ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

1 SUPPORTING STATEMENT

– INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST (ICR)

Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality
Standards ( Proposed Rule )

1. 0 I dentification of the Information C ollection

1.1 Title of the Information Collection

Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards, ICR Number 2391.0 4 , OMB Control Number 2060

- 0667

. 1.2 Short Characterization/Abstract

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to revise certain provisions of the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). The proposed revisions would alter
the universe of electricity generating uni ts (EGUs) covered by the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program but would not alter any reporting requirements faced by an individual unit covered by the program . This information collection request (ICR) addresses changes in
information collection under CSAPR associated with the proposed changes in the universe of units subject to the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program.

EPA issued CSAPR 1 in July 2011 to address Clean Air Act ( CAA ) requirements concerning interstate transport of air pollution with respect to the 1997 ozone national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter NAAQS

. As
amended in later rulemakings , CSAPR requires 28 states to limit their state

- wide emissions of nitrogen oxides ( NO X ) and/o r sulfur dioxide ( SO 2 ) beginning in 2015, and in some cases to limit emissions further beginning in 2017, in order to reduce or eliminate the states’ unlawful
contributions to ozone and fine particulate matter pollution in other states. The emissions
limit ations are defined in terms of maximum state

- wide “budgets” for emissions of ozone

season 2 NO X , annual NO X , and/or annual SO 2 by each state’s EGUs

. As the mechanism for achieving compliance with the emissions limitations, CSAPR require s the affected unit s in each affected state to participate in one or more emissions trading programs. Under e ach trading

program, an affected unit is required to report its emissions and to surrender emission allowances
sufficient to cover those emissions, and the total quan tities of allowances issued to the affected
unit s in each state are limited to the amounts in the state

- wide emissions budgets.

Implementation of CSAPR began in January 2015 following the U.S. Supreme Court’s
reversal of a 2012 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Distri ct of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) vacating the rule

. 3 In July 2015, the D.C. Circuit issued a second decision on CSAPR largely upholding the rule against remaining challenges but remanding certain state budgets to EPA for reconsideration

, including 11 states’ NO X Ozone Season trading budgets for

1 Federal Implementation Plans; Interstate Transport of Fine Particulate Matter and Ozone and Correction of SIP Approvals, 76 FR 48208 (August 8, 2011).

2 For purposes of CSAPR, the “ozone season” includes the months of May through September.

3 EPA v. EME H

omer City Generation, L.P. , 134 S. Ct. 1584 (2014), rev’g EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA , 696 F.3d 7 (D.C. Cir. 2012).ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

2 2017 and subsequent years

. 4 At the time of the D.C. Circuit’s second CSAPR decision, EPA had already commenced analysis of states’ potential obligations related to interstate trans port under
the 2008 ozone NAAQS. This proposed rulemaking would both respond to the D.C. Circuit’s
remand of NO X O zone S eason trading budgets established with respect to the 1997 ozone season NAAQS for certain states and also address obligations with resp ect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS for a larger group of states . Specifically, the proposal would establish new or revised NO X Ozone Season trading budgets for 23 states determined to have obligations related to interstate transport under the 2008 ozone NAAQS and eliminat e budgets for two states subject to the remand and determined not to have such obligations

. Units in states with new or revised budgets (as well as units in one other state with an existing budget that was not remanded ) would be required to pa rticipate in the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program, while unit s in states whose budgets are eliminated would no longer be required to participate in the program. 5 ( EPA notes that in the final rule, the specific states for which budgets are added or e liminated , and therefore the specific unit s that would be added to or removed from the universe of units participating in the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program, may change. )

All of the unit s that would be added to or removed from the universe of units subject to
the information collection requirements of the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program under this proposed rule are already subject either to those requirements or to overlapping
information collecti on requirements under the CSAPR NO X Annual Trading Program (or both)

. Most of these unit s also are already subject to related information collection requirements under the Acid Rain Program (ARP) established under Title IV of the 1990 C AA Amendments

. Bot h CSAPR and the ARP have existing approved ICRs: EPA ICR Number 2391.03 /OMB Control
Number 2060

- 0667 (CSAPR)

, and EPA ICR Number 1633.16/OMB Control Number 2060

- 0258 (ARP ). EPA has coordinate d the information collection requirements under the ARP and
CSA PR , and t he information collection burden and costs covered under the CSAPR ICR are
estimated as incremental to the information collection burden and costs under the ARP ICR. The
net reduction s in information collection burden and costs under this rule are estimated as
incremental to the information collection burden and costs under the CSAPR ICR. Most of the information used to estimate burden and costs in this ICR was developed for the existing CSAPR
and ARP ICRs. EPA intends to incorporate the changes in information collection burden and

costs quantified in this ICR into the next renewal of the CSAPR ICR.

EPA has publish ed a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the Federal Re gister that detail s all proposed changes resulting from the rule

, including the proposed changes in the set of units
that would face emission reduction requirements in order to address interstate transport obligations related to ozone. As relevant here, the proposed rule would establish new obligations

to address interstate ozon e transport for Kansas and would discontinue obligations to address interstate ozone transport for Florida and South Carolina, in all cases starting in 2017. Consequently, Kansas unit s would become subject to the information collection requirements of
the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program starting in 2017, while Florida and South
Carolina unit s would cease to be subject to those requirements in 2017 . Information collection

4 EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA , 795 F.3d 118 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

5 The proposed rule would not amend the information collection requirements applicable to any unit participating in the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program. The proposed rule would amend certain other provisions of the program.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

3 requirements for unit s in other states affected by the proposed rule would not change because
those unit s are already and would remain subject to the information collection requirements of
the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program, and the proposal does not alter the information collection requirements for any individual affected unit subject to the program. This ICR therefore focuses exclusively on changes in information collection burden and costs fo r unit s in Kansas, Florida, and South Carolina, which are summarized below.

With respect to affected unit s in Kansas and South Carolina that under this proposed rule would begin or end participation in the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program

, respective ly , all of these unit s also already are and would remain covered by the CSAPR NO X Annual Trading Program. The information collection requirements under the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program are almost entirely a subset of the information collection

r equirements under the CSAPR NO X Annual Trading Program

, with the only exceptions being requirements to compute and report a small number of additional subtotals from the same hourly
data. T he modest one

- time actions necessary for a unit that already repor ts annual data to add or

remove computation and reporting of the additional subtotals are encompassed within the scope of the information collection burden and costs already covered under the existing CSAPR ICR

. EPA therefore considers th is proposed rule to entail no change in information collection burden
or costs for these unit s. With respect to affected unit s in Florida that under this proposed rule would end participation in the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program, these unit s would no longer be

req uired to report NO X mass emissions under any CSAPR program but a majority would continue to be subject to the ARP

. EPA estimates that ARP

- affected Florida unit s would experience no change in information collection burden and costs as a result of this rule because information collection activities essentially the same as those formerly required under CSAPR
would still be required to fulfill ARP

- related monitoring and reporting obligations

. However, t he
subset of affected Florida un it s not subject to the ARP would experience a reduction in
information collection burden and costs . These units would no longer be subject to monitoring and reporting requirements under 40 CFR part 75 for either CSAPR or the ARP and would
therefore be abl e to discontinue monitoring and recording of hourly NO X emissions and heat input data

, including maintenance and quality assurance activities for the required monitoring equipment (to the extent the activities are not required to meet other obligations)

. 6 The magnitude of the reduction s in information collection burden and costs for a non

- ARP

- affected
Florida unit resulting from this rule would vary depend ing on which of the monitoring methodologies available under 40 CFR part 75 the unit currently employs.

