1
REVISION
OF
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
(
ICR)
FOR
THE
OIL
POLLUTION
PREVENTION
REGULATION
FOR
CERTAIN
FACILITIES
TO
PREPARE
AND
MAINTAIN
AN
OIL
SPILL
PREVENTION,
CONTROL,
AND
COUNTERMEASURE
(
SPCC)
PLAN
(
EPA
No.
0328.12,
OMB
No.
2050­
0021)

1.
IDENTIFICATION
OF
THE
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
Revision
of
Information
Collection
Request
(
ICR)
for
the
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
Regulation
for
Certain
Facilities
to
Prepare
and
Maintain
an
Oil
Spill
Prevention,
Control,
and
Countermeasure
(
SPCC)
Plan
(
40
CFR
Part
112).
EPA
ICR
No.
0328.12,
OMB
No.
2050­
0021.

1(
b)
Short
Characterization
The
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
regulation
at
40
CFR
part
112
requires
and
establishes
procedures
for
the
preparation
and
implementation
of
Spill
Prevention,
Control,
and
Countermeasure
(
SPCC)
Plans.
SPCC
Plans
help
minimize
the
potential
for
oil
discharges
by
nontransportation
related
onshore
and
offshore
facilities
into
or
upon
the
navigable
waters
of
the
United
States
or
adjoining
shorelines
or
from
affecting
certain
natural
resources.

Owners
and
operators
of
regulated
facilities
must
prepare
SPCC
Plans
in
accordance
with
good
engineering
practices
and
have
them
approved
by
a
person
with
the
authority
to
commit
the
resources
necessary
to
implement
the
SPCC
Plan.
SPCC
Plans
address
the
following
three
areas:
(
1)
operating
procedures
that
prevent
oil
spills;
(
2)
control
measures
installed
to
prevent
a
spill
from
reaching
navigable
waters
or
adjoining
shorelines;
and
(
3)
countermeasures
to
contain,
clean
up,
and
mitigate
the
effects
of
an
oil
discharge
that
could
reach
navigable
waters.
Each
SPCC
Plan,
while
unique
to
the
facility
it
covers,
must
include
certain
standard
elements
to
ensure
compliance
with
the
regulations.

This
ICR
revision
incorporates
proposed
changes
to
the
SPCC
rule
at
40
CFR
part
112
(
see
70
FR
73524).
If
the
amendments
are
finalized,
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
estimates
that
approximately
479,000
facilities
would
incur
paperwork­
related
burden
in
the
first
year
of
this
ICR.
EPA
estimates
the
total
reporting
and
recordkeeping
burden
to
these
facilities
would
be
approximately
1.9
million
hours
in
each
year
of
this
ICR.

2.
NEED
FOR
AND
USE
OF
THE
COLLECTION
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
Section
311(
j)(
1)(
C)
of
the
Federal
Water
Pollution
Prevention
Act,
or
Clean
Water
Act
(
CWA),
authorizes
the
President
to
issue
regulations
establishing
procedures,
methods,
equipment,
and
other
requirements
to
prevent
discharges
of
oil
from
vessels
and
facilities
and
to
contain
such
discharges.
1
The
President
delegated
the
authority
to
regulate
non­
transportation­
related
1
33
U.
S.
C.
1321(
j)(
1)(
C).
2
onshore
facilities
under
§
311(
j)(
1)(
C)
of
the
Act
to
EPA
under
Executive
Order
(
E.
O.)
12777,
§
2(
b)(
1).
2
By
this
same
Executive
Order,
the
President
delegated
authority
over
transportationrelated
onshore
facilities,
deepwater
ports,
and
vessels
to
the
U.
S.
Department
of
Transportation
(
DOT)
and
authority
over
other
offshore
facilities,
including
associated
pipelines,
to
the
U.
S.
Department
of
the
Interior
(
DOI).
A
subsequent
Memorandum
of
Understanding
(
MOU),
dated
February
3,
1994,
among
EPA,
DOT,
and
DOI,
reallocated
the
responsibility
for
non­
transportation­
related
offshore
facilities
that
are
landward
of
the
coastline
to
EPA.
An
earlier
MOU
between
the
Secretary
of
Transportation
and
the
EPA
Administrator,
dated
November
24,
1971
(
36
FR
24080),
established
the
definitions
of
non­
transportation­
related
facilities
and
transportation­
related
facilities.

The
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
regulation,
found
at
40
CFR
part
112,
outlines
requirements
for
both
preventing
and
preparing
for
oil
spills.
The
prevention
part
of
this
regulation
at
§
112.1
through
§
112.15
is
also
known
as
the
SPCC
rule.
It
was
originally
promulgated
on
December
11,
1973,
at
38
FR
34164,
under
the
authority
of
§
311(
j)(
1)(
C)
of
the
CWA.
The
regulation
established
spill
prevention
procedures,
methods,
and
equipment
requirements
for
non­
transportation­
related
onshore
and
offshore
facilities
with
aboveground
oil
storage
capacity
or
completely
buried
underground
oil
storage
capacity
greater
than
certain
thresholds
and
meeting
other
criteria
(
see
§
112.1).
Regulated
facilities
are
limited
to
those
that,
because
of
their
location,
could
reasonably
be
expected
to
discharge
oil
in
quantities
that
may
be
harmful
into
the
navigable
waters
of
the
United
States
or
adjoining
shorelines.

On
July
17,
2002,
at
67
FR
47042,
EPA
published
amendments
to
the
SPCC
rule.
These
amendments
included
new
subparts
outlining
the
requirements
for
different
classes
of
oil,
revised
the
applicability
of
the
regulation,
amended
the
requirements
for
completing
SPCC
Plans,
and
made
other
modifications.
The
final
rule
also
contained
a
number
of
provisions
designed
to
decrease
the
regulatory
burden
on
facility
owners
and
operators
subject
to
the
rule
while
preserving
environmental
protection.
The
rule
was
effective
August
16,
2002,
with
compliance
dates
outlined
in
§
§
112.3(
a)
and
(
b).
However,
the
original
compliance
dates
were
extended
for
eighteen
months
on
April
7,
2003
(
68
FR
18890).
On
August
11,
2004,
EPA
extended
the
compliance
dates
in
§
§
112.3(
a)
and
(
b)
by
an
additional
eighteen
months
and
amended
the
compliance
deadline
in
§
112.3(
c)
(
69
FR
48794).
On
February
17,
2006,
EPA
published
an
additional
extension
of
the
compliance
dates
in
§
§
112.3(
a),
(
b),
and
(
c),
establishing
October
31,
2007
as
the
new
deadline
for
owners
and
operators
to
prepare,
amend,
and
implement
SPCC
Plans
(
71
FR
8462).

On
December
12,
2005,
EPA
proposed
to
further
amend
the
SPCC
Plan
requirements
to
reduce
the
regulatory
burden
in
six
ways:
(
1)
by
providing
streamlined
options
for
facilities
that
meet
a
set
of
specified
qualifying
criteria;
(
2)
by
providing
streamlined
options
for
facilities
that
have
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment
(
OFE);
(
3)
by
exempting
certain
motive
power
containers;
(
4)
by
exempting
airport
mobile
refuelers
from
the
specifically
sized
secondary
containment
requirements
for
bulk
storage
containers;
(
5)
by
removing
certain
provisions
related
to
animal
fats
and
vegetable
oils
(
AFVO)
facilities;
and
(
6)
by
extending
the
compliance
dates
2
56
FR
54757
(
October
22,
1991),
superseding
Executive
Order
11735,
38
FR
21243.
3
for
farms
with
an
oil
storage
capacity
of
10,000
gallons
or
less
until
EPA
completes
its
research
into
whether
there
should
be
specific
requirements
to
these
farms
(
see
70
FR
73524).

2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
of
the
Data
EPA
does
not
collect
SPCC
Plans
or
related
records
from
facilities
on
a
routine
basis.
Preparation,
implementation,
and
maintenance
of
the
SPCC
Plan
by
the
facility
owner
or
operator
helps
prevent
oil
discharges
and
mitigate
the
environmental
damage
caused
by
such
discharges.
Therefore,
the
primary
user
of
the
data
is
the
facility
owner
or
operator.
For
example:

C
Accumulating
the
necessary
data
requires
that
the
facility
staff
analyze
the
facility
measures
and
procedures
for
preventing
oil
discharges,
facilitating
safety
awareness,
and
promoting
appropriate
modifications
to
facility
design
and
operations;

C
Having
the
required
information
in
a
single
document
promotes
efficient
response
in
the
event
of
a
discharge;

C
Implementing
the
Plan
according
to
the
specifications
of
40
CFR
part
112
requires
meeting
certain
design
and
operational
standards
that
reduce
the
likelihood
of
an
oil
discharge;

C
Keeping
inspection
records
promotes
important
maintenance,
facilitates
leak
detection,
and
demonstrates
compliance
with
the
SPCC
requirements;
and
C
Reviewing
the
Plan
periodically
ensures
the
implementation
of
more
effective
spill
prevention
control
technology
as
it
becomes
available
and
is
demonstrated
to
be
effective.

Although
facility
personnel
are
the
primary
users
of
the
data,
EPA
uses
the
data
in
certain
situations.
EPA's
primary
use
of
the
data
contained
in
an
SPCC
Plan
is
to
ensure
that
a
facility
is
in
full
compliance
with
all
elements
of
the
SPCC
rule,
including
design
and
operation
specifications
and
inspection
requirements.
For
example,
EPA
reviews
SPCC
Plans
as
part
of
EPA's
inspection
program.
A
Regional
Administrator
may
require
a
facility
owner
or
operator
to
amend
an
SPCC
Plan
if
he/
she
finds
that
the
facility
has
not
met
the
requirements
of
the
regulation
or
if
amendment
of
the
Plan
is
necessary
to
prevent
and
contain
discharges
of
oil.

State
and
local
governments
are
also
users
of
the
data.
The
information
provided
in
SPCC
Plans
(
e.
g.,
facility
configuration
and
potential
risks)
is
not
necessarily
available
elsewhere
and
assists
local
emergency
preparedness
planning
efforts.
The
Plan
must
be
compatible
and
coordinated
with
local
emergency
plans,
including
those
developed
under
Title
III
of
the
Superfund
Amendments
and
Reauthorization
Act
of
1986
(
Pub.
L.
99­
499).
Coordination
with
state
governments
is
facilitated
by
the
provision
in
§
112.4(
c)
requiring
that,
after
certain
discharges,
information
on
the
discharge
be
sent
to
the
relevant
state
agencies.
The
flexibility
with
respect
to
Plan
formatting
promotes
greater
coordination
with
state
planning
efforts
by
encouraging
the
use
of
plans
prepared
pursuant
to
state
regulations.
4
3.
NONDUPLICATION,
CONSULTATIONS,
AND
OTHER
COLLECTION
CRITERIA
3(
a)
Nonduplication
For
some
facilities,
certain
requirements
of
the
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
regulation
could
be
the
same
or
substantially
similar
to
regulations
addressing
underground
storage
tanks
(
USTs).
The
SPCC
rule
addresses
this
overlap
by
exempting
completely
buried
tanks
subject
to
all
of
the
technical
requirements
of
EPA's
UST
program
(
40
CFR
part
280)
or
a
state
program
approved
under
40
CFR
part
281.

The
regulation
allows
flexibility
in
Plan
preparation
and
recordkeeping.
The
definition
of
"
SPCC
Plan"
allows
the
use
of
alternative,
appropriately
cross­
referenced
formats
based
on
other
state
or
other
federal
requirements.
Greater
flexibility
is
also
provided
for
facility
recordkeeping
practices,
as
records
required
pursuant
to
the
National
Pollutant
Discharge
Elimination
System
(
NPDES)
program
and
API
Standards
may
satisfy
certain
SPCC
recordkeeping
requirements.
Records
kept
under
usual
and
customary
business
practices
are
also
accepted
for
inspections,
tests,
and
records.

3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
Pursuant
to
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.),
the
Agency
has
notified
the
public
through
a
Federal
Register
notice
as
part
of
the
proposed
rule
(
see
70
FR
73524).
As
part
of
this
process,
EPA
solicits
public
comment
concerning
the
burden
estimates
for
respondents.
EPA
specifically
requests
comments
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
will
consider
any
comments
when
an
ICR
package
is
prepared
to
support
the
final
rule.

3(
c)
Consultations
In
fall
of
2004,
EPA
asked
a
contractor
to
contact
up
to
nine
affected
facilities
regarding
EPA's
SPCC
ICR
burden
assumptions.
The
interviews
provided
insight
into
the
reasonableness
of
EPA's
estimates
of
the
paperwork
burden
facilities
incur
when
complying
with
the
SPCC
rule.
The
names,
companies,
and
telephone
numbers
of
these
representatives
are
given
below.

