Burden Calculation Tables

---

Overview

Table 1
Table 2
Total Annual Responses
Capital and O&M

---

Sheet 1: Table 1

Table 1: Annual Respondent Burden and Cost - NESHAP for Hazardous Waste Combustors (40 CFR 63, Subpart EEE) Renewal
		Total	Total		Total Hours and Costs
		Manager	Technical	Clerical	Person Hours Per	Labor Costs	# of	Total	Total Labor
		$149.35	$112.98	$54.81	Respondent	Per respondent	Respondents a	Hours	Cost b
INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITY
1. Applications
2. Survey and Studies
3. Reporting requirements
A. Familiarization with the rule c		0.0	4.0	0.0	4.0	$451.92	50.9	203.5	$22,987.88
B. Required Activities
Operation and maintenance plan (63.1206 (c)(7))
	Request for appoval for establishing set points with extrapolation for PM detectors d	0.0	10.0	1.0	11.0	$1,184.61	1	11	$1,184.61
	Recommend alternative OPLs for units with ESP or IWSs e	0.0	10.0	1.0	11.0	$1,184.61	6	66	$7,107.66
Feedstreams Analysis Plan (63.1209(c)(2)) f
	Monitor and record feedrates	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	$56.49	1	1	$56.49
	Perform waste analysis four time annually (non-commercial
	facilities)	0.0	8.0	0.0	8.0	$903.84	1	8	$903.84
	Perform waste analysis 50 times annually (commercial
	facilities)	0.0	100.0	0.0	100.0	$11,298.00	1	100	$11,298.00
Quality control program (63.1209(d) and 63.8(d) g
	Develop and implement a CMS QC program	5.0	64.0	10.0	79.0	$8,525.58	30	2,370	$255,767.40
Conduct of performance evaluation and performance evaluation dates (63.1209(d) and 63.8(e)(4)) h
	Conduct a CMS performance evalutaion	4.0	40.0	4.0	48.0	$5,335.85	36	1,728	$192,090.53
Quality control (QC) requirements (63, Subpart EEE Appendix, Section 1.1) i
	Develop and implement a QC program	8.0	140.0	12.0	160.0	$17,669.74	30	4,800	$530,092.08
	Revise program, if necessary	1.0	8.0	1.0	10.0	$1,108.00	6	60	$6,648.01
Quality assurance (QA) requirements (63, Subpart EEE Appendix, Section 1.1) j
	Develop and implement a QA program	8.0	120.0	12.0	140.0	$15,410.14	60	8,400	$924,608.16
	Revise or update plan, if necessary	1.0	8.0	1.0	10.0	$1,108.00	6.6	66	$7,312.81
Performance Evaluation (Appendix EEE, Section 5) k
	Conduct ACA, RATA, or interference reponse test as
	applicable	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	$0.00	0	0	$0
C. Create Information
D. Gather Information
E. Write Report
Cement kilns with in-line raw mills (63.1220(d)) l
	Prepare and submit notification of compliance using the
	emission averaging requirements for cement kilns with in-line
	raw mills	1.0	3.0	1.0	5.0	$543.10	1	5	$543.10
Extension of compliance with emission standards (63.1206(b)(4), 63.6(i), 63.1213, and 63.9(c)) m
	Prepare and submit the request for an extension of compliance	2.0	10.0	4.0	30.0	$1,647.74	10	162.8	$16,763.20
	Prepare and submit a progress report, as applicable	1.0	5.0	2.0	15.0	$823.87	10	81.4	$8,381.60
Changes in design, operation, or maintenance (63.1206(b)(5)) n
	Prepare and submit a notification of change in design,
	operation, or maintenance	2.0	52.0	8.0	62.0	$6,612.14	30	1,860	$198,364.32
Compliance with alternative MACT standards when not burning Hazardous Waste(63.1206(b)(1)(ii)) n
	Revise, as necessary, the performance test plan,
	Documentation of Compliance, and start-up, shutdown, and
	malfunction plan to reflect changes that will not adversely
	affect compliance with emission standards or operating
	requirements.	1.0	6.0	4.0	11.0	$1,046.47	30	330	$31,394.16
Applicability of particulate matter and opacity standards during particulate matter CEMS correlation tests (63.1206(b)(8)) o
	Prepare and submit a particulate matter CEMS correlation
	test plan	2.0	16.0	2.0	20.0	$2,216.00	13	260	$28,808.05
	Request additional time extension for waiving PM and Opacity stnds	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.1	$11.30	0	0	$0
Alternative hydrocarbon monitoring location for short cement kilns burning haz waste at location other than hot end of kiln p
	Prepare and submit a petition for alternative monitoring
	location and emission standards	1.0	18.0	0.5	19.5	$2,210.40	0	0	$0
Startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan (63.1206(c)(2) and 63.6(e)(3)) q
	Submit for review and approval by EPA	1.0	10.0	2.0	13.0	$1,388.77	7	91	$9,721.40
	Excessive emissions reporting	3.0	11.0	1.0	15.0	$1,745.65	6	90	$10,473.88
Automatic waste feed cutoff (63.1206(c)(3)) q
	Develop and submit a written report documenting excessive
	exceedances and result of the investigation and corrective
	measures taken	2.0	16.0	0.5	18.5	$2,133.79	6	111	$12,802.73
ESV openings (63.1206(c)(4)) r
	Develop and submit a written report documenting the ESV
	opening and result of the investigation and corrective
	measures taken, and whether ESV event caused non-compliance	2.0	16.0	0.5	18.5	$2,133.79	39	712.3	$82,150.88
Combustion system leaks (63.1206(c)(5)) s
	Prepare and submit a request to use an alternative means of
	control to provide control of combustion system leaks	0.5	10.0	0.5	11.0	$1,231.88	30	330	$36,956.43
Operation and maintenance plan (63.1206 (c)(7)) t
	Notify EPA if alarm limit is exceeded more than 5% of the time in a 6-month block period	5.0	40.0	0.0	45.0	$5,265.96	11.3	510	$59,680.88
Comprehensive performance test requirements (63.1207(b)(1)) h, u, v
	Submittal of comprehensive performance test no later than 61
	months after the date of commencing the previous
	comprehensive performance test	2.0	40.0	4.0	46.0	$5,037.14	36	1,656	$181,337.18
	Submittal of one-time D/F testing for units w/out numerical D/F stnd	0.5	10.0	1.0	11.5	$1,259.29	1	11.5	$1,259.29
	Request 60 day extention to complete testing	1.0	1.0	1.0	3.0	$317.14	12	36	$3,805.70
	Request additional time for waiving OPLs for pretesting	1.0	1.0	1.0	3.0	$317.14	6	18	$1,902.85
Confirmatory performance test requirements (63.1207(b)(2)) w
	Perform the confirmatory performance test no later than 31
	months after the date of commencing the previous
	comprehensive performance test	2.0	40.0	4.0	46.0	$5,037.14	33	1,518	$166,225.75
Data in lieu of the initial comprehensive performance test (63.1207(c)(2)) x
	Prepare and submit a request that previous emissions test
	data serve as documentation of conformance with emission
	standards	1.0	8.0	2.0	11.0	$1,162.81	6	66	$6,976.87
Notification of performance test and CMS perfomance evaluation and approval of test plan CMS performance evaluation plan (63.1207(e)) k, y
	Prepare and submit a notification of intention to conduct
	a perfomance test	1.0	4.0	1.0	6.0	$656.08	36	216	$23,618.95
	Prepare and submit the rescheduled notification of intent to
	conduct a performance test, if test is postponed	1.0	4.0	1.0	6.0	$656.08	3.6	21.6	$2,361.90
	Prepare and submit a site-specific comprehensive
	performance test plan	7.0	110.0	12.0	129.0	$14,130.98	36.0	4,644	$508,715.42
	Prepare and submit the site-specific confirmatory performance
	test plan	2.0	30.0	10.0	42.0	$4,236.20	21.6	907.2	$91,502.01
Notification of compliance (63.1207(j), 63.9(h), 63.7(g), 63.10(d)(2) and 63.1210(d)) z
	Prepare and submit a notification of compliance	10.0	104.0	16.0	130.0	$14,120.40	60	7,800	$847,224
	Prepare and submit a written request for a time extension, if
	necessary	0.5	0.0	1.0	1.5	$129.49	6	9	$776.92