As noted above, the reductions in information collection burden and costs under this proposed rule are estimated as incremental to the information burden and costs under the existing
CSAPR ICR . To provide context , this ICR describes th e full set of information collection
activities covered under the existing CSAPR ICR , noting instances where burden and costs would change as a result of this proposed rule

. Most of these activities relate to monitoring

, recordkeeping

, and reporting of ho urly emissions. CSAPR

- affected unit s are required to: (1) submit a monitoring plan and certification reports for each monitoring system, (2) monitor and

6 Because Florida was not covered by the NO X SIP Call , Florida EGUs have never been subject

to part 75 monitoring and reporting obligations arising from any SIP submitted under that rule.
See 40 CFR 51.121.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

4 record hourly emissions and operations data, and (3) submit quarterly reports of their emissions
and o perating data to EPA. All sources affected by CSAPR are required to monitor and report
NO X and/or SO 2 emissions in accordance with 40 CFR part 75. Sources with monitors already certified under 40 CFR part 75 may be exempt from initial certification requi rements.

Like the ARP, CSAPR employs emission trading programs as a mechanism to reduce the overall costs of reducing emissions. In addition to the emission monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting requirements just described, trading programs require oth er tasks that involve an
information collection burden for permitting authorities, sources, and EPA . These tasks include: (1) permitting and other certification

, ( 2 ) transfer and tracking of allowances; and (3)
determin ation of annual year

- end compliance. Emission allowance market participants using the CAMD Business System (CBS) to transfer allowances are required either to complete and submit an allowance transfer form for each allowance transfer or to perform the transfer on

- line.
CBS users that are n ot covered sources, such as allowance brokers, fuel suppliers, and environmental groups, are also required to file a onetime account information application to
establish accounts in CBS.

CSAPR regulates sources directly through f ederal i mplementatio n p lans (FIPs) and does not impose any reporting obligations on non

- industry entities. States have the option to replace provisions of the CSAPR trading programs applicable to the units in their states in whole or in part by submitting revisions to their s tate i mplementation p lans (SIPs).

2. 0 N eed for and U se of the C ollection

2.1 Need/Authority for the Collection

E missions data in general are of vital importance to EPA for fulfilling a host of monitoring, standard

- setting, rulemaking, reviewing, and reporting duties

. CSAPR and its
associated emissions data and other information collection requirements have been promulgated to implement CAA s ection 110(a)(2)(D)

, 42 U.S.C. 7410(a)(2)(D), often referred to as the Act’s “good neighbor” provision, which r equires states to prohibit certain emissions because of their impact on air quality outside their borders

. As relevant here

, the provision requires all states,
within three years of promulgation of a new or revised NAAQS, to submit SIPs that prohibit

cert ain emissions of air pollutants because of the impact they would have on air quality in other

states. As described above, CSAPR as originally promulgated addressed certain states’ good neighbor obligations with respect to the 1997 ozone NAAQS and the 1997 and 2006 fine particulate matter NAAQS, and this proposed rule addresses certain states’ good neighbor obligations with respect to the 2008 ozone NAAQS. Prior to CSAPR, EPA issued two other
rules also implementing the good neighbor provision: the 1998 NO X SIP Call and the 2005 Clean Air Interstate Rule ( CAIR )

, which superseded the NO X SIP Call. CAIR was remanded by the
D.C. Circuit and has now been replaced by CSAPR

. CAA s ection 110(c)(1) , 42 U.S.C. 7410(c)(1), requires EPA to act in certain
circumstances where SIP deficiencies exist

. Specifically, section 110(c)(1) requires the Administrator to promulgate a FIP at any time within two years after the Administrator either (1)
finds that a s tate has failed to make a required SIP submission ; (2) finds that a SIP submission is incomplete ; or (3) disapproves a SIP submission . The Administrator must promulgate a FIP in
the above

- described scenarios unless the s tate corrects the deficiency and the AdministratorICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

5 approves the SIP revision before the A dministrator promulgates the relevant FIP

. In this action, among other things, EPA is promulgating FIPs for states where SIP deficiencies exist with respect to states’ good neighbor obligations under the 2008 ozone NAAQS , and through those FIPs is requiri ng sources in the covered states to participate in the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program as a mechanism to address the states’ good neighbor obligations

. CAA s ection 301(a)(1) , 42 U.S.C. 7601(a)(1), gives the EPA Administrator general authority to pre scribe such regulations as are necessary to carry out her functions under the Act. Pursuant to this section, EPA has the authority to include provisions in the CSAPR trading program regulations that are necessary to ensure that the programs are able to ac complish their authorized objectives, including information collection requirements.

2 .2 Practical Utility/Users of the Data

Permit applications are used by states and EPA to issue operating and construction permits. A permit application is legally binding on the owners, operators, and designated representative of a source until the permit is issued. Affected sources rely on the permit for information regarding the applicable requirements with which they must comply. Because permit applications and permits are public documents, they may be used by the public to examine activities undertaken by affected sources.

Certificates of representation are used by EPA to ensure that emissions

- and allowance

related submissions by sources are authorized and to facilitate enforcement of program requirements.

Accurate emissions data obtained through monitoring and reporting under 40 CFR part
75 are indispensable to successful fulfillment of states ’ obligations under the CAA’s good neighbor provision as implemented through the CSAPR trading programs, for two reasons:

● Accurate emissions data are essential to enable EPA and state s to assess the impact of the trading programs in reducing NO X and SO 2 emissions, and therefore to assist states in meeting the ozone and f

ine particulate matter NAAQS. By reducing levels of NO X and
SO 2 emissions, the CSAPR trading programs reduce the adverse effects of the transport of ozone, ozone precursors, and fine particles from upwind states.

● EPA enforces the CSAPR trading program s (in part) by comparing emissions data measured, recorded, and reported under 40 CFR part 75 by affected sources with the
number s of allowances held in the respective compliance accounts of such affected

sources.

In addition to the uses described above und er CSAPR, e mission s data and related
information for unit s, along with emissions data and related information for other types of

sources, are routinely used by EPA’s Office of Atmospheric Programs (OAP), Office of Air Quality Programs and Standards (OAQPS), and regional offices in carrying out a variety of
activities

. These activities support regulatory functions as well as functions that are more programmatic i n nature such as trend analyses

. Such projects include:

● Evaluation of existing control strategies, such as CSAPR , for s tates and larger areas;

● Evaluation of proposed contr ol strategies for s tates and larger areas, including applications of regional scale models;ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

6 ● Development of national control strategies and preparation of r egulatory i mpact a nalyses (RIA s );

● Preparation and publication of national summaries of emissions

, including trend analyses;

● Development and maintenance of a data base to assi st in the identification of important source categories for future regulation; and

● Preparation of the stationary source portion of a report to Congress on SO 2 emissions

. This report is required by s ection 406 of the 1990 CAA Amendments, 104 Stat. 2632, and
is due on a five

- year cycle that began on January 1, 1995

. The report must contain an inventory of national annual SO 2 emissions from industrial sources (as defined in CAA section 402, 42 U.S.C. 7651a ).

