  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE
(SPCC) 

PLANS

1.	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

	1(a) 	Title of the Information Collection

Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans.  (EPA ICR No.
0328.16, OMB No. 2050-0021)

	1(b) 	Short Characterization

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The Oil Pollution Prevention regulation, 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 from
non-transportation-related onshore and offshore facilities into or upon
the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines that
affect certain natural resources.

Owners and operators of regulated facilities must prepare SPCC Plans in
accordance with good engineering practices and have them certified by a
Professional Engineer (PE) or self-certified in the case of qualified
facilities and 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 covers all provisions of 40 CFR part 112 relating to
SPCC Plans, including the final rule published on April 18, 2011 (76 FR
21652) to exempt milk and milk products containers, associated piping
and appurtenances. EPA expects that some facilities would no longer be
subject to the SPCC requirements as a result of the milk and milk
product containers exemption, because their total aggregate aboveground
oil storage capacity would be 1,320 gallons or less. Other facilities
may become qualified facilities (allowing the owner or operator to
self-certify the facility SPCC Plan) as a result of the milk and milk
product container exemption. EPA estimated there were approximately
66,000 farms and milk product manufacturing facilities with milk
containers in 2009. In aggregate, EPA estimated a total annualized
savings of $146 million for the final rule. The estimated cost savings
reflect a decrease in the number of dairy farms from about 75,000 farms
to 65,000 farms between 2006 and 2009, as well as additional milk
product manufacturing facilities with containers eligible for the
exemption.

This supporting statement estimates paperwork-related burden for the ICR
period, which covers three years: July 1 – December 31, 2013, 2014,
2015, and January 1 – June 30, 2016. The U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) estimates that approximately 657,000 facilities will be
covered by the SPCC regulations in 2014 and may incur paperwork-related
burden in the first year of this ICR in response to existing and amended
requirements. EPA estimates a total reporting and recordkeeping burden
for all regulated facilities at approximately 8.7 million hours in each
year of this ICR. The Agency estimates that there will be no increase or
decrease in paperwork burden over the three year covered period, because
we expect that there will be no amendments to the existing SPCC
regulations. 

2.	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

	2(a) 	Need/Authority for the Collection

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Section 311(j)(1)(C) of the Federal Water
Pollution Control 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. The President
delegated the authority to regulate non-transportation-related onshore
facilities under §311(j)(1)(C) of the Act to EPA under Executive Order
(E.O.) 12777, §2(b)(1).  By this same Executive Order, the President
delegated authority over transportation-related 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 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, 40 CFR Part 112, outlines
requirements for preventing, preparing, and responding to oil spills.
The prevention part of this regulation at §112.1 through §112.12 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 amendments 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 amended on January 9, 2003, for 60 days (68 FR 1348) and then
extended for an additional 18 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 18 months and amended the compliance dates 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)
until October 31, 2007 for owners and operators to prepare, amend, and
implement SPCC Plans (71 FR 8462). On May 16, 2007, EPA extended the
compliance dates to July 1, 2009 (72 FR 27444). On June 19, 2009, EPA
further extended the compliance dates for facility owners and operators
to November 10, 2010 (74 FR 29136). EPA again extended the compliance
dates for certain facilities by an additional year (to November 10,
2011) in a final rule published October 14, 2010 (75 FR 63093). The
compliance date was later extended for farms to May 10, 2013 in a final
rule published November 22, 2011 (76 FR 72120).

On December 26, 2006, EPA published a   HYPERLINK
"http://www.epa.gov/oilspill/spcc_dec06.htm"  final rule to amend 40 CFR
part 112  (71 FR 77266). EPA amended the SPCC rule to address a number
of issues raised by the regulated community about the 2002 amendments,
including those pertaining to facilities with smaller oil storage
capacities, qualified oil-filled operational equipment, motive power
containers, and mobile refuelers. EPA also removed sections of the rule
that were not appropriate for facilities with animal fats and vegetable
oils. The Agency also issued an indefinite compliance date extension for
farms.

On December 5, 2008, EPA published amendments to clarify, streamline and
tailor the rule requirements to sectors of the regulated industries
(e.g., oil production, farms).  However, the effective date of the
December 2008 rulemaking was delayed for 60 days from February 3, 2009
to April 4, 2009, in accordance with the January 20, 2009, White House
memorandum entitled, “Regulatory Review,” and the memorandum from
the Office of Management and Budget entitled “Implementation of
Memorandum Concerning Regulatory Review” (M-09-08, January 21, 2009
OMB memorandum). The Agency took this action to ensure that the rule
properly reflects consideration of all relevant facts. EPA requested
public comment on the delay of the effective date and its duration, and
on the regulatory amendments contained in the final rule (74 FR 5900,
February 3, 2009) and specifically on the requirements for produced
water containers and qualified oil production facilities. 

On April 1, 2009, the Agency further delayed the effective date of the
December 2008 rulemaking until January 14, 2010 (74 FR 14736). The
Agency took this action to allow sufficient time to address the comments
received on the February 3, 2009 notice. 

In the November 2009 amendments, EPA confirmed that the following  SEQ
CHAPTER \h \r 1  provisions finalized in the December 2008 final rule
would become effective on January 14, 2010, without further
modification: 

Exemption for hot-mix asphalt; 

Exemption for pesticide application equipment and related mix
containers; 

Exemption for residential heating oil containers; 

Amended definition of “facility” to clarify that contiguous or
non-contiguous buildings, properties, parcels, leases, structures,
installations, pipes, or pipelines may be considered separate
facilities; 

Amended facility diagram requirement at §112.7(a)(3); 

Definition for the term “loading/unloading rack,” and clarification
that this definition governs the applicability of the provisions for
facility tank car and tank truck loading/unloading racks at §112.7(h); 

Amended general secondary containment requirements at §112.7(c); 

Extension of the exemption from the sized secondary containment
requirement for mobile refuelers provided in the December 2006 SPCC rule
amendments (71 FR 77266, December 26, 2006) to
non-transportation-related tank trucks at a facility subject to the SPCC
rule; 

Amended facility security requirements at §112.7(g); 

Amended integrity testing requirements at §§112.8(c)(6) and
112.12(c)(6) to allow greater flexibility in the use of industry
standards; 

Amended integrity testing requirements at §112.12(c)(6) for containers
that store animal fats and vegetable oils (AFVOs) and meet certain
criteria; 

Amended definition of “production facility” to be consistent with
the amended definition of “facility”; 

Clarification that drilling and workover activities are not subject to
the provisions at  §112.9; 

Alternative compliance option for flow-through process vessels at oil
production facilities to comply with only the general secondary
containment requirements and additional oil spill prevention measures in
lieu of the sized secondary containment requirements; 

Definition for the term “produced water container”, and alternative
compliance measures for these containers which require general secondary
containment, a process or procedure certified by a PE designed to remove
free-phase oil on the surface of the produced water in these containers
and compliance with additional oil spill prevention measures in lieu of
sized secondary containment requirements; 

Exemption for certain intra-facility gathering lines subject to
requirements of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s)
pipeline regulations from the SPCC requirements; 

More prescriptive requirements for a flowline/intra-facility gathering
line maintenance program and an alternative compliance option of
contingency planning for flowlines and intra-facility gathering lines in
lieu of all secondary containment; and 

Clarifying the definition of “permanently closed” as it applies to
oil production facilities and containers present at an oil production
facility.

In the November 2009 amendments, EPA also made the following technical
corrections to the following provisions that were finalized in the
December 2008 final rule:

Language related to the exemption of underground oil storage tanks that
supply emergency diesel generators at nuclear power generation
facilities;

Clarifications and corrections of typographical and formatting errors
related to the designation of a subset of qualified facilities (“Tier
I qualified facilities”) with a set of streamlined SPCC rule
requirements; and

Amendment of the compliance date provision for new oil production
facilities, so that it applies to new oil production facilities that
begin operations after November 10, 2010.  

Based on comments received and consideration of all relevant facts in
the November 2009 amendments, EPA removed the following provisions:

The exclusion of oil production facilities and farms from the
loading/unloading rack requirements at §112.7(h); 

The exemption for produced water containers at an oil production
facility; 

The alternative qualified facility eligibility criteria for an oil
production facility.  