Waiver of performance tests and request for time extension (63.1207(h) and 63.1207(m)) z
	Prepare and submit a request for a 6 month time extension for
	conducting a performance test if test plan has not been approved	2.0	24.0	2.0	28.0	$3,119.84	6	168	$18,719.06
	Notify public of request for time extension	3.0	2.0	1.0	6.0	$728.83	6	36	$4,372.96
Feedstreams Analysis Plan (63.1209(c)(2))
	Submit the plan for review and approval, if requested by the
	EPA	0.0	0.0	0.5	0.5	$27.41	0	0	$0.00
Alternative compliance monitoring requirements for standards other than those monitored with a CEMS (63.1209(g)(1)) aa
	Prepare and submit an application for use of an alternative
	monitoring method	8.0	100.0	10.0	118.0	$13,040.92	6	708	$78,245.50
	Prepare and submit an application to waive an operating limit	4.0	24.0	2.0	30.0	$3,418.55	0	0	$0
Use of CEMS in lieu of OPLs; or alternative methods in lieu of CEMS (63.1209(a)(5)) aa
	Prepare and submit an application for use of an alternative
	monitoring method	8.0	100.0	10.0	118.0	$13,040.92	0	0	$0
	Prepare and submit an application to waive an operating limit	4.0	24.0	2.0	30.0	$3,418.55	0	0	$0
	Prepare and submit request to extrapolate mercury feedrate
	limits bb	0.5	4.0	1.0	5.5	$581.41	6	33	$3,488.44
	Prepare and submit request to extrapolate semivolatile metal
	and low volatile metal feedrate limits bb	0.5	4.0	1.0	5.5	$581.41	6	33	$3,488.44
	Submit the CMS quality control program for inspection, if
	requested by the EPA cc	0.0	0.0	0.5	0.5	$27.41	6	3	$164.43
Notification of performance evaluation (63.1209(d) and 63.8(e)(2)) g
	Prepare and submit a notification of CMS performance
	evaluation	1.0	4.0	1.0	6.0	$656.08	30	180	$19,682.46
Additional notification requirements for CMS (63.9(g)(2) and (3)) g
	Prepare and submit additional notification requirements for
	source with CMS	1.0	4.0	1.0	6.0	$656.08	30	180	$19,682.46
Submission of site-specific peformance evaluation test plan (63.1209(d) and 63.8(e)(3)) h
	Develop and submit a CMS site-specific performance
	evaluation test plan	10.0	44.0	8.0	62.0	$6,903.12	36	2,232	$248,512.32
Reporting results of CMS performance evaluations (63.10(e)(2)) h
	Prepare and submit a written report of the results of the
	CMS performance evaluation	1.0	36.0	6.0	43.0	$4,545.49	36	1,548	$163,637.71
	Prepare and submit written reports of the results of the
	COMS performance evaluation, as applicable dd	1.0	18.0	4.0	23.0	$2,402.23	0	0	$0
Notice of intent to comply 63.1206(b)-(d) ee
	Prepare draft NIC	9.0	45.0	3.0	57.0	$6,592.70	1	57	$6,592.70
	Notify public about meeting and draft NIC	1.0	3.0	2.0	6.0	$597.91	1	6	$597.91
	Conduct public meeting	4.0	20.0	3.0	27.0	$3,021.44	1	27	$3,021.44
	Prepare and submit final NIC	2.0	35.0	3.0	40.0	$4,417.43	1	40	$4,417.43
	Prepare progress report	3.0	30.0	3.0	36.0	$4,001.89	1	36	$4,001.89
Initial notification 63.9(b) and 63.5(d) ff
	Prepare and submit and initial notification	2.0	8.0	1.0	11.0	$1,257.35	1	11	$1,257.35
	Prepare and submit an application of approval of construction
	as applicable	7.0	32.0	0.5	39.5	$4,688.23	1	39.5	$4,688.23
	Prepare and submit an application of approval of reconstruction
	as applicable	7.0	32.0	0.5	39.5	$4,688.23	1	39.5	$4,688.23
Adjustment to time periods or postmark deadlines for submittal and review of required communications 63.9(i) gg
	Prepare and submit a request for an adjustment to a time
	period or postmark deadline	0.3	2.0	0.5	2.8	$290.70	15	41.3	$4,360.55
Request to reduce frequency of excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance results 63.10(e)(3)(ii) hh
	Prepare and submit a request to reduce the frequency of
	excess emissions and CMS performance reports	0.3	2.0	0.5	2.8	$290.70	6	16.5	$1,744.22
Waiver of recordkeeping and reporting requirements ii
	Prepare and submit a waiver of recordkeeping and reporting	0.3	2.0	0.5	2.8	$290.70	0.6	1.7	$174.42
Startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports 63.10(d)(5)(i) and (ii) jj
	Prepare and submit a periodic startup, shutdown, and
	malfunction report, as applicable	0.3	5.0	1.0	6.3	$657.05	15	93.8	$9,855.72
	Prepare and submit an immediate startup, shutdown, and
	malfunction report, as applicable	0.3	5.0	1.0	6.3	$657.05	6	37.5	$3,942.29
Excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report and summary report 63.10(e)(3) kk
	Prepare and submit an excess emissions and monitoring
	system performance report and summary report	0.3	4.0	2.0	6.3	$598.88	60	375	$35,932.68
Data compression ll
	Prepare and submit request for approval to use data
	compression techniques to record data on a less frequent
	basis than required by Section 63.1209	0.3	2.0	0.5	2.8	$290.70	15	41.3	$4,360.55
Extension of the compliance date to install pollution prevention or waste minimization controls (63.1213) mm
	Prepare and submit the request for an extension of compliance
	date due to installation of pollution prevention controls	4.0	24.0	2.0	30.0	$3,418.55	6	180	$20,511.29
	Prepare and submit the request for an extension of compliance
	date due to waste minimization controls	4.0	24.0	2.0	30.0	$3,418.55	6	180	$20,511.29
Performance Evaluation (Appendix EEE, Section 5) k
	Prepare and submit a written report of the results of the
	performance evaluation	0.3	1.0	0.0	1.3	$150.32	0	0	$0
Use of alternative CEMS spans (63, Subpart EEE Appendix, Section 6.3.5) nn
Prepare and submit a request to use an
alternative CEMS span		0.5	25.0	1.0	26.5	$2,953.99	0	0	$0
Alternative risk based chlorine standards oo
	Make request to use risk based chlorine stnds	2.0	40.0	5.0	47.0	$5,091.95	15	705	$76,379.31
Subtotal for Reporting Requirements		171	1807	204	2,203	$240,830		46,309	$5,058,836
4.  Recordkeeping  requirements
A.  Familiarization with Regulatory Requirements (see 3A)
B.  Plan activities (see 3B)
C.  Implement activities (see 3B)
D.  Develop record system
E.  Time to enter information
	Document in operating record compliance with the
	emission averaging requirements for cement kilns with in-line
	raw mills l	0.0	0.5	0.5	1.0	$83.90	1	1	$83.90
Compliance with alternative MACT standards when not burning Hazardous Waste(63.1206(b)(1)(ii)) pp
	Document in the operating record compliance with
	applicable CAA requirements in lieu of the requirements
	of Subpart EEE	0.0	4.0	0.0	4.0	$451.92	3	12	$1,355.76
	Document design, operation, or maintenance change in operating record
	if it is determined that the change will not adversely affect compliance with
	emission standards or operating requirements n	0.0	1.0	0.0	1.0	$112.98	30	30	$3,389.40
Hazardous waste residence time qq
	Document hazardous waste residence time in operating record	0.0	4.0	0.5	4.5	$479.33	1	4.5	$479.33
Startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan (63.1206(c)(2) and 63.6(e)(3)) q
	Develop or revise a startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan	6.0	82.0	8.0	96.0	$10,598.95	7	672	$74,192.66
Automatic waste feed cutoff (63.1206(c)(3)) rr
	Investigate the cause of any AWFCO, take appropriate
	corrective measures to minimize future AWFCOs, and
	record the findings and corrective measures in the operating
	record	2.0	16.0	0.5	18.5	$2,133.79	120	2,220	$256,054.68
	Test the AWFCO system and associated alarms weekely and
	document and record AWFCO operability test procedures and
	result in the operating record	0.0	1.5	0.0	1.5	$169.47	30	45	$5,084.10