EPA ' s Office of Research and Development (ORD) uses emission s data in determining priorities for control technology research and as a key data component in the application of regional scale models

. EPA ' s r egional o ffices use emission s data and other source parameters to support source inspections and in the analyses of the impact of new or modified sources within

an area

. EPA ' s Emission Inventory and Analysis g roup use s emissions data to assess and analyze trends in criteria pollutant emissions over time.

In addition to supporting projects and initiat ives inte rnal to EPA, OAP, OAQPS, and the

r egional o ffices respond to numerous requests for reports on emission s from sources

. Most requests come from contractors and consultants involved in special studies; a smaller number

come from the press, universit ies

, and others involved in research.

The collection of emissions data specific to nonattainment areas for certain criteria air pollutants is necessary to comply with requirements specified in Title I of the CAA

. States with nonattainment areas rely on current emissions informati on from point, nonpoint, and mobile
sources to revise their SIPs and to plan for emission reductions mandated by the CAA

. In addition, a s tate

- wide inventory compiled at least every three years for al l point, nonpoint, and
mobile sources is considered to be a key tool to assist s tates in meeting CAA requirements that address emissions tracking, compliance issues, and mid

- course adjustments

. State

- wide emission inventories can be used by s tates affecte d by pollution transport from upwind areas to develop more efficient control strategies to meet NAAQS

. State

- wide emission inventories that were developed by EPA (the N ational E missions I nventory, or NEI ) are being used by the Regional Planning Organizati ons (RPOs) as the starting point for the development of s tate

- wide emission inventories used in the regional haze program to define control strategies.

Information collected on allowance transfers in the CAMD Business System (CBS) is used by EPA to track a llowances for the purpose of determining compliance with the NO X and
SO 2 trading programs. Information on allowance transfers is also used by participants in the allowance market and the public to evaluate the activities of affected sources, and by EPA fo r program evaluation.

Toge ther, the permit applications, certificates of representation, emissions data, and
allowance transfer information help to provide the accountability to allow the NO X and SO 2 trading p rograms to function without more stringent command and control approaches.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

7 3. 0 N onduplication , C onsultations
, and Other C ollection C riteria

3 .1 Nonduplication

Monitoring requirements, quality assurance activities, and data r eporting requirements for
unit s affected under the CSAPR NO X and SO 2 t rading p rograms are set forth in 40 CFR part 75 and are integrated with the analogous requirements under 40 CFR part 75 for unit s affected under the ARP. In most cases, unit s subject to both the ARP and one or more of the CSAPR trading programs can comply with both programs using the same equipment subject to the same certification and quality assurance requirements. A single consolidated part 75 monitoring plan is required for each unit . Further, where applicable, a single consolidated quarterly electro nic report of hourly emissions and heat input data is required

. CSAPR imposes no independent permitting requirements. Operating permit requirements for CSAPR

- affected sources are integrated with other source operating permit requirements under Title V

, and any construction permit requirements arise under construction permit ting programs

.

3.2 Public Notice

The preamble to the proposed rule was provided to the public with notice of and the opportunity to comment on this ICR.

3 .3 Consultations

EPA has extensive experience with permitting requirements, emission reporting requirements, and administration of an allowance transfer and tracking system from implement ation of the ARP, NO X SIP Call, CAIR , and CSAPR trading programs . This experience includes fr equent interaction with affected sources and states . EPA has reflected lessons learned from program implementation and interactions with sources and states to refine the information collection requirements of each successive trading program, including the CSAPR trading programs.

EPA has also engaged in more structured consultation efforts. For example, d uring the development of CAIR, discussions were held with the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) to clarif y EPA ' s logic in developing the emissions reporting requirement s contained within th at rule. Likewise, i n 2009, EPA held a series of workshops with stakeholders to identify potential options for addressing the D.C. Circuit’s decision on CAIR. 7 EPA
considered comments received durin g and following the workshops when developing CSAPR
and its emission reporting requirements

.
A s part of updating the ARP ICR, EPA has contacted various affected parties to ga ther
information on continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) capital costs, CE M S operation and maintenance costs, fuel flow meter capital costs, and CEM S /fuel flow meter testing costs

. That information has been used in the existing CSAPR ICR and in this ICR , as appropriate.

7 North Carolina v. EPA , 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir), modified on reh’g , 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008).ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

8 Finally, as part of developing this ICR, EPA contacted vendors of data acquisition and handling systems (DAHS) used by unit s to collect and report emissions data under 40 CFR part
75 . The vendors confirmed that a unit already reporting hourly NO X emission s and heat input
data for compliance with an annual program can activate or deactivate the capability to compute and report additional subtotals of that hourly data for compliance with an ozone season program with a minimal update to the DAHS inputs, and t hat for the estimated 95% of units with DAHS software maintenance contracts, the update would entail zero incremental cost.

3.4 Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Submittal o f emissions and allowance transfer information on an annual basis (and/or on

an ozone

- season basis, as applicable) provides the data necessary to determine whether state budgets have been exceede d

. If this information collection were not carried out at least as frequently as annually, EPA would not be able to verify tha t emission red uctions necessary to
meet each s tate ' s NO X and SO 2 emission budgets were being achieved

. Because the NO X and
SO 2 budgets prescribed have been deemed essential in order to aid downwind s tates in attaining the NAAQS in a timely manner, data co llected less frequently would be of little or no use.

Quarterly collection of emissions data allows for frequent check ing of reported data for
errors and provide s rapid feedback to industry of needed adjustments to data collection systems, thereby promoting more accurate and reliable emissions data

. Also , existing federal and s tate emission monitoring programs often require quarterly, or in some cases, monthly reporting

. Collection less frequently than quarterl y would increase the amount of preparation and review time at the end of the reporting period both for regulated sources and for EPA , and would slow down the process of compliance determination

.

3 .5 General Guidelines

This ICR does not violate any of OMB ' s guidelines for information collections.

3 .6 Confidentiality

As required by CAA s ection 114, estimates or measurements of emissions submitted to
EPA under the CSAPR trading programs and this proposed rule must be treated as non

confidential

. Under Agency procedures, certain data items relating to the computation of emissions may be identified as sensitive by a s tate and are then treated as " s tate

- sensitive " by
EPA

. The potentially s tate

- sensitive items include the following: p rocess rate, boi ler design capacity, emission estimation codes, percent space heat, operating rate, and maximum operation
rate/hour

. Where f

ederal and s tate requirements are inconsistent, the appropriate EPA r egional

o ffice should be consulted.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

9 3 .7 Sensitive Questions

This information collection does not ask any questions concerning sexual behavior or attitudes, religious beliefs, or other matters usually considered private.

4. 0 T he R espon d e n ts and the I nformation R equested

4.1 Respondents/ NAICS Codes

CSAPR generally applies to stationary fossil fuel

- fired boilers and combustion turbines serving at any time on or after January 1, 2005 a generator with nameplate capacity greater than 25 megawatts producing electricity for sale. Under the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS), entities meeting these criteria are generally classified as code 221112, fossil fuel electric power generation , but some units classified under other NAICS codes may also meet
these criteria. C ogeneration units and solid waste incinerat ion units otherwise meeting these criteria may qualify for an exemption from CSAPR if they meet certain additional criteria.

