SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
FOR
INFORMATION
COLLECTION
REQUEST
FOR
PHASE
III
§
316(
B)
REQUIREMENTS
FOR
COOLING
WATER
INTAKE
STRUCTURES
UNDER
THE
NATIONAL
POLLUTANT
DISCHARGE
ELIMINATION
SYSTEM
PERMIT
PROGRAM
i
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
PART
A
OF
THE
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1.
Identification
of
the
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
1(
b)
Short
Characterization
(
Abstract)
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
1
2.
Need
For
and
Use
of
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
of
the
Data
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
3
3.
Non­
duplication,
Consultations,
and
Other
Collection
Criteria
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
3(
a)
Non­
duplication
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
5
3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
3(
c)
Consultations
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3(
e)
General
Guidelines
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3(
f)
Confidentiality
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
7
4.
The
Respondents
and
the
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4(
a)
Respondents
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
4(
b)
Information
Requested
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
(
I)
Data
items,
including
record
keeping
requirements
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
8
(
II)
Respondent
activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
13
5.
The
Information
Collected
­
Agency
Activities,
Collection
Methodology,
and
Information
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
ii
5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Information
Management
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
14
5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
6.
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
and
Cost
of
Collection
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
6(
d)
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Costs
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
6(
g)
Burden
Statement
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
17
PART
B
OF
THE
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
18
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment
1:
Federal
Register
Notice
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
19
LIST
OF
TABLES
Table
A1:
Reviewers
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
6
Table
A2:
Duration
of
Questionnaire
Activities
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
15
Table
A3:
Total
Estimated
Bottom
Line
Burden
and
Cost
Summary
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
16
1
PART
A
OF
THE
SUPPORTING
STATEMENT
1.
Identification
of
the
Information
Collection
1(
a)
Title
of
the
Information
Collection
Willingness
to
Pay
Survey:
Phase
III
Cooling
Water
Intake
Structures
1(
b)
Short
Characterization
(
Abstract)

The
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency
(
EPA)
is
in
the
process
of
developing
new
regulations
to
provide
national
performance
standards
for
controlling
impacts
from
cooling
water
intake
structures
(
CWIS)
for
Phase
III
facilities
under
section
316(
b)
of
the
Clean
Water
Act
(
CWA).
The
facilities
considered
Phase
III
facilities
under
Clean
Water
Act
section
316(
b)

regulations
include
existing
electrical
generators
with
cooling
water
intake
structures
that
are
designed
to
withdraw
50
million
gallons
of
water
per
day
(
MGD)
or
less,
as
well
as
existing
manufacturing
and
industrial
facilities
with
cooling
water
intake
structures,
that
withdraw
water
from
rivers,
streams,
lakes,
reservoirs,
estuaries,
oceans,
or
other
waters
of
the
United
States
for
cooling
purposes.
The
regulation
also
establishes
section
316(
b)
requirements
for
new
offshore
oil
and
gas
extraction
facilities.

EPA
has
previously
published
final
section
316(
b)
regulations
that
address
new
facilities
(
Phase
I)
on
December
18,
2001
(
66
FR
65256)
and
existing
large
power
producers
(
Phase
II)
on
July
9,
2004
(
69
FR
41576).
See
40
CFR
Part
125,
Subparts
I
and
J,
respectively.

As
required
under
Executive
Order
12866,
EPA
performs
economic
impact
and
cost/
benefit
analyses
of
the
section
316(
b)
regulation
for
Phase
III
facilities.
Comprehensive,

appropriate
estimates
of
total
resource
value
include
both
use
and
non­
use
values,
such
that
the
resulting
total
social
benefit
estimates
may
be
compared
to
total
social
cost.
"
Non­
use
values,
like
use
values,
have
their
basis
in
the
theory
of
individual
preferences
and
the
measurement
of
welfare
changes.
According
to
theory,
use
and
non­
use
values
are
additive"
(
Freeman,
1993).
Therefore,

use
values
alone
may
understate
total
social
values.
Recent
economic
literature
supports
the
1For
detail
see
"
Phase
II
­
Large
Existing
Electric
Generating
Plants
Response
to
Public
Comment,"
U.
S.
EPA,
2004.
Available
at:
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
waterscience/
316b/
commentph2.
htm
2
hypothesis
that
non­
use
values
are
greater
than
zero.
Moreover,
when
small
per
capita
non­
use
values
are
held
by
a
substantial
fraction
of
the
population,
they
can
be
very
large
in
the
aggregate.