Finally, on April 18, 2011, EPA amended the SPCC rule to exempt all milk
and milk product containers and associated piping and appurtenances from
the SPCC requirements (76 FR 21652). This supporting statement contains
the paperwork-related burden of SPCC Plans as amended by the 2011 final
amendments to exempt milk and milk product containers from the SPCC
rule. 

	2(b) 	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 EPA does not routinely collect SPCC Plans or
related records from SPCC regulated facilities.  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:

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;

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

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; 

Keeping inspection records promotes important maintenance, facilitates
leak detection, and demonstrates compliance with the SPCC requirements;
and

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 may
use the data in certain situations. EPA’s primary use of the data
contained in an SPCC Plan is through inspection 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. However, inspection-related activities are not
covered by this ICR.  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, has an oil
spill 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 should 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
and local 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.

3.	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

	3(a) Non-duplication

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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 considerable flexibility in Plan preparation and
recordkeeping. The regulation 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

As part of this process, EPA will solicit public comment concerning the
burden estimates for respondents. EPA will specifically request 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.  

	3(c) Consultations

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 As part of the effort to estimate the per-facility
compliance cost with the SPCC paperwork requirements, EPA contacted
seven affected facilities and professional engineering firms or
associations that provide PE services directly to or represent regulated
facilities about EPA’s SPCC burden assumptions and estimates. The
interviews were conducted to provide insight into the reasonableness of
EPA’s estimates of the paperwork burden that facilities may incur when
complying with the SPCC rule. The names, companies, and telephone
numbers of the representatives of those entities are given below.

	

Bob Nash, Prospect Iron and Steel, (617) 666-3405

Brian Klingler; Conoco Engineers, Scientists, and Surveyors; (508)
697-3191

Kelly Lamkin;  P.E. Grayson SWD No. B-1, (870) 947-0415

Warner T. Smith, PE; Warner T. Smith Associates, Inc.; (870) 725-2550

Timothy Laughlin, PE; N.C. Petroleum and Convenience Marketers
Association, and 

Gary Harris, Executive Director, (919) 782-4411 

	Steve Wavro, PE; Exxon Mobil Baytown Complex; Otis Dickenson,
Supervisor; and 

Raoul Lopez, Site Superintendent, (281) 834-0027

	Henri deLaunay, Michael Schoch, Hilcorp Corporation, (713) 289-2671

The contacted facilities were from the following industries: bulk oil
storage, oil production, petroleum refining, chemical manufacturing,
iron and steel, and professional engineering firms that provide PE
services to regulated facilities. The regulated facilities and PE firms
represent facilities from the largest companies in the U.S. to the
smallest companies and marginal oil production facilities. Estimates of
the costs of compliance with paperwork requirements provided by the
seven contacts are within the same range as that developed by EPA. The
findings suggest the EPA hour and cost burden estimates to prepare and
maintain an SPCC Plan used in the current ICR are reasonable.

	3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The SPCC rule requires the development and
maintenance of SPCC Plans. The Agency does not require the owners and
operators of facilities to submit these Plans to EPA. The Plan must be
available to the Regional Administrator (RA) (or an inspector) for
onsite review during normal business hours.  Section 112.4(a) requires
that owners and operators submit certain critical information to EPA
regarding a 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 regulation 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

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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
production, non-petroleum oil storage, processing (refining),
distribution, storage, and consumption. The majority of regulated
facilities fall under the industry sectors listed in   REF _Ref141689202
 \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 1 .

	

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  1 

Primary Industry Sectors and NAICS Codes Covered by the SPCC Rule

Industry Category	NAICS Code(s)

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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

Manufacturing Facilities Using and Storing Animal Fats and Vegetable
Oils	311, 325

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

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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

Military Installations	928110

Religiois Organizations	813110



	4(b) Information Requested

Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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, some of which are listed below. For more detailed
requirements, please refer to the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation
itself. 

Potential equipment failure.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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 (§112.7(b)).

Containment/diversion or contingency planning.  Appropriate containment
and/or diversion structures or equipment must be provided to prevent a
discharge (§§112.7(c), 112.7(h)(1), 112.8(c)(2), 112.8(c)(11),
112.9(c)(2), 112.10(c), 112.12(c)(2), and/or 112.12(c)(11), as
applicable according to facility type). For onshore facilities, the
owner or operator must use one of the following preventive systems or
its equivalent: 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. The owner or operator of an offshore facility is
subject to slightly different requirements due to the facility’s
unique configuration. While §112.7(c) generally requires secondary
containment to be appropriately sized (i.e., to address the most likely
discharge so that the oil will not escape containment before cleanup
occurs), the additional provisions listed above specify a required
minimum size for secondary containment at particular areas of a facility
(i.e., sized to contain the largest single oil compartment or container
plus sufficient freeboard to contain precipitation). 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
(§112.7(d)).

Owners and operators of facilities with certain types of oil-filled
operational equipment have 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). Owners or
operators who pursue this alternative are required to establish and
document an inspection or monitoring program for this qualified
oil-filled operational equipment to detect equipment failure and/or a
discharge, in lieu of providing secondary containment. An owner or
operator cannot pursue the option if that facility has had a single
discharge as described in §112.1(b) from any oil-filled operational
equipment exceeding 1,000 U.S. gallons or two discharges as described in
§112.1(b) from any oil-filled operational equipment each exceeding 42
U.S. gallons within any 12-month period in the three years prior to the
SPCC Plan self-certification date, or since becoming subject to 40 CFR
part 112 if the facility has been operating for less than three years.

Owners and operators of oil production facilities have the option of
preparing an oil spill contingency plan and a written commitment of
manpower, equipment, and materials in lieu of providing secondary
containment in accordance with §112.7(c) for flowlines and
intra-facility gathering lines. These facility owners/operators may also
choose alternative compliance options in lieu of sized secondary
containment requirements of §112.9(c)(2) for flow-through process
vessels and produced water containers. However, if the facility
experiences discharges from flow-through process vessel or produced
water container (excluding discharges that are the result of natural
disasters, acts of war, or terrorism) as described below, then the
facility if no longer eligible for the alternative requirements for this
equipment and must comply with the sized secondary containment and
inspection requirements of §112.9(c)(2) and (c)(3) within six months:

A discharge of more than 1,000 U.S. gallons of oil in a single discharge
as described in §112.1(b), or 

Two discharges of more than 42 U.S. gallons of oil in each of two
discharges as described in §112.1(b) within any twelve month period.

The alternative requirements for flow-through process vessels are
described in §112.9(c)(5) and require visual inspection and/or test of
flow-through process vessels and associated components (such as dump
valves) for leaks, corrosion, or other conditions that could lead to a
discharge as described in §112.1(b) on a periodic and regular schedule;
corrective action or repairs to flow-through process vessels and any
associated components as indicated by regularly scheduled visual
inspections, tests, or evidence of an oil discharge; and prompt removal
or actions initiated to stabilize and remediate any accumulations of oil
discharges associated with flow-through process vessels.

The alternative requirements for produced water containers are described
in §112.9(c)(6) and require:

A procedure for each produced water container that is designed to
separate the free-phase oil that accumulates on the surface of the
produced water be implemented on a regular schedule.  The SPCC Plan must
describe the procedures, frequency, amount of free-phase oil expected to
be maintained inside the container, and a Professional Engineer
certification in accordance with §112.3(d)(1)(vi). Records of such
events must be maintained in accordance with §112.7(e). 

Visual inspection and/or test of the produced water container and
associated piping for leaks, corrosion, or other conditions that could
lead to a discharge as described in §112.1(b) in accordance with good
engineering practice and on a regular schedule.

Corrective action or repairs to the produced water container and any
associated piping as indicated by regularly scheduled visual
inspections, tests, or evidence of an oil discharge.

Prompt removal or actions initiated to stabilize and remediate any
accumulations of oil discharges associated with the produced water
container.

Detailed requirements.    SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 In addition to secondary
containment requirements, the Plan must include a discussion of the
facility’s conformance with more detailed and specific requirements,
as applicable according to facility type. These specific requirements
concern 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)); other applicable
federal, state, and local requirements (§112.7(j)), integrity testing
and/or visual inspection (§112.8(c)(6), §112.9(c)(3) or
§112.12(c)(6)); and flow-line maintenance programs (§112.9(d)(4)).