As noted above, CSAPR regulates sources directly through FIPs and does not impose any reporting obligations on non

- industry entities. However, states have option s to replace the CSAPR trading program provisions applicable to their sources in whole or in part by submitting
SIP revisions , including limited SIP revisions that would change only how CSAPR emission allowances are allocated among the state’s affected sources

. Th e CSAPR ICR estimates a
burden for all states with CSAPR

- affected sources to submit limited SIP revisions for th at

p urpose. This proposed rule would reduce the number of states with such SIP revision options by only one state

. This proposed rule also does not change any information collection requirements for any individual unit subject to a CSAPR trading pr ogram, and an estimate of burden for state and local permitting agencies to review the information collection requirements of CSAPR is already reflected in the CSAPR ICR. EPA believes this proposed rule creates no material change in information collection burden and costs for state and local permitting authorities relative to the burden and costs for these entities reflected in the existing CSAPR ICR and therefore does not consider these entities to be respondents for purposes of this ICR

.

4.2 Informatio n Requested

CSAPR requires unit s to monitor and report emissions and heat input data under 40 CFR part 75. Most of the emission reporting requirements under 40 CFR part 75 were established
under the ARP and as subsequently modified are generally covered under the current ARP ICR for units subject to that program. The NO X SIP Call established additional obligations related to reporting of NO X mass emissions which were incorporated first into C AIR and then into CSAPR. As subsequently modified, these requi rements are covered under the current CSAPR ICR. With respect to unit s not subject to the ARP, the CSAPR ICR also covers requirements
that for ARP

- affected unit s are covered by the ARP ICR.

This section generally describes the data items requested from affected sources for the
collections covered under the CSAPR ICR and defines the activities i n which respondents must

engage to assemble, submit, or store these data items. EPA notes that this proposed rule does notICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

10 change any of the information requested from any individual unit subject to an y of the CSAPR trading programs, but would change the universe of units subject to these requirements.

(i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements

( a ) Permitting and Other Certification

CSAPR establishes no independent permitting requirements. A CSAPR

- affected unit
must revise its operating permit issued under Title V of the Act to incorporate CSAPR

- related applicable requirements in accordance with the provisions of Title V . Title V permit applications must be kept for five years pursuant to Title V recordkeeping requirements.

A unit that needs to add emissions monitoring equipment because of CSAPR’s monitoring and reporting requirements (and not because of any other monitoring and reporti ng requirements) may need to obtain a construction permit to install the required equipment.

For each affected source and each affected unit at the source , the designated representative must submit a certificate of representation. Under 40 CFR §§ 97.416, 97.516, 97.616, and 97.716, a complete certificate of representation includes:

● Identification of the source and unit;

● Dates on which the unit commenced commercial operation;

● Name and contact information for the CSAPR designated representative and alternate (if applicable);

● A list of the owners and operators of each unit; and

● A certification statement and signature of the CSAPR designated representative and alternate (if applicable).

Certification applications are to be kept for a period of five years pursuant to the general requirements imposed for Title V permitted sources

.

( b ) Monitoring and Reporting

CSAPR

- affected sources are required to monitor , record, and report NO X and/or SO 2 mass emissions data and heat i nput data following the requirements of 40 CFR part 75. The emissions monitoring requirements specify that affected sources must (1) submit a monitoring plan for each affected unit at a source, (2) submit data for certification of each monitor, (3)
record hourly operational, pollutant monitor, and /or flow monitor data for each affected unit (with specific requirements dependent on the particular monitoring methodology used) , and (4) submit quarterly reports of emissions data and heat input data to EPA.

Res pondents are required under 40 CFR 75.64 to submit the quarterly NO X and SO 2 mass emissions data via direct electronic submission to EPA. Such data must include a certification statement by the source’s designated representative attesting to the accuracy, truthfulness, and completeness of the submission. Generally, all monitoring records are required to be kept for three years.

( c ) Allowance Tra nsfer

Sources and other trading program participants must submit allowance transfer, allowance deduction, and compliance assurance information, as necessary.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

11 (ii) Respondent Activities

With respect to permitting and other certification, industry r espondents must include
CSAPR

- related applicable requirements in a Title V operating permit revision application. Although there is some possibility that a non

- Title V source could be affected under CSAPR , all
CSAPR

- affected sources are assumed to be Title V sources for purposes of this ICR. It is assumed the permit revision application and all other monitoring, repo rting, or recordkeeping requirements associated with Title V permitting are part of baseline Title V requirements. Respondents may also be required to submit construction permit applications if new emissions monitoring equipment is required and installati on of the equipment requires a construction permit

. Finally, respondents must submit an initial certificate of representation for each source
with affected unit s and must submit a new certificate of representation whenever the designated representative ch anges. The primary tasks that must be performed by industry respondents to meet CSAPR’s

em issions monitoring and reporting requirements are : (1) completing and updating monitoring plan s for each affected source and each affected unit at a source; (2) conducting tests to certify monitors and submitting test resul ts to EPA; (3) recording hourly emissions data (this activity is generally performed ele ctronically); (4) performing operation and maintenance activities associated with monitoring, including quality assurance activi ties; (5) assuring data quality

, preparing quarterly reports of emissions data

, and submitting these reports to EPA; and (6) responding to error messages generated by such submissions

. In addition, respondents will have

t o purchase the necessary monitoring hardware and electronic data reporting software (or software upgrades). For respondents that are also subject to the ARP, most of the burden
associated with these activities is included in the ARP ICR.

Industry responde nt t asks to meet CSAPR’s allowance transfer and tracking requirements include periodic submission of allowance transfer, allowance deduction, and compliance
assurance information. State respondents that elect to provide allowance allocations must

prepare and submit those allocations to EPA.

5. 0 T he I nformation C ollected

– A gency A ctivities , C ollection Methods
, and I nformation Management

5.1 Agency Activities

EPA activities associated with CSAPR information collection requirements include:

● Reviewing permit applications;

● Reviewing and processing certificates of representation;

● Reviewing monitoring plans and monitoring system certification applications;

● Receiving, reviewing, and storing the emission s and heat input data submitted by each
affected source ;

● Processing and updating the data submitted by sources , including performing quality
assurance of data and coordinati ng efforts to resolve errors and anomalies;

● Maintaining and administering the allowance transfer and tracking system;ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

12 ● Allocating allowances to affected units and recording allocations;

● Calculating and reviewing annual emissions from affected sources, and aggregating such annual emissions for compliance assurance purposes,

● Reviewing total annual emissions data submi tted to track each state's progress toward meeting its budgets and creating a summary report of emissions; and

● Fulfilling information requests.

5 .2 Collection Methodology and Management

To ensure consistency and to expedite data entry, EPA requires tha t standard data formats under 40 CFR part 75 be used to submit the information collected for CSAPR

. Several computer systems and associated databases have been developed to ( 1 ) record quarterly emissions monitoring data, ( 2 ) track allowance transfer activity , and (3) calculate the
number of allowances to be deducted each year

. The se systems and database s are designed to provide easy access to information for use by the Agency, s tate s, regulated community, and general public. For example, EPA also us es these systems to help answer respondent questions
and to conduct audits of data submissions.

EPA has also established a Clean Air Markets website that includes detailed information collected from emissions reports

. Those without access to the i nternet may use the Clean Air Markets Hotline to request information, including summary reports

.