	Document in the operating record that weekly inspections will
	unduly restrict or upset operations	0.0	0.5	0.0	0.5	$56.49	30	15	$1,694.70
	Test the AWFCO system monthly, and record results in
	operating record	0.0	1.5	0.0	1.5	$169.47	30	45	$5,084.10
	Document in the operating record the operating and maintenance
	plan ramp down procedures, as applicable	0.5	6.0	1.0	7.5	$807.37	120	900	$96,883.92
ESV openings (63.1206(c)(4)) r
	Develop an ESV operating plan and keep it in the operating
	record	2.0	20.0	1.0	23.0	$2,613.11	12.8	295.2	$33,534.96
	Investigate the cause of the ESV opening, take appropriate
	corrective measures to minimize such future ESV openings,
	record the findings and corrective measures in the operating
	record, and determine if ESV caused non-compliance	2.0	16.0	0.5	18.5	$2,133.79	39	712.3	$82,150.88
Combustion system leaks (63.1206(c)(5)) s
	Specify in the comprehensive test workplan and the notification
	of compliance the methods used to control combustion system leaks	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	$28.25	30	7.5	$847.35
Operation and maintenance plan (63.1206 (c)(7)) ss, t
	Prepare an operation and maintenance plan and
	put in the operating record	5.0	295.0	10.0	310.0	$34,623.96	7	2,170	$242,367.72
	Document alarm limit exceedences and corrective action taken.	5.0	40.0	0.0	45.0	$5,265.96	11.3	510	$59,680.88
Feedstreams Analysis Plan (63.1209(c)(2)) f
	Develop and implement a feedstream analysis plan and
	put plan in the operating record	1.0	5.0	1.0	7.0	$769.06	1	7	$769.06
Dioxins and furans (63.1209(k)) tt
	Document in the operating record procedures
	used to ensure carbon bed lifetime is being
	sufficiently monitored and controlled	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	$28.25	0	0	$0
	Document in the operating record that replacement carbon
	will provide the same level of control as original carbon
	used during the performance test	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	$28.25	0	0	$0
	Document in the operating record that replacement inhibitor
	will provide the same level of control as the original inhibitor
	used during the performance test	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	$28.25	0	0	$0
Total chlorine (hydrochloride and chlorine gas) (63.1209(o)) tt
	Document in the operating record that replacement sorbent
	will provide the same level of control as the original sorbent
	used during the performance test	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	$28.25	0	0	$0
Operating under different modes of operation (63.1207(g) and 63.1209(r)) g, uu
	Document the mode of operation in the operating record, if a
	source has tested under two or more operating modes	0.0	0.3	0.0	0.3	$28.25	30	7.5	$847.35
	Keep the CMS quality control program on record for the life
	of the affected source or until the affected source is no
	longer subject to the provisions of 40 CFR Part 63	0.0	0.0	0.5	0.5	$27.41	30	15	$822.15
General recordkeeping requirements 63.10(b) vv
	Retain files of all information (including all reports and)
	notifications) for atleast 5 years	0.0	0.0	40.0	40.0	$2,192.40	60	2,400	$131,544
Additional recordkeeping requirements for source with CMS (63.10(c)) vv
	Maintain additional records for continuous monitoring
	systems	0.0	0.0	20.0	20.0	$1,096.20	60	1,200	$65,772
Documentation of Compliance 63.1211(d) ww
	Develop a Documentation of Compliance and include it in the
	operating record	1.0	10.0	2.0	13.0	$1,388.77	60	780	$83,326.32
Quality control (QC) requirements (63, Subpart EEE Appendix, Section 1.1) j
	Record program in operating record	0.0	20.0	0.0	20.0	$2,259.60	60	1,200	$135,576
Quality assurance (QA) requirements (63, Subpart EEE Appendix, Section 1.1) j
	Record plan in the operating record	0.0	10.0	0.0	10.0	$1,129.80	60	600	$67,788
Calibration drift (CD) and zero drift (ZD) assessment and daily system audit (63, Subpart EEE Appendix, Section 4) j
	Check, record, and quantify the ZD and the CD
	at least once daily (330 times per year)	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	$0.00	60	0	$0
	Retain all CEMS measurements in the
	operating record for at least 5 years	0.0	1.0	0.0	1.0	$112.98	60	60	$6,778.80
F.  Train personnel
Operator training and certification (63.1206(c)(6)) yy
	Develop an operator training and certification program	6.8	136.0	13.6	156.4	$17,126.29	6	938.4	$102,757.74
	Implement an operator training and certification program	0.6	12.0	1.2	13.8	$1,511.14	60	828	$90,668.59
	Keep a record of the plan and records of certification and training activities	0.4	8.0	0.8	9.2	$1,007.43	60	552	$60,445.73
G.  Audits
Subtotal for Recordkeeping Requirements		32	692	101	825	$88,491		16,227	$1,609,980
TOTAL LABOR BURDEN AND COSTS (ROUNDED) zz		203	2498	305	3030	$329,000		62,500	$6,670,000
TOTAL CAPITAL AND O&M COST (ROUNDED) zz									$2,890,000
GRAND TOTAL (ROUNDED) zz									$9,560,000
a	The total number of respondents estimated over the next three years is based on approximately 177 existing units at 153 facilities that are subject to the standard, with one new unit per year over the same period. The overall average number of respondents submitting reports in each year is calculated as one-third of the total respondents and is 60 respondents per year.
b	This ICR uses the following labor rates: $149.35 per hour for Executive, Administrative, and Managerial labor; $112.98 per hour for Technical labor, and $54.81 per hour for Clerical labor. These rates are from the United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 2017 “Table 2: Civilian Workers, by occupational and industry group.” The rates are from column 1, “Total Compensation.” The rates have been increased by 110 percent to account for the benefit packages available to those employed by private industry.
c	Assumes respondents take 4 hours to refamiliarize themselves with rule requirements each year.
d	Assumes 1 respondent per year will request appoval for establishing set points with extrapolation for PM detectors.
e	It is estimated that of the sources reporting annually with ESPs or IWSs, 90% will request to use operating parameter limits instead of continuous particulate detectors.
f	Provides for one-time requirement for development and implementation of feedstream analysis plans for new respondents.
g	As part of the comprehensive performance test, HWCs will submit a CMS quality control program, notification of performance evaluation and additional notification requirements; we estimate that 50% of sources have submitted a CMS quality control program at this time.
h	HWCs are also required to submit a performance evaluation test plan, and conduct a CMS performance test. We estimate 60% of sources would submit test plans and conduct performance testing along with their comprehensive performance testing.
i	Assumes that respondents will develop and implement a QC program for 50% of units, and 10% will submit a revised QC program.
j	All sources must meet the QA requirements for CEMS. Assumes all sources will develop a QA program and 11% will submit a revised QA program.
k	Burden for performance evaluations is included in the the notification of performance test and CMS performance evaluations.