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 (§112.7(e)).
Records of inspections and tests may be kept under usual and customary
business practices.

	

Specific reporting requirements.  As the result of an oil discharge, in
accordance with §112.4 the following information must be provided to
the Regional Administrator:

		

		(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 the five-year review.

	

	Respondent Activities

The Oil Pollution Prevention regulation requires an owner or operator to
conduct the following compliance activities:

	

Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan (§§112.3 and 112.7);

Maintain the SPCC Plan and keep records (§§112.3 and 112.7(e));

Revise the SPCC Plan following a material modification of the facility
(§112.5(a)); and

Conduct periodic reviews of the SPCC Plan (§112.5(b)).

	

Each of these compliance activities is summarized in more detail below:

	Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan

The owner or operator of a new non-production facility must amend or
prepare, and implement, an SPCC Plan in accordance with the guidelines
set forth in 40 CFR part 112 before beginning operations. Farmers must
amend or prepare, and implement, an SPCC Plan in accordance with the
guidelines set forth in 40 CFR part 112 by May 10, 2013 or before
beginning operations, whichever is later. The actual preparation of the
Plan may involve several separate tasks, which could be conducted by the
facility’s technical personnel or PEs.  These tasks may include:

Field investigations, which are conducted 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);

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

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

Preparation of the Plan, which involves both technical and clerical
time, as well as a final review by facility management personnel prior
to completion (could also be performed by an engineering firm).

Tier I qualified facilities - a subset of qualified facilities having no
oil storage containers with a capacity greater than 5,000 gallons - are
allowed to complete an SPCC Plan template (Appendix G to the 40 CFR part
112) in lieu of a full SPCC Plan.  By completing the SPCC Plan template,
an owner or operator of a Tier I qualified facility self-certifies that
the facility complies with a set of streamlined SPCC rule requirements. 
The owner or operator is responsible for ensuring that the facility is
in compliance with all SPCC rule requirements.

For facility diagrams required under §112.7(a)(3) the facility owner or
operator must mark the location of fixed containers and mark the area on
the diagram where mobile containers are stored, and can choose to
indicate in the Plan the average number of mobile or portable containers
maintained at the facility and the anticipated contents and capacities
of those containers, rather than on the diagram itself.  

Certification of the Plan must be conducted for each new Plan.  For
facilities that do not meet the “qualified facility” criteria set
forth in §112.3(g), SPCC Plans and technical amendments to Plans must
be certified by a licensed PE. 

Owners and operators of “qualified” facilities have the option to
self-certify that their SPCC Plan complies with 40 CFR part 112, in lieu
of having a PE review and certify their Plan.  According to §112.3(g),
the self-certification option is available to the owners and operators
of those facilities that store 10,000 gallons of oil or less and that
have had no single discharge as described in §112.1(b) exceeding 1,000
U.S. gallons or no two discharges as described in §112.1(b) each
exceeding 42 U.S. gallons within any 12-month period in the three years
prior to the SPCC Plan self-certification date, or since becoming
subject to 40 CFR part 112 if the facility has been in operation for
less than three years. Owners and operators of Tier II qualified
facilities choosing this option may deviate from certain requirements of
the SPCC rule as specified under §112.7(a)(2) and make impracticability
determinations as described under §112.7(d) only if these portions of
the Plan are certified by a licensed PE (see §112.6(b)(4)).

	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 (§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 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; or

	(2)	Two or more discharges as described in §112.1(b), each of which is
over 42 U.S. gallons.

Submission of information after a discharge of oil is estimated to
require both technical personnel and management expertise/time for
collecting the required information. Section 112.4(c) also requires that
the facility owner or operator submit a copy of this information to the
state agency with regulatory authority over the facility.  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 30 days after the Regional Administrator
responds to the facility owner or operator concerning the final
amendments. The amended Plan must then be certified prior to
implementation by a licensed PE, or self-certified in the case of
qualified facilities.  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
facility technical personnel time, as well as some clerical time. The
amended Plan must then be certified prior to implementation by a
licensed PE, or self-certified in the case of qualified facilities. 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 Plan at least once every five years. This review is
expected to involve mostly technical personnel time to review spill
prevention and control procedures being implemented under the 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 be certified prior to
implementation by a licensed PE or, for qualified facilities,
self-certified in accordance with §112.6(b).  SPCC Plan 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 will not be required to conduct its review until
after the three-year period covered by this ICR.

5.	INFORMATION COLLECTED - AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION METHODOLOGY,
AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

	5(a) Agency Activities

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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’s review of the information submitted by the facility under 40 CFR
112.4(a), may include the necessity to:

Review facility characteristics;

Review the cause of the discharge;

Require any necessary amendments to the Plan to prevent and contain
discharges from the facility; and

Adjudicate any appeal of a final decision requiring an amendment.

	In addition, 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. These
inspections are not covered by this ICR.

	5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Plans may 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 and a performance based approach in Plan preparation and
recordkeeping in a way that allows the use of additional, appropriately
cross-referenced formats (§112.7).  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 provides flexibility and a performance based approach in the
development and use of user-friendly means of writing and maintaining
SPCC Plans, such as electronic programs, provided the Plans continue to
provide the required information and meet the administrative
requirements listed in the SPCC rule. Whatever medium is used, the Plan
should also be readily accessible to response personnel in an emergency.

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

	5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 In 2002, EPA promulgated revisions to the SPCC
rule that provided flexibility for small entities in several ways.
First, EPA no longer regulates, under 40 CFR part 112, a facility having
a single container with an aboveground storage capacity greater than 660
gallons, and aggregate aboveground capacity of 1,320 gallons or less of
oil. Second, EPA no longer regulates, under 40 CFR 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, under 40 CFR part 112, 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 the rule. Fifth,
the rule was modified to allow the use of additional, appropriately
cross-referenced 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. 

	The 2006 rule amendments further reduced the burden of the SPCC
regulation, with expected flexibility for small entities. Specifically,
the rule amendments reduced 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 oil storage capacity no longer need a licensed PE
to certify their Plans. The amendments also allow greater use of
contingency plans without requiring an impracticability determination
for facilities with qualified oil-filled operational equipment, a cost
reduction measure. Facilities that store oil solely in motive power
containers are no longer regulated, while other facilities with oil
storage in addition to motive power containers may incur lower
compliance costs. The rule also allows mobile refuelers to fall under
the rule’s general containment requirement, which does not require
specifically sized secondary containment.

	The 2008/2009 final amendments to the SPCC rule reduced the burden on
small businesses to the extent that these businesses are eligible for
amended regulatory requirements offered to hot-mix asphalt facilities,
oil production facilities, facilities that produce or process animal
fats and vegetable oil, Tier I qualified facilities, and others. 

	The 2011 final amendment exempted milk and milk product containers,
associated piping and appurtenances from the SPCC rule. Facilities that
only have milk and/or milk product containers are no longer regulated,
while other facilities with oil storage in addition to milk and/or milk
product containers may incur lower compliance costs.  

		5(d) Collection Schedule

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The SPCC rule does not require a specific
information collection schedule.  However, a facility owner or operator
must prepare, amend, and implement an SPCC Plan according to the
compliance deadlines in §112.3(a), and (b). The current compliance
dates under §112.3(a) and (b) apply to all SPCC-regulated facilities,
as follows: 

A farm, starting operation...	Must...

On or before August 16, 2002	Maintain its existing SPCC Plan

Amend and implement the amended SPCC Plan no later than May 10, 2013

After August 16, 2002 through May 10, 2013	Prepare and implement an SPCC
Plan no later than May 10, 2013

After May 10, 2013	Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan before beginning
operations



A drilling, production or workover facility, including a mobile or
portable facility, located offshore or with an offshore component; or an
onshore facility that is required to have and submit FRPs starting
operation...	Must...

On or before August 16, 2002	Maintain its existing SPCC Plan

Amend and implement the amended SPCC Plan no later than November 10,
2010

After August 16, 2002 through November 10, 2010	Prepare and implement an
SPCC Plan no later than November 10, 2010

After November 10, 2010 (excluding production facilities)	Prepare and
implement an SPCC Plan before beginning operations

After November 10, 2010 (production facilities)	Prepare and implement an
SPCC Plan within six months after beginning operations.