5 .3 Small Entity Flexibility

CSAPR allows use of the range of emissions monitoring and reporting options provided under 40 CFR part 75. Units combusting coal generally must use CEMS for NO X , SO 2 , and heat input that include equipment to continuously monitor flue gas flow and flue gas concentrations
of NO X , SO 2 , and either oxygen (O 2 ) or carbon dioxide ( CO 2 )

. Under options described in appendix D to part 75, unit s combusting exclusively natural gas and fuel oil may monitor fuel flow instead of flue gas flow and (where SO 2 reporting is required) may perform fuel sulfur sampling instead of continuous SO 2 concentration monitoring

. In addition, under options described in appendix E to part 75, n atural gas

- and oil

- fired units that qualify as peaking units

may perform periodic NO X emission rate testing instead of continuous NO X and O 2 or CO 2 concentration monitoring.

Further, m any natural gas

- a nd oil

- fired peaking units qualify as low mass emissions (LME) units under 40 CFR 75.19

. To qualify as an LME unit, a unit must emit no more than 50
tons of NO X during the May

- September ozone season , 100 tons of NO X annually, and 25 tons of
SO 2 annually

, and must annually calculate no more than the se amount s based on specified procedures for calculating and reporting emissions

. LME units are exempted from certain requirements to install and operate monitoring equipment, conduct fuel sampl ing, and perform quality assu rance or quality control tests

. Moreover, emissions reporting requirements are significantly simplified for these units.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

13 As discussed in the R egulatory Impact Analysis for the final ARP regulations (October 19, 1992), smaller utilities are mor e like ly to be dependent on natural gas

- and oil

- fired units, especially very small utilities

.

5 .4 Collection Schedule

Collection frequency under CSAPR is quarterly . All affected unit s must use the
E mission C ollection and M onitoring Plan S ystem (ECMPS) to submit monitoring plan, quality assurance, certification test, and emissions data to EPA quarterly . In addition, CSAPR requires
the collection of allowance tra cking information as transfers are submitted

, as well as information regarding other " event " submissions made on a one

- time or annual basis

.

6. 0 E stimating the B urden and C ost of the C ollection

6.1 Estimating Respondent Burden

This section discusses EPA’s estimates of the paperwork burden and cost associated with the categories of activities described above: permitting and other certification; emissions monitoring , recordkeeping, and reporting; and allowance transfer activities. To estimate the
burden and/or cost of each requirement, EPA has utilized prior estimates of the costs of
activities , estimates provided by affec ted utilities in comments to the Agency, and /or estimates
base d on the Agency ' s experience in implementing existing trading programs.

(i) Respondent Permitting and Other Certification Activities

Some existing sources affected by CSAPR may have been required to construct and therefore obtain construction permits for additional equipment that was not required for ARP compliance. In the existing CSAPR ICR, the Agency estimates that applying for a construction permit take s 20 hours of managerial and 20 hours of technician time, per permit. With respect to this proposed rule, all existing sources whose coverage under the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program changes would have already been subject to at least one CSAPR NO X trading

program and would have already been required to construct whatever new equipment was necessary, with the consequence that this proposed rule would cause no changes in the number of required construction permits. EPA assumes that new CSAPR

- affect ed sources generally would also be affected under the ARP and that any burden associated with construction permits required by those sources would therefore be encompassed within the information collection burden and costs under the existing ARP ICR.

Under CSAPR , the designated representative for each affected source must submit a certificate of representation to EPA. Because most existing CSAPR

- affected sources are already subject to the ARP, the Agency believes that the DRs for most CSAPR

- affected s ources only
need to revise their existing certificates of representation, and that such revisions are routine. In the existing CSAPR ICR, t he Agency therefore estimates that, on a per unit basis, about one half hour of managerial time and one half hour of technical time will be required to revise the certificate of representation. For purposes of this proposed rule, EPA estimates that changes in certificates of representation for affected unit s that are becoming subject to one more or one
fewer CSAPR tradi ng program are encompassed within the scope of the information collection burden and costs under the existing CSAPR ICR.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

14 (ii) Agency and State Activities Relating to Permitting and Other Certification.

Agency permitting activities (including activities of permitting authorities) include receiving and processing certificates of representation, permit applications, and retired unit exemptions. In the existing CSAPR ICR, t he Agency estimates that these act ivities will require 2,926 hours per year. EPA estimates that the proposed rule will not cause any material change in
these activities.

The existing CSAPR ICR also includes a one

- time allocation of burden for staff at permitting authorities to read the re quirements of CSAPR related to information collection. Because this proposed rule does not change the requirements of CSAPR related to information collection but only changes the universe of units covered by one of CSAPR’s trading program,
and because no new permitting authorities would need to undertake activities related to CSAPR’s information collection requirements as a result of this proposed rule, EPA has not included any burden for this item in this ICR.

(iii) Industry Respondent Monitoring Activities

The great majority of information collection burden and costs under CSAPR relate to emissions monitoring and reporting activities. CSAPR generally requires all affected sources to
monitor their NO X emission rate, SO 2 emission rate

, and heat inp ut in order to determine NO X mass emissions and SO 2 mass emissions ( except that CSAPR does not require SO 2 monitoring for sources subject to only the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program )

. Coal

- fired units

use NO X , SO 2 , and flue gas flow CEMS to meet those requirement s. As noted in section 5.3 above, natural gas

- and oil

- fired units have alternatives. To monitor SO 2 emission rate and heat input data, these units may perform fuel sampling and analysis (or use an SO 2 default factor for pipeline natural gas) combined with use of a fuel flowmeter. In addition, natural gas

- and oil

fired peaking units may perform periodic NO X emiss ion rate testing combined with use of a fuel
flowmeter to monitor NO X emission rate data

. C ertain additional data must also b e monitored for quality assurance purposes. C ertain units with low mass emissions may use assumed emissions factors together with operational data to calculate emissions.

CSAPR information collection burden and costs are calculated as incremental to the
information collection burden and costs under the ARP ICR

. CSAPR

- affected units sub ject to
the ARP already have all or , in a few cases, most of the monitoring and reporting capability required under CSAPR (or, in the case of CSAPR

- affected new units, are required to obtain that capability for ARP compliance) , and th e associated burden and costs are accounted for under the
ARP ICR

. In general, for ARP

- affected units, the principal additional information collection burden and costs required by CSAPR and the refore covered under the CSAPR ICR are those
associated with (1) modifying certificates of representation

, and (2) performing CSAPR
allowance tra nsfer activities

. For CSAPR

- affected units not subject to the ARP

, CSAPR

- related information collection
burde n and costs include the full burden and costs associated with reporting hourly NO X mass emissions, SO 2 mass emissions (for units in states covered by CSAPR’s SO 2 trading programs), and heat input data, as well as the burden and costs associated with modifying certificates of representation and performing CSAPR allowance tra nsfer activities. Most n on

- ARP units subject to CSAPR established their required monitoring and reporting capability under CAIR, and their ongoing burden and costs under CSAPR, inc luding annualized capital costs originally incurred under CAIR, are now acco unted for under the CSAPR ICR. As noted earlier in thisICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

15 section and in section 5.3 above , CSAPR provides a variety of monitoring options for affected
unit s. Most CSAPR

- affected u nit s not subject to the ARP are combustion turbines that commenced commercial operation before November 15, 1990. These units generally qualify to
use one of the alternative monitoring options available to natural gas

- or oil

- fired peaking units
under 40 CFR part 75. However, the set of CSAPR

- affected unit s not subject to the ARP also includes certain units qualifying for a cogeneration exemption under the ARP but not under CSAPR, some of which combust coal and therefore must use NO X , SO 2 (for units in states covered by CSAPR’s SO 2 programs), and flue gas flow CEMS to meet CSAPR’s monitoring and reporting requirements.