l	We estimate that 1 cement kiln with an in-line kiln raw mill will comply with the emission averaging requirements for kilns of this type. Thus, they will conduct a performance test when the raw mill is on-line and when the mill is off-line, and include the averaging procedures in their Notification of Compliance and operating record.
m	Assumes 20% of all facilities operating an HWC will apply for an extension each year.
n	It is estimated that 50% of the sources reporting annually will be making design, operation, and maintenance changes to comply with the MACT rule and document change in operating record.
o	It is anticipated that 39 sources (among all HWC) will conduct PM CEMS correlation testing over the 3-year period of this ICR and request a waiver of PM and opacity standards during the testing. It is estimated that none of these sources will request an extension of the 96 hours allowed for the waiver.
p	Assumes no respondents will petition for an alternative monitoring location or emission standards.
q	Assumes 1 new respondent and 10% of existing respondents reporting annually will develop or revise the SSM plan and resubmit the plan for approval, and 10% of respondents would be required to submit excess emissions reports.
r	It is estimated that 50% of hazardous waste incinerators reporting annually have ESVs, and will develop an ESV operating plan. On average, each unit will have 3 ESV openings per year.
s	It is estimated that respondents will request approval for 50% of all sources for use of an alternative means to provide control of combustion system leaks (control through a positively sealed combustion chamber).
t	Assumes all units with fabric filters (about 34 sources) will have to purchase, install, and operate bag leak detection systems over the three year period of this ICR.
u	Assumes 1 new respondent will submit one-time D/F testing for units without a numerical D/F standard.
v	Assumes 20% of sources will request an extension of the comprehensive performance test and 10% of sources will request additional time for waiving OPLs for pretesting.
w	It is assumed that 60% of units with PCDD/PCDF limits would be required to test over the three-year period of this ICR.
x	It is estimated that 10% of all sources reporting annually will submit a request to use previous emissions test data to serve as documentation of compliance with emission standards.
y	Assumes 60% of respondents must conduct a comprehensive performance test every 3 years and 60% of respondents must conduct a confirmatory performance every 5 years. It is estimated that 10% of these sources would reschedule the test.
z	All facilities will submit a Notification of Compliance. It is estimated that 10% of facilities conducting the comprehensive performance test will apply for a waiver or time extension.
aa	It is estimated that 10% of all facilities will apply for and receive approval to use alternative monitoring requirements to document compliance with the emission standards of Subpart EEE other than CO or HC which are monitored with a CEMS. It is estimated that no facilities will make a request to use alternative operating parameters or methods to CEMS or CEMS in lieu of operating parameters.
bb	It is estimated that no existing sources will chose to use a CEMS for compliance monitoring and that 10% of sources will make a request to set feedrate limits with extrapolation.
cc	It is estimated that EPA will request additional relevant information for the site-specific CMS performance test plan from 10% of the sources performing the test.
dd	This requirement only applies to cement kilns without bag leak systems and PM detectors. It is estimated that all existing sources have these systems in place.
ee	Assumes one respondent will prepare a draft NIC, notify the public about a NIC meeting, conduct the NIC meeting, prepare a final NIC with meeting comments, submit the NIC to EPA, and complete the progress report for one new HWC.
ff	Assumes one respondent will submit initial notifications for a new HWC.
gg	We estimate that 25% of all facilities will submit a request for an adjustment to a time period or postmark deadline.
hh	It is estimated that 10% of facilities will submit a request to reduce frequency of excess emissions and continuous system performance reports from a quarterly (or more frequent basis).
ii	It is estimated that 1% of all facilities reporting annually will submit a waiver of recordkeeping or reporting requirements.
jj	It is anticipated that 25% of facilities will take actions during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are consistent with the procedures specified in the facility's startup, shutdown, or malfunction plan. These facilities are required to submit a periodic startup, shutdown, and malfunction report. Another 10% of facilities will take actions that are not consistent with procedures specified in their plans. These facilities acquired to submit an immediate startup, shutdown, and malfunction report.
kk	It is anticipated that all facilities will submit an excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report and summary report.
ll	It is estimated that 25% of facilities will submit a request for approval to use data compression techniques.
mm	It is estimated that 10% of sources will submit a one-time request for a compliance extension due to the installation of controls, and that another 10% will submit a one-time request for a compliance extension for waste minimization purposes.
nn	It is estimated that no source will submit requests to use an alternative CEMS span.
oo	It is estimated that 25% of facilities will request to comply with the alternative risk based chlorine standards.
pp	Assumes 5% of all respondents will document in the operating record compliance with alternative applicable Clean Air Act requirements and standards.
qq	Assumes one respondent will document the hazardous waste residence time in the operating record for a new HWC.
rr	It is estimated that all sources (units) will have 2 AWFCO per year. We assume 50% of units will conduct weekly AWFCO system inspections, while 50% will conduct monthly system testing;
ss	Assumes 10% of existing respondents are updating an O&M plan and 1 new respondent is developing the plan.
tt	It is estimated that no facilities will make a request to use alternative operating parameters or methods to CEMS.
uu	It is estimated that 50% of all facilities will perform the comprehensive performance test under two or more operating modes. These facilities will be required to document what operating mode they are in during subsequent on-going day to day operations.
vv	It is estimated that it will take 40 hours each year for each of the HWC facilities to maintain copies of all required information (information must be retained for five years). All sources will need to maintain copies of all required information for continuous monitoring systems.
ww	It is anticipated that all facilities will develop a Documentation of Compliance to be included in their operating records
yy	Assumes 10% of respondents will update or develop the operator training and certification program each year. Assumes all respondents are conducting annual training.
zz	Totals have been rounded to 3 significant figures. Figures may not add exactly due to rounding.

