1 **SUPPORTING STATEMENT** Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Critical Use Exemption from the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide (Renewal) 1. Id entification of the In formation Collection a) Title: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Critical U se Exemption from the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide EPA Number: 2031.07 OMB Control Number 2060
- 0482 b) Short Characterization: With this Information Collection Request (I CR), the Environmental Protection Agency ’s ( EP A) Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) is seeking to renew the existing ICR for the methyl bromide critical use e xemption program (CUE) under the Clean Air Act
. This I CR seeks to characterize the burden associated with producing, importing, distributing, and using meth yl bromide under the critical use exemption program as described in 40 CFR Part 82. In addition, it includes the burden associated with appl yi ng for the critical use exemption. Entities applying for this exemption are asked to submit to EPA applications with necessary data to evaluate the need for a critical use exempt ion. This information collection is conducted to meet U.S. obligations under Article 2H of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol) an d to implement Section 604 (d)(6) of the CAA, added by Section 764 of the 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency

Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public L aw No. 105
- 277; October 21, 1998). Since 2002, entities have applied to EPA for a critical use exemption that would allow fo r the continued production, import , and use of meth ylbromide after the phaseout in January 2005. This exemption allows for consumption only in those agricultural sectors that have demonstrated that there are no technicall y or economicall y feasible alternatives to methyl bromide. The applications are rigorousl y assessed and anal yz ed b y EPA experts from the Office of Pesticide Programs
. On an annual basis, EPA uses the data submitted by applicants to nominate future critical uses . The Department of State, on behalf of the U.S. Government , submits the nomination to the Ozone Secretariat for their review
. That review includes anal ys es by an international panel o f experts and advisory bodies: the Methyl Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) and the Technical and Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP). EPA makes the uses authorized internationally by the Parties to the Protocol available in the U.S. on an annual basis through the annual critical use exemption allocation rulemaking
. 2. Need For, and Use Of, the Collection a) Authority

for the Collection This information collection is authorized under Section 604 (d)(6) of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, added by Section 764 of the 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency2

Supp lemental Appropriations Act (Public L aw No. 105
- 277; October 21, 1998). Because this action involves the controlled use of a pesticide, EPA’s Office of Pesticide Programs collaborates in the exemption application process. The regulation of pesticides is co nducted under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended by the Food Qualit y Protection Act (FQPA). b) Practical Utility

/Users of the Data The applications enable EPA to:

 Maintain consistency with the Protocol by

supporting critical use nominations to the Parties to the Protocol, in accordance with paragraph 2 of Decision IX/6 of the Protocol;  Ensure that critical use exemptions comply with Section 604(d)(6), as added to the CAA in 1998;  Provide EPA with necessary data t o evaluate the technical and economic feasibility of methyl bromide alternatives in the circumstance of the specific use, as presented in an applicati on for a critical use exemption. The reported data enable EPA to:

 Ensure that critical use exemptions comply with Section 604(d)(6) as added to the CAA in 1998;  Maintain compliance with the Protocol requirements for annual data submission on the production of ozone depleting substances;  Analyze technical use data to ensure that exemptions are used in accordance with r equirements included in the annual allocation rulemaking s . 3. Nonduplication, Consultation, and Other Collection Criteria a) Nonduplication All the information requested from respondents under this I CR is authorized by statute (CAA Sections 114 and 604 (d)(6)) and is not available from other sources because it is proprietary or sensitive information. b) Public Notice EPA will provide public notice and comment regarding this ICR with the publication of a notice in the Federal Register
. c ) Consultations EPA will consult with stakeholders familiar with the recordkeeping and reporting requirements as part of this I CR renewal.3

d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection EPA’s timing for information collection is motivated by the U.S. Government’s requirements under the Montreal Protocol. First, the timeline for critical use applications coincides with the critical use nomination process established b y the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. An y deviation from that timeline would result in a forfeiture from inclusion in the U.S. nomination package and subsequent consideration by the Parties. Second, the U.S. government is required to report data to the Ozone Secretariat on an annual basis. EPA is requesting quarterl y reporting from producers and importers of meth ylbromide to monitor the likelihood of compliance throughout the ye ar. T hese entities ty picall y prepare quarterl y reports and prefe r to report smaller data sets to EPA and not leave the entire task to the end of the year. EPA is requesting annual reporting from entities such as distri butors and fumigation companies because they t ypically have less regulatory compliance infrastructure and/ or are less familiar with Protocol reporting requirements.
e ) General Guidelines This rule does not exceed any of the OMB guidelines found at 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2). f ) Confidentiality EPA informs respondents that they may assert claims of business confidentiality for any of the information they