Developing
comprehensive
quantified
benefit
estimates
for
the
section
316(
b)
regulation
requires
consideration
of
non­
use
values
because
nearly
all
(
96
percent)
of
impingement
and
entrainment
losses
at
CWIS
consist
of
either
forage
species,
or
non­
landed
recreational
and
commercial
species
that
do
not
have
direct
uses.
Although
individuals
do
not
use
these
resources
directly,
they
may
nevertheless
be
affected
by
changes
in
the
resource
status
or
quality,
such
that
they
would
be
willing
to
pay
to
maintain
these
resources.
It
is
generally
accepted
in
economic
literature
that
non­
use
values
may
be
substantial
in
some
cases,
and
that
failure
to
recognize
such
values
may
lead
to
improper
inferences
regarding
policy
benefits
and
costs.
Many
public
comments
on
the
proposed
section
316(
b)
regulation
for
Phase
II
facilities
and
the
Phase
II
Notice
of
Data
Availability
(
NODA)
suggested
that
a
properly
designed
and
conducted
stated
preference,

or
contingent
valuation
(
CV),
survey
would
be
the
most
appropriate
and
acceptable
method
to
estimate
non­
use
benefits
of
the
rule.
1
Stated
preference
survey
methodology
is
the
generally
accepted
means
to
estimate
non­
use
values.
Stated
preference
surveys
use
carefully
designed
questions
to
elicit
respondents'
willingness
to
pay
(
WTP)
for
particular
ecological
improvements,

based
on
their
responses
to
either
discrete
choice
or
open­
ended
questions
regarding
hypothetical
resource
improvements
or
programs.
Such
improvements
may
include
increased
protection
of
aquatic
habitats
or
species
with
particular
attributes.

To
assess
public
policy
significance
or
importance
of
the
ecological
gains
from
the
section
316(
b)
regulation
for
Phase
III
facilities,
EPA
proposes
to
develop
a
stated
preference
study
to
measure
non­
use
benefits
of
reduced
fish
losses
at
CWIS
due
to
the
regulation.
The
study
would
focus
on
a
broad
range
of
aquatic
species,
including
forage
fish
and
a
variety
of
fish
species
harvested
by
commercial
and
recreational
fisherman.
The
estimated
values
of
reducing
impingement
and
entrainment
losses
of
a
variety
of
fish
species
are
also
of
academic
interest
since
past
studies
focused
only
on
a
few
select
fish
species
such
as
salmon
and
striped
bass.
The
findings
from
this
study
would
be
pertinent
to
economists
and
policy
makers
studying
changes
in
fish
populations
and
aquatic
habitat
improvements.
3
To
assist
in
the
development
of
a
stated
preference
survey,
EPA
requests
approval
from
the
Office
of
Management
and
Budget
to
conduct
a
series
of
focus
groups.
Such
use
of
focus
groups
is
well
established,
as
is
the
capacity
of
focus
groups
to
provide
insight
into
motivations
underlying
respondents'
stated
willingness
to
pay
(
WTP)
values
(
Mitchell
and
Carson
1989;

Desvousges
et
al.
1984;
Desvousges
and
Smith
1988;
Johnston
et
al.
1995).
Focus
groups
are
among
the
most
significant
qualitative
research
tools
used
in
social
sciences
(
Bateman
et
al.

2002),
and
are
considered
by
many
stated
preference
practitioners
to
be
a
critical
component
of
contingent
valuation
survey
design
(
Arrow
et
al.
1993;
Johnston
et
al.
1995).

Focus
groups
are
often
described
as
"
informal
sessions
in
which
a
skilled
moderator
leads
a
group
of
individuals
through
a
discussion
of
specific
topics
to
discover
their
attitudes
and
opinions"
(
Desvousges
et
al.
1984,
p.
2­
1,
cited
in
Johnston
et
al.
1995
p.
56).
Following
standard
practice,
EPA
will
use
focus
groups
to
better
understand
the
public's
perceptions
and
attitude
concerning
fishery
resources,
to
frame
and
define
survey
questions
and
to
pretest
draft
survey
questions.
Focus
groups
will
also
be
used,
following
advice
of
Mitchell
and
Carson
(
1989),

Desvousges
et
al.
(
1984),
Johnston
et
al.
(
1995),
to
test
for
and
eliminate
or
reduce
potential
biases
that
may
be
associated
with
stated
preference
methodology,
and
to
ensure
that
both
researchers
and
respondents
share
interpretations
of
survey
language
and
scenarios.

EPA
plans
to
conduct
12
focus
groups
at
different
geographic
locations
in
the
United
States.
Specific
focus
group
locations
will
be
selected
based
on
the
locations
of
the
majority
of
Phase
III
facilities.
Following
generally
accepted
practice
(
e.
g.,
Desvousges
et
al.
1984),
EPA
will
recruit
seven
to
nine
individuals
for
each
focus
group.
These
individuals
will
be
randomly
selected
by
marketing
research
firms
from
panels
of
focus
group
participants
maintained
by
each
firm.

Participants
will
be
asked
to
attend
a
focus
group
session
and
participate
in
a
discussion
of
specific
topics
led
by
a
moderator.

The
total
nation
burden
estimate
for
the
focus
group
sessions
is
256
hours.
The
burden
estimate
is
based
on
the
assumption
that
EPA
will
conduct
12
focus
groups
with
seven
to
nine
participants
each.
EPA
assumes
an
average
burden
estimate
per
participant
of
160
minutes.
The
total
focus
group
participant
cost
is
$
4,534.