---

Sheet 2: Table 2

Table 2: Average Annual EPA Burden and Cost – NESHAP for Hazardous Waste Combustors (40 CFR Part 63, Subpart EEE) (Renewal)
			Hours and Costs Per Respondent or Activity											Total Hours and Costs
		Manager	Technical	Clerical	Total Person Hrs Per	Total Labor	# Of	Total Labor	Total
		$64.80	$48.08	$26.02	Respondent	Cost Per Respondent	Respondents a	Hours	Costs b
INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITY
Operation and Maintenance Plan c
	Review request to use alternative OPLs for ESP and ISWs	0.3	8.0	0.0	8.3	$400.84	6.0	49.5	$2,405.04
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$256.22
Analysis of feedstream d
	Request feedstream analysis plan	0.8	10.0	0.3	11.0	$535.90	0.0	0.0	$0.00
Extension of the compliance date to install pollution prevention waste minimization controls e
	Review requests for an extension of compliance date	1.0	4.0	0.3	5.3	$263.62	12.0	63.0	$3,175.49
Extension of compliance with emission standards f
	Review requests for extension of the compliance date	0.5	4.0	0.0	4.5	$224.72	10.2	45.8	$2,286.17
	Review progress reports, if required by EPA	0.5	1.0	0.0	1.5	$80.48	10.2	15.3	$818.76
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	10.2	5.1	$281.84
Changes in design, operation, or maintenance g
	Review notifications of changes in design, operation, or
	maintenance	3.0	15.0	0.0	18.0	$915.60	30.0	540.0	$27,468
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	30.0	15.0	$711.12
Applicability of particulate matter and opacity standards during PM CEMS correlation tests h
	Review of PM CEMS correlation test plans	0.3	10.0	0.0	10.3	$497.00	13.0	133.3	$6,461.00
	Notify applicants of EPA' determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	13.0	6.5	$308.15
Alternative particulate matter standard for liquid fuel boilers with low feedrates of metals i
	Review petitions for alternative particulate matter standard
	for liquid boilers with low feedrates of metals	0.5	15.0	0.0	15.5	$753.60	6.0	93.0	$4,521.60
	Notify applicants of EPA' determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$136.22
Startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan j
	Review startup, shutdown, and malfunction plans, notify
	applicant of results of review	0.5	5.0	0.0	5.5	$272.80	7.0	38.5	$1,916.60
Automatic waste feed cutoff k
	Review excessive exceedance reports	0.3	5.0	0.1	5.4	$259.20	6.0	32.1	$1,555.21
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$142.22
ESV openings l
	Review ESV openings report	0.3	5.0	0.1	5.4	$259.20	38.5	206.0	$9,979.26
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	38.5	19.3	$912.60
Combustion system leaks m
	Review requests for approval of alternative means of
	combustion system leak control	0.5	2.0	0.0	2.5	$128.56	30.0	75.0	$3,856.80
	Notify applicants of EPA' determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	30.0	15.0	$711.12
Data in lieu of the initial comprehensive performance test n
	Review requests to base initial compliance data in lieu of a
	comprehensice performance test	2.0	20.0	0.0	22.0	$1,091.20	6.0	132.0	$6,547.20
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$142.22
Notifcation of performance test and CMS performance evaluation and approval of test plan and CMS performance evaluation plan o
	Review notifications of intention to conduct a performance
	test	0.3	0.3	0.0	0.5	$28.22	36.0	18.0	$1,015.92
	Review notifications of delay in conducting a performance
	test	0.3	0.3	0.0	0.5	$28.22	3.6	1.8	$101.59
	Review site-specific comprehensive performance test plans	5.0	50.0	0.0	55.0	$2,728.00	36.0	1980.0	$98,208
	Review site-specific confirmatory performance test plans	2.0	10.0	0.0	12.0	$610.40	21.6	259.2	$13,184.64
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	36.0	18.0	$1,537.34
Notification of compliance p
	Review notifications of compliance	3.0	40.0	0.0	43.0	$2,117.60	60.0	2580.0	$127,056
	Review requests for a time extension for Notification of
	Compliance	0.3	4.0	0.0	4.3	$208.52	6.0	25.5	$1,251.12
	Notify applicants of the EPA' s determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$136.22
Waiver of performance tests p
	Review requests to waive a performance test	1.0	4.0	0.0	5.0	$257.12	6.0	30.0	$1,542.72
	Notify applicants of EPA' s determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$136.22
Time extension for subsequent performance tests p
	Review requests for an extension for conducting a
	performance test (other than the initial comprehensive
	performance test)	4.0	16.0	0.0	20.0	$1,028.48	6.0	120.0	$6,170.88
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$142.22
Alternative compliance, monitoring requirements for standards other than those monitored with a CEMS q
	Review requests for approval of alternative monitoring
	methods, except for standards that must be monitored with a
	CEMS	0.5	10.0	0.0	10.5	$513.20	6.0	63.0	$3,079.20
	Review requests for approval of a waiver of an operating
	parameter limit	1.0	10.0	0.0	11.0	$545.60	0.0	0.0	$0
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination for approval of
	alternative monitoring requirements	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$142.22
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination for approval of a
	waiver of an operating parameter limit	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	0.0	0.0	$0
Dioxins and furans q
	Review requests for approval to substitute a different brand
	or type of carbon	0.5	2.0	0.0	2.5	$128.56	0.0	0.0	$0
	Review requests for approval to substitute a different brand
	or type of inhibitor	0.5	2.0	0.0	2.5	$128.56	0.0	0.0	$0
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination for approval to
	substitute a different brand or type of carbon	0.5	0.3	0.0	0.8	$44.42	0.0	0.0	$0
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination for approval to
	substitute a different brand or type of inhibitor	0.5	0.3	0.0	0.8	$44.42	0.0	0.0	$0
Mercury q, r
	Review requests for approval to use a CEMS in lieu of
	operating parameter limits	0.3	2.0	0.0	2.3	$112.36	0.0	0.0	$0
	Review requests to extrapolate mercury feedrate limits	0.3	2.0	0.0	2.3	$112.36	6.0	13.5	$674.16
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination to extrapolate
	mercury feedrate limits	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$142.22