Affected unit s in the following states are subject to the CSAPR NO X Annual Trading Program and one of CSAPR’s two annual SO 2 trading programs: Alabama, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and W isconsin. 8 This proposed rule would not alter the states whose
unit s are subject to these programs.

A ffected unit s in the following states are currently subject to the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia, and Wisconsin. 9 This proposed rule would alter co verage status under the CSAPR
NO X Ozone Season Trading Program for affected unit s in three states beginning in 2017. Specifically, the rule would add coverage for affected unit s in Kansas and end coverage for
affected unit s in South Carolina and Florida

. The following discussion highlights the estimated effects of the proposed rule on
information collection burden for affected unit s in Kansas, South Carolina, and Florida incremental to the burden covered under the existing CSAPR ICR

. EPA estimates th at affected unit s in Kansas would experience no change in information collection burden as a result of this proposed rule. The information collection requirements
under the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program are almost entirely a subset of the
informa tion collection requirements under the CSAPR NO X Annual Trading Program, with the only exceptions being requirements to compute and report a small number of additional subtotals from the hourly data that must already be collected and reported under the ann ual program

. The capability to perform these computations and report the results is already part of standard DAHS programming requirements, so initiation of computation and reporting requires only a simple programming command to activate the built

- in capa bility. EPA has confirmed with DAHS
vendors that approximately 95 percent of affected unit s have DAHS maintenance contracts under
which activation would entail zero incremental cost, and EPA estimates that activation costs for

8 The D.C. Circuit has remanded to EPA for reconsideration the CSAPR SO 2 Group 2 trading budgets for 2017 and subsequent years for Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, and Texas. EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. EPA , 795 F.3d 11 8 (D.C. Cir. 2015).

9 The D.C. Circuit has remanded to EPA for reconsideration the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season trading budgets for 2017 and subsequent years for Florida, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. Id.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

16 remaining unit s would be enc ompassed within the scope of DAHS maintenance costs covered under the existing CSAPR ICR. The only other monitoring

- related change for an affected unit
would be a one

- time revision to the unit’s monitoring plan. EPA estimates that zero incremental
burden would be incurred to revise the monitoring plan to indicate that the unit is subject to ozone season reporting requirements as part of a routine periodic monitoring plan update

. EPA estimates that affected unit s in South Carolina wo uld likewise experience no change in information collection burden as a result of this proposed rule for the same reasons discussed above with respect to affected unit s in Kansas. In order to avoid automatic error messages generated by submission of their electronic quarterly reports to EPA, affected unit s in South Carolina would need to deactivate computation and reporting of the additional subtotals required to be reported by unit s subject to the ozone season program. Deactivation would be covered
under the DAHS maintenance contracts that approximately 95 percent of affected sources have, and EPA estimates that deactivation costs for remaining unit s would be encompassed within the scope of DAHS maintenance costs covered under the existing CSAPR ICR. EPA estimates that
zero incremental burden would be incurred to revise an affected unit ’s monitoring plan to indicate that the unit is no longer subject to ozone season reporting requirements as part of a routine periodic monitoring plan update

. Florida unit s also subject to the ARP would no longer be required to report hourly NO X mass emissions data to EPA under any CSAPR trading program. However, under the ARP these
units would continue to report hourly NO X emission rate, SO 2 mass emissions, and heat input
data , and their m onitoring requirements, including the ir options as to the equipment used and the quality assurance activities performed, would not change . For this reason, EPA estimates that these units would experience no material change in information collection burden

. Similar to a unit in South Carolina, in order to avoid automatic error messages generated by submission of electronic quarterly reports to EPA, a Florida unit subject to the ARP would need to deactivate certain computation and reporting capability built into the unit’s DAHS. Deactivation would be covered under DAHS maintenance contracts for approximately 95 percent of affected units, and EPA estimates that deactivation costs for remaining unit s would be encompassed within the scope of D AHS maintenance costs covered under the existing CSAPR ICR. EPA estimates that
zero incremental burden would be incurred to revise an affected unit ’s monitoring plan to indicate that the unit is no longer subject to CSAPR NO X Ozone Season reporting requirements as part of a routine periodic monitoring plan update.

Florida unit s not subject to the ARP would no longer be required to monitor or report
NO X mass emissions or heat input data to EPA. These units would experience a decrease in
information c ollection burden, with the magnitude of the burden varying depending on which monitoring option available under 40 CFR part 75 the unit currently employs

. Units currently using continuous flue gas flow and NO X concentration monitoring would be able to dis continue equipment maintenance and quality assurance activities associated with both of these activities (unless required to meet obligations not arising under CSAPR or the ARP) and would experience the largest reduction in burden. Units currently using a ppendix D methodologies that involve fuel flow monitoring instead of flue gas flow monitoring and using appendix E methodologies
that involve periodic NO X emission rate testing instead of continuous NO X and O 2 or CO 2 concentration monitoring would experien ce smaller reductions in burden. Units currently using the LME monitoring methodology would experience the smallest reductions in burden. This ICR reflects the reduction in ongoing operation and maintenance costs associated with theseICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

17 reductions in burde n, but does not reflect any reduction in annualized capital costs related to investments that are assumed to have already taken place.

New units covered by CSAPR are in most cases also covered by the ARP. CSAPR
creates no material incremental monitoring

- related burden or costs for these units, and their monitoring

- related b urden and costs (both capital/startup and ongoing) are accounted for in the
ARP ICR. The existing CSAPR ICR includes monitoring and reporting burden and costs for an
estimat ed number of new CSAPR units not covered by the ARP. The proposed rule only reduces the number of states in which new units could be subject to CSAPR by one state and hence is not expected to materially change the number of new CSAPR units not covered by the ARP. EPA
therefore estimates zero incremental information collection burden and costs for new units as a
result of this rule.

The specific elements of monitoring

- related burden under the existing CSAPR ICR are described below. For each element, EPA i ndicates whether the burden associated with that element is expected to change for any units as a result of this rule. In this ICR, estimates of information collection burden and costs are quantified only for the two elements of respondent monitoring and reporting activities that EPA estimates will change as a result of this rule: (1) quality assurance (QA) activities and maintenance, and (2) quarterly reporting activities. As discussed above, EPA estimates that the only unit s that would experience a chan ge in
information collection burden and costs associated with these activities as a result of this proposed rule are non

- ARP

- affected unit s in Florida. EPA notes that m onitoring burdens in general can differ significantly based on the particular monitoring methodology employed

. The cost estimates EPA has used in this ICR therefore distinguish between units based on their current monitoring methodologies.

Re view of Re gulatory Re quirements

The existing CSAPR ICR includes an allocation of time for respondents’ managerial and
technical staff to review the CSAPR regulatory requirements as well as the XML formats and
instructions associated with electronic emissions data submissions. Because this proposed rule makes no change in the information collec tion requirements applicable to any individual unit, EPA considers the costs for respondents to review information collection requirements to be covered under the existing CSAPR ICR. This ICR therefore reflects no burden or costs for this activity.