The December 2008 rule amendments (73 FR 74236, December 5, 2008) allow
new oil production facilities a period of six months after the start of
operations to prepare and implement an SPCC Plan. A “new” oil
production facility is one that becomes operational after the applicable
compliance date, not an existing production facility (in operation prior
to the compliance date) that has changed name, owner, operator, or
equipment. 

All other facilities starting operation...	Must...

On or before August 16, 2002	Maintain its existing SPCC Plan

Amend and implement the amended SPCC Plan no later than November 10,
2011

After August 16, 2002 through November 10, 2011	Prepare and implement an
SPCC Plan no later than November 10, 2011

After November 10, 2011 (excluding production facilities) 	Prepare and
implement an SPCC Plan before beginning operations

After November 10, 2011 (production facilities) 	Prepare and implement
an SPCC Plan within six months after beginning operations.



The compliance date amendments described above affect only requirements
of the rule amendments (67 FR 47042, July 17, 2002; 71 FR 77266,
December 26, 2006; 73 FR 74236, December 5, 2008; and 74 FR 58784,
November 13, 2009) that impose new or more stringent compliance
obligations than did the original 1973 SPCC rule. Provisions in these
amendments that provide regulatory relief are not affected by these
compliance date amendments because they would not typically require
amendments to existing Plans ‘‘to ensure compliance’’ (see
§112.3). Provisions in these amendments that provide regulatory relief
to facilities are applicable as of the effective date of the amendment. 

	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) Estimating Respondent Burden

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 	Facility Characteristics

For the purpose of this analysis, EPA divided regulated facilities into
four size categories based on their aggregate oil storage capacity (see 
 REF _Ref141689305  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 2 ). These size categories
help to (1) account for differences in the potential compliance time
burden and costs experienced by facilities of different sizes and (2)
determine the number of facilities affected by each of the changes based
on facility’s storage capacity.  

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  2 

SPCC-Regulated Facility Size Categories

Size Category	Aggregate Capacity

I	  1,321 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.	

Additionally, 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 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.

	Estimating Burden of SPCC Plan

For its Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), EPA developed a unit cost
inventory with cost estimates for each of the 2002 SPCC rule
requirements. The Agency also assessed paperwork-related changes
resulting from the 2006, 2008, 2009 and 2011 final amendments.  EPA
relied on the most recent cost estimates from the unit cost inventory.
To complete the unit cost inventory, the Agency developed a detailed
list of the SPCC requirements that are expected to have a labor burden
and cost impact, and obtained unit cost estimates for each of these
requirements from a professional engineering firm with experience across
a broad spectrum of industries, that serves the 48 contiguous states of
the United States.  In addition, EPA also conducted interviews of seven
regulated entities to obtain data on compliance measures at facilities
and their associated costs to crosscheck the estimates and develop a
better understanding of the ranges of cost estimates. 

	Estimating Facility Labor Costs

To determine the per-facility costs to develop the SPCC Plan and comply
with other paperwork-related requirements for typical new and existing
respondents in each facility size category, unit labor estimates for
management, technical, and clerical personnel were multiplied by the
hourly wage rate for each labor category and were then added to
paperwork-related capital and operating and maintenance (O&M) costs.

The labor wage rates for private industry were derived from the June
2012 U.S. Department of Labor’s Employment Cost Indexes and Levels. 
The June 2012 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 estimated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) based on a
survey of 47,400 occupations within 9,500 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 wages received by other facility
personnel.  EPA further adjusted these rates to reflect overhead costs
of 17 percent.  Following are the estimated loaded wage rates used in
the analysis:

Management:  $ $69/hour;

Technical:  $58/hour; and

Clerical:   $30/hour.

EPA assumed the above labor rates would apply to all scenarios when
facilities use in-house personnel to satisfy requirements involving
labor burden such as preparing the SPCC Plan.  When required or needed,
a facility owner/operator would contract a PE to develop and/or certify
his Plans, however, not all facility owners and operators are expected
to contract a PE for activities that can be conducted by in-house
personnel. On the one hand, a small facility is more likely to hire
outside engineers because it may not have the in-house expertise to
comply with the SPCC requirements. On the other hand, a small facility
may not have the resources to hire outside engineers and may be in a
better position to use in-house labor because the owner may be closely
involved with all the operations. A similar two-sided argument can also
be made for larger facilities. Therefore, EPA assumed that 50 percent of
the facilities of all size categories use in-house labor and the
remaining 50 percent use outside professional labor.  

Overhead rates for SPCC paperwork-related activities 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 Capital and Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

	EPA expects that facilities will incur paperwork-related capital and
operating and maintenance (O&M) 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 will purchase file cabinets at a cost of $300. 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 will incur costs for photocopying
and postage. For costing purposes, EPA assumes that facilities will
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 $17.00,
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
costs associated with submitting information to EPA are not measurable
for the average facility.

EPA assumed that the cost to a facility owner or operator to retain an
outside PE to certify the SPCC Plan varies by the size, complexity and
location of the facility.  EPA used this assumption because a larger
facility likely has a more complex SPCC Plan, and more complex Plan
amendments, than a smaller facility.  Unless facilities meet the
“qualified facility” criteria, the burden associated with certifying
SPCC Plans and their amendments requires a PE. The estimated wages for
PE labor used in this analysis are as follows:

Management:  $158/hour; 

Technical:   $127/hour;

Drafter: $79/hour; and

Clerical:   $58/hour.

	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 in 40 CFR part 112. Furthermore, a PE must certify
any technical amendment to an SPCC Plan.

	  REF _Ref141689613  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 3  summarizes the average
expected costs for facilities of different sizes for PE certification of
a new Plan as well as any subsequent amendments.

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  3 

Cost of PE Certification for the SPCC Plan (2009$)1

Size Category	Facility Type	New Plan	Amendments

I	Storage	$1,590	$2,130

	Production	$794	$1,070

II	Storage	$3,170	$4,280

	Production	$1,590	$2,130

III	Storage	$4,760	$6,410

	Production	$3,170	$4,280

IV	Storage	$7,140	$9,700

	Production	$4,760	$6,410

Source: SCS Engineers adjusted with June 2012 BLS data published in
September 2012.

1 One-time costs of compliance.



6(b)   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Burden and Costs per Facility

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 This section discusses the potential
paperwork-related burden and costs to facilities that are regulated by
the SPCC rule. Plan preparation and PE certification costs affect new
facilities that become subject to the SPCC rule unless they meet the
“qualified facility” criteria. 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 and PE certification in their first year.  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 – i.e., 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.  

	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. For the 2002 rule ICR, based on
spill data obtained from the Emergency Response Notification System
database, EPA estimated that approximately 0.15 percent of all
facilities would incur costs each year due to reporting requirements
related to an oil discharge (see §112.4(a)).  In addition, based on
conversations with EPA regional personnel involved with the SPCC
program, EPA estimated that approximately 10 percent of all facilities
would revise their Plan each year to address §112.5(a) or (c) or
§112.4(d). 

  REF _Ref141694923  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 4  through   REF
_Ref141694931  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 8  provides average burden and
cost estimates for each existing and new facility. For existing
facilities, the following activities are included: five-year review -
§112.5(b); information submission in the event of certain oil
discharges - §112.4(c); Plan modification - §112.5(a) and PE
certifications of any technical amendment - §112.5(c); and
recordkeeping.  For newly regulated facilities, paperwork-related
activities include SPCC Plan preparation - §112.3(a); oil spill
contingency plan preparation - §112.7(d); information submission in the
event of certain oil discharges - §112.4(c); Plan modification -
§112.5(a) and PE certifications of any technical amendment -
§112.5(c); and recordkeeping §112.7(e).

The option to self-certify a facility-specific SPCC Plan according to
the requirements in §112.6 is available to any qualified facility
having 10,000 gallons or less in storage capacity. EPA assumed that all
new qualified facilities with storage capacity of 10,000 gallons or less
would self-certify the Plan instead of having it certified by a PE. The
Agency also assumed that under these requirements, owners and operators
of all existing qualified facilities would not use a PE to certify a
technical amendment to their Plan.