submit. Information claimed confidential will be treated in accordance with the procedures for handling information claimed as confidential unde r 40 CFR Part 2, S ubpart b, and will be disclosed only

i f EPA determines that the information is not entitled to confidential treatment. If no claim of confidentiality is asserted when the information is received by E PA, it may be made available to the public without further notice to the respondents (40 CFR 2.203). g) Sensitive Information Individual reporting data may be claimed as sensitive and will be treated as confidential information in accordance with procedures outlined in 40 CFR Part 2. 4. The Respondents and the Information Requested a) Respondents NAI C S Codes Respondents include producers, importers, distributors, and custom applicators of methyl bromide , organizations, consortia, and associations of methyl bromide users , as well as individual methyl bromide users. The appropriate North American Industry Classification Sy stem (NAICS) and Standard Industrial Classification (SI C) codes for these entities are:

**TABLE I: NAICS CLASSIFICATION OF REGULATED ENTITIES Category**  **NAICS code SIC code**  Agricultural production 1112
- Vegetable and Melon farming 0171
- Berry Crops4 1113
- Fruit and Nut Tree Farming 0172
- Grapes 1114
- Greenhouse, Nursery, and Floriculture Production 0173
- Tree Nuts 0175
- Deciduous Tree Fruits (except apple orchards and farms) 0179
- Fruit and Tree Nuts 0181
- Ornamental Floriculture and Nursery Products 0831
- Forest Nurseries and Gathering of Forest Products 1119
- Other Crop Farming Storage Uses 115114
- Postharvest Crop activities (except

Cotton Ginning) 311211
- Flour Milling 2041
- Flour and Other Grain Mill Products 311212
- Rice Milling 2044
- Rice Milling 493110
- General Warehousing and Storage 4225
- General Warehousing and Storage 493130
- Farm

Product Warehousing and Storage 4221
- Farm Product Warehousing and Storage Distributors and Applicators 115112
- Soil Preparation, Planting and

Cultivating 0711
- Soil Preparation Services 0721
- Crop Planting, Cultivation, and Protection 0723
- Crop Preparation Service for Market (except Cotton Ginning) 424910
- Farm

Supplies and Merchant Wholesalers Producers and Im porters 325320
- Pesticide and Other Agricultural

Chemical Manufacturing 2879
- Pesticides and Agricultural Chemicals b) In formation Requested (i) Applications The Agency intends to continue seeking the same information as in previous years and will use the current application forms. The following information encompasses any information that will be requested from those entities seeking a critical use exemption, and includ es applications for both pre - plant and post
- harvest sectors:  **Identity of contact person(s).** Unless otherwise specified, the person who submits the application will be considered the contact person for all matters relating to the critical use exemption. Requests must identify by name and telephone number one or more qualified experts who may

be contacted in case any

questions arise concerning the application.  **Description of the proposed use.** The applications shall provide information on the proposed use ( crop/pest combination), the amount of methyl bromide to be used, the location of use, the method of application and an y other use information requested by the Administrator.  **Description of past use.** The applications shall provide information on past use ( crop/pest combination), acreage, the amount of meth ylbromide used, the method of application and other historical use data requested b y the Administrator.5

