Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0153-0014
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2008-07-23T04:00Z

SUPPORTING STATEMENT

for

Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Critical Use Exemption from the
Phaseout of Methyl Bromide (Renewal)

1.  Identification of the Information Collection

a)	Title: Protection of Stratospheric Ozone: Critical Use Exemption from
the Phaseout of Methyl Bromide

EPA Number: 2031.03

OMB Control Number 2060-0482

b)	Short Characterization:

With this Information Collection Request (ICR), the Environmental
Protection Agency’s (EPA) Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) is seeking
to renew an existing ICR for the methyl bromide critical use exemption
program (CUE) under the Clean Air Act and transfer the burden under a
second ICR (2060-0564) to this one.  Thus, EPA is creating a single
comprehensive ICR for the methyl bromide CUE program.  2060-0564 will be
discontinued once this ICR is approved.  This ICR seeks to characterize
the burden associated with producing, importing, distributing, and using
methyl bromide under the critical use exemption program as described in
40 CFR Part 82.  

Specifically, EPA is renewing ICR 2060-0482 which allows EPA to collect
CUE applications from regulated entities on an annual basis. EPA is also
renewing and transferring the burden from ICR 2060-0564, which requires
the submission of data from regulated industries to the EPA and require
recordkeeping of key documents to ensure compliance with the Montreal
Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer (Protocol) and the
CAA.  

Entities applying for this exemption are asked to submit to EPA
applications with necessary data to evaluate the need for a critical use
exemption.  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) and to implement Section 604(d)(6) of
the CAA, added by Section 764 of the 1999 Omnibus Consolidated and
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act (Public Law No. 105-277;
October 21, 1998).  

Since 2002, entities have applied to EPA for a critical use exemption
that would allow for the continued production and import of methyl
bromide after the phaseout in January 2005.  These exemptions are for
consumption only in those agricultural sectors that have demonstrated
that there are no technically or economically feasible alternatives to
methyl bromide.  The applications are rigorously assessed and analyzed
by EPA staff, including experts from the Office of Pesticides Programs. 
On an annual basis, EPA uses the data submitted by end users to create a
nomination of critical uses which the U.S. Government submits to the
Protocol’s Ozone Secretariat for review by an international panel of
experts and advisory bodies.  These advisory bodies include the Methyl
Bromide Technical Options Committee (MBTOC) and the Technical and
Economic Assessment Panel (TEAP).  The uses authorized internationally
by the Parties to the Protocol will be made available in the U.S. on an
annual basis.  

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 Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act
(Public Law No. 105-277; October 21, 1998).

Because this action involves the controlled use of a pesticide, EPA’s
Office Pesticides Programs is collaborating in the exemption application
process.  The regulation of pesticides is conducted under the Federal
Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), as amended by the
Food Quality Protection Act (FQPA).  

b)	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The applications will enable EPA to:

1)	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;

2)	Ensure that critical use exemptions comply with Section 604(d)(6), as
added to the CAA in 1998;

3)	Provide EPA with necessary data to evaluate the technical and
economic feasibility of methyl bromide alternatives in the circumstance
of the specific use, as presented in an application for a critical use
exemption;

The reported data will enable EPA to:

1)	Ensure that critical use exemptions comply with Section 604(d)(6) as
added to the CAA in 1998;

2)	Maintain compliance with the Protocol requirements for annual data
submission on the production of ozone depleting substances;

3)	Analyze technical use data to ensure that exemptions are used in
accordance with requirements included in today’s proposed rulemaking.

3.	Nonduplication, Consultation, and Other Collection Criteria

a) 	Nonduplication

All the information requested from respondents under this ICR 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 provided public notice and comment regarding this ICR with the
publication of a notice in the Federal Register (73 FR 12725,
3/10/2008).  EPA received two comments generally opposed to a critical
use exemption process for methyl bromide but without direct relevance to
the burden imposed by the renewed information collection request.  This
second notice is being submitted to the Federal Register concurrent with
submission of today’s ICR request to the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB). 

c)        Consultations

EPA has held consultations regarding the application, reporting, and
recordkeeping requirements of the critical use exemption program in the
form of stakeholder meetings since 2001.   Users and producers of methyl
bromide have offered their feedback on how best to create and implement
the application process while receiving clarification from EPA to their
questions and concerns.  Users and producers have also provided feedback
over that time concerning the reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
EPA continues to meet with stakeholder groups at their request to
discuss the methyl bromide critical use exemption process and remains
open to receiving comments from stakeholders.  Additionally,
stakeholders utilize the opportunity for continued consultations during
EPA’s annual notice-and-comment rulemaking process for allocating
critical use methyl bromide.