A qualified facility would be a facility subject to the SPCC rule that,
as described in 112.3(g), meets the storage capacity threshold and
discharge history criteria. Additional flexibility is available for
facilities with aggregate aboveground oil storage capacity of 10,000
gallons or less and no single containers greater than 5,000 gallons
capacity (i.e. Tier I qualified facilities). This option allows an
owner/operator to complete the Tier I SPCC Plan template to serve as the
SPCC Plan.  

The Agency assumed that owners and operators of existing facilities
would not use the provided option, because they are expected to have an
SPCC Plan in place and preparing a template would present an additional
expense for those facilities. Correspondingly, EPA assumed that owners
and operators of all new qualified facilities with no single containers
greater than 5,000 gallons would take advantage of the reduced
requirements and complete a Tier I template to serve as the facility
SPCC Plan.

The costs presented in   REF _Ref141694923  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 4 
through   REF _Ref141694931  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 8  represent the
average costs for each facility 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. Low
probability costs (e.g., complying with §112.4(c)) distributed across
many facilities yield only nominal per-facility average costs,
particularly when state overlap is taken into consideration.

The state-overlap assumptions are based on research conducted for the
2002 SPCC rule and are described in the regulatory impact analysis for
the SPCC final rule.  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 about 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 burden hours 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 regulatory analysis for the
2009 final SPCC amendments, EPA analyzed the overlap of state
regulations to determine whether an adjustment of the estimate would
more accurately account for recent changes in state requirements and/or
refine the previously generated estimates. As a result of this review,
the Agency concluded that there was no compelling evidence to adjust the
overlap estimate between the SPCC rule and state regulations. When
estimating paperwork-related burden resulting from the SPCC
requirements, EPA takes into account the estimated degree of overlap to
avoid double counting. The reduced burden due to state overlap was
estimated by applying the overlap percentages to the total burden
associated with each paperwork compliance activity.

	Total Annual Burden per Average Respondent

Once the unit per-facility burden hours were determined for each
compliance activity undertaken by the average facility in each size
category, EPA calculated the total annual burden 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 oil storage capacity and 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   REF _Ref141694923  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 4  through  
REF _Ref141694931  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 8 .

	Total Annual Cost per Average Respondent

In estimating the per-respondent costs for existing and new facilities
in each size category, EPA calculated the unit cost for each compliance
activity performed by the average facility. These average per-facility
costs are shown in the right-hand column of   REF _Ref141694923  \*
MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 4  through   REF _Ref141694931  \* MERGEFORMAT 
Exhibit 8 . To estimate the cost for each compliance activity performed
by the average respondent facility in each size category under the rule,
EPA multiplied the unit time estimates for management, technical, and
clerical personnel by the hourly wage rate for each labor category and
then added the result to the paperwork-related capital and O&M (PE)
costs.  

Existing facilities include those facilities that have been in operation
for longer than a year. Costs for existing facilities include activities
that incur continuously such as recordkeeping or once every several
years such as SPCC Plan review. For the average existing SPCC-regulated
facility, following are the estimated total annual costs for all
information collection activities required by the final rule:

Category I (Tier I):  $970 per facility;

Category I:  $970 per facility;

Category II: $1,295 per facility;

Category III: $2,245 per facility; and

Category IV: $4,211 per facility.

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. Therefore,
each year a new set of facilities would incur the costs listed below. A
typical SPCC-regulated facility would incur the costs for new facilities
in Year 1 and incur the costs for existing facilities presented above in
each subsequent year.  For the average new SPCC-regulated facility,
following are the estimated total annual costs for all information
collection activities required by the final rule:

Category I (Tier I): $932 per facility;

Category I: $4,410 per facility;

Category II: $7,920 per facility;

Category III: $14,180 per facility; and

Category IV: $24,220 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, including PE certification when necessary,
and an oil spill contingency plan.	

	

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  4 

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection
Activities

Average Category I Facility (Tier I)

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost

(2012)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	0.4	2.9	0.0	0.4	3.6	$0	$0	$324

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil3	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.3	1.9	0.0	0.2	2.4	$0	$0	$492

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	2.6	0.0	0.0	2.6	$0	$0	$154

TOTAL	0.7	7.4	0.0	0.6	8.7	$0	$0	$970

New Facilities3

Prepare an SPCC Plan	0.0	3.0	0.0	0.0	3.0	$0	$0	$164

Prepare a Contingency Plan	0.7	3.5	0.0	1.0	5.1	$0	$0	$234

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil4	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$6

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	3.8	0.0	0.0	3.8	$100	$0	$528

TOTAL	0.7	10.2	0.0	1.0	11.9	$100	$0	$932

1 Unit burden estimates 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  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.
As a result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities
will become operational.

4 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 $139.
 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.



Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  5 

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection
Activities

Average Category I Facility 

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost

(2012)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	0.4	2.9	0.0	0.4	3.6	$0	$0	$324

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil3	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.3	1.9	0.0	0.2	2.4	$0	$0	$492

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	2.6	0.0	0.0	2.6	$0	$0	$154

TOTAL	0.7	7.4	0.0	0.6	8.7	$0	$0	$970

New Facilities3

Prepare an SPCC Plan	1.8	27.4	10.1	3.7	43.0	$0	$0	$3,642

Prepare a Contingency Plan	0.7	3.5	0.0	1.0	5.1	$0	$0	$234

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil4	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$6

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	3.8	0.0	0.0	3.8	$100	$0	$528

TOTAL	2.5	34.6	10.1	4.6	51.9	$100	$0	$4,410

1 Unit burden estimates 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  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.
As a result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities
will become operational.

4 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 $139.
 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.



Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  6 

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection
Activities

Average Category II Facility 

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost (2012$)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	0.3	4.1	0.0	0.3	4.6	$0	$0	$415

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil3	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.4	2.6	0.0	0.4	3.4	$0	$363	$666

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	3.6	0.0	0.0	3.6	$0	$0	$214

TOTAL	0.7	10.3	0.0	0.6	11.7	$0	$363	$1,295

New Facilities3

Prepare an SPCC Plan	2.8	38.9	15.1	5.1	61.9	$0	$1,960	$7,290

Prepare a Contingency Plan	0.7	3.5	0.0	1.0	5.1	$0	$0	$234

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil4	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$4	$7

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	1.4	0.0	0.0	1.4	$100	$0	$389

TOTAL	3.5	43.7	15.1	6.1	68.4	$100	$1,970	$7,920

1 Unit burden estimates 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  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.
As a result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities
will become operational.

4 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 $139.
 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.



Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  7 

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection
Activities

Average Category III Facility 

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost (2012$)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	0.5	7.4	0.0	0.5	8.4	$0	$0	$763

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil3	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.8	4.8	0.0	0.6	6.3	$0	$661	$1,221

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	4.5	0.0	0.0	4.5	$0	$0	$261

TOTAL	1.3	16.7	0.0	1.1	19.2	$0	$661	$2,245

New Facilities3

Prepare an SPCC Plan	5.5	72.7	30.0	6.0	114	$0	$3,650	$13,448

Prepare a Contingency Plan	0.7	3.5	0.0	1.0	5.1	$0	$0	$234

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil4	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.1	$0	$0	$0

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	1.9	0.0	0.0	1.9	$126	$0	$498

TOTAL	6.2	78.1	30.0	6.9	121	$126	$3,650	$14,180

1 Unit burden estimates 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  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. As a
result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities will
become operational.

4 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 $139.
 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.



Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  8 

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection
Activities 

Average Category IV Facility 

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost (2012$)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	0.9	13.1	0.0	0.9	14.8	$0	$0	$1,346

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil3	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	1.4	8.5	0.0	1.1	11.0	$0	$1,170	$2,156

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.3	11.5	0.0	0.7	12.5	$0	$0	$790

TOTAL	2.6	33.1	0.0	2.7	38.4	$0	$1,170	$4,211

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan	10.9	126	40.8	13.6	192	$0	$6,520	$23,075

Prepare a Contingency Plan	0.7	3.5	0.0	1.0	5.1	$0	$0	$234

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil4	0.0	0.0
0.0	0.0	0.0	$0	$0	$0

Revise the SPCC Plan	0.0	0.1	0.0	0.0	0.1	$0	$13	$25

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0.0	7.1	0.0	0.0	7.1	$155	$0	$886

TOTAL	11.6	137 	40.8	14.5	204	$155	$6,530	$24,220

1 Unit burden estimates 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  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. As a
result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities will
become operational.