2.
Need
For
and
Use
of
the
Collection
4
2(
a)
Need/
Authority
for
the
Collection
The
project
is
being
undertaken
pursuant
to
sections
104
of
the
Clean
Water
Act
dealing
with
research.
Section
104
of
the
Clean
Water
Act
authorizes
and
directs
the
EPA
administrator
to
conduct
research
into
a
number
of
subject
areas
related
to
water
quality,
water
pollution,
and
water
pollution
prevention
and
abatement.
This
section
also
authorizes
the
EPA
administrator
to
conduct
research
into
methods
of
analyzing
the
costs
and
benefits
of
programs
carried
out
under
the
Clean
Water
Act.

This
research
project
is
exploring
how
public
values
for
fishery
resources
(
including
use
and
non­
use
values)
are
affected
by
fish
losses
from
impingement
and
entrainment
at
CWIS.

Understanding
total
public
values
including
non­
use
values
for
fishery
resources
lost
to
impingement
and
entrainment
is
necessary
to
determine
the
full
range
of
benefits
associated
with
reductions
in
impingement
and
entrainment
losses,
and
whether
the
benefits
of
government
action
to
reduce
impingement
and
entrainment
losses
at
Phase
III
facilities
are
commensurate
with
the
costs
associated
with
such
actions.
Because
non­
use
values
may
be
substantial
in
some
cases,

failure
to
recognize
such
values
may
lead
to
improper
inferences
regarding
policy
benefits
and
costs.
Although
the
findings
from
this
study
will
primarily
be
used
by
EPA
to
improve
estimates
of
the
economic
benefits
of
the
section
316(
b)
regulation
for
Phase
III
facilities
as
required
under
Executive
Order
12866,
these
findings
are
also
expected
to
be
useful
to
the
state
and
local
regulatory
agencies
dealing
with
fishery
resources
and
fish
habitat
and
the
research
community.

2(
b)
Practical
Utility/
Users
of
the
Data
EPA
will
use
focus
groups
to
assist
in
the
design
of
stated
preference
surveys
to
measure
total
(
i.
e.,
non­
use
and
use)
benefits
of
the
section
316(
b)
regulation
for
Phase
III
facilities,

following
standard
guidance
in
the
stated
preference
literature
(
Mitchell
and
Carson
1989).

Specifically,
EPA
will
use
focus
groups
to
better
understand
the
public's
perceptions
and
attitude
about
fishery
resources
and
to
obtain
insight
into
motivations
underlying
respondents'
willingness
to
pay
(
WTP)
values.
Information
obtained
during
focus
group
sessions
will
be
used
to
frame
and
define
survey
questions
to
ensure
that
the
stated
preference
survey
measures
willingness
to
pay
2
Olsen,
D.,
J.
Richards,
and
R.
D.
Scott.
1991.
"
Existence
and
Sport
Values
for
Doubling
the
Size
of
Columbia
River
Basin
Salmon
and
Steelhead
Runs."
Rivers.
2(
1):
44­
56.

3
Cameron,
T.
A.
and
D.
D.
Huppert.
1989.
OLS
versus
ML
Estimation
of
Non­
market
Resource
Values
with
Payment
Card
Interval
Data.
Journal
of
Environmental
Economics
and
Management.
17,
230­
246.

5
values
more
appropriately.
Focus
groups
will
also
be
used
to
pretest
draft
survey
questions,
and
to
test
for
the
presence
of
potential
biases
related
to
survey
design.
Input
from
focus
groups
will
enable
EPA
to
adjust
the
survey
instrument
to
ameliorate
or
reduce
the
potential
for
such
biases,

such
that
more
valid
estimates
of
WTP
may
be
generated.

3.
Non­
duplication,
Consultations,
and
Other
Collection
Criteria
3(
a)
Non­
duplication
EPA
has
not
identified
any
previous
studies
that
would
allow
estimation
of
the
social
benefits
of
nationwide
changes
in
populations
of
fish
species
(
including
forage,
recreational,
and
commercial
species)
affected
by
the
proposed
316(
b)
regulation.
Although
many
previous
studies
have
estimated
the
value
of
changes
in
catch
rates
or
populations
of
select
recreational
and
commercial
species
or
changes
in
water
quality
that
affect
fish,
no
studies
have
specifically
valued
changes
in
forage
fish
populations.
For
example,
Olsen
et
al
(
1991)
2
conducted
a
survey
of
Pacific
Northwest
residents,
including
both
anglers
and
non­
anglers,
to
determine
their
willingness­
to­
pay
(
WTP)
for
doubling
the
size
of
the
Columbia
River
Basin
salmon
and
steelhead
runs.
EPA's
proposed
survey
approach
differs
from
this
study
and
others
like
it
(
such
as
Cameron
and
Huppert,

19893)
in
that
it
would
include
respondents
from
various
geographic
regions
in
the
United
States
and
would
provide
values
for
a
variety
of
forage,
recreational,
and
commercial
species,
instead
of
valuing
a
few
recreational
species
in
one
specific
geographical
area.