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 by the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. 
Any 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 quarterly
reporting from producers and importers of methyl bromide to monitor the
likelihood of compliance throughout the year.  These entities typically
prepare quarterly reports and prefer 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 distributors and fumigation
companies because they typically 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 under 40 CFR Part 2,
Subpart b, and will be disclosed only if EPA determines that the
information is not entitled to confidential treatment.  If no claim of
confidentiality is asserted when the information is received by EPA, 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/SIC Codes

	Respondents may 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
System (NAICS) and Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) 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
Crops

	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, NEC

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 Importers	325320- Pesticide and Other Agricultural
Chemical Manufacturing	2879- Pesticides and Agricultural Chemicals, NEC

b)	Information 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 includes
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 any 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 methyl bromide
used, the method of application and other historical use data requested
by the Administrator. 

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 any other information
required by the Administrator 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, research proposals and funding levels, and
transition plans.  

(ii) Reporting

EPA is requesting that entities provide the following information to the
Agency:

Producers and importers

Quarterly: number and type of expended and unexpended critical use
allowances (CUAs);

Quarterly: number and type of expended and unexpended critical stock
allowances (CSAs);

Annually: the total amount and type of methyl bromide sold directly to
critical uses (in kilograms); 

Annually: the total amount and type of critical use methyl bromide held
in inventory for themselves or on behalf of a third party (in
kilograms);

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

Periodically: other such 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.

Distributors

Annually: the total amount and type of methyl bromide bought (in
kilograms);

Annually: the total amount and type of methyl bromide sold directly to
critical uses (in kilograms); 

Annually: the total amount and type of critical use methyl bromide held
in inventory for themselves or on behalf of a third party (in
kilograms);

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

Periodically: provide other such 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.

Fumigators and applicators

Annually: the total amount and type of methyl bromide bought (in
kilograms);

Annually: the total amount and type of methyl bromide sold directly to
critical uses (in kilograms); 

Annually: the total amount and type of critical use methyl bromide held
in inventory for themselves or on behalf of a third party (in
kilograms);

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

Periodically: provide other such 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.

(iii)  Recordkeeping

Producers and importers

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 methyl bromide;

Records to be kept for 3 years.

Distributors

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 methyl bromide;

Records to be kept for 3 years.

Fumigators and applicators

Self certification form for each sale that indicates the end user will
only use/sell the methyl bromide for approved critical uses;

Order forms and invoices for methyl bromide;

Records to be kept for 3 years.

5.	The Information Collected, Agency Activities, Collection Methodology,
and Information Management

a)	Agency Activities

(i)	Applications

	Submitted critical use exemption applications are received by the
Stratospheric Program Implementation Branch (SPIB), of the Stratospheric
Protection Division (SPD) of the Office of Atmospheric Programs (OAP). 
The Biological and Economic Assessment Division (BEAD) of the Office of
Pesticide Programs (OPP) then conducts a technical review of the
applications.  Both 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 technically
or economically feasible alternatives exist” for the specified methyl
bromide use. The review also determines if a lack 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 consultation with the applicants if further
clarification is needed.

	EPA, in consultation with the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the
Department of State, compiles a nomination package containing all uses
to be nominated by the U.S. as “critical.”  This package is
submitted to the Ozone Secretariat of the Protocol, reviewed by MBTOC
and TEAP, and later authorized by the Parties at their annual meeting.  

	In order to complete the application process, EPA must:

Publish a Federal Register notice announcing the availability of
applications

Collect, compile, and analyze submitted applications

Check for any duplication and organize applications into sectors

Review applications for completeness and inform applicants if
application is not complete

Review applications for critical need for methyl bromide (e.g., data
supporting a finding that there is no technically or economically
feasible alternative)

Transpose data from the applications into the required nomination format
(as consistent with the MBTOC Handbook)

Compile applications into U.S. nomination package for submission to the
Ozone Secretariat

(ii)	Reported Data

All reported data will be reviewed by EPA.

EPA will ensure that compliance has been maintained with U.S. production
and consumption levels of exempted material at the national and sector
levels.