4 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 $139.
 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.



6(c) 	Estimating Agency Burden and Costs

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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.   REF _Ref141690222  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 9  shows the
total burden and labor cost to EPA.  As described in Section 6(b), EPA
assumed that 0.15 percent of regulated facilities would submit
information to EPA for review. The costs to EPA are not included in the
calculation of total cost and burden hours for regulated entities,
because EPA is not considered a “person” as the term applies to
regulated entities.

EPA labor costs are based on the January 2012 General Schedule (GS) pay
schedule.  EPA estimates an average hourly labor cost (labor plus
overhead) of $63.40 for managerial staff (GS-13, Step-5), and $44.48 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   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  9 

Estimated Annual Burden and Cost to EPA 

Activity	Burden Hours	Total Cost (2012$)

	Managerial	Technical	Clerical	Total



($63.40)	($44.48)



	Plans Evaluation	1,005	10,051	0	11,056	$511,000 

Review of Comments	503	503	0	1,005	$54,000 

Consideration of Appeals	804	0	0	804	$51,000 

Total	2,312	10,600	0	12,900	$616,000 

	Note: costs may not total due to rounding; January 2012 General
Schedule.

	

6(d)	Estimating the Respondent Universe

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1   SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 This section describes the
universe of facilities subject to 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

	

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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.

In 1995, EPA conducted an OMB-approved statistically based, random
sample 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.

	Current Estimation Methodology 

	

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 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 30 industry sectors,
including (but not limited to) those listed in   REF _Ref141689202  \*
MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 1 .  For sectors without reliable national-level
data, the basic estimation procedure involved extrapolating from eight
state databases using information from the U.S. Census Bureau.

	Estimates based on state-level data

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 For many industry sectors affected by the SPCC
rule, the basic estimation procedure used to update the regulated
universe was similar to that used in the 1991 facilities study.  EPA
used 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. To
extrapolate the estimates to the entire country, these values were
multiplied by a facility ratio. The facility ratio was estimated as the
number of SPCC-regulated facilities in the eight states for an industry
sector divided by the total number of facilities reported for that
industry sector in those states.  

	Estimates based on national-level data

Because of the availability of federal and proprietary data, EPA used a 
SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1  different estimation approach 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. These sectors
represent 70 percent of the facilities affected by the SPCC rule.

The 2002 Economic Census was 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 were assumed to be
regulated under the SPCC rule.

EPA assumed all oil production facilities are regulated under the SPCC
rule. Certain gas production facilities may also be regulated, given
that some gas wells have tanks for storing condensate oil generated
during the gas-production process. EPA used Energy Information
Administration (EIA) data to estimate the total number of oil-production
wells as well as gas wells that produce condensate oil. All active wells
that were producing in 2004 are considered in the analysis. The EIA
database contains historical data on oil and gas wells, including
marginal wells, compiled from government and commercial sources.  EIA
provides data on oil and oil-condensate produced at oil and gas
production wells according to various production-rate classes. Gas wells
that do not produce oil condensate are not included. To convert the
number of wells that produce oil and oil condensate to the total number
of SPCC-regulated production facilities, EPA assumed four wells per
facility based on personal communication with industry experts.  Under
this assumption, EPA estimated that approximately 166,000 oil production
facilities are SPCC-regulated.

The number of farms was 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, EPA
multiplied the total expenditure on fuels in 2002 by the ratio of diesel
(gasoline) expenditure to total expenditure from the 1997 data. The
Agency assumed that the percentage of diesel (gasoline) expenditure
remained the same from 1997 through 2002.  Finally, the total quantity
of diesel (gasoline) purchased in 2002 was 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 was 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 stored on farms.  Since no data
were available on the type of storage (i.e., aboveground or underground)
EPA assumed that the entire storage is aboveground. The expenditure
ranges were converted to capacity ranges and assigned to a percentage of
farms that are regulated within the capacity ranges.

EPA calculated the number of SPCC-regulated electric utility plants 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 was estimated based
on data reported by the Energy Information Administration (EIA). The
number of substations was estimated based on the number of substations
listed by each major utility reporting to the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission (FERC).  A national estimate was 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.  Non-petroleum oils include, but are not limited to,
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 or vegetable oil, EPA used data on the number of
manufacturing establishments from the 2005 U.S. Census of Manufacturing.
 Four possible types of AFVO facilities were considered:  (1) industries
that produce AFVO; (2) industries that use AFVO as a primary input; (3)
industries that use AFVO in moderate amounts; and (4) industries that
use AFVO as a minor component of their input. EPA assumed that all
facilities that produce AFVO (group 1) are SPCC-regulated. Then, low,
medium, and high estimates were developed using professional judgment
for industries in the remaining three groups regarding the percentage of
each industry group assumed to be regulated by the SPCC rule. EPA also
identified a category of “other” facility types that may produce or
use AFVO.  For these facilities, specific information on the number of
regulated facilities was available and was used instead of the assumed
percentages. This methodology yielded 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.

On April 18, 2011, EPA published a final rule that exempted milk and
milk product containers and appurtenances from the SPCC regulations. As
a result, a portion of the universe of dairy farms and milk
manufacturing facilities became exempt from the SPCC regulations or
shifted to a lower category.  For example, a Category I facility that
could self certify their SPCC plan may be eligible to use a Tier I
qualified facility template plan. This change in the SPCC facility
regulatory requirements is reflected in the adjustment to the farm
universe in this ICR, that led to a lower number of farms for 2014.  

 	Industry Growth Rates

To project the number of existing and new facilities regulated under the
SPCC rule over the 2014 through 2016 ICR period, EPA used
industry-specific growth rates for new and existing facilities.  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.

To estimate industry-specific growth rates for existing facilities of
all SPCC-related industry categories except farms and oil production,
EPA used 1992, 1997, and 2002 U.S. Economic Census data on the number of
establishments in each industry. The use of an extended time period to
estimate industry-specific growth rates attempted to account for diverse
economic conditions under which SPCC-regulated industries operate. To
estimate annual growth rates for agricultural establishments, EPA used
data reported by the USDA National Agricultural Statistics Service on
the number of farms in the United States over the past 10 years (1996
through 2005). The data for the past 10 years were expected to be more
representative of the latest developments in the agricultural business
than data for years prior to 1996. 

EPA estimated the growth rates for new facilities only using
commercially available data obtained on the number of businesses (by
NAICS code) in 2005 from the D&B Market Spectrum database. These data
allowed for an estimation of the fraction of businesses that became
operational in 2005 relative to the total number of businesses in that
year. This analysis assumed that industry growth rates would be constant
over the 10-year analytical period for all industries except oil
production, which may or may not adequately represent the trends for
individual sectors.

Because oil production facilities account for the largest fraction of
SPCC-regulated facilities across all industry categories and represent a
dynamic industry, an alternative approach was used for estimating future
oil production industry growth rates.  EPA relied on industry-specific
forecasting information, which was expected to reflect growth rates
better than an approach based on historical trends.  EPA estimated
annual growth rates for the oil production facilities relying on
historical and forecasted U.S. oil production data and historical number
of oil wells.  The approach used to estimate the growth rates for oil
production facilities is described in the regulatory impact analysis for
the 2008 SPCC final rule.      SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1   

	In total, EPA estimated that 640,000 facilities would be regulated by
the SPCC rule in 2010.  Oil production facilities (34 percent), farms
(23 percent), and electric utilities (10 percent) account for the
majority of SPCC-regulated facilities.

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1   REF _Ref141690303  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 10 
and   REF _Ref244074430  Exhibit 11  present the estimated number of
existing and new SPCC-regulated facilities that are expected to incur
paperwork-related burden associated with the final amendments to the
SPCC rule.   REF _Ref141690303  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 10  presents the
number of facilities by facility type - storage and production
facilities - for the first year of the ICR, 2014.   REF _Ref244074430 
Exhibit 11  presents the number of facilities for the entire analysis
period, 2014 - 2016.