Peter
Wolberg,
Western
Gas
Resources,
(
303)
252­
6105
Jerry
Steckard,
Hyperion
Energy,
(
214)
750­
3384
Joanne
Lupa,
Massachusetts
Electric
Co.,
(
508)
482­
1257
Kyle
Mullens,
Kaneb
Pipe
Line
Partners,
L.
P.,
(
972)
699­
4062
Jim
Baker,
Colonial
Group
Inc.,
(
912)
236­
1331
Matt
Yost,
Martin
Midstream
Partners
L.
P.,
(
903)
983­
6200
Sally
Rogers,
Sinclair
Oil
Corp.
Casper
Refinery,
(
307)
265­
2800
Block
Andrews,
Aquila,
Inc.,
(
816)
421­
6600
Brad
Bergman,
Sun
Ray
Energy
Co.,
(
760)
254­
3381
5
The
nine
facilities
contacted
were
from
the
electric
utility
and
petroleum
industries
and
represented
various
facility
sizes.
Six
of
the
nine
contacts
suggested
the
EPA
hour
and
cost
burden
estimates
to
prepare
and
maintain
an
SPCC
Plan
used
in
the
current
ICR
were
reasonable.
The
other
three
contacts
suggested
the
burden
hour
and
cost
estimates
were
low.
More
recently,
several
engineering
firms
were
asked
about
the
costs
of
preparing
Plans
and
EPA
updated
these
costs
based
on
input
from
those
companies
(
see
Section
6(
a)).

3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
The
SPCC
rule
requires
the
development
and
maintenance
of
SPCC
Plans.
In
general,
these
Plans
are
not
required
to
be
submitted
to
EPA
unless
a
facility
is
being
inspected
or
if
a
Regional
Administrator
has
other
reasons
to
review
a
Plan.
Section
112.4(
a)
requires
that
owners
and
operators
submit
only
certain
critical
information
regarding
the
discharge
and
corrective
actions.
In
order
to
conduct
proper
follow­
up
actions,
as
necessary,
Agency
personnel
may
request
the
Plan
itself
or
access
a
copy
of
the
entire
SPCC
Plan
by
visiting
the
facility.
Because
collection
is
not
periodic,
less
frequent
collection
is
not
possible.

The
owner
or
operator
of
a
facility
is
required
to
review
and
evaluate
the
facility
Plan
every
five
years.
EPA's
experience
in
administering
the
SPCC
Program
indicates
that
updating
Plans
to
reflect
currently
available
and
proven
technology
and
techniques
for
preventing
and
controlling
oil
discharges
every
five
years
is
sufficient
given
the
degree
to
which
such
technologies
and
techniques
evolve
over
time.

3(
e)
General
Guidelines
The
information
collection
activities
discussed
in
this
ICR
comply
with
the
general
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
guidelines
at
5
CFR
1320.5(
d)(
2).

3(
f)
Confidentiality
The
nature
of
the
data
being
gathered
as
part
of
this
ICR
is
not
confidential.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
The
information
gathering
activities
discussed
in
this
ICR
do
not
involve
sensitive
questions.

4.
THE
RESPONDENTS
AND
THE
INFORMATION
REQUESTED
4(
a)
Respondents/
NAICS
Codes
The
industries
that
are
likely
to
be
covered
by
the
SPCC
rule
fall
into
many
North
American
Industrial
Classification
System
(
NAICS)
categories,
including
those
associated
with
petroleum
and
non­
petroleum
oil
production,
processing
(
refining),
distribution,
storage,
and
consumption.
EPA's
recent
study
of
the
universe
of
regulated
facilities
determined
that
the
majority
of
regulated
facilities
fall
mainly
into
the
industry
sectors
listed
in
Exhibit
1.
6
EXHIBIT
1
Primary
Industry
Sectors
and
NAICS
Codes
Covered
by
the
SPCC
Rule
Industry
Category
NAICS
Code(
s)

Oil
and
Gas
Extraction
211
Farms
111,
112
Electric
Utility
Plants
2211
Petroleum
Refining
and
Related
Industries
324
Chemical
Manufacturing
325
Food
Manufacturing
311,
312
Metal
Manufacturing
331,
332
Other
Manufacturing
31­
33
Real
Estate
Rental
and
Leasing
531­
533
Retail
Trade
441­
446,
448,
451­
454
Contract
Construction
23
Wholesale
Trade
42
Other
Commercial
492,
541,
551,
561­
562
Transportation
481­
488
Arts
Entertainment
&
Recreation
711­
713
Other
Services
(
Except
Public
Administration)
811­
813
Education
611
Petroleum
Bulk
Stations
and
Terminals
4247
Hospitals
&
Other
Health
Care
621­
624
Accommodation
and
Food
Services
721,
722
Fuel
Oil
Dealers
45431
Gasoline
Stations
4471
Information
Finance
and
Insurance
51,
52
Mining
212,
213
Warehousing
and
Storage
493
Pipelines
4861,
4869
Government
92
4(
b)
Information
Requested
(
i)
Data
Items,
Including
Recordkeeping
Requirements
The
primary
data
collection
activities
required
by
the
SPCC
rule
are
the
preparation
and
maintenance
of
the
SPCC
Plan
along
with
preparing
records
of
inspections
and
tests.
In
preparing
a
Plan,
a
facility
owner
or
operator
must
follow
the
provisions
outlined
in
the
regulation
and
include
a
discussion
of
the
measures
taken
to
meet
the
SPCC
requirements.
For
7
more
detailed
requirements,
please
refer
to
the
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
regulation
itself
and
to
the
proposed
amendments
published
on
December
12,
2005
(
70
FR
73524).
For
the
reader's
reference,
the
SPCC
rule
contained
in
40
CFR
part
112
is
provided
as
an
appendix
to
this
document.
Key
provisions
are
summarized
below.

C
Potential
equipment
failure.
Where
experience
indicates
a
reasonable
potential
for
equipment
failure
(
e.
g.,
tank
overflow,
rupture,
or
leakage),
the
Plan
must
include
a
prediction
of
the
direction,
rate
of
flow,
and
total
quantity
of
oil
that
could
be
discharged
from
the
facility
as
a
result
of
each
major
type
of
equipment
failure
(
40
CFR
112.7(
b)).

C
Containment
and/
or
diversion.
Appropriate
containment
and/
or
diversion
structures
or
equipment
must
be
provided
to
prevent
a
discharge
(
40
CFR
112.7(
c)).
The
use
of
required
preventive
measures
depends
on
whether
a
particular
facility
is
onshore
or
offshore.
For
onshore
facilities,
the
owner
or
operator
must
use
one
of
the
following
preventive
systems:
dikes,
berms,
or
retaining
walls
sufficiently
impervious
to
contain
oil;
curbing;
culverting,
gutters,
or
other
drainage
systems;
weirs,
booms,
or
other
barriers;
spill
diversion
ponds;
retention
ponds;
or
sorbent
materials.
Where
installation
of
these
structures
or
equipment
is
determined
by
the
owner
or
operator
to
be
impracticable,
a
facility
owner
or
operator
must
explain
why,
provide
a
contingency
plan
following
40
CFR
part
109
(
or
a
Facility
Response
Plan),
conduct
periodic
integrity
testing
of
the
containers
and
periodic
integrity
and
leak
testing
of
valves
and
piping,
and
provide
a
written
commitment
of
the
manpower,
equipment,
and
materials
required
to
expeditiously
control
and
remove
any
harmful
quantity
of
oil
discharged
(
40
CFR
112.7(
d)).
The
owner
or
operator
of
an
offshore
facility
is
subject
to
slightly
different
requirements
due
to
the
facility's
unique
configuration.

EPA
is
proposing
to
provide
owners
and
operators
of
facilities
with
certain
types
of
oilfilled
operational
equipment
the
option
of
preparing
an
oil
spill
contingency
plan
and
a
written
commitment
of
manpower,
equipment,
and
materials
in
lieu
of
providing
secondary
containment
for
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment,
without
making
an
individual
impracticability
determination
as
required
in
§
112.7(
d).
EPA
is
proposing
to
eliminate
the
current
requirement
for
an
individual
impracticability
determination
for
oilfilled
operational
equipment
at
a
facility
that
has
had
no
discharges
as
described
in
§
112.1(
b)
from
any
oil­
filled
operational
equipment
during
the
ten
years
prior
to
the
Plan
certification
date
or,
since
becoming
subject
to
the
SPCC
requirements
if
the
facility
has
been
in
operation
for
less
than
ten
years.

C
Detailed
requirements.
In
addition
to
the
minimum
prevention
standards
contained
in
40
CFR
112.7(
c),
the
Plan
must
include
a
discussion
of
the
facility's
conformance
with
more
detailed
and
specific
requirements
concerning
environmental
equivalence
determinations,
facility
diagrams,
and
discharge
reporting
information
and
procedures
(
§
112.7(
a));
personnel,
training,
and
discharge
prevention
procedures
(
§
112.7(
f));
security
(
§
112.7(
g));
facility
tank
car
and
tank
truck
loading/
unloading
rack
(
excluding
offshore
facilities)
(
§
112.7(
h));
brittle
fracture
issues
related
to
certain
field­
constructed
aboveground
containers
(
§
112.7(
i));
and
other
applicable
requirements
(
§
112.7(
j)).
8
 
Specific
recordkeeping
requirements.
Every
facility
owner
or
operator
must
conduct
inspections
and
tests
required
by
40
CFR
part
112
in
accordance
with
written
procedures
in
the
Plan
and
keep
a
record
of
the
inspections
and
tests,
signed
by
the
appropriate
supervisor
or
inspector,
with
the
SPCC
Plan
for
a
period
of
three
years.
Records
of
inspections
and
tests
kept
under
usual
and
customary
business
practices
will
suffice.

C
Specific
reporting
requirements.
If
a
facility
owner
or
operator
must
submit
its
SPCC
Plan
to
the
Regional
Administrator
as
the
result
of
an
oil
discharge
in
accordance
with
§
112.4,
the
following
information
must
be
provided:

(
1)
Name
of
the
facility;
(
2)
Name
of
the
owner
or
operator;
(
3)
Location
of
the
facility;
(
4)
Maximum
storage
or
handling
capacity
of
the
facility
and
its
normal
daily
throughput;
(
5)
The
corrective
action
or
countermeasures
taken,
including
an
adequate
description
of
equipment
repairs
and/
or
replacements;
(
6)
Description
of
the
facility
including
maps,
flow
diagrams,
and
topographic
maps;
(
7)
Cause(
s)
of
the
spill,
including
a
failure
analysis
of
the
system
or
subsystem
in
which
the
failure
occurred;
(
8)
Additional
preventive
measures
taken
or
contemplated
to
minimize
the
possibility
of
recurrence;
and
(
9)
Such
other
information
as
the
Regional
Administrator
may
reasonably
require
pertinent
to
the
Plan
or
to
the
spill
event.

In
addition,
a
facility
owner
or
operator
must
update
his
or
her
Plan
as
necessary,
following
a
modification
in
the
facility's
design
or
operations
that
materially
affects
its
potential
for
a
discharge
and
following
its
five­
year
review.

(
ii)
Respondent
Activities
The
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
regulation
requires
an
owner
or
operator
to
conduct
the
following
compliance
activities:

C
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
(
40
CFR
112.3(
b)
and
112.7);

C
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
keep
records
(
40
CFR
112.3
and
112.7(
e));

C
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
following
a
material
modification
of
the
facility
(
40
CFR
112.5(
a));
and
C
Conduct
a
review
of
the
SPCC
Plan
(
40
CFR
112.5(
b)).

Each
of
these
compliance
activities
is
summarized
in
more
detail
below:
9
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
The
owner
or
operator
of
a
new
facility
must
prepare
and
implement
an
SPCC
Plan
in
accordance
with
the
guidelines
set
forth
in
40
CFR
part
112
before
beginning
operations.
The
actual
preparation
of
the
Plan
involves
several
separate
tasks,
the
majority
of
which
are
conducted
by
the
facility's
technical
personnel.
These
tasks
include:

C
Field
investigations,
which
are
conducted
by
technical
personnel
to
fully
understand
the
design
of
the
facility
and
to
accurately
predict
the
areas
or
equipment
most
likely
to
discharge
oil
(
this
involves
predicting
the
flow
paths
of
spilled
oil);

C
A
regulatory
review
conducted
by
management
personnel,
such
that
the
technical
and
clerical
personnel
in
charge
of
actually
preparing
the
Plan
are
fully
aware
of
all
requirements
in
40
CFR
part
112;

C
A
review
of
existing
procedures
conducted
by
technical
personnel
to
determine
the
effectiveness
of
the
current
spill
prevention
and
control
practices
employed
by
the
facility;

C
Preparation
of
the
Plan,
which
involves
both
technical
and
clerical
time,
as
well
as
a
final
review
by
facility
management
personnel
prior
to
completion;
and
C
Certification
by
a
licensed
Professional
Engineer
(
PE),
which
must
be
conducted
for
each
new
Plan.
Technical
amendments
to
a
Plan
must
also
be
re­
certified
by
a
PE.