EPA will report annually to the Ozone Secretariat, through the U.S.
Department of State, on U.S. compliance with allowable production and
consumption levels.

EPA will adjust future amounts of exempted materials requested based on
actual use data and levels of material in inventory.

The data will then be stored.

b)	Collection and Methodology and Management

(i)	Applications

	

	When applications for methyl bromide critical uses are received by EPA,
they will be assigned a CUE number and tracked accordingly in a
spreadsheet as active submissions through the process, after which
applications will become historical files.  

(ii)	Reported Data

Data will be tracked by industry and will be provided to EPA on a
quarterly and/or annual basis on forms to be provided by the Agency on
EPA’s website (www.epa.gov/ozone/record/mbr.html).  EPA will use our
electronic tracking system to update company specific and overall U.S.
compliance with production, consumption, and use. Confidential business
information will be stored in appropriately controlled areas.

c)	Small Entity Flexibility

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

EPA believes the application information collection provides meaningful
relief for those users of methyl bromide who do not have technically or
economically feasible alternatives.  Applying for the exemption is
voluntary and only those entities that believe they have no technically
or economically feasible alternative will submit an application.  While
the exemption itself will relieve burden on affected entities, the
burden on all affected entities associated with applying for the
exemption, and especially the burden on small entities, has been reduced
to every extent possible.  To reduce the burden on small businesses, EPA
encourages small businesses to participate in and/or form representative
organizations that will serve to aid in gathering information and
completion of applications.

Bearing in mind U.S. obligations under the Protocol, EPA designed a
reporting and recordkeeping system 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 system that requires end users to sign a short form (1-2
pages in length) certifying that they are buying the exempted material
for an allowable use and will use it accordingly. The form would be 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 publishes an application request in the Federal Register annually
(in April) announcing the availability of the pre-plant and post-harvest
applications.  Entities have between 60 and 90 days from the date of
publication of the Federal Register notice to submit an application. 
Applications for exemptions are requested with three years of
anticipation due to the international process and EPA’s
notice-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 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 development of
U.S. nomination package

January, Year 2: Inter-Agency review of nomination package

January 31, Year 2: U.S. nomination submitted to Ozone Secretariat

February-June, Year 2: Advisory body (MBTOC/TEAP) review

November-December, Year 2: Parties authorize critical uses

January-December, Year 3: EPA publishes critical use exemption amounts
in notice-and-comment rulemaking

	Subsequent collection schedules depend on the timetables established by
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 quarterly basis (see
section 5 a) to EPA beginning in the last quarter of 2008 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 analysis is EPA’s experience with implementing
the critical use exemption program since 2002 and EPA’s previous ICR
analyses for the CUE program.  EPA expects the burden estimate to be
conservatively high as the Agency believes that the respondents are
familiar with EPA’s regulations and likely have an established system
for complying with those requirements. 

The burden analyzed is that associated with the application, reporting,
and recordkeeping requirements of the program. As in the previous ICR,
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, EPA used an hourly industry wage rate
of $100.86 per hour, including benefits and overhead. This is the
estimated hourly wage rate for management within the Pesticide,
Fertilizer, & Other Agricultural Chemical Manufacturing sector (325300
Series NAICS code).  This rate was developed by the Office of Pesticides
Programs within EPA and is based on the National Industry-Specific
Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics (BLS) at http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm. 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 39, with approximately 75 total applications
expected.  Over the last four years, EPA has received on average 65
applications each year, but it is possible that more users may apply for
exemptions as the stockpile of methyl bromide is depleted.  Therefore,
EPA uses a total of 75 responses as the estimate.  The burden hours have
decreased from previous ICRs as 1) the prior ICR estimated 100
respondents, 2) the stakeholders are more familiar with the CUE program,
and 3) stakeholders have already organized associations to apply on
behalf of multiple growers. EPA believes that the number of hours may be
an overestimate as there have been minimal formatting /data changes to
the application form, encouragement of electronic submissions, reduced
requirements for repeat applicants, frequent communication with
stakeholders, and six years of implementation.

ii)	Reported Data

To determine respondent costs for recordkeeping and reporting, EPA used
an hourly industry wage rate of $100.86 per hour as described above.
Some activities, such as rule familiarization, are one time activities
therefore total respondent burden hours indicated in Table II (below)
may be overestimated.  This ICR doubles the number of expected
respondents compiling and reporting data on an annual basis.  These are
distributors and third party applicators of critical use methyl bromide.
 EPA has reason to believe this universe is larger than was originally
estimated through conversations with stakeholders and recent information
gathering efforts conducted by the Agency under Section 114 of the Clean
Air Act.  Unlike previous ICRs, the table below also explicitly breaks
out the expected burden from responding to such periodic information
gathering efforts.

