1No
SIDs
or
other
identifying
information
is
included
in
this
memorandum
in
order
to
keep
it
nonconfidential

2The
previous
version
of
this
memo
reported
an
additional
unweighted
facility.
The
facility's
response
was
clear
that
there
was
no
unpaid
labor
at
the
site,
but
unclear
whether
or
not
there
was
unpaid
management.
Follow
up
with
the
facility
indicates
that
no
unpaid
management
exists.
The
facility
has
been
removed
from
this
analysis.

1
Date:
9
February
2004
To:
Chris
Miller,
EPA
From:
Ian
Cadillac
and
Maureen
Kaplan,
ERG
Subject:
UPDATED:
Concentrated
Aquatic
Animal
Production
Industry:
Unpaid
Labor
1.
How
Many
Facilities
Within
The
Scope
of
the
Regulation
Report
Unpaid
Labor
and/
or
Management?
1
The
population
within
the
scope
of
the
regulation
are
net
pen,
flow­
through,
and
recirculating
systems
that
produce
at
least
100,000
pounds/
year.
Within
the
scope
of
the
regulation,
we
have
#
2
unweighted
facilities2,
representing
#
3
weighted
facilities
nationwide
that
are
within
the
scope
of
the
regulation
and
report
unpaid
labor
and/
or
management.
One
facility
reports
only
unpaid
management
while
the
other
reports
both
unpaid
labor
and
unpaid
management.
In
terms
of
financial
organization,
they
are
a
S
Corporation/
Limited
Liability
Corporation,
and
a
Sole
Proprietorship.
All
report
annual
sales
less
than
$
750,000,
i.
e.,
they
are
small
businesses.

2.
Baseline
Status
of
These
Facilities
Both
facilities
pass
the
baseline
discounted
cash
flow
analysis.
Neither
incur
impacts
under
any
of
the
five
options
examined
for
the
Notice
of
Data
Availability
or
final
rule.
3<
http://
Stats.
bls.
gov/
cps/
cpsaat39.
pdf>
downloaded
26
January
2004
and
<
http://
Stats.
bls.
gov/
pdf/
cpsaat39.
pdf>
downloaded
12
April
2001.

4<
http://
www.
bls.
oes.
2002.
oes119011.
htm>
downloaded
26
January
2004.

5United
States
Department
of
Agriculture.
Economic
Research
Service.
Agricultural
Income
and
Finance
Outlook.
AIS­
81.
5
November
2003.

2
3.
Estimated
Costs
for
Sensitivity
Analysis
We
examined
several
sources
for
possible
wage
estimates
to
use
in
the
sensitivity
analysis:

#
Federal
Minimum
Wage
($
5.15/
hr)

#
Current
Population
Survey
(
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics)

#
United
States
Department
of
Agriculture
(
USDA),
Economic
Research
Service
(
ERS).

Table
39
of
the
Current
Population
Survey
lists
median
weekly
earnings
of
full­
time
wage
and
salary
workers
by
detailed
occupation.
3
For
farm
workers,
median
weekly
earnings
range
from
$
309
in
2000
to
$
318
in
2002
or,
roughly,
$
16,000
to
$
16,500
per
year.
For
farm
managers,
median
weekly
earnings
range
from
$
547
in
2000
to
$
488
in
2002
or,
roughly,
$
28,450
to
$
25,376
per
year.

The
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics,
Occupational
Employment
and
Wages,
202
for
category
11­
9011
Farm,
Ranch,
and
Other
Agricultural
Managers
reports
an
average
(
not
median)
annual
wage
of
$
51,370.4
USDA
administers
the
Agricultural
Resource
Management
Survey
(
ARMS).
USDA
reports
a
2002
average
farm
household
income
of
$
65,757
for
all
farms.
5
For
commercial
farms
(>$
250,000
in
sales),
farming
contributes
the
major
part
of
the
income
and
the
graph
indicates
an
income
of
about
$
75,000.

We
examined
the
effect
of
including
the
following
labor
and
management
costs:

#
lowest
of
the
USDA
ARMS
estimate
for
commercial
farms,
USDA
ARMS
estimate
for
all
farms,
and
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics,
Occupational
Employment
and
Wages
($
51,370).

#
2002
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics,
Current
Population
Statistics,
farm
manager
($
25,376/
yr).

#
minimum
wage
($
10,712/
yr).

These
costs
were
prorated
according
to
the
number
of
hours
worked,
if
the
respondent
reported
less
than
40
hours/
week.
3
4.
Results
of
the
Sensitivity
Analysis
#
Under
the
first
assumption
($
51,370),
all
facilities
are
baseline
closures.

#
Under
the
second
assumption,
all
facilities
remain
open
in
the
baseline
and
under
all
of
the
options.

#
Under
the
minimum
wage
assumption,
all
facilities
remain
open
in
the
baseline
and
under
all
of
the
options
5.
Observations
The
threshold
change
from
20,000
lbs/
yr
to
100,000
lbs/
year
removed
10
of
12
unweighted
facilities
from
the
unpaid
labor
and
management
analysis
reported
in
May
2003.
So
the
majority
of
concern
goes
away
with
the
change
in
threshold.

Of
the
two
unweighted
facilities
that
remain,
none
show
a
change
in
the
impacts
of
the
rule
when
a
wage
is
imputed
for
unpaid
labor
and
management.
That
is,
either
they
are
open
in
the
baseline
and
remain
open
under
all
options,
or
they
close
in
the
baseline.