EPA
is
proposing
to
provide
streamlined
requirements
for
facilities
that
meet
a
set
of
specified
qualifying
criteria.
Owners
and
operators
of
qualified
facilities
would
have
the
option
to
self­
certify
that
their
SPCC
Plan
complies
with
40
CFR
part
112,
in
lieu
of
having
a
Professional
Engineer
(
PE)
review
and
certify
their
Plan.
EPA
is
proposing
that
an
SPCC­
regulated
facility
must
meet
the
following
criteria
to
qualify
for
this
reduced
burden
option:
(
1)
total
facility
oil
storage
capacity
of
10,000
gallons
or
less;
and
(
2)
no
reportable
discharge
of
oil
during
the
ten
years
prior
to
self­
certification
or
since
becoming
subject
to
SPCC
requirements
if
the
facility
has
been
in
operation
for
less
than
ten
years.
Owners
and
operators
of
qualified
facilities
choosing
this
option
may
not
deviate
from
any
requirement
of
the
SPCC
rule
under
§
112.7(
a)(
2)
and
may
not
make
impracticability
determinations
as
described
under
§
112.7(
d),
although
flexibility
for
the
security
requirements
and
container
integrity
testing
would
be
available.

Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
keep
records
Section
112.3
requires
the
owner
or
operator
to
maintain
a
copy
of
the
SPCC
Plan
at
the
facility,
if
the
facility
is
normally
attended
for
at
least
four
hours
per
day
or,
if
not,
at
the
nearest
field
office.
The
Plan
must
be
available
to
the
Regional
Administrator
for
review
during
normal
working
hours
(
40
CFR
112.3(
e)).
In
addition,
as
described
in
section
4(
b)(
i)
of
this
document,
a
facility
owner
or
operator
is
required
to
maintain
(
and
update)
Plan­
specific
records
as
outlined
under
§
112.7(
e).
Plan
maintenance
and
recordkeeping
activities
are
estimated
to
involve
10
almost
entirely
technical
personnel
time,
although
a
small
amount
of
clerical
personnel
time
may
also
be
required
for
these
activities.

Submit
information
in
the
event
of
certain
discharges
of
oil
In
the
event
of
certain
discharges
of
oil
into
navigable
waters,
a
facility
owner
or
operator
must
submit
information
described
in
§
112.4(
a)
to
the
Regional
Administrator
within
60
days.
A
discharge
of
oil
occurring
within
any
12­
month
period
that
triggers
the
§
112.4
reporting
requirements
is:

(
1)
A
single
discharge
as
described
in
§
112.1(
b)
of
more
than
1,000
U.
S.
gallons
into
or
upon
navigable
waters;
or
(
2)
Two
or
more
discharges
as
described
in
§
112.1(
b),
each
of
which
is
over
42
U.
S.
gallons,
into
or
upon
navigable
waters.

Submission
of
information
after
a
discharge
of
oil
is
estimated
to
involve
both
technical
personnel
time
for
collecting
the
required
information,
as
well
as
time
for
review
by
management
personnel
before
the
information
is
submitted.
Section
112.4(
c)
also
requires
that
the
facility
owner
or
operator
submit
a
copy
of
this
information
to
the
state
agency
in
charge
of
oil
pollution
control
activities
for
the
area
in
which
the
facility
is
located.
The
Regional
Administrator
may
require
the
owner
or
operator
of
the
facility
to
amend
the
SPCC
Plan
to
prevent
and
contain
discharges
from
the
facility.
Such
amendments,
if
uncontested
by
the
facility
owner
or
operator,
must
become
part
of
the
Plan
thirty
days
after
the
Regional
Administrator
responds
to
the
facility
owner
or
operator
concerning
the
proposed
amendments.
The
amended
Plan
must
then
be
certified
by
a
PE
prior
to
implementation.
As
required
by
§
112.4(
e),
amendments
to
the
Plan
must
be
implemented
as
soon
as
possible,
but
no
later
than
six
months
after
the
amendments
become
part
of
the
Plan.
Section
112.4(
f)
allows
a
facility
owner
or
operator
to
appeal
a
decision
made
by
the
Regional
Administrator
requiring
a
Plan
amendment.

Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
following
modification
of
the
facility
Section
112.5(
a)
requires
the
facility
owner
or
operator
to
amend
his
Plan
in
accordance
with
§
112.7
whenever
there
is
a
change
in
the
facility's
design,
construction,
operation,
and
maintenance
that
materially
affects
the
facility's
potential
to
discharge
oil
into
navigable
waters.
Such
facility
changes
may
include
the
addition
of
a
new
or
rebuilt
container;
a
change
in
the
service
of
a
container;
any
physical
changes
or
improvements
to
the
facility;
or,
the
construction
of
a
new
well
and
associated
piping.
The
activities
to
amend
the
SPCC
Plan
as
a
result
of
these
facility
changes
are
estimated
to
involve
mostly
facility
technical
personnel
time,
as
well
as
some
clerical
time.
The
amended
Plan
must
also
be
certified
by
a
PE
prior
to
implementation.
Such
amendments
to
the
SPCC
Plan
must
be
implemented
as
soon
as
possible,
but
not
later
than
six
months
after
the
change
occurs.

Review
the
SPCC
Plan
An
owner
or
operator
of
an
SPCC­
regulated
facility
is
required
to
review
and
evaluate
his/
her
Plan
at
least
once
every
five
years.
This
review
is
estimated
to
involve
mostly
technical
personnel
time
to
review
spill
prevention
and
control
procedures
being
implemented
under
the
11
current
Plan,
as
well
as
a
regulatory
review
involving
management
personnel
time.
Clerical
personnel
time
is
also
involved
to
complete
necessary
paperwork.
An
owner
or
operator
is
required
to
amend
his
SPCC
Plan
within
six
months
of
the
review
to
include
more
effective
prevention
and
control
technology
if:
(
1)
such
technology
will
significantly
reduce
the
likelihood
of
a
discharge
as
described
in
§
112.1(
b)
from
the
facility;
and
(
2)
such
technology
has
been
field­
proven
at
the
time
of
the
review.
Any
technical
amendments
to
the
Plan
must
also
be
certified
by
a
PE
prior
to
implementation.
Review
cost
estimates
are
generated
in
this
ICR
for
an
existing
facility
only,
since
a
new
facility
that
becomes
operational
after
the
beginning
of
the
ICR­
approval
period
would
not
be
required
to
conduct
its
review
until
after
the
three­
year
period
covered
by
this
ICR
expires.

5.
INFORMATION
COLLECTED
­
AGENCY
ACTIVITIES,
COLLECTION
METHODOLOGY,
AND
INFORMATION
MANAGEMENT
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
In
the
event
that
an
SPCC­
regulated
facility
discharges
more
than
1,000
gallons
of
oil
into
or
upon
the
navigable
waters
of
the
United
States
in
a
single
discharge
as
described
in
§
112.1(
b),
or
discharges
more
than
42
U.
S.
gallons
of
oil
in
each
of
two
discharges
as
described
in
§
112.1(
b)
within
any
12­
month
period,
EPA
is
required
to
review
the
information
submitted
to
it
by
the
facility
under
40
CFR
112.4(
a),
including
the
necessity
to:

C
Review
facility
characteristics;

C
Review
the
cause
of
the
discharge;

C
Require
any
necessary
amendments
to
the
Plan
to
prevent
and
contain
discharges
from
the
facility;
and
C
Adjudicate
any
appeal
of
a
final
decision
requiring
an
amendment.

In
addition,
while
not
required
by
the
SPCC
rule,
EPA
also
conducts
routine
inspection,
enforcement,
and
outreach
activities
as
part
of
administering
this
program.
Inspections
may
occur
either
after
a
discharge
as
part
of
the
review
of
the
submitted
spill
notification
report
or
on
a
periodic
basis.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Management
The
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
regulation
allows
Plans
to
be
tailored
to
the
unique
characteristics
of
the
facility.
Due
to
the
wide
range
of
types
and
sizes
of
facilities
subject
to
the
regulation,
EPA
does
not
prescribe
any
specific
information
management
technique
or
technology
in
preparing
and
maintaining
SPCC
Plans
or
records.
The
regulation
allows
flexibility
in
Plan
preparation
and
recordkeeping
by
defining
"
SPCC
Plan"
in
a
way
that
allows
the
use
of
additional,
appropriately
cross­
referenced
formats.
Greater
flexibility
is
also
provided
for
facility
recordkeeping
practices,
as
records
kept
under
normal
business
practices,
such
as
those
required
pursuant
to
the
NPDES
program
and
API
Standards,
may
satisfy
certain
SPCC
recordkeeping
requirements.

EPA
remains
amenable
to
the
development
and
use
of
more
flexible
and
user­
friendly
means
of
writing
and
maintaining
SPCC
Plans,
such
as
electronic
programs,
provided
the
Plans
continue
12
to
provide
the
required
information
and
meet
the
administrative
requirements
listed
in
the
SPCC
rule.
Whatever
medium
is
used,
the
Plan
must
also
be
readily
accessible
to
response
personnel
in
an
emergency.
For
example,
a
Plan
might
be
electronically
produced,
but
computers
can
fail
and
may
not
be
operable
during
an
emergency.
For
an
electronic
Plan,
therefore,
a
backup
copy
must
be
readily
available
in
another
medium.
"
Accessibility"
also
includes
a
requirement
that
the
Plan
be
written
in
English
so
that
it
will
be
readily
understood.

EPA
maintains
the
information
submitted
by
facilities
following
certain
oil
discharges
to
the
regional
offices
to
support
ongoing
program
activities
such
as
targeting
inspections
as
well
as
to
support
response
operations
during
spills.
However,
EPA
does
not
collect
SPCC
Plans
or
related
records
from
facilities
on
a
routine
basis.

5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
In
2002,
EPA
promulgated
revisions
to
the
SPCC
rule
that
provided
benefits
for
small
entities
in
several
ways.
First,
EPA
no
longer
regulates
a
facility
having
a
single
container
with
an
aboveground
storage
capacity
greater
than
660
gallons,
but
aggregate
aboveground
capacity
of
1,320
gallons
or
less
of
oil.
Second,
EPA
no
longer
regulates,
under
part
112,
a
completely
buried
container
that
is
subject
to
all
of
the
technical
requirements
of
40
CFR
part
280
or
a
state
program
approved
under
40
CFR
part
281.
Third,
the
2002
rule
includes
a
de
minimis
container
size
of
less
than
55
gallons.
As
a
result,
containers
less
than
55
gallons
are
no
longer
included
in
a
facility's
aboveground
total
storage
or
use
capacity
calculation
and
no
longer
need
to
be
discussed
in
the
SPCC
Plan.
Fourth,
EPA
no
longer
regulates
wastewater
treatment
facilities
or
parts
thereof
(
except
at
oil
production,
oil
recovery,
and
oil
recycling
facilities)
used
exclusively
for
wastewater
treatment
and
not
used
to
meet
any
other
requirement
of
part
112.
Fifth,
the
definition
of
"
SPCC
Plan"
was
modified
to
allow
the
use
of
additional,
appropriately
crossreferenced
formats
that
would
encourage
all
regulated
facilities,
including
smaller
facilities,
to
take
advantage
of
similar
planning
efforts
conducted
pursuant
to
state
or
other
federal
standards.
The
revisions,
targeted
towards
reducing
the
recordkeeping
burden
to
facilities,
also
decreased
the
burden
to
smaller
facilities.

EPA
is
proposing
to
further
reduce
the
burden
of
the
SPCC
regulation,
with
expected
benefits
for
small
entities.
For
example,
proposed
revisions
to
the
SPCC
rule
would
reduce
the
regulatory
burden
on
qualified
facilities
and
facilities
with
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment.
Qualified
facilities
with
10,000
gallons
or
less
of
aggregate
aboveground
storage
would
no
longer
need
a
licensed
PE
to
certify
their
Plans.
The
proposed
revisions
to
the
SPCC
rule
also
would
allow
greater
use
of
contingency
plans
without
requiring
an
impracticability
determination
for
facilities
with
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment.
Facilities
that
store
oil
solely
in
motive
power
containers
would
no
longer
be
regulated,
while
other
facilities
with
oil
storage
in
addition
to
motive
power
containers
may
incur
lower
compliance
costs.
The
proposed
rule
would
also
allow
airport
refueler
trucks
to
fall
under
a
facility's
general
containment
requirements
rather
than
require
sized
secondary
containment.
Under
the
proposal,
SPCC
requirements
would
be
suspended
for
farms
with
an
oil
storage
capacity
of
10,000
gallons
or
less
.
In
addition,
the
proposed
rule
would
remove
certain
provisions
related
to
animal
fat
and
vegetable
oils
facilities
because
these
provisions
do
not
apply.
13
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
The
SPCC
rule
does
not
require
a
specific
collection
schedule.
However,
a
facility
owner
or
operator
must
prepare,
amend,
and
implement
its
SPCC
Plan
according
to
the
compliance
deadlines
in
§
§
112.3(
a),
(
b),
and
(
c).
As
amended
on
February
17,
2006
(
71
FR
8462),
the
SPCC
rule
requires
an
owner
or
operator
of
a
regulated
onshore
or
offshore
facility
that:
(
1)
was
in
operation
on
or
before
August
16,
2002,
and
could
reasonably
be
expected
to
have
a
discharge
as
described
in
40
CFR
112.1(
b),
maintain
his
or
her
Plan,
but
amend
it,
if
necessary
to
ensure
compliance,
by
October
31,
2007,
and
implement
the
amended
Plan
by
October
31,
2007;
(
2)
becomes
operational
after
August
16,
2002,
through
October
31,
2007,
and
could
be
expected
to
have
a
discharge
as
described
in
40
CFR
112.1(
b),
must
prepare
and
implement
a
Plan
by
October
31,
2007;
and
(
3)
becomes
operational
after
October
31,
2007,
and
could
reasonably
be
expected
to
have
a
discharge
as
described
in
40
CFR
112.1(
b),
must
prepare
and
implement
a
Plan
before
it
begins
operations.
A
regulated
onshore
or
offshore
mobile
facility
owner
or
operator
must
amend
his
or
her
Plan,
if
necessary,
and
implement
such
amendments
by
October
31,
2007.