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	75	75	1	75

Process, compile, and review the requested data for accuracy and
appropriateness	75	75	30	2250

Generate application correspondence (and any follow-up information
requested)	75	75	7	525

Store, file, or maintain the information	75	75	1	75

Total burden for applications	75	75	39	2,925

 

ii)  Recordkeeping and Reporting

Rule Familiarization	100	100	2	200

Data Compilation (quarterly basis)	4	16	4	64

Data Compilation (annual basis)	100	100	8.5	850

Data Reporting (quarterly basis)	4	16	0.5	8

Data Reporting (annual basis)	100	100	1	100

Reporting on Allowance Trading Activities	4	16	0.5	8

Self Certification Activities by Producers, Importers, and Distributors 
100	150	0.25	37.5

Self Certification Activities by End Users 	2,000	2,500	0.25	625

Responding to periodic questions regarding CUE program and fumigation
industry	100	100	1	100

Total Burden for reporting and recordkeeping	2,104	3098	18	1,992.5

COMBINED TOTAL BURDEN HOURS	2179	3173	57	4,917.5

There are no capital and operating costs associated this action.

TABLE III- CAPITAL AND OPERATING COSTS

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 that number
of hours and costs incurred by the Agency to review each application. 
The second is the number of hours and costs incurred by the Agency in
reviewing reporting data, preparing nominations, submitting data to the
Ozone Secretariat on U.S. compliance, distributing critical use
allowances, and developing guidance for regulated entities.

	The number of applications submitted each year has been approximately
65. While EPA estimates the end user universe to be around 2000, EPA has
found that the majority of users have applied through their consortia,
and that these consortia represent many growers. As mentioned above, EPA
is using an estimate of 75 respondents in case the number of applicants
increase as the stockpile of methyl bromide is depleted.

The calculations below are based on combined OAR/OPP experience
implementing the CUE program over the past six years.  The Agency burden
in reviewing the applications has decreased from those in ICR 2060-0482
as the Agency has developed a regular system over the course of
implementing the CUE program over the last six years.  In addition, the
number of sectors applying 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 ICR 2060-0564. Some steps analyzed in prior
ICRs, such as writing the reporting forms and determining the historic
baseline, have already been completed are unnecessary for this renewal. 
Other steps that the Agency has taken, such as period requests for
information, has been explicitly broken out based off the Agency’s
experience.  

	The hourly wage rates for EPA clerical, technical and managerial staff
were derived from the 2008 OPM annual base pay table divided by 2,080 to
estimate the hourly wage and then multiplied by 1.6, the standard
government benefits multiplier.  The hourly wage rates are as follows: 
EPA estimates an average hourly labor cost of $73.38 (GS-15 level) for
managerial costs, $52.79 (GS-13 level) for technical staff, and $20.20
(GS-5 level) for clerical staff based on 2008 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 extramural (contractor) time is valued at $85.00 per hour
including overhead and fringe.  

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	75	0	2	2	2

Group applications	75	0	1	0	0

Route application to appropriate scientists/economists for review	75	0	1
0	0

Review information submitted for accuracy	75	0	10	0	0

Perform economic and technical analysis and compile nomination on
proposed exemption to the Ozone Secretariat	75	5	40	45	0

Respond to questions on Nomination from MBTOC/TEAP (advisory bodies to
Parties to Protocol)	100	2	10	0	0

Final decision on proposed exemptions (sectors)	15	30	15	0	0

Store, file, and maintain applications	75	0	1	1	1

TOTAL per response (applications)	 	37	80	48	3

TOTAL per year (applications)	 	1,025	5,350	3,600	225

 

i)  Reporting and Recordkeeping

Process annual reports	50	0.5	1.5	0	1

Process quarterly reports	16	0.5	1.5	0	1

Distribute allowances annually	4	1	5	0	4

Report to the Ozone Secretariat	1	0	10	0	10

Provide Guidance	30	0	1	0	0

Seek information on CUE program and fumigation industry	100	0.25	0.25	0
0

TOTAL per response (recordkeeping and reporting)	 	2.25	19.25	0	16

Write/revise reporting forms (one time only)	1	10	10	0	100

TOTAL per year (recordkeeping and reporting)	 	72	194	0	192

 