 **Consideration of alternatives (Technical).** The applicant must demonstrate what steps have been, and will be, taken to find and implement alternatives. The applicant must also provide an explanation of, and data relating to, the technical feasibility of currently

available alternatives for their proposed use and an y other information required b y the Admi nistrator to determine whether technically feasible alternatives are available for the proposed use.  **Consideration of alternatives (Economic).** To determine whether an applicant’s proposed use has economically

feasible alternatives, EPA will request information on historical revenue and available economic measures, such as operating costs.  **Additional information.** Additional information required of applicants may include, but is not limited to, agricultural statistics, fumigation conditions and timeline, res earch proposals and funding levels, and transition plans. (ii ) Reporting EPA is requesting that entities provide the following information to the Agency : **Producers and**  **importers**  Quarterl y: the quantity of methyl bromide produced or imported under the exemptions for Quarantine and Preshipment (QPS), critical uses, emergency uses, lab uses, and export to Article 5 countries ;  Quarterl y: the quantity of methyl bromide produced or imported for uses resulting in its transformation and/or destructio n;  Quarterl y: the number and ty pe of expended and unexpended critical use allowances (CUAs) ;  Annually : the total amount and ty pe of methyl bromide sold directly to critical uses;  Annually : the total amount and ty pe of critical use methyl bromide held in i nventory for themselves o r on behalf of a third party ;  Annually : the total amount of methyl bromide that was produced/imported prior to January 1, 2005, that is held in inventory for themselves o r on behalf of a third party ;  Periodically , ( likely

less than annuall y) : information that the Administrator may reasonably require in carrying out the critical use exemption program under Section 604(d)(6) of the Clean Air Act including management and composition of pre
- phaseout inventory , price of m ethyl bromide and its alternatives, and fumigant emissio ns reductions practices. EPA may also use the information gathering authority under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act to ensure compliance with existing regulations under the critical use exemption pro gram. **Exporters**  Quarterl y: names and addresses of the exporter and the recipient of the exports, and the exporter’s Employer Identification Number;  Quarterl y: the quantity of methyl bromide exported under each exemption ; the date on which, and the port f

rom which, the controlled substances were exported from the United States or its territories; and the country to which the contr olled substances were exported. **Distributors and Applicators**   Annually : the total amount an d ty pe of methyl bromide purchased ;  Annually : the total amount and ty pe of methyl bromide so ld directly to critical uses ;  Annually : the total amount and ty pe of critical use methyl bromide held in inventory for6

themselves o r on behalf of a third party ;  Annually : the total amount of methyl bromide that was produced/imported prior to January 1, 2005, that is held in inventory for themselves o r on behalf of a third party ;  Periodically , ( likely

less than annuall y) : information that the Administrator may reasonably require in carrying out the critical use exemption program under Section 604(d)(6) of the Clean Air Act including management and composition of pre
- phaseout inventory , price of methyl bromide and its alternatives, and fumigant emissio ns reductions practices. EPA may also use the inform ation gathering authorit y under Section 114 of the Clean Air Act to ensure compliance with existing regulations under the critical use exemption program. (iii ) Recordkeeping **EPA is requiring the following record s are kept for three years.**  **Produce rs,**  **im porters**  **, and exporters**  Self
- certification form for each sale that indicates the buyer will only sell or use meth yl bromide for approved critical uses;  Order forms and invoices for meth ylbromide. **Distributors and Applicators**   Self
- certification form for each sale that indicates the buyer will only sell/use the methyl bromide for approved critical uses;  Order forms and invoices for meth ylbromide. 5. The Information Collected, Agency Activities, Collection Methodology , and Information Management a) Agency

Activities (i) Applications Submitted critical use exemption a pplications are receiv ed b y the Stratospheric Program Implementation Branch (SPIB), of the Stratospheric Protection Division (SPD) of the Office of Atmospheric Programs (OAP). The Biol ogical and Economic Assessment Division (BEAD) of the Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) conducts a technical review of the applications
. B oth a biologist and an economist review each application, and the applications are grouped according to agricultural sector. Specifically , the review determines whether or not there is sufficient information to support the contention that “no technicall y or economically feasible alternatives exist” for the specified methyl bromide use. The review also determines if a lac k of methyl bromide availability would cause a significant market disruption. These requirements for critical use exemptions were agreed to by the Parties to the Protocol at their Seventh Meeting, and are delineated in Decision IX/6, as well as Section 604 (d) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). This review may require additional c onsultation with the applicant s if further clarification is needed
. EPA, in consultation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Department of State, compile s a nomination package containing all the critical uses to be nominated by the U.S. This package is submitted to the Ozone Secretariat of the Protocol, reviewed b y MBTOC and TEAP, and7

later authorized b y the Parties at their annual meeting. Ty pically , EPA must respond to one or two rounds of questions from MBTOC as that body conducts a technical review of the U.S. Nomination. In order to complete the application process, EPA:

 Publish es a Federal Register notice announcing the availability of applications ;  Collect s , compile s , and analyze s submitted applications ;  Review s applications for completeness and inform s applicants if application is not complete ;  Review s applications for critical need for meth ylbromide (e.g., data supporting a finding that there is no technically

or econ omicall y feasible alternative) ;  Compile s applications into U.S. nomination package for submission to the Ozone Secretariat (ii) Reported Data Reported data are received by the Stratospheric Program Implementation Branch (SPIB), of the Stratospheric Protection Division (SPD) of the Office of Atmospheric Programs (OAP).  All reported data are reviewed b y EPA for completeness and accuracy , potentially through follow
- up with the reporting entit y .  EPA e nsure s that compliance has been maintained with U.S. p roduction and consumption levels of exempted material at the national and sector levels.  EPA report s annuall y to the Ozone Secretariat, through the U.S. Department of State, on U.S. compliance with allowable production and consumption levels.  EPA uses data on actual use levels and material in inventory to adjust future nomination and allocation amounts
.  EPA maintains the d ata in an electronic tracking sy stem and file room
. b) Collection and Methodology and Management (i) Applications When applications for methyl bromide critical uses are received by EPA, they are assigned a CUE number and tracked in a spreadsheet as active submissions through the process, after which applications become historical files. (ii) Reported Data Data are tracked b y industry and are provided to EPA on a quarterl y and/or annual basis on forms provided b y the Agency on EPA’s website (www.epa.gov/ozone/record/mbr.html)
. EPA will use our electronic tracking s ys tem to update company specific and overall U.S. compliance with production, consumption , and use . Confidential business information are stored in appropriately controlled areas. c) Small Entity

Flexibility This information collection is authorized by statute under S ection 604 of the Clean Air Act and is required in order to ensure U.S. compliance with international treaty obligations under the8

Montreal Protocol. Methyl bromide was phased out under the Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act in 2005, except for limited exemptions. T he application informat ion collection provide s meaningful relief for those users of meth ylbromide who do not have technicall y or economically feasible alternatives
. Applying for the exemption is voluntary and o nl y those entities that believe they have a critical use will submit an application. While the exemption itself will relieve burden on affected entities, the burden on all affected entities associated with applyingfor the exemption, and especiall y the burden on small entities, has been reduced to every extent possible. EP A encouraged small businesses to participate in and/or form representative organizations that will serve to aid in gathering information and completion of applications. Today , most applications received are submitted by such organizations. Bearing in mind U.S. obligations under the Protocol , EPA designed a reporting and recordkeeping sy stem that would remove almost all burden from the end users of methyl bromide, some of whom are small entities. This program seeks to place the burden instead on chemical manufacturers, distributors , and applicators who are not small entities. EPA created a s ys tem that requires end users to sign a short form (1 page in length) certifying that they are buying the exempted material for an allowable use and will use it according ly
. T he form is kept by the supplier, not the end user. Participation in this exemption program is voluntary and constitutes a benefit. d) Collection Schedule (i) Applications EPA annually publishes a notice in the Federal Register announcing the avai lability of the pre - plant and post
- harvest applications. Entities have 90 day s from the date of publication to submit an application. Applications for exemptions are requested with three ye ars of anticipation due to the international process and EPA’s noti ce - and
- comment rulemaking procedures. For example, the first time EPA requested applications, in May 2002, the exemptions were requested for the use of methyl bromide during the 2005 calendar year. The applications requested in May 2003 were for use in the 2006 calendar year, etc. Once applications are submitted to EPA, the following schedule takes place:  August, Year 1 : Applications due  September
- December, Year 1 : Review of applications and developm ent of U.S. nomination  January , Year 2 : Inter
- Agenc y review of nomination package  January