Some
previous
studies
do
provide
values
for
changes
in
water
quality
that
affect
all
fish
species,
including
forage
fish.
However,
the
resulting
values
for
water
quality
improvements
from
these
studies
also
include
values
for
changes
in
other
factors
such
as
water
clarity,
pollution
levels,
4
Magat,
Wesley
A.,
J.
Huber,
K.
W.
Viscusi,
and
J.
Bell.
2000.
"
An
Iterative
Choice
Approach
to
Valuing
Clean
Lakes,
Rivers,
and
Streams."
Journal
of
Risk
and
Uncertainty.
21(
1):
7­
43.

5
Mitchell,
Robert
Cameron,
and
R.
T.
Carson.
1981.
An
Experiment
in
Determining
Willingness
to
Pay
for
National
Water
Quality
Improvements.
Preliminary
Draft
of
a
report
to
the
U.
S.
Environmental
Protection
Agency.
Resources
for
the
Future,
Inc.,
Washington.

6
Whitehead,
John
C.,
and
P.
A.
Groothuis.
1992.
"
Economic
Benefits
of
Improved
Water
Quality:
a
Case
Study
of
North
Carolina's
Tar
Pamlico
River."
Rivers.
3:
170­
178.

6
species
diversity,
etc.
For
example,
Magat
et
al.
(
2000)
4
asked
North
Carolina
and
Colorado
residents
to
value
an
increase
in
water
quality
under
which
fresh
water
in
their
states
would
become
safer
for
swimming
in,
fish
could
be
eaten
safely,
and
the
number
and
diversity
of
plants
and
aquatic
organisms
would
increase.
EPA's
proposed
survey
approach
differs
from
this
study
and
other
similar
studies
(
such
as
Mitchell
and
Carson,
19815;
or
Whitehead
and
Groothuis,
19926)

in
that
it
will
value
only
changes
in
fish
populations,
not
changes
in
general
water
quality
that
affect
a
variety
of
ecological
services
provided
by
a
water
body.

3(
b)
Public
Notice
Required
Prior
to
ICR
Submission
to
OMB
In
accordance
with
the
Paperwork
Reduction
Act
(
44
U.
S.
C.
3501
et
seq.),
EPA
published
a
notice
in
the
Federal
Register
on
[
]
announcing
that
the
focus
group
methodology
and
script
were
available
for
comment.
A
copy
of
the
Federal
Register
notice
is
attached
at
the
end
of
this
document.

3(
c)
Consultations
EPA's
Office
of
Water
consulted
with
typical
focus
group
participants
while
developing
the
focus
group
format
and
script.
EPA
recruited
a
total
of
eight
individuals
to
participate
in
a
preliminary
focus
group
session.
These
individuals
provided
advice
about
the
content
and
format
of
the
focus
group
opening
statement,
introductory
materials,
the
sequence
and
content
of
questions
in
the
focus
group
script.
The
preliminary
focus
group
session
was
also
used
to
obtain
more
accurate
burden
estimates.
7
3(
d)
Effects
of
Less
Frequent
Collection
The
focus
groups
are
a
one­
time
activity.
Therefore,
less
frequent
collection
is
not
practical.

3(
e)
General
Guidelines
The
focus
groups
will
not
violate
any
of
the
general
guidelines
described
in
EPA's
ICR
Handbook.

3(
f)
Confidentiality
The
focus
groups
will
be
recorded
using
audiotapes,
which
will
later
be
transcribed.

However,
individuals
will
not
be
identified
on
the
transcripts.
To
insure
that
the
focus
groups
include
a
representative
and
diverse
sample
of
individuals,
EPA
will
tabulate
basic
demographic
information
for
participants,
such
as
age,
ethnicity,
occupation,
and
income.
However,
no
personal
identifying
information
about
participants,
such
as
names,
phone
numbers,
or
addresses,
will
be
included
in
the
focus
group
transcripts.
Prior
to
commencing
any
audio
recordings,
respondents
would
be
informed
of
EPA's
intentions
to
audiotape
the
focus
group
proceedings,
and
informed
that
all
taped
responses
will
be
strictly
anonymous
and
confidential.

3(
g)
Sensitive
Questions
No
sensitive
questions
pertaining
to
private
or
personal
information,
such
as
sexual
behavior
or
religious
beliefs,
will
be
asked
during
the
focus
groups.
8
4.
The
Respondents
and
the
Information
Requested
4(
a)
Respondents
Following
generally
accepted
practice
(
e.
g.,
Desvousges
et
al.
1984),
EPA
will
recruit
seven
to
nine
individuals
for
each
focus
group.
Focus
group
participants
will
be
randomly
selected
by
marketing
research
firms
from
panels
of
focus
group
participants
maintained
by
each
firm.