The
owner
or
operator
must
review
the
SPCC
Plan
once
every
five
years.
A
periodic
review
is
necessary
to
ensure
that
SPCC
Plans
reflect
currently
available
and
proven
technology
and
techniques
for
preventing
and
controlling
oil
discharges.

6.
ESTIMATING
THE
BURDEN
AND
COST
OF
THE
COLLECTION
6(
a)
Burden
and
Cost
Methodology
and
Assumptions
Facility
Characteristics
For
the
purpose
of
this
analysis,
EPA
divided
regulated
facilities
into
four
size
categories
based
on
aggregate
oil
storage
capacity
(
see
Exhibit
2).
These
size
categories
help
to
(
1)
account
for
differences
in
the
potential
compliance
costs
experienced
by
facilities
of
different
sizes
and
(
2)
determine
the
number
of
facilities
affected
by
each
of
the
proposed
changes
in
the
rule
based
on
facility=
s
storage
capacity.

EXHIBIT
2
SPCC­
Regulated
Facility
Size
Categories
Size
Category
Aggregate
Capacity
I
1,320
to
10,000
gallons
II
10,001
to
42,000
gallons
III
42,001
to
1
million
gallons
IV
greater
than
1
million
gallons
For
the
purposes
of
this
ICR,
facilities
are
also
grouped
into
two
categories:
production
facilities
(
facilities
whose
operations
primarily
involve
oil
production)
and
storage
facilities
(
all
other
industry
groups).
This
categorization
of
facilities
reflects
differences
in
the
estimated
burden
of
compliance
activities
depending
on
the
nature
of
the
facility's
operations.
14
In
addition,
facilities
are
divided
into
existing
and
new
facilities,
to
reflect
the
differences
in
compliance
activities
between
these
two
groups.
Existing
facilities
include
facilities
that
initiated
operations
prior
to
initiation
of
this
ICR.
All
facilities
in
operation
at
the
start
of
this
ICR
period
are
assumed
to
have
prepared
their
SPCC
Plans.
Consequently,
existing
facilities
are
assumed
to
have
incurred
all
costs
associated
with
initially
preparing
and
implementing
their
SPCC
Plans,
but
some
are
expected
to
incur
costs
to
perform
a
technical
five­
year
review,
revise
their
SPCC
Plan,
submit
information
in
the
event
of
certain
oil
discharges,
and
maintain
the
Plan
and
keep
records.
New
facilities
include
those
facilities
that
will
initiate
operations
during
the
ICR
period.
For
the
purpose
of
this
analysis,
new
facilities
become
existing
facilities
after
the
first
year
of
operation.

Lastly,
Category
I
facilities
are
divided
into
those
that
may
take
advantage
of
EPA's
proposed
streamlined
option
for
qualified
facilities
and
those
that
may
not.
For
this
analysis,
EPA
assumed
that
50
percent
of
Category
I
facilities
with
the
aggregate
storage
capacity
less
than
or
equal
to
10,000
gallons
would
be
qualified
facilities
(
see
Section
5
(
c)
for
the
description
of
the
proposed
changes
to
the
rule).
The
other
50
percent
of
Category
I
facilities
and
all
facilities
of
Category
II
through
IV
are
non­
qualified.

Estimating
Burden
of
SPCC
Plan
Per­
facility
burden
hour
estimates
are
based
primarily
on
analyses
by
staff
at
ABB
Environmental
Services,
who
were
experienced
in
preparing
SPCC
Plans.
These
estimates
were
developed
for
production
and
storage
facilities
of
various
sizes,
and
for
clerical,
technical/
engineering,
and
management
hours.
The
burden
included
new
Plan
preparation
(
site
work,
regulatory
review,
review
of
existing
procedures,
formulating
new
procedures,
preparing
the
Plan,
and
PE
review);
Plan
modification
(
site
work,
regulatory
review,
review
of
existing
procedures,
formulating
new
or
changed
procedures
or
recommendations,
preparing
the
amendment,
and
PE
review);
formal
review
(
site
work,
regulatory
review,
review
of
existing
procedures,
preparing
the
review
report,
and
PE
review);
submittal
of
information
after
a
discharge;
and
recordkeeping
requirements
(
maintaining
the
Plan,
records
of
inspections,
and
records
of
equipment
maintenance).

EPA
reviewed
these
estimates
with
EPA
regional
personnel
involved
with
the
SPCC
program,
and
on
several
occasions
EPA
has
solicited
public
comment
concerning
the
burden
estimates.
No
commenter
has
provided
more
complete
data
on
the
annual
burden
for
required
information
collection
activities
for
typical
facilities.
EPA
has
also
consulted
with
contacts
from
facilities
affected
by
SPCC
requirements
(
see
Section
3(
c)
of
this
document),
as
well
as
with
engineering
firms
that
prepare
SPCC
Plans,
and
determined
that
its
burden
hour
estimates
are
reasonable.

Estimating
Facility
Labor
Costs
To
determine
the
per­
facility
costs
for
typical
new
and
existing
respondents
in
each
facility
size
category,
unit
time
estimates
for
management,
technical,
and
clerical
personnel
were
multiplied
by
the
hourly
wage
rate
for
each
labor
category
and
were
then
added
to
capital
and
Operating
and
Maintenance
(
O&
M)
costs.
15
The
labor
wage
rates
for
private
industry
were
derived
from
the
September
2005
U.
S.
Department
of
Labor's
Employment
Cost
Indexes
and
Levels.
3
The
2005
wage
rates
include
wages
and
salaries;
benefit
costs,
including
paid
leave,
supplemental
pay,
insurance,
retirement
and
savings,
legally
required
benefits,
severance
pay,
and
supplemental
unemployment
benefits.
These
wage
rates
reflect
private
industry
averages,
which
were
estimated
by
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics
(
BLS)
based
on
a
survey
of
35,600
occupations
within
8,200
establishments
in
the
private
sector.
These
wage
rates
reflect
industry
averages,
which
may
underestimate
the
actual
wages
received
by
some
SPCC
regulated
facility
personnel
but
overestimate
the
actual
wage
rate
received
by
other
facility
personnel.
EPA
further
adjusted
these
rates
to
reflect
associated
overhead
costs.
4
The
estimated
wage
rates
used
in
the
analysis
are:

 
Management:
$
55.73/
hour;
 
Technical:
$
47.91/
hour;
and
 
Clerical:
$
25.31/
hour.

Overhead
rates
can
be
calculated
using
various
formulas.
To
see
how
overall
costs
might
change
under
different
overhead
loading
rate
assumptions,
EPA
calculated
alternative
overhead
rates
based
on
recommendations
in
Estimating
Costs
for
the
Economic
Benefits
of
RCRA
Noncompliance
(
September
1997).
This
document
suggests
that
labor
overhead
and
profit
can
be
estimated
at
50
to
100
percent
of
the
base
salary
and
fringe
benefit
costs.
EPA
estimated
that
raising
the
overhead
rate
to
50
percent
would
increase
the
wages
listed
above
by
28
percent.
If
a
100
percent
overhead
rate
were
used,
these
wages
would
increase
by
71
percent.
The
50
percent
and
100
percent
alternatives
may
be
high
because
the
rates
include
profit
as
well
as
overhead.
The
appropriate
overhead
loading
rate
is
highly
dependent
on
not
only
the
industry
in
question,
but
also
individual
businesses.
The
alternative
rates
are
explored
in
the
discussion
of
total
respondent
costs
in
Section
6(
e)
of
this
document.

Estimating
Burden
of
Oil
Spill
Contingency
Plan
For
this
ICR,
EPA
developed
a
unit­
cost
estimate
for
preparing
an
oil
spill
contingency
plan,
to
evaluate
the
potential
impacts
of
proposed
revisions
to
the
SPCC
rule.
EPA
assumed
that
the
activities
associated
with
preparing
a
contingency
plan
are
similar
to
those
required
by
a
Facility
Response
Plan
(
FRP).
Therefore,
the
hour
and
cost
burden
estimates
associated
with
preparing
a
contingency
plan
are
based
on
burden
estimates
developed
for
an
FRP.
5
EPA
assumed
that
the
following
elements
would
be
included
in
the
oil
spill
contingency
plan
preparation:

$
Emergency
Response;

$
Hazard
Evaluation;

3
United
States
Department
of
Labor,
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics,
Employer
Costs
for
Employee
Compensation,
December
2005.

4
Overhead
costs
were
computed
separately
from
BLS
data
and
were
assumed
to
be
an
additional
17
percent
of
the
total
wage
rate,
which
is
composed
of
direct
wages
and
salaries
and
employee
benefits,
as
reported
by
BLS.

5
For
details,
see
A
Regulatory
Impact
Analysis
of
Revisions
to
the
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
Regulation
(
40
CFR
112)
to
Implement
the
Facility
Response
Planning
Requirements
of
the
Oil
Pollution
Act
of
1990".
16
$
Discussion
of
Spill
Scenarios;

$
Discharge
Detection;

$
Plan
Implementation.

Since
an
FRP
is
more
complex
than
an
oil
spill
contingency
plan,
the
FRP
cost
estimates
were
adjusted
downward
to
estimate
the
burden
for
the
contingency
plan.
The
cost
associated
with
each
of
these
elements
was
assumed
to
be
half
the
FRP
cost
(
except
for
discharge
detection,
which
was
assumed
to
be
the
same).
The
cost
estimates
were
inflated
to
2005
dollars
using
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics=
Producer
Production
Index.
The
typical
annual
cost
of
preparing
an
oil
spill
contingency
plan
is
estimated
at
$
818.

EPA
assumed
that
the
fraction
of
managerial,
technical,
and
clerical
time
of
the
total
labor
burden
associated
with
a
contingency
plan
is
the
same
as
that
for
preparing
a
new
SPCC
Plan.
Exhibit
3
presents
the
hour
and
cost
burden
estimated
for
a
typical
oil
spill
contingency
plan.

EXHIBIT
3
Estimated
Cost
of
Preparing
a
Typical
Contingency
Plan
Burden
Annual
(
hours)
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Annual
Cost
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
2.5
12.2
3.7
18.4
$
818
Estimating
Capital
Costs
EPA
estimates
that
facilities
would
incur
small
capital
costs
in
complying
with
the
SPCC
requirements
to
maintain
the
Plan
and
keep
records
(
40
CFR
112.3
and
112.7(
e))
and
to
submit
required
information
in
the
event
of
certain
discharges
of
oil
(
40
CFR
112.4).
EPA
estimates
that
to
maintain
files,
new
facilities
would
purchase
file
cabinets
at
a
cost
of
$
200.
In
the
event
of
certain
discharges,
the
owner
or
operator
is
required
to
submit
information
to
the
Regional
Administrator
and
the
state
agency
in
charge
of
oil
pollution
control
activities
for
the
area
in
which
it
is
located.
Consequently,
the
owner
or
operator
would
incur
costs
for
photocopying
and
postage.
For
costing
purposes,
EPA
assumes
that
facilities
would
submit
no
more
than
10
pages
for
a
small
facility;
20
pages
for
a
medium
facility;
and
40
pages
for
a
large
facility.
Assuming
the
cost
of
photocopying
to
be
$
0.11
per
page,
photocopying
costs
are
estimated
to
be
$
2.20
for
a
small
facility;
$
4.40
for
a
medium
facility;
and
$
8.80
for
a
large
facility,
respectively.
EPA
estimates
that
the
cost
to
submit
the
information
through
the
Post
Office
is
approximately
$
12.00,
based
on
the
cost
to
mail
a
two­
pound
package
to
two
different
recipients.
Because
only
0.15
percent
of
facilities
are
expected
to
incur
oil
discharges
that
trigger
an
information
submission,
the
annual
capital
costs
to
a
typical
facility
are
negligible.
A
facility
is
not
expected
to
incur
any
other
capital­
related
costs
to
respond
to
this
information
collection
request.
17
Estimating
Operating
and
Maintenance
(
O&
M)
Costs
Some
facilities
are
expected
to
incur
O&
M
costs
associated
with
retaining
a
PE
to
certify
their
SPCC
Plans,
along
with
any
subsequent
technical
amendments
that
are
made
to
the
Plan.
In
certifying
the
Plan,
the
engineer
attests
to
have
examined
the
facility
and
that
the
Plan
has
been
prepared
in
accordance
with
good
engineering
practices
that
satisfy
the
SPCC
requirements
found
in
40
CFR
part
112.
Furthermore,
whenever
an
owner
or
operator
amends
its
SPCC
Plan,
a
PE
must
certify
any
technical
amendment.