24 , Year 2 : U.S. nomination submitted to Ozone Secretariat  February
- June, Year 2 : Adv isory body (MBTOC/TEAP) review  November
- December, Year 2 : Parties authorize critical uses  January
- December, Year 3 : EP A publishes crit ical uses and allocates allowances in notice
and
- comment rulemaking Subsequent collection schedules depend on the timetables established b y the Parties. In some instances additional (“Extraordinary”) meetings have been required, delaying the schedule. ( ii) Reported Data The information is to be submitted on an annual or quarterl y basis (see section 5 a) to EPA9

beginning in the second quarter of 2015 and continuing for the life of the exemption. 6) Estimating the Burden and Cost of Collection a) Estimating the Burden The basis of the burden analy sis is EPA ’s experience with implementing the critical use exemption program since 2002 and EPA’s previous I CR anal ys e s for the CUE program
. EPA expects that the burden estimate is conservative ly high as the Agency believes that the respondents are familiar with EPA’s regulations and likely have an established s ys tem for complying with those requirements. The burden anal yz ed is that associated with the application, reporting , and recordkeeping requirements of the program
. As in previous ICR s , EPA identified the steps involved in applying for and complying with the requirements of the CUE program
. This includes identifying the principal information needed to support U.S. nominations to Parties to the Protocol. The burden has been estimated by

identifying the number of times the step will be undertaken and the number of hours required to complete each step. b) Estimating the Respondent Cost i) Applications To determine the respondent cost, E PA used an hourly industry wage rate of $ 67.57. This is the estimated hourl y mean wage rate for management within the Management, Scientific, and Technical Consulting Services sector (541600 Series NAICS code) and is based on the May 2013 National Industry
- Specifi c Occupational Employ ment and Wage Estimates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics4_541600.htm
. EPA added 110 percent to the hourly

industry wage rate to reflect additional costs for overhead and fringe, increasi ng the wage rate to $ 141.90 per hour. EPA anticipates this rate to overestimate the burden on the whole universe of respondents, as the wage rates are lower for growers, applicators, and other respondents within the Critical Use Exemption program. Burden hours needed to complete each application that is forwarded to EPA is estimated to be 3 8
. The number of applications has been declining from a maximum of 6 3 to 7 applications for the 2017 control period. EPA does not anticipate new users or groups to submi t applications , though groups that have submitted in the past may reapply . T herefore EPA is conservativel y estimating 15 applicants for future control periods
. Total burden hours have decreased from the previo us I CR as the it estimated 40 respondents. EPA believes that the number of hours may be an overestimate as there have been minimal formatting /data changes to the application form, encouragem ent of electronic submissions, frequent communication with stakeholders, and eleven ye ars of implementation. EPA has also found that the majority of users have applied through their consortia, and that these c onsortia represent many growers. ii) Reported Data To determine the labor costs associated with recordkeeping and reporting, EPA used an10

hourly industry wage rate of $ 52.24
. This is the average hourl y wage rate for professional and related persons derived from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employer Cost and Employee Compensation Table 2 (http://www.bls.gov/news.rel ease/ecec.t02.htm ), March 2014
. EPA added 11 0 percent to the hourly industry wage rate to reflect additional costs for overhead and fringe, increasing the wage rate to $ 109.70 per hour. Some activities, such as rule familiarization, are one time activities therefore total respondent burden hours indicated in Table II (below) may be overestimated. This renewal , as compared to the existing IC R, reduces the expected burden for the respondents compiling and reporting data on an annual basis . T he number of distributors of methyl bromide has decreased as the amount of critical use methyl bromide sold in the U.S. has decreased
. As discussed above, the number of applications submitted the last three years has declined. This corresponds to a similar decrease in the end user universe which EPA now estimates to be approximately 1 , 0 00
.

**TABLE II -**  **RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS PER YEAR Collection Activity**  **No. of Respondents**  **Total No. of**

**Responses Hours per** 

**Response Total** 

**Hours i) Applications**  Read CAA Request for applications 15 15 0.5 7.5 Process, compile, and review the requested data for accuracy and appropriateness 15 15 30 450 Generate application correspondence (and any follow
- up information requested) 15 15 7 105 Store, file, or maintain the information 15 15 0.5 7.5 **Total burden for applications 15**  **15 38**  **570 ii) Recordkeeping and Reporting**  Rule Familiarization 50 50 2 100 Data Compilation (quarterly basis) 4 16 4 64 Data Compilation (annual basis) 50 50 8 400 Data Reporting (quarterly basis) 4 16 0.5 8 Data Reporting (annual basis) 50 50 1 50 Reporting on Allowance Trading Activities 4 32 0.5 16 Responding to periodic questions regarding CUE program and fumigation industry 50 50 1 50 Self
- certification Activities by Producers, Im porters, and Distributors 50 50 0.25 12.5 Self
- certification Activities by End Users 1,000 1,300 0.25 325 **Total Burden for reporting and recordkeeping**  **1,054 1614**  **17.5 1,025.5**  **COM BINED TOT**  **AL BURDEN HOURS**  **1069 1629**  **55.5 1,595.5**  There are no capital and operating costs associated this action
.