Participants
are
eligible
if
they
are
18
years
of
age
or
older;
if
they
are
not
full­
time
students;
if
they
do
not
have
occupations
related
to
the
environment,
including
water
treatment
and
sewage,
electric
or
nuclear
power
companies;
and
if
they
have
not
participated
in
a
survey
or
focus
group
in
the
last
six
months.
Each
of
the
focus
groups
will
include
a
mix
of
individuals
with
diverse
socioeconomic
backgrounds,
based
on
characteristics
such
as
income,
marital
status,
age,
race,
education,

occupation,
and
gender.
Participants
will
be
asked
to
attend
a
focus
group
session
and
participate
in
a
discussion
of
specific
topics
led
by
a
moderator.
Participation
in
the
focus
group
sessions
is
voluntary.
Participants
will
have
to
expend
time,
effort,
and
travel
to
participate
in
the
focus
group
sessions.
Following
standard
practice
in
marketing
research,
participants
will
be
compensated
for
their
time
and
effort.
The
offered
compensation
would
also
help
to
avoid
the
self
selection
bias
that
otherwise
may
result.
The
proposed
incentive
fee
is
$
50.00
per
participant.

4(
b)
Information
Requested
(
I)
Data
items,
including
record
keeping
requirements
Participant
information
typically
maintained
by
marketing
research
firms:

NAME:

ADDRESS:

CITY/
STATE/
ZIP:

PHONE:

DATE/
TIME
OF
INTERVIEW:

RECRUITER:

ASK
TO
SPEAK
TO
______________
9
The
initial
screener
questionnaire
used
by
the
marketing
research
firms
to
recruit
participants
for
the
focus
groups
will
have
the
following
format:

(
Introduction
to
respondent:)
Hello,
I'm
_____________________,
with
Abt
Associates,
a
national
public
policy
research
and
consulting
firm.
We
are
conducting
focus
groups
with
people
like
you,
for
a
research
study
on
the
views
of
Americans
on
environmental
issues
that
affect
water
resources.
Focus
groups
are
small
groups
discussions
led
by
a
moderator.
If
you
qualify,
we
will
offer
you
$
50.00
to
participate
in
a
focus
group
at
our
facility.

(
If
the
respondent
asks,
this
research
is
funded
by
the
Water
Office
of
the
United
States
Environmental
Protection
Agency.)

I
would
like
to
ask
you
a
few
questions
to
see
if
you
qualify.
Let
me
assure
you,
this
is
NOT
a
sales
call
and
the
information
is
for
research
purposes
only.

(
SCHEDULE
CALL
BACK
IF
NECESSARY.
GET
FIRST
AND
LAST
NAME
AND
DIRECT
TELEPHONE
NUMBER
OF
RESPONDENT.)

1.
What
is
your
age
(
RECORD
AGE)
______

If
younger
than
18:
terminate.

2.
Record
Gender
Male
.............................................................
1
Female
.........................................................
2
3.
Have
you
participated
in
a
focus
group
in
the
past
6
months?
Yes
...............................................................
1
(
Terminate)
No
................................................................
2
(
Continue)

4.
What
is
your
occupation?
RECORD
OCCUPATION:_________________________

If
occupation
is
related
to
the
environment,
including
water
treatment
and
sewage,
electric
or
nuclear
power
companies,
etc.:
terminate.
If
full­
time
student:
terminate.

5.
Do
you
currently
own
or
rent
your
primary
residence?
Own
.........................................................................................
1
Rent
.........................................................................................
2
Don't
know/
Refused
.................................................................
8
6.
What
is
your
marital
status?
Married
....................................................................................
1
Living
as
married
.....................................................................
2
Widowed
..................................................................................
3
Divorced/
Separated
..................................................................
4
Single
.......................................................................................
5
Refused
....................................................................................
8
10
7.
Do
you
have
any
children,
including
any
stepchildren
and/
or
adopted
children?
Yes
...........................................................................................
1
No
............................................................................................
2
Don't
know/
Refused
.................................................................
8
8.
What
level
of
education
have
you
completed?
Less
than
high
school
..............................................................................................................
1
High
school
graduate,
grade
12,
or
GED
certificate
.................................................................
2
Some
college
or
university
work,
but
no
four­
year
degree
........................................................
3
College
or
university
graduate
(
BA,
BS
or
other
four­
year
degree
received)
.............................
4
Post
graduate
or
professional
schooling
after
college,
but
no
degree
yet
(
including
work
toward
degree)
...............................................................................................
5
Master's
degree
or
higher
completed
(
M.
D.,
J.
D.,
Ph.
D.,
Ed.
D.,
Sc.
D.)
...................................
6
REFUSED
...............................................................................................................................
7
9.
What
is
your
race
or
ethnicity?
(
Circle
all
categories
that
respondent
mentions.)
American
Indian
or
Alaska
Native
.............................
1
Asian
(
Specify_______________)
.............................
2
Black
or
African
American
........................................
3
Hispanic
or
Latino
(
Specify_____________)
..............
4
Native
Hawaiian
or
Other
Pacific
Islander
..................
5
Caucasian
...................................................................
6
Other
(
Specify_______________)
..............................
7
REFUSED
..................................................................
8
10.
What
is
your
annual
combined
household
income?
Up
to
$
20,000/
year
.....................................................
1
$
21,000­$
40,000
........................................................
2
$
41,000­$
75,000
........................................................
3
More
than
$
75,000
.....................................................
4
REFUSED
..................................................................
8
IF
THE
RESPONDENT
DOES
NOT
MEET
THE
SPECIFICATIONS
OF
A
GROUP,
PLEASE
THANK
RESPONDENT
AND
TERMINATE
THE
CALL.
PLEASE
USE
THE
FOLLOWING
STATEMENT:

"
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
time.
It
appears
that
you
do
not
qualify
for
our
group
discussion
."