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  10 

Number of Existing and New Facilities

(First Year of ICR: 2014)

Facility Type	Category I (1,320-10,000 gallons)	Category II
(10,001-42,000 gallons)	Category III (42,001 to 1 million gallons)
Category IV (>1 million gallons)	Total

 	Storage	288,000	80,800	35,700	2,980	408,000

Existing	Production	29,000	157,000	41,300	405	228,000

 	Total	317,000	238,000	77,000	3,380	636,000

 	Storage	5,750	2,400	1,070	80	9,300

New	Production	1,540	8,270	2,170	21	12,000

 	Total	7,290	10,670	3,240	101	21,300

Total	324,000	249,000	80,200	3,480	657,000

Note: values may not total due to rounding.

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  11 

Number of Existing and New Facilities

(ICR Period: 2014 - 2016)

Facility Type/ Year	Category I (1,320-10,000 gallons)	Category II
(10,001-42,000 gallons)	Category III (42,001 to 1 million gallons)
Category IV (>1 million gallons)	Total

Existing	Year 1 - 2014	318,000 	238,000	77,000	3,380 	636,000 

	Year 2 - 2015	321,000 	243,000	78,400	3,410 	645,000 

	Year 3 - 2016	324,000 	246,000	79,400 	3,430 	653,000 

New	Year 1 - 2014	7,280 	10,700 	3,240 	102 	21,300 

	Year 2 - 2015	7,840 	12,800 	3,830 	110 	24,600 

	Year 3 - 2016	8,680 	16,400 	4,790 	123 	30,000 

Total	Year 1 - 2014	325,000 	249,000 	80,200 	3,490 	657,000 

	Year 2 - 2015	329,000 	256,000 	82,000 	3,520 	670,000 

	Year 3 - 2016	333,000 	262,000 	84,000 	3,550 	683,000 

Note: values may not total due to rounding.

	6(e)	Estimated Total Annual Burden for All Respondents

  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 The total hour burden is estimated as the average
per-facility burden 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
costs for each compliance activity. The total annual burden and costs
for all respondents in each category are presented in   REF
_Ref141695125  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 13  through   REF _Ref141695135 
\* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 17  for each facility size. The annual average
total burden is estimated at 8.8 million hours; the annual average total
cost is estimated at $987 million.

	

	Alternative Estimates

	

EPA also calculated alternative cost estimates based on higher overhead
rates for labor costs, which are presented in   REF _Ref141690364  \*
MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 12 . 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 $987 million. Under
the alternative assumptions, the estimated total burden ranges from
$1,211 to $1,556 million.

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  12 

Sensitivity Analysis for Total Cost 

Varying Overhead Rates

(2012$, Millions)

Assumption	Labor	Capital	O&M	Total

	Baseline Burden

17% Overhead	$801 	$3.0 	$184 	$987 

50% Overhead	$1,025 	$3.0 	$184	$1,211 

100% Overhead	$1,369	$3.0 	$184	$1,556 



Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  13 

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Facilities

Average Category I Facilities (Tier I)

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost (2012$)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	92,000	707,000	0	92,00	861,000	$0	$0	$80,100,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	370	370	0	0
741	$7,434	$0	$55,000

Revise the SPCC Plan	76,600	460,000	0	61,300	598,000	$0	$0	$121,515,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	652,000	0	0	652,000	$0	$0
$38,066,000

TOTAL	169,000	1,819,000	0	153,000	2,141,000	$7,434	$0	$239,736,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan	0	18,300	0	0	18,300	$0	$0	$971,000

Prepare a Contingency Plan	3,980	21,100	0	5,850	31,000	$0	$0	$1,383,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	9	9	0	0	18
$184	$0	$1,250

Revise the SPCC Plan	22	131	0	17	170	$0	$0	$34,600

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	23,200	0	0	23,200	$698,000	$0
$3,203,000

TOTAL	4,020	62,800	0	5,870	72,700	$698,000	$0	$5,593,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest
three significant figures 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 three significant figures.





Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  14 

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Other Facilities

Average Category I Facilities

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost (2012$)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	27,500	211,000	0	27,500	266,000	$0	$0	$23,900,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	111	111	0	0
221	$2,220	$0	$16,300

Revise the SPCC Plan	22,900	137,000	0	18,300	178,000	$0	$0	$36,300,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	195,000	0	0	195,000	$0	$0
$11,400,000

TOTAL	50,500	543,000	0	45,800	639,000	$2,220	$0	$71,616,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan	3,360	50,000	18,500	6,750	78,500	$0	$0	$6,420,000

Prepare a Contingency Plan	1,190	6,320	0	1,750	9,250	$0	$0	$413,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	3	3	0	0	5
$55	$0	$372

Revise the SPCC Plan	7	39	0	5	51	$0	$0	$10,300

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	6,930	0	0	6,930	$209,000	$0
$957,000

TOTAL	4,560	63,000	18,500	8,500	94,800	$209,000	$0	$7,800,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest
three significant figures 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 three significant figures.

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  15 

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Facilities

Average Category II Facilities

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost (2012$)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	64,900	973,000	0	65,000	1,103,000	$0	$0
$100,500,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	363	363	0	0
726	$7,288	$0	$53,700

Revise the SPCC Plan	105,000	633,000	0	84,400	823,000	$0	$87,029,000
$161,400,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	887,000	0	0	887,000	$0	$0
$52,000,000

TOTAL	170,000	2,493,000	0	149,000	2,813,000	$7,288	$87,029,000
$314,000,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan	37,700	517,000	201,000	67,800	823,000	$0
$26,100,000	$93,600,000

Prepare a Contingency Plan	8,670	46,000	0	12,700	67,400	$0	$0	$3,000,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	20	20	0	0
40	$440	$0	$2,940

Revise the SPCC Plan	61	366	0	49	476	$0	$50,000	$93,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	18,600	0	0	18,600	$1.519,000
$0	$5,187,000

TOTAL	46,500	582,000	201,000	80,500	910,000	$1,519,000	$26,100,000
$102,000,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest
three significant figures 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 three significant figures.

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  16 

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Facilities

Average Category III Facilities

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost (2012$)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	38,600	578,000	0	38,600	655,000	$0	$0	$59,700,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	117	117	0	0
235	$2,354	$0	$17,300

Revise the SPCC Plan	62,600	376,000	0	50,100	489,000	$0	$51,372,000
$95,500,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	349,000	0	0	349,000	$0	$0
$20,400,000

TOTAL	101,300	1,303,000	0	88,700	1,493,000	$2,354	$51,372,000
$176,000,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan	22,400	287,000	119,000	23.700	452,000	$0
$14,430,000	$51,500,000

Prepare a Contingency Plan	2,579	13,700	0	3,786	20,100	$0	$0	$895,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	6	6	0	0	12
$119	$0	$875

Revise the SPCC Plan	35	207	0	28	269	$0	$0	$0

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	7,510	0	0	7,510	$570,000	$0
$1,990,000

TOTAL	25,000	309,000	119,000	27,500	480,000	$570,000	$14,430,000
$54,400,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest
three significant figures 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 three significant figures.





Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  17 

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Facilities

Average Category IV Facilities

Activity	Annual Burden Hours1	Total Burden Hours	Capital/Startup Costs
PE Costs	Annual Cost (2012$)2

	Management	Technical	Drafter	Clerical





Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan	2,940	44,400	0	2,940	50,300	$0	$0	$4,600,000

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	5	5	0	0	10
$102	$0	$754

Revise the SPCC Plan	4,880	28,700	0	3,830	37,400	$0	$3,960,000
$7,340,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	1,220	40,200	0	2,450	43,800	$0
$0	$2,400,000

TOTAL	9,050	113,300	0	9,220	131,600	$102	$3,960,000	$14,000,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan	1,216	14,100	4,580	1,520	21,400	$0	$727,000
$2,490,000

Prepare a Contingency Plan	73	386	0	107	566	$0	$0	$25,300

Submit Information in the Event of Certain Discharges of Oil	0	0	0	0	0
$3	$0	$25

Revise the SPCC Plan	2	10	0	1	14	$0	$1,450	$2,680

Maintain the SPCC Plan and Keep Records	0	792	0	0	792	$19,800	$0	$98,300

TOTAL	1,290	15,300	4,580	1,630	22,700	$19,800	$728,000	$2,610,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest
three significant figures 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 three significant figures.