**TABLE III -**  **CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS**11

**Activity No of Entities**  **Affected Estimated Annual** 

**Cost per entity**  **Total Estimated**

**Annual Cost TOTAL CAPITAL AND**  **OPERATING COSTS** 0 0 0 c) Estimating Agency Burden and Cost The estimated cost to the Federal Government of the critical use exemption process consists of two components. The first is the number of hours and costs incurred b y the Agen cy to review each application. The second is the number of hours and costs incurre d by the Agency in reviewing reported data, preparing nominations, submitting data to the Ozone Secretariat on U.S. compliance, distributing critical use allowances , and developing guidance for regulated entities. The calculations below are based on combined OAR/OPP experience implementing the CUE program over the past twelve years. The Agency burden in reviewing each application remains the same as the previous I CR but the total burden has decreased as the numbe r o f sectors appl yi ng to the program has decreased. The values in this renewal for recordkeeping and reporting are also less than the sum of the burdens listed in the prior I CR. The hourl y wage rates for EPA clerical, technical and managerial staff were derived from the 2014 OPM pay

table multiplied by

1.6, the standard government benefits multiplier. The hourly wage rates are as follows: EPA estimates an average ho urly labor cost of $ 95.82 (GS
- 15 level) for managerial costs, $ 68.94 (GS
- 13 lev el) for technical staff, and $ 32.69 (GS
- 7 level) for clerical sta ff based on 2014 figures. While the number of occurrences of each activity is shown per application, EPA intends to continue grouping applications according to agricultural sectors. Each hour of extr amural (contractor) time is valued at $ 1 32 .00 per hour including overhead and fringe benefits
. **TABLE IV -**  **AGENCY BURDEN HOURS**

**No. of Responses**  **Managerial**

**hours per response**  **Technical**

**hours per response**  **Clerical**

**hours per**  **response Extramural** 

**hours per response**  **i) Applications** Read and review the applications for completeness; make appropriate amount of electronic/paper copies 15 0 1 1 0
Revie w information submitted for accuracy 15 0 10 0 0 Perform economic and technical analysis and compile nomination on proposed exemption to the Ozone Secretariat 15 5 40 45 0 Respond to questions on Nomination from MBTOC/TEAP (advisory bodies to Parties to Protocol) 15 2 10 0 0
Final decision on each sector 12 10 15 0 0 Store, file, and maintain applications 15 0 1 1 0 **TOTAL per response (applications) 17**  **77 47**  **0 TOTAL per year (applications)**  **225 1,110**  **705 0**  **i) Reporting and Recordkeeping**12

Process annual reports 75 0.25 1 0 0.25 Process quarterly reports 40 0.25 1 0 0.25 Report to the Ozone Secretariat 1 0.25 10 0 1 Provide Guidance 30 0.25 1 0 0 Seek information on CUE program and fumigation industry 75 0.25 0.25 0 0 **TOTAL per response (recordkeeping and reporting)**  **1.25 13.25**  **0 1.5**  **TOTAL per year (recordkeeping and reporting)**  **55.25 173.75**  **0 29.75** 
**TOTAL FOR ALL AGENCY ACTION PER YEAR**  **280 1,284**  **705 30**  d) Estimating the Respondent Universe EPA ’s estimate of the number of regulated entities is based upon the Agency ’s experience regulating those entities under the CUE program for the last twelve ye ars. This program does not require reporting or recordkeeping from end users of methyl bromide, but the Agency is able to make an estimation based on self
- reported data from entities who requested an exemption. As mentioned above, the number of applications has been declining, and was 7 for the 2017 control period
. The number of applicants for the exemption is much less than the estimated end user universe of 1 , 000 as the majority of end users apply