IF
THE
RESPONDENT
MEETS
THE
CRITERIA
FOR
A
GROUP,
PLEASE
INVITE
THEM
TO
PARTICIPATE.

I
would
like
to
invite
you
to
participate
in
a
small
group
discussion
with
other
people
like
yourself
to
help
us
better
understand
the
way
Americans
think
about
environmental
problems
that
affect
water
resources.
The
discussion
will
last
for
about
90
minutes
and
will
be
audio­
taped
(
if
respondent
asks
why
say:
this
is
standard
procedure
and
it's
for
the
researchers
note­
taking
purposes
only.)
You
will
be
asked
to
sign
a
consent
form
when
you
arrive
at
the
facility.
The
discussion
will
be
held
on
(
GIVE
DATE
AND
TIME).

Will
you
be
able
to
attend?
11
Yes
.....
1
(
GIVE
DIRECTIONS
TO
FACILITY)

No
......
2
Thank
you
again
for
agreeing
to
participate.
The
session
will
begin
promptly
at
6:
00
PM
so
please
be
there
at
least
15
minutes
early
to
sign
the
consent
form.
If
you
are
not
there
on
time
you
will
not
be
invited
into
the
group.
We
look
forward
to
your
participation.

Individuals
who
attend
the
focus
groups
will
be
asked
to
discuss
their
knowledge
and
opinions
about
freshwater
and
marine
fish
resources.
The
moderator
of
the
focus
group
will
read
and
ask
participants
questions
from
the
example
script
provided
below.
To
maximize
the
research
value
of
the
focus
group
sessions
for
stated
preference
survey
design,
EPA
will
proceed
iteratively.
The
version
of
the
focus
group
script
provided
below
will
undergo
several
modifications
based
on
findings
from
initial
focus
groups.
The
goal
of
subsequent
modifications
is
to
develop
and
refine
survey
questions
to
ensure
greater
clarity
of
survey
questions
and,
as
a
result,
validity
of
the
survey
responses.
Modifications
will
also
be
tested
in
terms
of
their
ability
to
eliminate
or
reduce
biases
that
may
occur
in
surveys
that
have
undergone
insufficient
testing
and
development
(
Mitchell
and
Carson
1989).
Based
on
the
planned
iterative
modification
of
focus
group
and
draft
survey
questions,
the
structure
of
subsequent
draft
survey
instruments
will
depend
on
how
people
respond
to
surveys
and
questions
in
previous
focus
groups.

Focus
Group
Script
[
Terms
in
bold
may
change
depending
on
the
terms
mentioned
by
participants
in
the
discussion.]
1.
Introduction
Welcome!
Thanks
for
coming
out.
I
very
much
appreciate
you
joining
us
this
evening
for
a
focus
group.
Focus
groups
are
small
group
discussions
led
by
a
moderator.
My
name
is
_________,
and
I
am
from
___________.
I
will
moderate
this
focus
group
session.
The
reason
that
we
have
invited
you
to
participate
in
a
focus
group
is
because
we
are
in
the
middle
of
a
large­
scale
research
project
looking
at
how
people
view
different
resources.
Focus
groups
are
small
group
discussions
led
by
a
moderator.
Today,
we
will
be
talking
about
fish
and
fish
habitat,
but
I
don't
want
to
be
too
specific,
because
I
want
to
hear
what
you
want
to
say,
instead
of
having
you
listen
to
me.
Eventually,
we
will
be
designing
a
survey
to
try
to
figure
out
how
we
can
better
manage
these
resources
to
suit
people
and
how
to
deal
better
with
these
resources
as
a
society.
However,
before
we
can
even
get
to
the
point
where
we
design
this
survey,
we
need
to
listen
to
people
like
you
and
learn
how
you
think
about
these
resources
and
if
they
matter
or
don't
matter
to
you.
That
can
help
us
to
figure
out
what
questions
we
should
ask.
I
very
strongly
believe
that
if
you
ask
a
confusing
question,
you
are
going
to
get
an
answer
that
doesn't
mean
very
much.
And
so
that
is
why
we
are
here.
At
the
end
of
this
discussion,
I
will
be
perfectly
happy
to
answer
any
questions
you
may
have.
However,
at
this
point
I
don't
want
to
give
out
too
much
information
because
the
purpose
of
this
focus
group
is
to
learn
from
you.
I
don't
know
if
any
of
you
have
ever
done
anything
like
this
before,
but
I
view
this
as
an
informal
discussion
where
there
is
no
right
or
wrong
answer.
Even
if
I
say
something
that
seems
a
little
bit
weird
or
is
different
than
how
others
view
things,
it
is
ok.
I
will
learn
from
you.
It
is
important
that
we
all
respect
each
other
and
give
everyone
a
chance
to
talk.
This
session
will
go
between
one
and
one
and
a
half
hours,
depending
on
how
the
discussion
goes.
12
We
are
going
to
audiotape
this
discussion
to
help
us
remember
what
was
said.
Your
names
will
not
go
on
the
tape,
and
there
is
no
one
videotaping.
Before
I
start,
does
anyone
have
any
questions?
[
If
no
one
has
questions,
begin
discussion.]