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination for approval to
	use a CEMS	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	0.0	0.0	$0
Semivolatile and low semivolatile metals q, r
	Review requests for approval to use a CEMS in lieu of
	operating parameter limtis	0.3	2.0	0.0	2.3	$112.36	0.0	0.0	$0
	Review requests to extrapolate semivolatile metal and low
	volatile metal feedrate limits	0.3	2.0	0.0	2.3	$112.36	6.0	13.5	$674.16
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination to extrapolate
	SVM and LVM feedrates	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$142.22
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination for approval to
	use a CEMS	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	0.0	0.0	$0
Total chlorine (hydrogen chloride and chlorine gas) q
	Review requests for approval to substitute a different brand
	or type of sorbent	0.3	2.0	0.0	2.3	$112.36	6.0	13.5	$674.16
	Review requests for approval to use a CEMS in lieu of
	operating parameter limtis	0.3	2.0	0.0	2.3	$112.36	0.0	0.0	$0
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination for approval to
	substitute a different brand or type of sorbent	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$142.22
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination for approval to
	use a CEMS	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	0.0	0.0	$0
Quality control program s
	Review CMS quality control program	0.3	10.0	0.0	10.3	$497.00	6.0	61.5	$2,982.00
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$388.22
Notification of performance evaluation t
	Review notifications of CMS performance evaluation	0.0	0.3	0.1	0.4	$14.62	30.0	10.5	$438.65
Additional notification requirements for sources with continuous monitoring systems t
	Review additional notification requirements for source with
	CMS	0.3	1.0	0.0	1.3	$64.28	30.0	37.5	$1,928.40
Submission of site-specific performance evaluation test plan u
	Review site-specific performance evaluation test plans	1.0	10.0	0.0	11.0	$545.60	36.0	396.0	$19,641.60
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	36.0	18.0	$1,537.34
Reporting results of continuous monitoring system performance evaluations u
	Review written reports of the results of the CMS performance
	evaluation	0.5	5.0	0.0	5.5	$272.80	36.0	198.0	$9,820.80
Notice of Intent to Comply v
	Review draft and final NIC	2.0	30.0	0.0	32.0	$1,572.00	1.0	32.0	$1,592.00
	Attend public meeting	0.0	10.0	0.0	10.0	$480.80	1.0	10.0	$480.80
Initial notification w
	Review intial notifications	0.3	1.0	0.0	1.3	$64.28	1.0	1.3	$64.28
	Review applications of approval of construction	0.3	10.0	0.0	10.3	$497.00	1.0	10.3	$497.00
	Review applications of approval of reconstruction, as
	applicable	0.3	1.0	0.0	1.3	$64.28	1.0	1.3	$64.28
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	1.0	0.5	$23.70
Adjustment to time periods or postmark deadlines for submittal and review of equiped communications x
	Review requests for an adjustment to time periods or
	postmark deadlines for submittal and review of required
	informaiton	0.5	1.0	0.0	1.5	$80.48	15.0	22.5	$1,207.20
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	15.0	7.5	$355.56
Request to reduce frequency of excess emissions an continuous monitoring system performance results y
	Review requests to reduce the frequency of excess
	emissions and CMS performance reports	0.5	1.0	0.0	1.5	$80.48	6.0	9.0	$482.88
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$142.22
Waiver of record keeping and reporting requirements z
	Review waivers of recordkeeping or reporting	0.5	1.0	0.0	1.5	$80.48	0.6	0.9	$48.29
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	0.6	0.3	$14.22
Startup shutdown and malfunction reports aa
	Review startup, shutdown, and malfunction report, as
	applicable	0.3	5.0	0.0	5.3	$256.60	15	78.8	$3,849.00
	Review immediate startup, shutdown, and malfunction
	report, as applicable	0.3	1.0	0.0	1.3	$64.28	6	7.5	$385.68
Excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report and summary report bb
	Review excess emissions and monitoring system
	performance reports and summary reports	0.3	5.0	0.0	5.3	$256.60	60.0	315.0	$15,396.00
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	60.0	30.0	$1,422.24
Data compression cc
	Review requests for approval to use date compression
	technigues to record data on a less frequent basis	0.5	1.0	0.0	1.5	$80.48	15.0	22.5	$1,207.20
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	15.0	7.5	$355.56
Performance Evaluation dd
	Review data collected from CEMS performance evaluation	0.5	5.0	0.0	5.5	$272.80	0.0	0.0	$0
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	0.0	0.0	$0
Use of alternative CEMS spans ee
	Review requests for approval to use alternative CEMS spans
	and ranges	1.0	4.0	0.0	5.0	$257.12	0.0	0.0	$0
	Notify applicants of the EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	0.0	0.0	$0
Alternative Risk Based Chlorine Standards ff
	Review request for use of alternative risk based chlorine standards	3.0	20.0	2.0	25.0	$1,208.03	15.0	375.0	$18,135.48
Compliance with alternative MACT standards gg
	Review operating record documenting compliance with all
	applicable CAA requirements and standards when not
	burning hazardous waste	0.5	2.0	0.0	2.5	$128.56	3.0	7.5	$385.68
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	3.0	1.5	$71.11
Hazardous waste residence time hh
	Review determination of hazardous waste residence time	0.3	2.0	0.0	2.3	$112.36	1.0	2.3	$112.36
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	1.0	0.5	$23.70
Operator training and certification ii
	Review operator training and certification programs	0.3	15.0	0.0	15.3	$737.40	6.0	91.5	$4,424.40
	Notify applicants of EPA's determination	0.3	0.0	0.3	0.5	$22.70	6.0	3.0	$256.22
Additional mailing materials and postage costs (non-labor)									$2,290
TOTAL ANNUAL BURDEN AND COST (ROUNDED) jj								8420	$421,000
a	The total number of respondents estimated over the next three years is based on approximately 177 existing units at 153 facilities that are subject to the standard, with one new unit per year over the same period. The overall average number of respondents submitting reports in each year is calculated as one-third of the total respondents and is 60 respondents per year.