through their consortia, not individually
. EPA continues to encourage u sers with similar circumstances to utilize grower and user organizations to aid in completion of the application, thereb y reducing both the burden on applicants (particularly small businesses) and the Agency
. The registrat ion of additional alternatives in the U.S. has also result ed in fewer applications received. There are 4 producers and importers of meth ylbromide who report quarterly and up to 50 distributors/ applicators of methyl bromide who may report annuall y . Thus the total number of r espondents is estimated to be 1,0 69 ( 1 , 000 end users, 15 applicants, 50 distributors/applicators, and 4 producers/importers )
. e) Bottom L ine Burden Hours and Cost Tables i) The burden hour portion of the respondent application, reporting , and recordkeeping burden and operating/capital costs are estimated in Table s I I and III respectively
. The dollar estimate associated with this burden is d isplayed in Table V below
. The total annual labor cost burden is $ 624,721
. **TABLE V -**  **RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS**

**Response No of**  **Responses Hours per** 

**response Cost/Hour**  **Total Cost** Application 15 38 $141.90 $80,883 Recordkeeping and Reporting 264 17.5 $109.70 $506,814 Self
- certification: producers, importers, distributors, end users 1,350 0.25 $109.70 $37,02413

**Total $624,721**  ii) Agency

burden is repo rted in Table IV
. This includes technical review of each application as well as distributing critical use allowances, reviewing reporting data, submitting data to the Ozone Secretariat on U.S. compliance, preparing nominations , and developing guidance for regulated entities. The total annual labor cost burden below in Table VI is $ 8,4 74 per application and $ 1, 231 per recordkeeping and reporting response. Total annual cost to the Agency is $ 142,329
. **TABLE VI -**  **ANNUAL AGENCY BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS**  **Managerial Hours**  **Annual Total**  **Technical**

**Hours Annual**  **Total Clerical** 

**Hours Annual**  **Total Extramural** 

**Hours Annual**  **Total Total** 

**Agency Hours per**  **Response Total** 

**Agency Costs per**  **Response $95.82**  **$68.94 $32.69**  **$132.00 Part I. Hours per response** 

- Application 17 77 47 0 141 $8,474

- Recordkeeping and reporting 1.25 13.25 0 1.5 16 $1,231 **Part II. Hours per year**

- Application 225 1110 705 0 2040

- Recordkeeping and reporting 55.25 173.75 0 29.75 258.75 **TOTAL HOURS** 280.25 1,283.75 705 29.75 **2,298.75 TOTAL COSTS**  $26,854 $88,502 $23,046 $3,927 **$142,329** f) Reasons for Change in Burden There is a decrease of 1, 663 hours in the total estimated respondent burden compared with the burden currentl y approved by OMB
. T he primary reason for the decrease in burden hours is a decre ase in the number of applicants and end users as well as distributors of methyl bromide
. T he CUE Allocation rule for 2014/2015 removed minor reporting and recordkeeping requirements related to critical stock allowances
. In addition, after December 31, 2014, when methyl bromide is phased out in d eveloping countries, certain reporting requirements related to the production and export of methyl bromide to those countries are no longer applicable. g) Burden Statement The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1
. 0 hour s per response . Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended b y per sons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or p rovide information to or for a Federal agency
. This includes the time needed to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize technology

and sy stems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and verifying information, processing and maintai ning information, and disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing way s to comply with an y previously

applicable instructions and requirements; train personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search data sources; complete14

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 display s a currently valid OMB control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's re gulations are listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR C hapter 15. To comment on the Agency 's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and an y suggested methods for minimizing respond ent burden, including the use of aut omated collection techniques, EPA has established a public docket for this I CR under Docket ID No . EPA
- HQ
- OAR
- 2014
- 0743 , which is available for public viewing at the Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday , excluding legal holiday s. The telephone number for the Readi ng 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 co mments, 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 sy stem, select “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. Also, you c an send comments to the Office of In formation and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA. Please include the EPA Docket ID No
. EPA
- HQ
- OAR
- 2014
- 0743 and OMB control number 2060
- 0 482 in an y correspondence. Part B of the Supporting Statement This Section is not applicable.