Start

- up Activities

In general, st art

- up activities when a unit first becomes subject to particular emissions monitoring and reporting obligations encompass the acquisition, installation, and t esting of necessary monitoring equipment, including both capital expe nditures and labor costs. For most
CSAPR

- affected unit s, no such activities would have been required under CSAPR because the necessary monitoring equipment was already in place for ARP compliance. In the cases of unit s affected by CSAPR but not the ARP, annualized capital costs for startup activities are reflected in the existing CSAPR ICR. Because these annualized costs reflect recovery of sunk costs that are not affected by the program coverage changes in this proposed rule, no change in burden or

cost s for startup activities is reflected in this ICR.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

18 Monitor Certification/Recertification

Initial certification burdens and costs for new monitoring equipment are generally encompassed within startup activities. However, monitoring systems occasionally re quire recertification because of changes in equipment. In the existing CSAPR ICR, EPA assumes that approximately ten percent of all units will have to recertify each year following the year in which
the initial certification occurs

. EPA estimates that there would be no change in this burden as a result of this proposed rule.

DAHS Debugging

The existing CSAPR ICR includes an estimated ongoing burden for affected unit s to debug the DAHS software used to report in the 40 CFR part 75 formats consisting of o ne managerial and four technician hours per year

. EPA estimates that any change in responding to error messages as a result of this proposed rule would be minimal and is encompassed within the burden and costs covered by the existing CSAPR ICR.

Quality As surance Quality assurance (QA) activities and other routine maintenance for monitoring systems represent the largest burden item under CSAPR

. These requirements generally include daily, quarterly

, and annual QA requirements, depending on the 40 CFR part 75 monitoring approach being used

. In the case of ARP

- affected units, the burden and costs associated with these activities are covered by the ARP ICR, while for non

- ARP

- affected units the burden and costs are covered by the existing CSAPR ICR. Under thi s proposed rule, non

- ARP

- affected unit s in
Florida would n o longer be subject to part 75 monitoring and reporting requirements under either the ARP or any CSAPR trading program. These unit s would therefore experience a reduction in
burden and costs associated with QA activities for their current monitoring systems. This reduction is covered by this ICR.

For units that use a CEMS, the Agency has assumed a per unit labor burden based on a variety of sources, including the existing ARP and CSAPR ICR s , information provided by ARP
and CSAPR sources, a CEM cost model developed by EPA, and comments submitted in response to the NO X SIP Call

. For units that rely on the methodologies under appendices D and/or E of part 75 or the LME methodology under §75.19

, reduced labor burden estimates apply because the quality assurance activities for th ose methodologies are less than for a CEMS

. Under both the existing ARP ICR and the existing CSAPR ICR, the labor burden is expected to
be a lmost entirely technician labor , and the same assumption is reflected in this ICR as well.

Quarterly Reports

Tasks performed by utilities in preparing quarterly reports include: (1) assuring the quality of the data, (2) preparing the quarterly report, (3) revising the monitoring plan, if necessary, (4) prepar ing hard copy documentation accompanying the quarterly repor t s, and (5) managerial review

. In the case of ARP

- affected units, the burden and costs associated with these activities are covered by the ARP ICR, while for non

- ARP

- affe cted units the burden and costs are covered by the existing CSAPR ICR. Under this proposed rule, non

- ARP

- affected unit s in Florida would no longer be subject to part 75 monitoring and reporting requirements under either the ARP or any CSAPR trading progra m. These unit s would therefore experience a reduction in burden and costs associated with quarterly reporting activities. This reduction is covered by this ICR, using the costs in the existing CSAPR ICR as the basis for the estimates.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

19 Respon ding to Error Messages

The Agency provides feedback for errors that are found in monitoring plans or other reports. For the existing CSAPR ICR, EPA assumes that each respondent not subject to the ARP experiences a burden for responding to these error messages estimate d as four hours of managerial time and eight hours of technician time each year. (The burden for ARP

- affected
sources is accounted for in the ARP ICR.) EPA estimates that any change in responding to error messages as a result of this proposed rule would be minimal and is encompassed within the burden and costs covered by the existing CSAPR ICR.

(iv) Agency Monitoring Activities

Agency activities related to the monitoring and reporting of emissions data include processing, reviewing

, and evaluating reports of quarterly emissions data from affected units. In the existing CSAPR ICR, t he Agency estimates that these activities will require 4,500 hours per

year. EPA estimates that this proposed rule will not result in any material change to this burden.

( v ) Industry Respondent Allowance Transfer A ctivities

In the existing CSAPR ICR, t he Agency estimates that the average annual number of
CSAPR allowance transactions will be approximately 7,500 per year. This estimate is based on

transact ion data associated with the CAIR trading programs. The Agency believes that each transaction will involve about one hour each of managerial and technician time

. EPA estimates that this proposed rule will not result in any material change to this burden.

( v i ) Agency Allowance Transfer Activities

Agency activities related to a llowance t ransactions include allocating allowances to existing and new units, reviewing allowance transfer information, recording transfers, notify ing transfer participants, entering deduction data and deducting allowances , and ensuring compliance assurance provisions are met. In the event that compliance assurance provisions are not met it is
estimated that the burden for each s tate exceeding compliance assurance levels woul d be 160 hours, however

, the agency assumes that the compliance assurance provisions will be met in all states in all years

. In the existing CSAPR ICR, EPA estimates that allowance transaction
activities require 290 hours per year. EPA estimates that thi s proposed rule will not result in any material change to this burden.

(vii) State Allowance Transfer Activities

The FIPs promulgated by EPA specify default allocations of CSAPR emission
allowances for each CSAPR trading program among each state’s affected sources. States that wish to revise these default allocations may do so by submitting limited SIP revisions for that

purpose

. In the existing CSAPR ICR, EPA has conservatively assumed that all states with
CSAP R

- affected sources will choose to submit such revisions, and that the activities to prepare the submissions will require 100 hours per year. EPA estimates that this proposed rule will not result in any material change to this burden.

6 .2 Estimating Resp ondent Costs

Table 6

- 1 summarizes the annual industry respondent costs

. It should be noted that the labor hours and cost estimates per unit identified in this document represent averages for all unitsICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

20 subject to changed information collection requirements and do not represent the actual burden and cost for any particular unit. The following discussion describes how the costs were derived.

(i) Estimating Labor Costs

For this ICR, EPA has estimat ed labo r costs for industry respondents based on cost rates of $ 95.10 /hour for managers and $67.38/hour for technicians

. These rates are consistent with the Current Employment Cost Index for 20 1 3 and were also used in the existing CSAPR ICR.

This ICR does not require estimates of labor costs for federal, state, or local entities because EPA estimates that the changes in burden under this proposed rule affect only industry respondents.

( ii) Estimating Capital and Operation and Maintenance Cos ts
In general, c apital/start

- up costs for a CSAPR

- affected unit include the cost of installing required CEMS or alternatives

. Operation and maintenance costs (exclusive of labor costs) reflect ongoing costs to a unit and include both contractor costs for the required recertification, diagnostic, and quality assurance (QA) testing, and other direct maintenance

- related expenses (e.g., spare parts and calibration gases)

. For the existing CSAPR ICR, EPA has derived cost estimates for these items from EPA CEM cost models ; ICRs for the ARP, the NO X SIP Call, and CAIR; Agency staff experience under the ARP

, NO X SIP Call, CAIR, and CSAPR programs ; and supplemental estimates provided by affected utilities and others related to the various cost
items. For purposes of the ICR under this proposed rule, EPA has relied on the cost estimates for the existing CSAPR ICR.