2.
Discussion
topics
What
comes
to
mind
when
I
ask
you
about
fish
that
live
in
saltwater
and
freshwater
in
this
country
(
name
local
water
body
or
region)?
[
May
want
follow­
up
with
more
focused
geography
­
such
as
local
waters,
state
waters,
and
national
waters.
Otherwise,
the
question
is
too
vague
an
invites
unfocused
speculation.]

How
do
fish
in
(
name
geographical
region)
affect
you
and/
or
your
family,
if
at
all?
[
Again,
follow­
up
with
a
more
narrow
geographic
focus
if
needed]

What
are
the
relationships
that
you
see
between
fish
and
your
local
environment,
if
any?

What
types
of
fish
were
you
thinking
about
as
you
answered
our
previous
questions?
Are
these
fish
found
in
your
local
community
or
environment?

Are
some
kinds
of
fish
more
important
to
you
than
others?
Why
are
these
fish
more
important
to
you?

Is
it
important
to
you
that
they
are
in
your
immediate
area,
in
your
state,
or
elsewhere
in
the
United
States?

When
you
hear
the
term
"
fish
habitat"
what
kinds
of
things
do
you
think
about?
What
does
it
mean
to
you?

What
do
you
think
about
coastal
waters
or
freshwater
bodies?
Are
you
telling
me
about
places
in
your
local
area,
state,
and/
or
the
country?

In
your
experience
are
there
different
types
of
fresh
water
habitats
for
fish,
or
are
they
all
similar?
In
your
experience
are
there
different
types
of
salt
water
habitats
for
fish,
or
are
they
all
similar?

For
the
fish
that
you
told
me
were
important
to
you
earlier,
what
habitat/
s
do
they
live
in?

When
you
think
about
fish
and
fish
habitat,
do
you
consider
them
to
be
a
local
issue,
or
a
national
issue?
Does
it
matter
to
you
what
happens
to
fish
in
other
areas
of
the
country?

What
different
kinds
of
benefits
do
freshwater
(
coastal)
habitats
provide
to
you
personally?
Why
are
they
important?
Does
it
matter
to
you
what
different
types
of
fish
or
shellfish
live
in
these
habitats?

Do
you
derive
any
personal
benefits
from
your
use
of
fish?
Could
you
describe
them
to
me?

Tell
me
about
your
personal
experiences
with
 
or
perceptions
of­­
the
current
health/
quality
of
fish
populations/
resources?
13
In
your
experience,
what
causes
or
factors
affect
the
health/
quality
of
fish?

Have
you
heard
about
any
notable
changes
in
your
local
fish
or
fish
habitat
in
recent
years?
What
do
you
think
is
responsible
for
those
changes?

Have
you
experienced
or
are
you
familiar
with
any
particular
threats
to
fish
and
fish
habitat
in
your
area?
In
other
areas?

The
numbers
of
fish
in
the
environment
have
been
found
to
go
up
and
down
according
to
natural
events.
Does
it
matter
if
those
natural
changes
in
the
numbers
of
fish
are
somehow
changed
by
man­
made
events?
Have
you
heard
of
times
when
this
has
happened?
Does
it
matter
to
you
what
kinds
of
fish
are
affected?

Would
it
matter
to
you
if
you
heard
that
some
human
activity
had
killed
a
large
number
of
fish,
even
if
scientists
are
unsure
whether
it
would
have
any
long­
term
effect
on
fish
populations?
Compared
to
other
important
environmental
issues
that
affect
your
community,
how
would
you
rate
changes
in
fish
populations,
in
terms
of
importance
to
you
personally?

If
you
had
to
vote
for
a
referendum
on
a
program
that
would
reduce
fish
mortality
or
losses
of
fish
associated
with
man­
made
actions,
what
additional
information
would
you
want
to
know?

Do
you
think
you
would
vote
for
a
referendum
on
a
regulatory
program
that
would
increase
the
number
of
sport
or
commercial
fish?
What
if
that
program
would
increase
the
costs
of
living
faced
by
your
household,
through
such
thing
as
increased
electricity
bills?
Would
you
still
vote
for
the
program
knowing
most
of
those
fish
protected
would
never
be
caught
by
anyone?

Why
would
you
vote
for
(
or
against)
such
a
program?

Why
would
you
spend
your
money
to
protect
fish?

It
is
difficult
to
predict
the
impact
of
reducing
fish
losses
on
fish
populations
or
ecological
health.
If
you
were
told
it
is
not
possible
to
predict
the
impact
of
the
program
on
fish
populations
or
health,
how
would
that
affect
your
decision?