Not
all
facilities
are
expected
to
contract
with
a
PE
to
have
their
Plan
certified.
Some
facilities
have
in­
house
PEs
that
can
perform
this
task.
EPA
assumed
that
the
cost
to
a
facility
to
retain
an
outside
PE
to
certify
the
SPCC
Plan
varies
by
the
size
of
the
facility.
EPA
assumed
that
Category
I
and
Category
II
facilities
do
not
have
an
in­
house
PE
who
can
certify
a
facility's
Plan
and
that
these
facilities
would
retain
an
outside
PE.
EPA
assumed
that
50
percent
of
the
Category
III
facilities
and
25
percent
of
the
Category
IV
facilities
would
retain
an
outside
PE
to
certify
their
SPCC
Plans.
The
greater
use
of
outside
PEs
by
the
smaller
facilities
(
Category
I
and
II)
results
in
a
higher
average
cost
for
Plan
preparation
activities
at
these
facilities
compared
to
Category
III
facilities
and
a
similar
cost
compared
to
Category
IV
facilities.
EPA
plans
to
re­
evaluate
these
assumptions
before
finalizing
the
rule.

EPA
revised
the
cost
estimate
developed
for
the
2002
final
rule
for
obtaining
PE
certification
of
a
new
SPCC
Plan
and
technical
changes
to
an
existing
Plan.
6
Exhibit
4
summarizes
the
expected
cost
facilities
of
different
sizes
to
retain
a
PE
and
to
have
a
PE
certify
a
new
Plan,
as
well
as
any
subsequent
amendments.

EXHIBIT
4
Cost
to
Facilities
to
Retain
an
Outside
PE
for
Certification7
Size
Category
New
Plan
Amendments
I
and
II
$
2,000
$
750
III
$
2,550
$
1,030
IV
$
3,110
$
1,310
6(
b)
Burden
and
Cost
per
Facility
This
section
discusses
the
potential
paperwork­
related
burden
and
costs
to
both
existing
and
new
facilities
under
the
proposed
amendments
to
the
SPCC
rule.
For
existing
facilities,
this
section
details
unit
cost
estimates
for
the
following
categories:
five­
year
review
­
§
112.5(
b);
information
submission
in
the
event
of
certain
oil
discharges
­
§
112.4(
c);
Plan
modification
­
§
112.5(
a);
technical
amendments
­
§
112.5(
c);
Plan
amendment
­
§
112.4(
d);
and
recordkeeping.
For
newly
regulated
facilities,
this
section
describes
the
following
unit
cost
categories:
SPCC
6
The
revised
estimates
are
based
on
findings
from
discussions
with
several
engineering
firms.

7
The
cost
to
facilities
to
retain
an
outside
PE
for
certification
were
adjusted
and
rounded
to
the
nearest
$
10
in
this
ICR
for
inflationary
changes
using
the
Producer's
Price
Index
for
August
2005,
found
in
the
annual
Economic
Report
of
the
President.
18
Plan
preparation
­
§
112.3(
a);
oil
spill
contingency
plan
preparation;
information
submission
in
the
event
of
certain
oil
discharges
­
§
112.4(
c);
Plan
modification
­
§
112.5(
a);
technical
amendments
­
§
112.5(
c);
Plan
amendment
­
§
112.4(
d);
and
recordkeeping.
In
Exhibits
5
through
8
and
12
through
15,
the
activity
called
"
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan"
includes
all
changes
to
the
Plan,
whether
in
response
to
§
112.5(
a)
or
(
c)
or
§
112.4(
d).
Revisions
resulting
from
the
five­
year
review
are
captured
under
"
Review
the
SPCC
Plan".

EPA
assumes
that
owners
or
operators
of
all
facilities
will
comply
with
rule
deadlines.
Plan
preparation
costs
affect
new
facilities
that
become
subject
to
the
SPCC
rule.
New
facilities
include
those
facilities
that
will
initiate
operations
during
the
ICR
period.
Owners
or
operators
of
new
facilities
are
assumed
to
incur
the
total
cost
of
preparing
a
Plan
in
Year
1.
In
addition
to
preparing
or
reviewing
SPCC
Plans,
owners
or
operators
of
all
new
and
existing
facilities
will
incur
costs
to
prepare
and
maintain
records.

EPA
assumes
that
the
formal
five­
year
review
of
SPCC
Plans
will
affect
one­
fifth
of
all
existing
facilities
annually.
In
other
words,
owners
or
operators
of
one­
fifth
of
all
existing
facilities
will
undergo
their
formal
five­
year
review
of
their
Plans
in
each
year
of
the
ICR
period.
The
total
cost
incurred
by
existing
facilities
for
this
review
is
greater
if,
following
the
review,
the
facility
owner
or
operator
must
amend
his
or
her
Plan.
EPA
estimates
that
three
percent
of
existing
facilities
will
require
a
Plan
amendment
as
a
result
of
the
five­
year
review.

Owners
or
operators
of
some
new
and
existing
facilities
will
submit
information
as
a
result
of
discharging
oil
and
others
will
need
to
revise
their
Plan
during
the
ICR
period.
Based
on
spill
data
obtained
from
the
Emergency
Response
Notification
System
database,
EPA
estimates
that
owners
or
operators
of
approximately
0.15
percent
of
all
facilities
will
incur
costs
each
year
due
to
reporting
requirements
related
to
certain
oil
discharges
(
see
§
112.4(
a)).
In
addition,
EPA
currently
assumes
that
10
percent
of
all
facilities,
whether
new
or
existing
and
regardless
of
size,
will
revise
their
Plan
each
year
to
address
§
112.5(
a)
or
(
c)
or
§
112.4(
d).
EPA
plans
to
reevaluate
this
assumption
for
the
final
rule,
given
that
EPA
would
expect
different
types
of
facilities
to
revise
their
SPCC
Plans
at
different
times
and
for
different
reasons.

Exhibits
5
through
8
summarize
the
average
costs
for
facilities
of
different
sizes,
accounting
for
the
probability
that
certain
facilities
will
incur
those
costs
(
e.
g.,
five­
year
reviews
affect
one­
fifth
of
existing
facilities)
and
for
the
estimated
overlap
between
federal
and
state
requirements.
The
state
overlap
assumptions
are
described
in
the
economic
analysis
for
the
2002
final
rule.
8
Each
state
has
its
own
regulations
regarding
the
storage,
handling,
and
containment
of
oil.
In
some
cases,
the
effort
required
by
these
state
regulations
may
be
the
same
as
what
is
required
by
SPCC.
Overall,
in
2002
EPA
found
that
5.9
percent
of
facilities
are
in
states
with
complete
overlap;
about
5.6
percent
of
facilities
in
states
with
substantial
overlap;
and
about
5.7
percent
of
facilities
in
states
with
partial
overlap.
To
develop
the
burden
estimates,
EPA
multiplied
the
hours
burden
by
both
the
percentage
of
facilities
in
each
overlap
category
and
the
degree
of
overlap
(
i.
e.,
100
percent
for
complete
overlap,
75
percent
for
substantial
overlap,
and
50
percent
for
partial
overlap).
As
part
of
the
economic
analysis
for
the
current
SPCC
proposed
rulemaking,
EPA
studied
the
overlap
of
state
regulations
to
determine
whether
to
adjust
the
8
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency,
"
Economic
Analysis
For
The
Final
Revisions
To
The
Oil
Pollution
Prevention
Regulation
(
40
CFR
part
112),"
May
2002.
19
estimate
to
account
more
accurately
for
recent
changes
in
state
requirements
and/
or
refine
the
previously
generated
estimates.
As
a
result
of
this
review,
EPA
concluded
that
there
was
noncompelling
evidence
to
adjust
the
current
overlap
estimate
between
the
SPCC
proposed
rule
and
state
regulations.

Total
Annual
Burden
per
Average
Respondent
Once
the
individual
burden
hours
estimates
are
determined
for
each
compliance
activity
undertaken
by
the
average
facility
in
each
size
category,
the
total
annual
burden
estimate
is
obtained
by
summing
the
unit
estimates
for
all
compliance
activities.
The
annual
burden
for
an
average
facility
differs
for
each
size
category
based
on
the
assumed
differences
in
the
complexity
of
the
facility
and
its
operations.
The
estimated
annual
burden
hours
for
an
average
respondent
in
each
size
category
for
existing
and
new
facilities
are
presented
in
Exhibits
5,
6,
7,
and
8.
Because
of
the
proposed
amendments
to
the
SPCC
rule,
paperwork­
related
burden
would
be
different
for
qualified
and
non­
qualified
facilities.

Total
Annual
Cost
per
Average
Respondent
In
estimating
the
per­
respondent
costs
for
both
existing
and
new
facilities
in
each
size
category,
EPA
calculates
the
unit
cost
for
each
compliance
activity
performed
by
the
average
respondent
facility.
These
average
per­
facility
costs
are
shown
in
the
right­
hand
column
of
Exhibits
5,
6,
7,
and
8.
To
estimate
the
cost
for
each
compliance
activity
performed
by
the
average
respondent
facility
in
each
size
category
under
the
proposed
rule,
unit
time
estimates
for
management,
technical,
and
clerical
personnel
were
multiplied
by
the
hourly
wage
rate
for
each
labor
category
and
were
then
added
to
capital
and
O&
M
costs.
For
the
average
existing
facility,
following
are
the
estimated
total
annual
costs
for
all
information
collection
activities
required
by
the
regulation:

 
Category
I
(
qualified):
$
152
per
facility;
 
Category
I
and
II
(
non­
qualified):
$
225
per
facility;
 
Category
III:
$
209
per
facility;
and
 
Category
IV:
$
351
per
facility.

For
the
average
new
facility,
following
are
the
estimated
total
annual
costs
for
all
information
collection
activities
required
by
the
regulation:

 
Category
I
(
qualified):
$
1,990
per
facility;
 
Categories
I
and
II
(
non­
qualified):
$
3,870
per
facility;
 
Category
III:
$
3,480
per
facility;
and
 
Category
IV:
$
3,630
per
facility.

Estimated
annual
costs
for
new
facilities
are
higher
than
those
for
existing
facilities
because
of
the
greater
expenses
associated
with
preparing
a
new
SPCC
Plan
and
oil
spill
contingency
plan.
20
EXHIBIT
5
Annual
Burden
and
Unit
Costs
for
All
Required
Information
Collection
Activities
Average
Category
I
Facility
(
Qualified)

Annual
Burden
Hours1
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Burden
Hours
Capital/
Startup
Costs
O&
M
Costs
Annual
Cost2
Existing
Facilities
Review
the
SPCC
Plan
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.9
$
0
$
0
$
43
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.5
$
0
$
0
$
22
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0.0
1.6
0.5
2.0
$
0
$
0
$
88
TOTAL
0.2
2.6
0.7
3.5
$
0
$
0
$
152
New
Facilities
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
5.4
22.6
3.6
31.7
$
0
$
0
$
1,477
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
1.0
4.9
1.5
7.4
$
0
$
0
$
330
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.5
$
0
$
0
$
22
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0.0
1.6
0.5
2.0
$
76
$
0
$
164
TOTAL
6.4
29.5
5.7
41.6
$
76
$
0
$
1,990
1
Unit
burdens
are
weighted
averages,
rounded
to
the
nearest
tenth
of
an
hour,
based
on
the
distribution
of
storage
and
production
facilities
and
the
number
of
facilities
estimated
to
perform
each
activity
during
the
one­
year
period.
The
numbers
in
this
exhibit
may
not
add
precisely
due
to
rounding.