As discussed above, EPA estimates that the only types of costs for which respondents would experience a change under this proposed rule are annually recurring costs related to QA activities and maintenance and quarterly reporting of emissions and other data . QA and maintenance costs vary depending on whether the unit employs CEMS or follows one of the other monitoring methodologies available under 40 CFR part 75. The costs shown for units employing particular monitoring methodologies in Table 6

- 1 represent estimated average costs for units using that methodology, and the total costs per respondent represent weighted average
costs for all res pondents, not the costs for any individual respondent.

EPA has concluded that the c apital and o perations and m aintenance c osts estimated for the Agency under the ARP ICR are sufficient to accommodate the modest changes in reporting
burden for the Agency un der CSAPR . Therefore, no further estimate of c apital and o perations
and m aintenance c osts for the Agency is reflected either in the CSAPR ICR or in the ICR for this proposed rule.

( iii) Capital/Start

- up vs. Operati on and Maintenance Costs

All cost estimates presented in this ICR are for annually recurring operati on and
maintenance costs . EPA assumes that no existing CSAPR

- affected unit s would incur or avoid capital expenditures or other startup costs as a result of this proposed rule becau se the relevant capital expenditures and startup costs have already been incurred. Units whose information collection requirements change as a result of this proposed rule would continue to bear the annualized capital costs for expenditures they have alre ady made, as estimated under the existing
CSAPR ICR. EPA also assumes for purposes of this ICR that any new CSAPR

- affected unit s would be also be subject to the ARP, and that capital costs and startup costs for these units are covered under the existing A RP ICR.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

21 (iv) Annualizing Capital Costs

As discussed above, the information collection costs covered under this ICR do not include any annualized capital costs.

6.3 Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

In the existing CSAPR ICR

, t he total number of industry respondents is estimated to be
1

, 201 sources

. For purposes of this proposed rule, the total number of industry respondents i s the subset of those sources that would either gain or lose information collection requirements
under the CSAPR NO X Ozone Season Trading Program . EPA estimates that th e set of industry respondents for this proposed rule comprises 116 sources in Florida, Kansas, and South Carolina
wi th unit s that currently are affected under CSAPR

. EPA estimates that 443 units at these

sources would gain or lose information collection requirements under this proposed rule.

As discussed above, EPA estimates that all CSAPR

- affected units in Kansas an d South
Carolina and CSAPR

- affected units in Florida that are also affected under the ARP would experience no change in information collection burden or costs as a result of this proposed rule despite the change in information collection requirements . E P A estimates that the CSAPR

affected units in Florida that are not affected under the ARP would experience a reduction in information collection burden and costs as a result of this rule, with the magnitude of the reduction varying based on the monitoring me thodology employed at each individual unit

. EPA
estimates that there are 113 units in Florida that currently are affected under CSAPR but are not affected under the ARP.

Table 6

- 1 contains estimates of the reductions in annual information collection burden
and costs to the 113 Florida units that would experience a change in information collection burden and costs under this rule, expressed as incremental to the information collection burden and costs under the existing CSAPR ICR. As discussed above, w hile the overall set of activities producing an information collection burden and costs for a unit subject to CSAPR include s permitting and other certification, emissions monitoring and reporting

, and allowance transfer
activities

, EPA estimates that the only activities for which burden and cost s would materially change under this rule are the activities related to emissions monitoring and reporting.

The existing CSAPR ICR reflects a burden for 104 s tate and local permitting authorities
associated with r eading CSAPR’s information collection requirements, review ing CSAPR

related permit submissions, and performing optional allocations of allowances. As discussed above, EPA estimates that this proposed rule would not cause any material change to the
information collection burden and costs encompassed in the existing CSAPR ICR for either the Agency or for any state and local permitting authorit y

.

6.4 Bottom Line Burden Hours and Cost

EPA estimates that this proposed rule would alter information co llection requirements for 116 industry respondents in Florida, Kansas, and South Carolina either by causing the CSAPR
NO X Ozone Season Trading Program to apply to a unit not currently subject to the program or by ending applicability for a unit currently s ubject to the program. EPA estimates that the aggregated change in information collection burden resulting from these changes would be aICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

22 burden reduction of 1 4,064 hours, or an average burden reduction of 121 hours per respondent. EPA estimates that the aggregated change in information collection costs would be a cost reduction of $ 1, 472,047

, or an average cost reduction of $ 1 2

, 690 per respondent.

6.5 Reasons for Change in Burden

The reason for the decrease in burden estimated in this ICR is that the proposed rule would decrease the universe of respondents subject to information collection requirements under the existing CSAPR ICR and would not impose any new substantive informatio n collection requirements on any respondents.

6.6 Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this proposed collection of
information is estimated to be an average reduction of 121 hours per response from the burden for approved existing collections of information

. Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, maintain, retain, disclose or provide
information to

, or for

, a f ederal 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

, maintaining, disclosing

, and providing information; adjust ing the exist ing ways to comply with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train ing personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information;
search ing data sources; complet ing and review ing the collection of information; and transmit ting

or ot herwise disclos ing 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 l isted in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.

To facilitate comment on the Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for
this ICR under Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 2015

- 0500, which is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC),
WJC West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave nue NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566

- 1744, and the telephone number for the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center is (202) 566

- 1742. An electronic version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit or view public comments, to access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to access those documents i n 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 Budge t, 725 17th Street NW, Washington, DC 20503,
Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please include EPA Docket ID No. EPA

- HQ

- OAR

- 20 15

- 0500
and OMB Control Number 2060

- NEW in any correspondence.ICR for the Cross

- State Air Pollution Rule Update for the 2008 Ozon e NAAQS November 17, 2015

23 Table 6

- 1: Annual Industry Respondent Burden and Cost by Activity

Manager $95.10
Per Hour (2013) Technical

$67.38
Per Hour (2013) Respondent
Hours/Year Respondent

Labor
Cost/Year Annual

Capital
Cost O&M
Cost Number of Respondents ( U nits ) Total

Hours/Year Total

Cost/Year

Perform QA T esting and M aintenance

Florida u nits n o l onger affected under either CSAPR or ARP

a. Solid fuel

- f

ired
units: NO X CEMS and flue gas flow
CEMS ( 40 ) ( 400 ) ( 440 ) ( $30,756 ) ( $31,949 ) 7 (3,080) ($438,935)

b. Gas/oil

- f

ired units:
NO X CEMS and
A ppendix D fuel flow monitoring ( 20 ) ( 375 ) ( 395 ) ( $27,170 ) ( $17,818 ) 2 (790) ($8 9 ,976)

c. Gas/oil

- fired peaking
units: A ppendix D
fuel flow monitoring
and A ppendix E
NO X rate testing

, or §75.19 LME
methods ( 5 ) ( 30 ) ( 35 ) ( $2,497 ) ( $1,843 ) 104 (3,640) ( $ 451

, 360 )

Assure Data Quality, Prepare Reports, Submit Reports

All F lorida u nits n o l onger affected under
either CSAPR or ARP ( 16 ) ( 42 ) ( 58 ) ( $4,352 ) 113 (6,554) ($491,776)

TOTAL (1 4

, 064 ) ($1, 472

, 047 )