: General Facility I

nformation 6 1 6 15 2 912 46 91 $ 99 ,4 62 Part II: Process and Emission s In formation Section 1. Energy Management 3 1 3 152 456 23 46 $49,731 Section 2

. Process Heater Data 4 1 4 152 608 30 61 $66,308 Section 3

. Equipment Leaks 5 1 5 152 760 38 76 $82,885 Section 4

. Storage Tanks 5 1 5 152 760 38 76 $82,885 Section 5 . Catalytic Cracking Unit 3 1 3 101 303 15 30 $33,045 Section 6

. Fluid Coking Unit 3 1 3 5 15 1 2 $1,636 Section 7

. Delayed Coking Unit 3 1 3 58 174 9 17 $18,976 Section 8

. Catalytic Reforming Unit 3 1 3 116 348 17 35 $37,953 Section 9

. Sulfur Recovery Unit 3 1 3 111 333 17 33 $36,317 Section 10

. Hydrogen Plant Vent 3 1 3 54 162 8 16 $17,668 Section 11

. Other Atmospheric Vents 4 1 4 152 608 30 61 $66,308 Section 12

. Flares 4 1 4 152 608 30 61 $66,308 Section 13. Fuel Gas Systems 3 1 3 152 456 23 46 $49,731 Section 14. Cooling Water Systems 3 1 3 152 456 23 46 $49,731 Section 15. Wastewater Collection and Treatment 5 1 5 152 760 38 76 $82,885 Section 16. Loading Operations 3 1 3 152 456 23 46 $49,731 Section 17. Solid Waste Management 3 1 3 50 150 8 15 $16,359 Part III: National Response Center Notifications 2 1 2 152 304 1 5 30 $33,154 Part I V: Complete and submit cost forms 2 20 1 20 114 2,280 114 228 $ 248 , 656 Part V: Emissions Monitoring and Source Test Data Gather/scan/copy existing test reports 3,4 1.5 2 3 60.8 182 9 18 $19,892 Fill out Source Test Summary Table (Attachment 1 ) 3 1 2 2 60.8 122 6 12 $13,262 Submit existing reports 3,5 1 2 2 60.8 122 6 12 $13,262 Fill out CEMS data (Attachment 2 ) 6 2 9 18 136.8 2,462 123 246 $268,548 Subtotal for Component 1 $ 1 , 7 0 3 , 618 b. Component 2: Emissions I nventory Data (Part VI) 200 1 200 152 30,400 1,520 3,040 $3,315,409 Subtotal for Component 2 $3,315,409 c. Component 3: Distillation Feed An alysis (Part VII) 7 4 152 $9,728,000 Subtotal for Component 3 $9,728,4091

- 2 Respondent Activity (A) Hours per Occurrence (B)

Occurrences/ Respondent/ Year (C) Hours/

Respondent/ Year (A x B) (D)

Respondents/ Year 1 (E)

Technical Hours/Year (C x D) (F)

Managerial Hours/Year (E x 0.05) (G) Clerical

Hours/Year (E x 0.10) (H) Cost/ Year d. Component 4: Emissions Testing and Analysis (Part VIII) 8 Read Test Plan provided by EPA for testing 0.7 1 0.7 81 57 3 6 $6,184 Procure contractor to perform testing 20 1 20 237 4,740 237 474 $516,942 Plant personnel for testing oversight 16 2 32 237 7,584 379 758 $827,107 Review the test report data 5 1 5 237 1,185 59 119 $129,236 Submit stack test results through the ERT 2 1 2 237 474 24 47 $51,694 QA/QC entered data on web s ite 1 1 1 237 237 12 24 $25,847 Emissions tests Organic c ompounds (group “a” stack tests for CRU) 12 $1,560,000 Organic c ompounds (group “a” stack tests for other units) 45 $4,626,000 Dioxin/furan HAP (group “b” stack tests) 39 $1,482,000 Acid g ases and reduced sulfur (group “c” stack tests) 8 $363,200 Mercury and m etallic HAP (including Cr +6 and ammonia) (group “d” stack tests for FCCU, FCU) 13 $1,376,440 Mercury and m etallic HAP (group “d” stack tests for other cracking, other coking, and reforming units) 26 $2,076,880 Acid g ases (group “e” stack tests) 31 $ 880,400 Reduced sulfur (group “f” stack tests) 12 $388,800 NO X and SO 2 (group “e” stack tests) 12 $374,400 Organic c ompounds, reduced sulfur, and o ther p arameters in refinery f uel g as 2 1 $ 777 ,000 Analysis via Texas El Paso s tripping c olumn s 12 $372,000 Wastewater treatment systems 6 $342,000 Subtotal for Component 4 $ 16,176,130 C. Create I

nformation (I

ncluded in 4B) D. Gather Existing I

nformation (I

ncluded in 4B) E. Write Report (Not Applicable) 5. RECORDKEEPI

NG REQUIREMENTS (I ncluded in 4B)
TOTAL ANNUAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST 60,298 3,015 6,030 $30,923,157 total hours = 69,342 avg. hr/ refinery = 456 avg. cost/ respondent = $203,442 ANNUAL CAPITAL COSTS (Not Applicable) $