2
Annual
costs
are
rounded
to
the
nearest
dollar.

3
The
unit
burden
for
a
facility
that
needs
to
submit
information
because
of
a
discharge
is
estimated
to
be
one
hour
of
management
labor
and
one
hour
of
technical
labor,
resulting
in
a
total
unit
cost
of
$
104.
Because
only
0.15
percent
of
all
facilities
are
expected
to
meet
the
discharge
criteria
and
submit
information,
the
average
unit
burden
is
less
than
0.1
hours,
and
is
therefore
indicated
here
as
0.
However,
the
actual
unit
burden
and
cost
estimates
are
used
in
later
calculations.
21
EXHIBIT
6
Annual
Burden
and
Unit
Costs
for
All
Required
Information
Collection
Activities
Average
Category
I
(
Non­
Qualified)
and
Category
II
Facility
Annual
Burden
Hours1
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Burden
Hours
Capital/
Startup
Costs
O&
M
Costs
Annual
Cost2
Existing
Facilities
Review
the
SPCC
Plan
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.9
$
0
$
5
$
47
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.5
$
0
$
68
$
90
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0.0
1.6
0.5
2.0
$
0
$
0
$
88
TOTAL
0.2
2.6
0.7
3.5
$
0
$
72
$
225
New
Facilities
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
5.4
22.6
3.6
31.7
$
0
$
1,809
$
3,286
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
1.0
4.9
1.5
7.4
$
0
$
0
$
330
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0.0
0.4
0.1
0.5
$
0
$
68
$
90
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0.0
1.6
0.5
2.0
$
76
$
0
$
164
TOTAL
6.4
29.5
5.7
41.6
$
76
$
1,880
$
3,870
1
Unit
burdens
are
weighted
averages,
rounded
to
the
nearest
tenth
of
an
hour,
based
on
the
distribution
of
storage
and
production
facilities
and
the
number
of
facilities
estimated
to
perform
each
activity
during
the
one­
year
period.
The
numbers
in
this
exhibit
may
not
add
precisely
due
to
rounding.

2
Annual
costs
are
rounded
to
the
nearest
dollar.

3
The
unit
burden
for
a
facility
that
needs
to
submit
information
because
of
a
discharge
is
estimated
to
be
one
hour
of
management
labor
and
one
hour
of
technical
labor,
resulting
in
a
total
unit
cost
of
$
104.
Because
only
0.15
percent
of
all
facilities
are
expected
to
meet
the
discharge
criteria
and
submit
information,
the
average
unit
burden
is
less
than
0.1
hours,
and
is
therefore
indicated
here
as
0.
However,
the
actual
unit
burden
and
cost
estimates
are
used
in
later
calculations.
22
EXHIBIT
7
Annual
Burden
and
Unit
Costs
for
All
Required
Information
Collection
Activities
Average
Category
III
Facility
Annual
Burden
Hours1
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Burden
Hours
Capital/
Startup
Costs
O&
M
Costs
Annual
Cost2
Existing
Facilities
Review
the
SPCC
Plan
0.2
1.0
0.2
1.4
$
0
$
3
$
68
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.4
$
0
$
39
$
57
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0.0
1.5
0.4
1.9
$
0
$
0
$
84
TOTAL
0.2
2.9
0.7
3.8
$
0
$
42
$
209
New
Facilities
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
4.5
33.3
4.5
42.4
$
0
$
966
$
2,932
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
1.0
4.9
1.5
7.4
$
0
$
0
$
330
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.4
$
0
$
39
$
57
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0.0
1.5
0.4
1.9
$
76
$
0
$
160
TOTAL
5.6
40.2
6.5
52.2
$
76
$
1,000
$
3,480
1
Unit
burdens
are
weighted
averages,
rounded
to
the
nearest
tenth
of
an
hour,
based
on
the
distribution
of
storage
and
production
facilities
and
the
number
of
facilities
estimated
to
perform
each
activity
during
the
one­
year
period.
The
numbers
in
this
exhibit
may
not
add
precisely
due
to
rounding.

2
Annual
costs
are
rounded
to
the
nearest
dollar.

3
The
unit
burden
for
a
facility
that
needs
to
submit
information
because
of
a
discharge
is
estimated
to
be
one
hour
of
management
labor
and
one
hour
of
technical
labor,
resulting
in
a
total
unit
cost
of
$
104.
Because
only
0.15
percent
of
all
facilities
are
expected
to
meet
the
discharge
criteria
and
submit
information,
the
average
unit
burden
is
less
than
0.1
hours,
and
is
therefore
indicated
here
as
0.
However,
the
actual
unit
burden
and
cost
estimates
are
used
in
later
calculations.
23
EXHIBIT
8
Annual
Burden
and
Unit
Costs
for
All
Required
Information
Collection
Activities
Average
Category
IV
Facility
Annual
Burden
Hours1
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Burden
Hours
Capital/
Startup
Costs
O&
M
Costs
Annual
Cost2
Existing
Facilities
Review
the
SPCC
Plan
0.2
1.6
0.2
2.1
$
0
$
2
$
97
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.4
$
0
$
22
$
38
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0.0
4.3
0.3
4.7
$
0
$
0
$
216
TOTAL
0.2
6.3
0.6
7.1
$
0
$
24
$
351
New
Facilities
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
4.0
50.6
5.3
59.9
$
0
$
517
$
3,298
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
3
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
$
0
$
0
$
0
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0.0
0.3
0.1
0.4
$
0
$
22
$
38
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0.0
4.3
0.3
4.7
$
76
$
0
$
292
TOTAL
4.0
55.2
5.7
64.9
$
76
$
539
$
3,630
1
Unit
burdens
are
weighted
averages,
rounded
to
the
nearest
tenth
of
an
hour,
based
on
the
distribution
of
storage
and
production
facilities
and
the
number
of
facilities
estimated
to
perform
each
activity
during
the
one­
year
period.
The
numbers
in
this
exhibit
may
not
add
precisely
due
to
rounding.

2
Annual
costs
are
rounded
to
the
nearest
dollar.

3
The
unit
burden
for
a
facility
that
needs
to
submit
information
because
of
a
discharge
is
estimated
to
be
one
hour
of
management
labor
and
one
hour
of
technical
labor,
resulting
in
a
total
unit
cost
of
$
104.
Because
only
0.15
percent
of
all
facilities
are
expected
to
meet
the
discharge
criteria
and
submit
information,
the
average
unit
burden
is
less
than
0.1
hours,
and
is
therefore
indicated
here
as
0.
However,
the
actual
unit
burden
and
cost
estimates
are
used
in
later
calculations.
24
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
EPA
incurs
costs
associated
with
the
evaluation
of
information
submitted
in
accordance
with
§
112.4
as
well
as
consideration
of
appeals.
This
section
summarizes
the
estimated
burden
and
cost
of
these
activities
to
EPA.
Burden
estimates
are
based
on
input
from
EPA
regional
staff
involved
directly
with
the
implementation
of
40
CFR
part
112.
Exhibit
9
shows
the
total
burden
and
labor
cost
to
EPA.
EPA
assumed
that
0.15
percent
of
regulated
facilities
would
submit
information
to
EPA
for
review.

EPA
labor
costs
are
based
on
the
2006
General
Schedule
(
GS)
pay
schedule.
EPA
estimates
an
average
hourly
labor
cost
(
labor
plus
overhead)
of
$
58.23
for
managerial
staff
(
GS­
13,
Step­
5),
and
$
40.86
for
technical
staff
(
GS­
11,
Step­
5).
To
derive
hourly
estimates,
EPA
divided
annual
compensation
estimates
by
2,080,
which
represents
the
number
of
hours
in
the
federal
work
year.
EPA
then
multiplied
hourly
rates
by
the
standard
government
overhead
factor
of
1.6.
Unit
costs
were
calculated
as
unit
time
estimates
multiplied
by
the
hourly
labor
rates
for
EPA
personnel.

EXHIBIT
9
Estimated
Annual
Burden
and
Cost
to
EPA
Burden
Hours
Activity
Managerial
($
55.73)
Technical
($
47.91)
Clerical
Total
Total
Cost
Plans
Evaluation
720
7,196
0
7,915
$
335,918
Review
of
Comments
360
360
0
720
$
35,652
Consideration
of
Appeals
576
0
0
576
$
33,522
Total
1,650
7,550
0
9,210
$
405,000
Note:
Totals
are
rounded
to
three
significant
figures.

6(
d)
Estimating
the
Respondent
Universe
This
section
describes
the
universe
of
facilities
subject
to
current
and
proposed
SPCC
regulations.
Estimating
the
number
of
regulated
entities
is
not
straightforward.
The
SPCC
rule
does
not
include
a
notification
requirement
and,
with
certain
exceptions,
owners
and
operators
do
not
submit
their
SPCC
Plans
to
EPA.

Previously
Developed
Estimates
In
1991,
EPA
published
the
"
Spill
Prevention,
Control,
and
Countermeasures
Facilities
Study,"
which
summarized
information
on
small,
medium,
and
large
facilities
in
16
industry
sectors
that
store
oil
aboveground
and
underground.
For
each
of
these
sectors,
EPA
collected
and
evaluated
data
from
ten
states
on
medium
and
large
facilities.
Information
on
small
facilities
came
from
New
York.
In
the
end,
the
1991
study
estimated
the
number
of
facilities
based
on
extrapolation
of
data
from
four
state
databases
(
Illinois,
California,
Maryland,
and
New
York)
to
the
nation.
25
In
1995,
EPA
conducted
a
survey
of
approximately
30,000
facilities
in
the
industries
covered
by
the
1991
study.
The
1995
survey
yielded
detailed
information
about
the
oil
storage
characteristics
of
the
surveyed
facilities,
and
was
designed
to
allow
statistical
extrapolation
to
a
broader
universe.
EPA
compared
the
results
of
the
1995
survey
to
the
1991
facility
study
and
to
a
1989
American
Petroleum
Institute
report
and
calculated
a
1996
Adjusted
National
Estimate,
which
has
been
the
basis
of
EPA's
approximation
of
the
number
of
facilities
regulated
by
the
SPCC
Program.
9
Current
Estimation
Methodology
EPA
has
updated
its
estimates
of
the
number
of
facilities
regulated
by
the
SPCC
rule,
based
on
recent
federal,
state,
and
proprietary
data
on
facilities
that
store
or
handle
oil.
The
estimates
of
the
SPCC
universe
were
developed
for
31
industry
sectors,
including
(
but
not
limited
to)
those
listed
in
Exhibit
1.
For
sectors
without
reliable
national­
level
data,
the
basic
estimation
procedure
involves
extrapolating
from
eight
state
databases
using
information
from
the
U.
S.
Census
Bureau.
10
Estimates
based
on
state­
level
data
For
many
industry
sectors
affected
by
the
SPCC
rule,
the
basic
estimation
methodology
used
to
update
the
regulated
universe
is
similar
to
that
used
in
the
1991
facilities
study.
The
approach
uses
eight
primary
state
databases
(
Florida,
Kansas,
Maryland,
Minnesota,
New
York,
Oklahoma,
Virginia,
and
Wisconsin)
to
determine
the
number
of
SPCC­
regulated
facilities
in
the
state
for
each
industry
sector.

The
information
in
state
databases
was
matched
with
the
Dun
&
Bradstreet
(
D&
B)
Market
Spectrum
database
to
assign
industry
sectors.
11
To
extrapolate
the
estimates
to
the
entire
country,
these
values
are
multiplied
by
a
facility
ratio.
This
ratio
is
computed
by
dividing
the
total
number
of
facilities
in
the
industry
sector
by
the
total
number
of
facilities
in
the
eight
states.
Specifically,
the
total
number
of
SPCC­
regulated
facilities
in
the
eight
states
is
calculated
and
multiplied
by
the
facility
ratios
(
i.
e.,
the
total
number
of
U.
S.
facilities
in
each
industry
sector
divided
by
the
total
number
of
facilities
in
these
states).
12
9
Analysis
of
the
Number
of
Facilities
Regulated
by
EPA's
SPCC
Program
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
oilspill/
pdfs/
pap_
tpop.
pdf.

10
Oil
storage
data
are
not
available
for
all
states.

11
The
following
facilities
and
tanks
were
not
considered
in
the
estimation:
facilities
with
less
than
1,320
gallons
of
storage,
tanks
with
less
than
55
gallons
of
storage,
completely
buried
underground
tanks,
tanks
subject
to
EPA
UST
requirements,
inactive
tanks,
and
tanks
that
did
not
store
oil
substances.
Not
all
the
facilities
in
the
state
databases
were
matched
with
D&
B
because
of
resource
constraints.
The
matched
facilities
were
assumed
to
be
representative
of
the
SPCC
regulated
facilities.
The
percentage
industry
distribution
of
the
matched
facilities
was
applied
to
all
regulated
facilities
in
the
databases.

12
When
information
was
available
from
multiple
states
for
an
industry
sector,
the
1991
facilities
study
extrapolated
from
each
of
the
states
separately
and
used
the
mid­
point
as
the
"
best
estimate."
The
current
approach
is
equivalent
to
using
the
average
ratio
for
all
states
for
which
data
are
available,
rather
than
the
average
of
the
absolute
numbers
of
facilities
in
a
specific
industry
sector
as
was
done
in
the
1991
study.
The
chosen
approach
may
provide
a
more
reliable
"
best
estimate"
because
the
extrapolation
would
be
based
on
a
larger
number
of
facilities
combining
data
from
more
than
one
state.
This
approach
also
assumes
that
if
there
are
no
observations
for
an
industry
sector
in
the
database,
then
there
are
no
regulated
facilities
in
that
industry
sector
in
the
state
(
rather
than
assuming
that
the
state
database
does
not
cover
that
industry
sector).
26
Estimates
based
on
national­
level
data
Because
of
the
availability
of
federal
and
proprietary
data,
a
different
estimation
approach
is
used
for
the
following
industry
sectors:
petroleum
bulk
stations
and
terminals;
fuel
oil
dealers;
pipelines;
petroleum
refinery
and
related
industries;
oil
and
gas
production;
farms;
electric
utilities;
and
manufacturing
facilities
handling
or
storing
animal
fats
and
vegetable
oils.