b	Labor cost is based on the following hourly labor rates times a 1.6 benefits multiplication factor to account for government overhead expenses: $64.80 for Managerial (GS-13, Step 5, $40.50 x 1.6), $48.08 for Technical (GS-12, Step 1, $30.05 x 1.6) and $26.02 Clerical (GS-6, Step 3, $16.26 x 1.6). These rates are from the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), 2017 General Schedule, which excludes locality rates of pay.
c	It is estimated that of the sources reporting annually with ESPs or IWSs, 90% will request to use operating parameter limits instead of continuous particulate detectors.
d	Assumes all HWCs have already developed and implemented feedstream analysis plans under current RCRA requirements (referred to as the waste analysis plan). There is no incremental burden for this requirement.
e	It is estimated that 10% of sources will submit a one-time request for a compliance extension due to the installation of controls, and that another 10% will submit a one-time request for a compliance extension for waste minimization purposes.
f	Assumes 20% of all facilities operating an HWC will apply for an extension each year.
g	It is estimated that 50% of the sources reporting annually will be making design, operation, and maintenance changes to comply with the MACT rule.
h	It is anticipated that 39 sources (among all HWC) will conduct PM CEMS correlation testing over the 3-year period of this ICR and request a waiver of PM and opacity standards during the testing.
i	Assumes 10% of respondents will submit a petition for an alternative particulate matter standard for liquid fuel boilers with low feedrates.
j	Assumes 1 new respondent and 10% of existing respondents reporting annually will develop or revise the SSM plan and resubmit the plan for approval.
k	Assumes 10% of respondents will submit AWFCO excessive exceedance reports.
l	It is estimated that 50% of hazardous waste incinerators reporting annually have ESVs, and will develop an ESV operating plan. On average, each unit will have 3 ESV openings per year.
m	It is estimated that respondents will request approval for 50% of all sources for use of an alternative means to provide control of combustion system leaks (control through a positively sealed combustion chamber).
n	It is estimated that 10% of all sources reporting annually will submit a request to use previous emissions test data to serve as documentation of compliance with emission standards.
o	Assumes 60% of respondents must conduct a comprehensive performance test every 3 years and 60% of respondents must conduct a confirmatory performance every 5 years.
p	All facilities will submit a Notification of Compliance. It is estimated that 10% of facilities conducting the comprehensive performance test will apply for a waiver or time extension.
q	It is estimated that 10% of all facilities will apply for and receive approval to use alternative monitoring requirements to document compliance with the emission standards of Subpart EEE other than CO or HC which are monitored with a CEMS. It is estimated that no facilities will make a request to use alternative operating parameters or methods to CEMS or CEMS in lieu of operating parameters.
r	It is estimated that no existing sources will chose to use a CEMS for compliance monitoring and that 10% of sources will make a request to set feedrate limits with extrapolation.
s	It is estimated that EPA will request additional relevant information for the site-specific CMS performance test plan from 10% of the sources performing the test.
t	As part of the comprehensive performance test, HWCs will submit a CMS quality control program, notification of performance evaluation and additional notification requirements; we estimate that 50% of sources have submitted a CMS quality control program at this time.
u	HWCs are also required to submit performance evaluation test plan, and conduct a CMS performance test. We estimate 60% of sources would submit test plans and conduct performance testing along with their comprehensive performance testing.
v	Assumes one respondent will prepare a draft NIC, notify the public about a NIC meeting, conduct the NIC meeting, prepare a final NIC with meeting comments, submit the NIC to EPA, and complete the progress report for one new HWC.
w	Assumes one respondent will submit initial notifications for a new HWC.
x	We estimate that 25% of all facilities will submit a request for an adjustment to a time period or postmark deadline.
y	It is estimated that 10% of facilities will submit a request to reduce frequency of excess emissions and continuous system performance reports from a quarterly (or more frequent basis).
z	It is estimated that 1% of all facilities reporting annually will submit a waiver of recordkeeping or reporting requirements.
aa	It is anticipated that 25% of facilities will take actions during a startup, shutdown, or malfunction that are consistent with the procedures specified in the facility's startup, shutdown, or malfunction plan. These facilities are required to submit a periodic startup, shutdown, and malfunction report. Another 10% of facilities will take actions that are not consistent with procedures specified in their plans. These facilities acquired to submit an immediate startup, shutdown, and malfunction report.
bb	It is anticipated that all facilities will submit an excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report and summary report.
cc	It is estimated that 25% of facilities will submit a request for approval to use data compression techniques.
dd	Burden for performance evaluations is included in the the notification of performance test and CMS performance evaluations.
ee	It is estimated that no source will submit requests to use an alternative CEMS span.
ff	It is estimated that 25% of facilities will request to comply with the alternative risk based chlorine standards.
gg	Assumes 5% of all respondents will document in the operating record compliance with alternative applicable Clean Air Act requirements and standards.
hh	Assumes one respondent will document the hazardous waste residence time in the operating record for a new HWC.
ii	Assumes 10% of respondents will update or develop the operator training and certification program each year.
jj	Totals have been rounded to 3 significant figures. Figures may not add exactly due to rounding.