6(f)	Bottom Line Burden and Cost Tables

	The total estimated burden hours and costs incurred by all new and
existing facilities are summarized in   REF _Ref141690606  \*
MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 18 . The exhibit shows the burden and cost
components for each year of this ICR, along with total and annualized
costs. 

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  18 

Estimated Total Burden and Costs for Facilities

Year	Total Burden (million hours)	Total Cost (2012$, millions)



Labor	Capital	O&M	Total

First	8.4	$768 	$2.2 	$173 	$944 

Second	8.8	$797 	$2.6 	$183	$982 

Third	9.2	$836 	$3.1 	$195 	$1,034 

TOTAL	26.4	$2,402 	$8.0 	$551 	$2,961 

ANNUALIZED	8.8	$801 	$3.0 	$184 	$987 



6(g) 	Reasons for the Change in Burden

	  SEQ CHAPTER \h \r 1 Differences in burden and costs from the previous
ICR are attributed to adjustments for wage rates and the projected
universe of facilities over the covered period 2014 through 2016.
Adjustments capture updates to the number of affected facilities and
wages. The only program change that affected the ICR was the final rule
to exempt milk and milk product containers and associated piping and
appurtenances published in April 2011. As a result, EPA estimated that
approximately 66,000 farms and milk product manufacturing facilities
were affected by this amendment and this is reflected in the projections
for farms over the 2014 – 2016 ICR period. EPA estimates that there
will be a reduction of approximately 100,000 annual burden hours and
savings of $4 million in costs as a result of this program change. These
savings are accounted for in the March 24, 2011 RIA for the final milk
and milk product container exemption rule. 

	  REF _Ref141690501  \* MERGEFORMAT  Exhibit 19  presents the annual
burden hours and costs. In total, the burden hours presented in this ICR
have increased relative to the current OMB inventory. The new burden
estimate shows a net annual increase of approximately 660,000 hours. The
Agency estimates that capital and O&M costs would increase by
approximately $26 million due to a change in the universe of regulated
facilities. This is partially offset by $4 million in savings from the
milk and milk product container exemption, leaving a net increase of $22
million in capital and O&M. The increase in hours and capital and O&M is
attributable to a small increase in wage rates and the population of
facilities in the universe estimated over the 2014 through 2016 covered
period.

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  19 

Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours and Annualized Costs Comparison

 	Annual Burden Hours	Annualized Capital and O&M Costs 

(2012$, Thousands)

Current OMB Inventory Burden	8,040,000	$161,000

Change in Burden

	Adjustment

	Program Change	660,000

760,000

-100,000	$22,000

$26,000

-$4,000

SPCC Final Rule Collection Burden	8,700,000	$183,000



	The exhibits below present the change in burden (hours and costs) as
compared to the burden estimates currently approved by OMB. The exhibits
show change in burden separately for Private facilities (  REF
_Ref244340479  Exhibit 21 ) and State and Local Government facilities ( 
REF _Ref244340487  Exhibit 22 ). 

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  20 

Total Estimated Annual Burden and Costs Comparison: All Facilities

	Total Requested	Change Due to Agency Discretion	Due to Agency Estimate
Currently Approved

Annual Responses	              663,000 	-20,000          	          
31,000 	652,000

Annual Hour Burden	           8,700,000 	-100,000	760,000	8,040,000

Annual Cost Burden (Capital/StartUp and O&M costs)	$183,000,000
-$4,000,000	$26,000,000	$161,000,000

Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  21 

Total Estimated Annual Burden and Costs Comparison: Private Facilities

	Total Requested	Change Due to Agency Discretion	Due to Agency Estimate
Currently Approved

Annual Responses	              663,000 	-20,000	           31,000 
652,000 

Annual Hour Burden	           8,700,000 	-100,000	      760,000
8,040,000 

Annual Cost Burden (Capital/StartUp and O&M costs)	$183,000,000 
-$4,000,000	$26,000,000 	 $161,000,000 



Exhibit   SEQ Exhibit \* ARABIC  22 

Total Estimated Annual Burden and Costs Comparison: State and Local
Government Facilities

	Total Requested	Change Due to Agency Discretion	Due to Agency Estimate
Currently Approved

Annual Responses	                     610 	-4	                  8 	606 

Annual Hour Burden	                  7,830 	-20	             380 	7,470 

Annual Cost Burden (Capital/StartUp and O&M costs)	$276,000 	-1,200	    
  $127,000 	 $150,000 



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
11.9 to 203.9 hours per facility, with an average burden of
approximately 58 hours per response. The net annual public reporting and
recordkeeping burden for facilities already regulated by the rule is
estimated to range from 8.7 to 38.4 hours, with an average burden of
approximately 11 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 chapter 15 of 48 CFR.     

	To comment on the Agency’s need for this information, the accuracy of
the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing
respondent burden, including the use of automated collection techniques,
EPA has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID Number
[EPA-HQ-OPA-2007-0584], which is available for online viewing at  
HYPERLINK "http://www.regulations.gov"  www.regulations.gov , or in
person viewing at the Superfund Docket in the EPA Docket Center
(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 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, comments can be sent 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-2007-0584] and OMB Control Number 2050-0021 in any
correspondence.

 While new facilities will incur significant paperwork-related burden by
taking certain actions in the first year of the ICR (e.g., new
facilities will prepare an SPCC Plan), existing facilities may not need
to take any action except for maintaining records.	

 33 U.S.C. 1321(j)(1)(C).

 56 FR 54757 (October 22, 1991), superseding Executive Order 11735, 38
FR 21243.

 The extension applied to all facilities except drilling, production or
workover facilities that are offshore or that have an offshore
component, or onshore facilities required to have and submit Facility
Response Plans (FRPs).

  Note that the secondary containment requirements of §112.7(c) still
apply to these containers.

 In the November 2009 amendments, EPA allowed owners and operators of
new oil production facilities a period of six months to prepare and
implement an SPCC Plan. 

 For the purposes of this ICR, EPA assumes that no facilities will
require section-specific certification by a PE.

 SCS Engineers adjusted with the June 2012 Bureau of Labor Statistics
wage rates.

 United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer
Costs for Employee Compensation, September 2012. BLS wage rates reported
for June 2012 are final.

 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.

 Source: SCS Engineers, a professional engineering firm adjusted with
BLS wage rates for June 2012 published September 2012.

 Information Collection Request for the final rule to amend the oil
pollution prevention regulation (40 CFR part 112), May 2002.

 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Economic Analysis for the
Final Revisions to the Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation (40 CFR part
112),”  May 2002.

  The cost estimates in the tables present average annual costs for each
facility, e.g., the annual cost estimate for Plan review represents the
total cost for Plan review divided by five.  

 “Analysis of the Number of Facilities Regulated by EPA’s SPCC
Program”. http://www.epa.gov/oilspill/pdfs/pap_tpop.pdf.

 For details, see the regulatory impact analysis for the 2006 final rule
(“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”)

 Oil storage data are not available for all states.

 In the matching process, the following facilities and tanks were
dropped from the estimation:  facilities with less than 1,320 gallons of
aggregate storage, tanks with less than 55 gallons of storage,
underground tanks subject to EPA UST requirements, inactive tanks, and
tanks that do not store oil substances.

  The facility ratio is calculated using the eight state databases for
all capacity categories except Category I.  Because the Maryland
database does not include information on Category I facilities, the
ratio for Category I facilities is calculated using seven state
databases (excluding Maryland).  

 U.S. Energy Information Administration,  Distribution and Production of
Oil and Gas Wells by State, data available from   HYPERLINK
"http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petrosystem/petrosysog.html" 
http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petrosystem/petrosysog.html .

 Personal communication with a Federal On-Scene Coordinator for EPA
Region 6 and Mark England, Texas Railroad Commission, 2005.

 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).

 April 18, 2011 (76 FR 21652)

 OMB’s currently approved burden was estimated for 2010 – 2012,
covering July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2013. 

 PAGE   

 PAGE   46 

	           		                     