The
2002
Economic
Census
is
used
to
estimate
the
number
of
regulated
facilities
for
the
petroleum
bulk
stations
and
terminals,
fuel
oil
dealers,
pipelines,
and
petroleum
refinery
and
related
industries.
As
in
previous
analyses,
all
facilities
in
these
industries
are
assumed
to
be
regulated
under
the
SPCC
rule.

The
number
of
oil
production
facilities
is
based
on
oil­
well
data
obtained
from
PetroDataSource,
Inc.
This
source
maintains
data
on
commercial
wells
based
on
federal
and
state
data
including
tax
records
and
geological
surveys.
All
active
oil
wells
located
inland
and
offshore
were
included
in
the
estimation.
To
calculate
the
total
number
of
oil
production
facilities,
the
methodology
uses
an
assumption
of
four
wells
per
facility.
13
In
addition
to
the
oil
production
facilities,
gas
production
facilities
are
included
in
the
estimate
for
the
SPCC
universe.
Some
gas
wells
have
tanks
for
storing
condensate
oil
that
is
generated
as
a
result
of
the
gas
production
process.
This
analysis
assumes
that
all
gas
wells
that
store
condensate
oil
exceed
1,320
gallons
of
oil
storage
capacity.
Among
the
states
with
the
largest
percentage
of
gas
wells,
Texas,
Oklahoma,
and
Louisiana
have
condensate
oil
storage
at
gas
wells.
The
estimates
for
the
number
of
SPCC­
regulated
gas
production
facilities
were
calculated
based
on
these
assumptions
for
the
percentage
of
wells
that
store
condensate
oil
and
the
number
of
gas
wells
per
facility
(
using
the
total
number
of
gas
wells
from
the
PetroDataSource
database).

The
number
of
farms
is
calculated
based
on
Census
of
Agriculture
data
on
production
expenses
related
to
petroleum­
related
purchases
from
2002
and
1997
and
on
diesel
storage
data
from
1982.
In
the
2002
Census
of
Agriculture,
expenditure
data
are
available
only
in
aggregate
for
all
fuels.
To
arrive
at
the
expenditure
on
diesel
(
gasoline)
in
2002,
the
total
expenditure
on
fuels
in
2002
is
multiplied
against
the
ratio
of
diesel
(
gasoline)
expenditure
to
total
expenditure
from
the
1997
data.
This
methodology
assumes
that
the
percentage
of
diesel
(
gasoline)
expenditure
remained
the
same
from
1997
through
2002.
Finally,
the
total
quantity
of
diesel
(
gasoline)
purchased
in
2002
is
calculated
by
dividing
the
expenditure
on
diesel
(
gasoline)
by
diesel
(
gasoline)
prices.
Using
1982
data
on
fuel
storage
and
expenditures
on
farms,
the
ratio
of
diesel
(
gasoline)
storage
with
respect
to
the
annual
quantity
of
diesel
(
gasoline)
purchased
is
calculated.
On
average
approximately
one­
fifth
of
the
annual
quantity
of
diesel
purchased
and
about
one
fourth
of
the
annual
quantity
of
gasoline
purchased
is
found
to
be
stored
on
farms.
Since
no
data
are
available
on
the
type
of
storage
 
aboveground
or
underground
 
it
is
assumed
that
the
entire
storage
is
aboveground.
The
expenditure
ranges
are
converted
to
13
The
assumption
is
based
on
expert
opinions
from
Richard
Franklin,
a
Federal
On­
Scene
Coordinator
for
EPA
Region
6
(
02/
14/
2005,
personal
communication),
and
Mark
England,
Texas
Railroad
Commission
(
05/
20/
2005,
personal
communication).
27
capacity
ranges
and
assigned
to
a
percentage
of
farms
that
are
regulated
within
the
capacity
ranges.

The
number
of
SPCC­
regulated
electric
utility
plants
is
calculated
as
a
combination
of
the
number
of
substations
and
the
number
of
power
plants
in
the
United
States.
All
electricity
generation
facilities
and
substations
are
assumed
to
contain
enough
oil
to
be
subject
to
SPCC
requirements.
The
number
of
electric
utility
plants
is
estimated
based
on
data
reported
by
the
Energy
Information
Administration
(
EIA).
The
number
of
substations
is
estimated
based
on
the
number
of
substations
listed
by
each
major
utility
reporting
to
the
Federal
Energy
Regulatory
Commission
(
FERC).
14
A
national
estimate
is
extrapolated
from
these
data
using
the
ratio
of
the
megawatt
hours
sold
by
utilities
to
the
estimated
total
retail
megawatt
hours
of
electricity
sold
nationwide
according
to
the
EIA.

Facilities
handling
or
storing
non­
petroleum
oil
are
also
subject
to
SPCC
regulations.
Nonpetroleum
oil
includes
animal
fats
and
oils
and
greases,
or
fish
and
marine
mammal
oils;
and,
oils
of
vegetable
origin,
including
oils
from
seeds,
nuts,
fruits,
and
kernels.
To
estimate
the
number
of
facilities
that
could
produce
or
store
animal
fat
and
vegetable
oil
(
AFVO),
the
following
types
of
industries
are
considered:
(
1)
industries
that
use
AFVO
as
a
primary
input,
(
2)
industries
that
use
AFVO
in
moderate
amounts,
and
(
3)
industries
that
use
AFVO
as
a
minor
component
of
their
input.
It
is
assumed
that
all
the
facilities
in
the
AFVO
production
industry
are
subject
to
SPCC
regulations.
Several
facilities
in
this
category
were
contacted
and
claimed
that
AFVO
is
their
primary
product
and
they
store
enough
oil
to
be
subject
to
SPCC.
Based
on
conversations
with
several
facilities,
it
is
assumed
that
20
percent
to
90
percent
of
facilities
in
the
industries
involved
in
vegetable
oil
processing
and
refining,
animal
carcass
rendering,
and
food
products
store
enough
oil
to
be
subject
to
the
SPCC
rule.
Industries
such
as
pesticide,
paint
and
coating,
printing
ink,
and
soap
and
other
detergent
manufacturing
use
vegetable
oil
as
an
alternative
to
their
conventional
inputs.
To
account
for
facilities
that
use
AFVO
as
a
small
component
of
their
input,
it
is
assumed
that
1
percent
to
10
percent
of
facilities
in
these
industries
store
enough
oil
to
be
subject
to
SPCC.
This
methodology
yields
estimates
of
the
number
of
facilities
that
may
be
regulated
based
only
on
their
storage
of
AFVO.
Some
of
these
facilities
are
probably
regulated
because
they
also
store
petroleum
oils.

Industry
Growth
Rates
To
project
the
number
of
existing
and
new
facilities
regulated
under
the
SPCC
rule
over
the
ICR
period,
industry­
specific
growth
rates
were
calculated
using
the
change
in
the
number
of
establishments
reported
in
the
1997
and
2002
Economic
Censuses
for
each
industry
sector.
Data
on
the
number
of
establishments
were
obtained
and
organized
by
NAICS
industry
codes,
and
then
linked
to
the
regulated
industries.
EPA's
previous
approach
was
to
apply
a
uniform
one­
percent
growth
rate
across
all
sectors,
which
did
not
account
for
significant
variations
(
including
negative
growth
rates)
among
the
sectors.

In
this
analysis,
these
rates
are
held
constant
over
the
three­
year
analytical
period,
which
may
or
may
not
adequately
represent
the
trends
for
individual
sectors.
Industry
groups
with
a
14
Major
regulated
utilities
must
file
FERC
Form
No.
1,
on
which
utilities
report
information
on
their
substations
and
electrical
equipment.
"
Major"
is
defined
as
having
(
1)
one
million
megawatt
hours
or
more;
(
2)
100
megawatt
hours
of
annual
sales
for
resale;
(
3)
500
megawatt
hours
of
annual
power
exchange
delivered;
or
(
4)
500
megawatt
hours
of
annual
wheeling
for
others
(
deliveries
plus
losses).
28
positive
growth
rate
comprise
the
new
facilities
that
will
be
subject
to
SPCC
regulations
as
they
start
their
business.

In
total,
EPA
estimates
that
474,000
facilities
would
be
regulated
under
the
proposed
SPCC
rule.
Oil
production
facilities
(
36
percent),
electric
utilities
(
11
percent),
and
gas
production
facilities
(
9
percent)
account
for
most
of
the
SPCC­
regulated
facilities.

Facilities
Affected
by
the
Proposed
Revisions
in
the
Rule
°
Qualified
Facilities:
EPA
does
have
empirical
data
on
the
number
of
facilities
that
would
meet
the
criteria
and
choose
to
avail
themselves
of
the
`
qualified
facility'
option.
For
the
purposes
of
this
ICR,
EPA
assumed
that
50
percent
of
facilities
with
an
oil
storage
capacity
of
10,000
gallons
or
less
would
meet
`
qualified
facility'
status
and
obtain
regulatory
relief
under
the
proposed
rule.

°
Facilities
with
Oil­
Filled
Operational
Equipment:
The
proposed
amendments
affecting
facilities
with
oil­
filled
operational
equipment
address
such
items
as
hydraulic
systems,
lubricating
systems
(
e.
g.,
those
for
pumps,
compressors
and
other
rotating
equipment,
including
pumpjack
lubrication
systems),
gear
boxes,
machining
coolant
systems,
heat
transfer
systems,
transformers,
circuit
breakers,
electrical
switches,
and
other
systems
containing
oil
to
enable
the
operation
of
the
devices.
EPA
proposed
an
alternative
for
owners
and
operators
of
facilities
with
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment,
allowing
them
to
prepare
an
oil
spill
contingency
plan
and
a
written
commitment
of
manpower,
equipment
and
material,
without
having
to
determine
that
secondary
containment
is
impracticable.
Due
to
data
and
time
limitations,
EPA
focused
its
analysis
on
the
electric
utility
sector.
Consequently,
the
analysis
likely
underestimates
the
number
of
facilities
that
would
take
advantage
of
the
proposed
action
for
facilities
with
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment.

°
Farms,
Airport
Mobile
Refuelers,
AFVO
Facilities:
EPA
proposes
to
extend
the
compliance
dates
for
farms
with
oil
storage
capacity
of
10,000
gallons
or
less
while
the
Agency
considers
whether
this
sector
warrants
differentiated
requirements
under
the
SPCC
rule.
Therefore,
farms
with
an
oil
storage
capacity
of
10,000
gallons
or
less
would
only
incur
burden
of
reading
and
understanding
the
proposed
rule
to
be
able
to
take
advantage
of
the
proposed
extension.
EPA
has
not
yet
quantified
the
burden
associated
with
reading
the
rule
and
interpreting
the
proposed
revisions,
but
plans
to
do
so
in
time
for
the
final
rule.
The
Agency
did
not
change
its
paperwork
burden
estimates
associated
with
amendments
to
requirements
for
certain
motive
power
containers,
airport
mobile
refuelers,
and
facilities
that
handle,
store,
or
transport
animal
fats
and
vegetable
oils.

Exhibit
10
presents
the
estimated
number
of
existing
and
new
SPCC­
regulated
facilities
that
are
expected
to
incur
paperwork­
related
burden
associated
with
the
proposed
amendments
to
the
SPCC
rule.
29
EXHIBIT
10
Number
of
Existing
and
New
Facilities
(
First
Year)

Facility
Type
Category
I
and
II
Category
III
Category
IV
Total
Storage
252,435
46,055
3,142
301,632
Existing
Production
140,526
31,160
305
171,992
Total
393,000
77,200
3,450
474,000
Storage
4,162
857
37
5,055
New
Production
0
0
0
0
Total
4,160
857
37
5,050
Total
397,000
78,100
3,480
479,000
Note:
Totals
are
rounded
to
three
significant
figures.

6(
e)
Estimated
Total
Annual
Burden
for
All
Respondents
The
total
hour
burden
is
estimated
as
the
average
burden
hours
required
of
facility
personnel
to
complete
the
recordkeeping
and
reporting
requirements
multiplied
by
the
number
of
affected
facilities.
Similarly,
the
total
cost
burden
for
all
respondents
is
estimated
by
multiplying
the
number
of
facilities
in
each
size
category
by
the
unit
burden
hour
estimate
for
each
compliance
activity.
The
total
annual
burden
hours
and
costs
for
all
respondents
in
each
category
are
presented
in
Exhibits
12,
13,
14,
and
15
for
each
facility
size.
The
total
annual
burden
is
presented
separately
for
qualified
and
non­
qualified
facilities
under
the
proposed
amendments.
The
annual
average
total
burden
is
estimated
at
1.9
million
hours;
the
annual
average
total
cost
is
estimated
at
$
117
million.