---

Sheet 3: Total Annual Responses

(A) INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITY		(B) No. of Responses Submitted Per Year	(C) Number of Existing Respondents That Keep Records But Do Not Submit Responses	(D) Total Annual Responses (D) = (B+C)
Cement kilns with in-line raw mills		1	0	1
Extension of compliance with emission standards and compliance report		20	0	20
Changes in design, operation, or maintenance		30	0	30
Compliance with alternative MACT standards when not burning Hazardous Waste		30	3	33
Applicability of particulate matter and opacity standards during particulate matter CEMS correlation tests		13	0	13
Alternative hydrocarbon monitoring location for short cement kilns burning haz waste at location other than hot end of kiln		0	0	0
Startup, shutdown, and malfunction plan and excessive emissions report		13	0	13
Automatic waste feed cutoff exceedances report, testing results, and documentation		6	90	96
Automatic waste feed cutoff operating and maintenance plan ramp down procedures		0	120	120
ESV openings - reports and operating plan		39	13	51
Combustion system leaks - request for altermative means of control		30	30	60
Operator training and certification program		0	60	60
Operation and maintenance plan		11	18	30
Comprehensive performance test requirements, D/F testing, and extensions		55	0	55
Confirmatory performance test requirements		33	0	33
Data in lieu of the initial comprehensive performance test		6	0	6
Notifications of performance test and CMS perfomance evaluation and approval of test plan CMS performance evaluation plan		97	0	97
Notification of compliance and time extension		66	0	66
Waiver of performance tests and request for time extension		12	0	12
Feedstreams Analysis Plan		0	0	0
Alternative compliance monitoring requirements for standards other than those monitored with a CEMS		6	0	6
Use of CEMS in lieu of OPLs; or alternative methods in lieu of CEMS		0	0	0
Mercury, request to extrapolate feedrate lmits and semivolatile metal and low volatile metal feedrate limits		12	0	12
Dioxins and furans, operating records		0	0	0
Total chlorine, CMS quality control plan and operating records		6	0	6
Operating under different modes of operation		0	30	30
Notification of performance evaluation		30	0	30
Additional notification requirements for CMS		30	0	30
Submission of site-specific peformance evaluation test plan		36	0	36
Reporting results of CMS and COMS performance evaluations		36	0	36
Notices of intent to comply		5	0	5
Initial notification, applications of construction and reconstruction		3	0	3
Adjustment to time periods or postmark deadlines for submittal and review of required communications		15	0	15
Request to reduce frequency of excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance results		6	0	6
Periodic and immediate startup, shutdown, and malfunction reports		21	0	21
Excess emissions and continuous monitoring system performance report and summary report		60	0	60
Request for approval for data compression		15	0	15
Extension of the compliance date		12	0	12
Performance Evaluation Report		0	0	0
Request to use alternative CEMS spans (63, Subpart EEE Appendix, Section 6.3.5)		0	0	0
Request for alternative risk based chlorine standards		15	0	15
General recordkeeping requirements 63.10(b)		0	60	60
Additional recordkeeping requirements for source with CMS (63.10(c))		0	60	60
Waiver of recordkeeping and reporting requirements		1	0	0
Documentation of Compliance		0	60	60
Quality control (QC) requirements		0	60	60
Quality assurance (QA) requirements		0	60	60
Calibration drift (CD) and zero drift (ZD) assessment and daily system audit		0	120	120
			Total	1,555
				40	hrs/response

---

Sheet 4: Capital and O&M

Capital/Startup vs. Operation and Maintenance (O&M) Costs
(A)	(B)	(C)	(D)	(E)	(F)	(G)
Continuous Monitoring Device	Capital/Startup Cost for One Respondent	Number of New Respondents	Total Capital/Startup Cost, (B X C)	Annual O&M Costs for One Respondent	Number of Respondents with O&M	Total O&M, (E X F)
Bag leak/PM Detectors	$6,000	1	$6,000	$500	11.3	$5,667
Correlation testing	$18,000	1	$18,000	$2,000	1	$2,000
CEMS (CO or THC and O2)	$137,547	1	$137,547	$26,729	1	$26,729
COMs/Opacity Monitoring	$51,949	1	$51,949	$14,725	1	$14,725
PM CEMS	$158,000	1	$158,000	$34,165	1	$34,165
CPMS	$43,500	1	$43,500	$9,700	1	$9,700
Comprehensive performance test	$0	0	$0	$60,000	36	$2,160,000
One-time D/F testing for units w/o D/F standard	$0	0	$0	$5,000	1	$5,000
Confirmatory performance test	$0	0	$0	$6,000	33	$198,000
Mailing Costs for Notifications and Reports
Notifications, requests for approval, and reports	$0	0	$0	$8	533	$4,264
Additional notifications	$0	0	$0	$1	106	$106
Operator and Training Program
Develop operator training and certification program	$0	0	$0	$50	6	$300
Public Notification Costs
Public Notification of Intent to Comply	$250	1	$250	$520	1	$520
Recordkeeping Costs
Recordkeeping	$200	180	$12,001	$0	0	$0
Total (Rounded)			$427,000			$2,460,000