TOTAL FOR ALL AGENCY ACTION PER YEAR	 	1,097	5,544	3,600	417

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 six years. This program does not directly regulate 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 submitted each year has
been approximately 65. EPA is using a conservative estimate of 75
respondents, however, in case the number of applicants increase as the
stockpile of methyl bromide is depleted.  This is smaller than the
estimated end user universe of 2000 as the majority of end users apply
through their consortia, not individually. EPA continues to encourage
users with similar circumstances to utilize grower and user
organizations to aid in completion of the application, thereby reducing
both the burden on applicants (particularly small businesses) and the
Agency.  The registration of additional alternatives (since 2002) in the
U.S. may also result in fewer applications received.  

	There are 4 producers and importers of methyl bromide who report
quarterly and up to 100 distributors/ applicators of methyl bromide who
may report annually. Thus the total number of respondents is estimated
to be 2,179 (2,000 end users, 75 applicants, 100
distributors/applicators, and 4 producers/importers).

e)	Bottom Line 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 Tables
II and III respectively. The dollar estimate associated with this burden
is displayed in Table V below. The total annual labor cost burden is
$993,622.  

TABLE V- RESPONDENT BURDEN HOURS AND COSTS

Response	No of Responses	Hours per response	Cost/Hour	Total Cost

Application	75	39	$100.86 	$295,016 

Recordkeeping and Reporting	348	18	$100.86 	$631,787 

Self certification: producers, importers, distributors, end users	2,650
0.25	$100.86 	$66,820 

Total	 	 	 	$993,622 

	ii) Agency burden is reported 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 $8,162.86 per application and $2,541.31 per
recordkeeping and reporting response.  Total annual cost to the Agency
is $481,330.62.

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

 	$73.38	$52.79	$20.20	$85.00	 	 

Part I.  Hours per response

     -Application	37	80	48	3	168	$8,162.86

     -Recordkeeping and reporting	2.25	19.25	0	16	37.50	$2,541.31

Part II. Hours per year

     -Application	1,025	5,350	3,600	225	10,200	 

     -Recordkeeping and reporting	72	194	0	192	458.00	 

     -Write/revise reporting forms	10	10	0	100	120.00	 

TOTAL HOURS	1,097	5,544	3,600	417	10,658	 

TOTAL COSTS	$80,497.86	$292,667.76	$72,720.00	$35,445.00	$481,330.62

	

f)	Reasons for Change in Burden

	There is a decrease of 82 hours in the total estimated respondent
burden compared with the burden currently approved by OMB.  This
estimate for total burden hours includes updated burden estimates from
this ICR as well as ICR 2060-0564, which is being transfered into this
ICR.  

	The reason for the decrease in burden hours is that the Agency has six
years of experience managing the critical use exemption program which
has led to efficiency and greater accuracy in estimating future burden. 
Over the last four years, EPA has received on average 65 applications
each year, rather than the 100 estimated in the previous ICR.  EPA
continues to encourage users with similar circumstances to utilize
grower and user organizations to aid in completion of the application,
thereby reducing both the burden on applicants (particularly small
businesses) and the Agency.  The registration of additional alternatives
since 2002 in the U.S. may also result in fewer applications received. 
Furthermore, stakeholders are more familiar with the critical use
exemption program and have already organized associations to apply on
behalf of multiple growers.  Other reasons for burden reduction include
the encouragement of electronic submission of applications and other
data and very frequent EPA communication with methyl bromide
stakeholders. 

g)	Burden Statement

	The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this
collection of information is estimated to average 2 hours per response. 
Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information.  An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number.  The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are
listed in 40 CFR Part 9 and 48 CFR Chapter 15.     

	To comment on 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-2008-0153, 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 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, access the index listing of the contents of the
public docket, and to access those documents in the public docket that
are available electronically.  When in the system, select “search,”
then key in the Docket ID Number identified above.  Also, you can send
comments to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of
Management and Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503,
Attention: Desk Office for EPA.  Please include the EPA Docket ID No.
EPA-HQ-OAR-2008-0153 and OMB control number 2060-0482 in any
correspondence.

Part B of the Supporting Statement

This Section is not applicable.

  PAGE  1