- ANNUALIZED CAPITAL COSTS (Not Applicable) $

- TOTAL ANNUAL COSTS (O&M) 9 $912 TOTAL ANNUALIZED COSTS (Annualized capital + O&M costs) $912 TOTAL LABOR AND O&M COSTS $ 30,924,069 1 The number of respondents per year is based on the counts listed in Part B, Section 1

- Respondent Universe. 2 Assumes that 75 % of refineries will provide cost information

. 3 Itis estimated that 40% of refineries will submit two previous reports

. 4 Itis estimated that it would take 1.5 hours to locate and scan or copy each test report

.1

- 3

5 Existing reports include source tests, qualified CEMS data, biological treatment units data, and ambient or remote sensing da ta
. 6 Assumes 90% of refineries will fill out nine CEMS/CMS forms

. 7 Average number of samples per refinery a ssuming that 50 refineries will have two distillation columns from which they must sample and test three times (for a total of six samples) and the other 1 02 refineries will have one distillation column from which they must sample and test sample three times ((102×3 + 50×6) / 1 52 refineries = 4 tests per refinery). 8 Some units will be tested for more than one group of pollutants. Number of respondents based on 237 groups of tests on 9 6 total emissions sources at 81 different refineries. 9 Postage Costs for mailing survey re s ponses to EPA are estimated at $6 for Federal Express letter size envelope flat rate (1 per respondent).2

- 4 Attachment 2 . Agency Burden and Costs

Agency Activity (A) EPA

Hours/ Occurrenc e (B) Occurrences/ Respondent/Yea r (C) EPA

Hours/Responden t/ Year (A x B) (D)

Respondents/Yea r 1 (E) EPA

Technica l Hours/ Year (C x D) (F) EPA Manageria l Hours/Yea r (E x 0.05) (G) EPA

Clerical Hours/Yea r (E x 0.10) (H) Cost,

$ Develop/revise questionnaire spreadsheets and instructions 2 400 1 400 1 400 20 40 $24,547 Develop survey web site 10 1 10 1 10 1 1 $614 Mail out questionnaire 3 1 1 1 152 152 8 15 $9,328 Answer respondent questions via phone, email, and/or frequently asked questions posted on web site 4 1 1 1 38 38 2 4 $2,332 Handle and review responses for confidentiality5 1 1 1 152 152 8 15 $9,328 Review and analyze responses (including follow

- up) Survey 12 1 12 152 1,824 91 182 $111,935 CEMS /CMS data6 8 9 72 136.8 9,850 492 985 $604,450 C ost data 7 8 1 8 114 912 46 91 $55,968 Emissions i nventory d ata 20 1 20 152 3,040 152 304 $186,559 Review/analyze/inp ut existing emissions test data 8 7 2 14 60.8 851 43 85 $52,236 Review/analyze electronically submitted emissions test data 9 8 2. 5 19. 8 81 1, 600 8 0 160 $ 98,173

Total Annual Hours 18,829 941 1,883 $1,1 55,47 0 21,653 hours Expenses (O&M) 11 Printing letter and enclosures $532 Postage $912 Computer storage of data & web site usage $2,042 Total Expenses $3,486 TOTAL ANNUAL LABOR BURDEN AND COST $1,1 58 , 95 7 1 The number of respondents per year is based on the refinery counts listed in Part B, Section 1

- Respondent Universe. 2 In cludes determining which emissions sources will be required to complete emissions testing. 3 Mailout package includes section 114 letter with standard enclosures and hard copy of survey instructions. Assumes EPA will mail one questionnaire per facility

. 4 Assumes that 25% of the facilities will have questions. 5 Assumes that all facilities will have confidential data. 7 Assumes 90% of refineries will populate nine CEMS spreadsheet forms with CEMS and/or CMS data

. 8 Assumes that 75 % of refineries will provi de cost information

. 9 Assumes that 40% of refineries will submit two previous reports

. 10 Based on 237 total groups of tests on 9 6 total emissions sources at 81 different refineries (237 tests/9 6 emissions sources = 2. 5 tests per emissions source, 81 refineries).2

- 5 11 Copy costs are estimated for 70 pages at $0.05/page. Postage Costs are estimated at $6 for Federal Express letter size envel ope flat rate. Data storage estimated at $21/GB/mo, assuming 25 MB per response. Web site cost estimated at $85/mo for 6 months.