Alternative
Estimates
EPA
also
calculated
alternative
cost
estimates
based
on
higher
overhead
rates
for
labor
costs,
which
are
presented
in
Exhibit
11.
The
primary
estimates
are
based
on
a
17
percent
overhead
rate
and
the
alternatives
are
calculated
assuming
a
50
percent
overhead
rate
and
a
100
percent
overhead
rate.
The
discussion
of
facility
labor
costs
in
section
6(
a)
describes
how
the
overhead
rates
affect
wage
rates.
Under
the
primary
assumption,
the
estimated
total
annualized
burden
of
the
information
collection
is
$
117
million.
Under
the
alternative
assumptions,
the
estimated
total
burden
ranges
from
$
140
to
$
177
million.
30
EXHIBIT
11
Alternative
Total
Cost
Measures
(
millions
of
dollars)

Labor
Capital
O&
M
Total
Assumption
Burden
17%
Overhead
$
84.6
$
0.5
$
31.6
$
117
50%
Overhead
$
108.2
$
0.5
$
31.6
$
140
100%
Overhead
$
144.6
$
0.5
$
31.6
$
177
31
EXHIBIT
12
Annual
Average
Total
Burden
and
Costs
Category
I
Facilities
(
Qualified)

Annual
Burden
Hours
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Burden
Hours
Capital/

Startup
Costs
O&
M
Costs
Annual
Cost
Existing
Facilities
Review
the
SPCC
Plan
17,924
53,638
9,768
81,330
$
0
$
0
$
3,815,928
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
134
134
0
269
$
2,180
$
0
$
16,101
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0
36,472
8,105
44,577
$
0
$
0
$
1,952,552
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0
143,011
40,525
183,535
$
0
$
0
$
7,877,414
TOTAL
18,100
233,000
58,400
310,000
$
2,180
$
0
$
13,700,000
New
Facilities
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
7,913
32,970
5,275
46,158
$
0
$
0
$
2,154,116
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
1,482
7,180
2,175
10,837
$
0
$
0
$
481,627
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
2
2
0
4
$
35
$
0
$
262
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0
593
132
725
$
0
$
0
$
31,771
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0
2,327
659
2,986
$
127,042
$
0
$
255,220
TOTAL
9,400
43,100
8,240
60,700
$
127,000
$
0
$
2,920,000
Note:
Totals
have
been
rounded
to
three
significant
figures.
32
EXHIBIT
13
Annual
Average
Total
Burden
and
Costs
Category
I
(
Non­
Qualified)
and
Category
II
Facilities
Annual
Burden
Hours
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Burden
Hours
Capital/

Startup
Costs
O&
M
Costs
Annual
Cost
Existing
Facilities
Review
the
SPCC
Plan
60,868
182,154
33,173
276,195
$
0
$
1,369,529
$
14,328,307
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
456
456
0
912
$
7,405
$
0
$
54,679
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0
123,859
27,524
151,383
$
0
$
20,643,101
$
27,273,909
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0
485,660
137,621
623,280
$
0
$
0
$
26,751,459
TOTAL
61,300
792,000
198,000
1,050,000
$
7,400
$
22,000,000
$
68,400,000
New
Facilities
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
15,496
64,567
10,331
90,393
$
0
$
5,165,342
$
9,383,821
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
2,901
14,061
4,259
21,222
$
0
$
0
$
943,187
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
4
4
0
9
$
69
$
0
$
513
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0
1,162
258
1,420
$
0
$
193,700
$
255,919
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0
4,557
1,291
5,848
$
248,790
$
0
$
499,807
TOTAL
18,400
84,400
16,100
119,000
$
249,000
$
5,360,000
$
11,100,000
Note:
Totals
have
been
rounded
to
three
significant
figures.
33
EXHIBIT
14
Annual
Average
Total
Burden
and
Costs
Category
III
Facilities
Annual
Burden
Hours
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Burden
Hours
Capital/

Startup
Costs
O&
M
Costs
Annual
Cost
Existing
Facilities
Review
the
SPCC
Plan
15,416
77,674
15,878
108,969
$
0
$
238,177
$
5,220,599
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
116
116
0
231
$
2,166
$
0
$
14,139
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0
26,281
5,840
32,121
$
0
$
3,007,716
$
4,414,678
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0
119,409
29,201
148,610
$
0
$
0
$
6,460,056
TOTAL
15,500
223,000
50,900
290,000
$
2,170
$
3,250,000
$
16,100,000
New
Facilities
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
4,068
29,832
4,068
37,968
$
0
$
864,443
$
2,623,372
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
909
4,406
1,335
6,650
$
0
$
0
$
295,544
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
1
1
0
3
$
25
$
0
$
164
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0
305
68
373
$
0
$
34,917
$
51,250
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0
1,386
339
1,725
$
77,957
$
0
$
152,953
TOTAL
4,980
35,900
5,810
46,700
$
78,000
$
899,000
$
3,120,000
Note:
Totals
have
been
rounded
to
three
significant
figures.
34
EXHIBIT
15
Annual
Average
Total
Burden
and
Costs
Category
IV
Facilities
Annual
Burden
Hours
Activity
Management
($
55.73/
hr)
Technical
($
47.91/
hr)
Clerical
($
25.31/
hr)
Total
Burden
Hours
Capital/

Startup
Costs
O&
M
Costs
Annual
Cost
Existing
Facilities
Review
the
SPCC
Plan
684
5,622
704
7,010
$
0
$
6,717
$
332,005
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
5
5
0
10
$
96
$
0
$
627
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0
1,024
228
1,251
$
0
$
74,510
$
129,319
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0
14,803
1,138
15,941
$
0
$
0
$
738,044
TOTAL
689
21,500
2,070
24,200
$
96
$
81,300
$
1,200,000
New
Facilities
Prepare
an
SPCC
Plan
152
1,924
203
2,279
$
0
$
19,688
$
125,483
Prepare
a
Contingency
Plan
Submit
Information
in
the
Event
of
Certain
Discharges
of
Oil
0
0
0
0
$
1
$
0
$
7
Revise
the
SPCC
Plan
0
11
3
14
$
0
$
829
$
1,439
Maintain
the
SPCC
Plan
and
Keep
Records
0
165
13
177
$
3,315
$
0
$
11,529
TOTAL
152
2,100
218
2,470
$
3,320
$
20,500
$
138,000
Note:
Totals
have
been
rounded
to
three
significant
figures.
35
6(
f)
Bottom
Line
Burden
and
Cost
Tables
The
total
estimated
burden
hours
and
costs
incurred
by
all
respondent
facilities
(
new
and
existing)
are
summarized
in
Exhibit
16.
The
exhibit
shows
the
burden
and
cost
components
for
each
year
of
this
ICR,
along
with
total
and
annualized
costs.

EXHIBIT
16
Estimated
Total
Burden
and
Costs
for
Facilities
Total
Cost
(
millions)
Year
Total
Burden
(
million
hours)
Labor
Capital
O&
M
Total
First
1.89
$
84.00
$
0.40
$
31.40
$
116.00
Second
1.90
$
84.50
$
0.41
$
31.61
$
117.00
Third
1.92
$
85.10
$
0.43
$
31.85
$
117.00
TOTAL
5.71
$
254.00
$
1.23
$
94.90
$
350.00
ANNUALIZED
1.90
$
84.60
$
0.47
$
31.60
$
117.00
Note:
Values
are
rounded
to
three
significant
figures
and
may
not
sum
to
the
total.

6(
g)
Reasons
for
the
Change
in
Burden
Differences
in
burden
and
costs
from
the
previous
ICR
are
attributed
solely
to
the
proposed
amendments
to
the
SPCC
rule,
which
affect
both
the
number
of
affected
facilities
and
per­
facility
costs.
Adjustments
to
estimates
associated
with
updating
information
(
e.
g.,
number
of
affected
facilities,
burden
estimates,
or
labor
rates)
are
not
applicable
to
this
ICR.

Changes
in
the
paperwork
burden
attributed
to
proposed
revisions
to
the
SPCC
rule
include
the
following
three
elements:

$
Extending
the
compliance
dates
for
farms
with
an
oil
storage
capacity
under
of
10,000
gallons
or
less
reduces
the
number
of
affected
respondents.
Owners
and
operators
of
farms
with
oil
storage
capacity
of
10,000
gallons
or
less
would
only
incur
burden
of
reading
and
understanding
the
proposed
rule
to
determine
whether
they
are
qualified
to
take
advantage
of
the
proposed
extension.
EPA
estimates
that
a
total
of
145,000
farms
would
be
affected
by
this
extension.

$
Qualified
facilities
would
reduce
their
paperwork­
related
burden
as
a
result
of
the
proposed
revisions
to
the
rule
that
allows
owners
and
operators
of
facilities
to
self­
certify
their
SPCC
Plans
in
lieu
of
certification
by
a
PE.
Therefore,
qualified
facilities
are
expected
to
save
the
cost
of
PE
certification.
EPA
estimates
that
approximately
90,000
facilities
with
an
aggregate
oil
storage
capacity
of
10,000
gallons
or
less
would
take
advantage
of
this
proposed
amendment
to
the
rule.

$
Facilities
with
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment
could
prepare
an
oil
spill
contingency
plan
with
a
written
commitment
of
resources
rather
than
provide
secondary
containment.
New
facilities
with
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment
would
choose
36
to
take
advantage
of
this
option
to
save
the
difference
between
the
cost
of
secondary
containment
and
the
cost
of
preparing
a
contingency
plan.
This
regulatory
change
introduces
an
additional
paperwork
burden
but
lowers
the
overall
compliance
cost
associated
with
the
SPCC
rule
since
preparing
a
contingency
plan
with
a
written
commitment
of
manpower,
equipment
and
materials
is
less
costly
than
providing
secondary
containment.
EPA
estimates
that
approximately
2,120
facilities
with
qualified
oil­
filled
operational
equipment
would
take
advantage
of
this
proposed
change.

Exhibit
17
presents
program
changes
attributed
to
the
proposed
amendments
to
the
SPCC
rule.
In
total,
the
burden
hours
presented
in
this
ICR
have
decreased
relative
to
the
current
OMB
inventory.
The
new
burden
estimate
shows
an
annualized
decrease
of
481,000
hours
due
to
a
smaller
number
of
facilities
expected
to
comply
with
the
proposed
rule
and
changes
in
perfacility
costs.
The
annualized
capital
and
O&
M
costs
are
estimated
to
decrease
with
the
proposed
rule
by
$
19.7
million.

EXHIBIT
17
Estimated
Annualized
Burden
and
Costs
Comparison
Annualized
Burden
Hours
Annualized
Capital
and
O&
M
Costs
(
Thousands)

Current
OMB
Inventory
Burden
2,386,000
$
51,800
Change
in
Burden
(
481,000)
($
19,700)

Proposed
SPCC
Rule
Collection
Burden
1,900,000
$
32,100
6(
h)
Burden
Statement
The
annual
public
reporting
and
recordkeeping
burden
for
this
collection
of
information
for
newly
regulated
facilities
is
estimated
to
range
from
41.6
to
64.9
hours
per
facility,
with
an
average
burden
of
approximately
45.3
hours
per
response.
The
net
annual
public
reporting
and
recordkeeping
burden
for
facilities
already
regulated
by
the
rule
is
estimated
to
range
from
3.5
to
7.1
hours,
with
an
average
burden
of
approximately
3.5
hours.

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
37
ID
Number
[
EPA­
HQ­
OPA­
2005­
0001],
which
is
available
for
online
viewing
at
www.
regulations.
gov,
or
in
person
viewing
at
the
Superfund
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Avenue,
NW,
Washington,
D.
C.
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
Superfund
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
0276.
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,
D.
C.
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Officer
for
EPA.
Please
include
the
EPA
Docket
ID
Number
EPA­
HQ­
OPA­
2005­
0001
and
OMB
Control
Number
2050­
0021
in
any
correspondence.
38
APPENDIX
From
the
Federal
Water
Pollution
Control
Act
(
i.
e.,
Clean
Water
Act):

Sec.
311(
i)
National
Response
System
­­

(
1)
In
General
­­
Consistent
with
the
National
Contingency
Plan
required
by
subsection
(
c)(
2)
of
this
section,
as
soon
as
practicable
after
the
effective
date
of
this
section,
and
from
time
to
time
thereafter,
the
President
shall
issue
regulations
consistent
with
maritime
safety
and
with
marine
and
navigation
laws
(
A)
establishing
methods
and
procedures
for
removal
of
discharged
oil
and
hazardous
substances,
(
B)
establishing
criteria
for
the
development
and
implementation
of
local
and
regional
oil
and
hazardous
substance
removal
contingency
plans,
(
C)
establishing
procedures,
methods,
and
equipment
and
other
requirements
for
equipment
to
prevent
discharges
of
oil
and
hazardous
substances
from
vessels
and
from
onshore
facilities
and
offshore
facilities,
and
to
contain
such
discharges,
and
(
D)
governing
the
inspection
of
vessels
carrying
cargoes
of
oil
and
hazardous
substances
and
the
inspection
of
such
cargoes
in
order
to
reduce
the
likelihood
of
discharges
of
oil
from
vessels
in
violation
of
this
section.