EPA
notes
that
not
all
discussion
topics
would
be
covered
in
one
focus
group
session
due
to
time
constrains.
In
subsequent
focus
groups,
the
moderator
would
also
offer
some
sample
valuation
questions
to
focus
group
participants.
The
focus
group
participants
will
be
debriefed
after
completing
responses
to
the
sample
survey
questions.

(
II)
Respondent
activities
We
expect
individuals
to
engage
in
the
following
activities
during
their
participation
in
the
focus
groups:
14

Respond
to
phone
recruitment
from
the
marketing
research
firm.


Travel
to
and
from
the
focus
group
location.


Review
and
sign
a
consent
form.


Participate
in
focus
group
discussion
and
answer
draft
survey
questions.

A
typical
participant
will
be
recruited
by
phone
to
participate
in
the
focus
group
(
about
10
minutes).
On
the
day
of
the
focus
group,
the
participant
will
travel
to
the
focus
group
facility
(
about
30
to
60
minutes
round­
trip).
Before
the
focus
group
session,
the
participant
will
review
and
sign
a
consent
form
(
15
minutes).
During
the
focus
group
session,
the
participant
will
participate
in
discussion
and
answer
draft
survey
questions
(
90
minutes).

5.
The
Information
Collected
­
Agency
Activities,
Collection
Methodology,
and
Information
Management
5(
a)
Agency
Activities
These
focus
groups
are
being
conducted
by
Abt
Associates
Inc.
and
are
funded
by
EPA
contract
No.
68­
C99­
239,
which
provides
funds
for
the
purpose
of
analyzing
the
economic
benefits
of
the
proposed
rule
for
Phase
III
facilities
subject
to
the
section
316(
b)
regulation.
EPA
would
use
information
obtained
from
the
focus
groups
to
design
and
pre­
test
a
survey
that
can
be
used
to
estimate
the
social
value
of
changes
in
impingement
and
entrainment
losses
and
populations
of
forage,
recreational,
and
commercial
species
of
fish.

5(
b)
Collection
Methodology
and
Information
Management
The
target
population
for
the
focus
groups
is
members
of
households
of
the
United
States
who
are
18
years
of
age
or
older,
who
are
not
full­
time
students,
whose
occupation
is
not
related
to
the
environment,
including
water
treatment
and
sewage,
electric
or
nuclear
power
companies,

and
who
have
not
participated
in
a
survey
or
focus
group
in
the
last
six
months.
EPA,
with
15
assistance
from
the
marketing
research
firms,
will
take
measures
to
recruit
individuals
from
diverse
socioeconomic
backgrounds.

As
a
means
of
recording
information
provided
by
focus
group
participants,
the
focus
groups
will
be
audiotaped
and
then
transcribed.
Individuals
will
not
be
identified
in
the
transcripts.

EPA
will
use
the
information
to
aid
in
designing
questions
for
its
stated
preference
survey.

5(
c)
Small
Entity
Flexibility
This
survey
will
be
administered
to
individuals
(
not
businesses)
who
will
be
compensated
for
their
time
and
effort.
This
section
is
not
applicable.

5(
d)
Collection
Schedule
The
focus
group
schedule
will
be
as
follows:

Table
A2:
Duration
of
Focus
Group
Activities
Activity
Duration
of
Each
Activity
(
in
days)
Total
Elapsed
Time
Period
for
Project
Following
OMB
Approval
(
in
days)

Per
Focus
Group
Focus
Group
Participants
Recruited
7
per
group
7
Focus
Group
Session
1
per
group
7
Total
per
Group
8
per
group
8
Total
for
12
Focus
Groups
Total
for
12
Focus
Groups
96
96
Preparation
of
Focus
Group
Report
10
106
6.
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
and
Cost
of
Collection
6(
a)
Estimating
Respondent
Burden
7
U.
S.
Department
of
Labor,
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics.
"
Employer
costs
for
Employee
Compensation:
March
2004".
Press
release.
June
24,
2004.
http://
www.
bls.
gov/
news.
release/
pdf/
ecec.
pdf.

16
The
focus
groups
will
require
subjects
to
expend
time
on
several
activities.
The
total
national
burden
estimate
for
all
focus
group
activities
is
256
hours.
A
typical
focus
group
participant
will
spend
10
minutes
responding
to
the
phone
recruiting
process;
30
to
60
minutes
traveling
to
and
from
the
focus
group
facility;
15
minutes
reviewing
and
signing
a
consent
form;

and
90
minutes
participating
in
discussion
and
answering
draft
survey
questions,
for
a
total
of
160
minutes
(
2.66
hours)
on
average.
EPA's
burden
estimates
are
based
on
average
duration
of
similar
activities
in
the
past
focus
groups.
Based
on
the
assumption
that
there
would
be
12
focus
groups
with
an
average
of
eight
participants
each,
the
total
national
burden
estimate
for
all
participants
is
256
hours.
This
burden
estimate
reflects
a
one­
time
expenditure
in
a
single
year.

EPA
does
not
anticipate
any
capital
or
operation
and
maintenance
costs
for
respondents.

6(
b)
Estimating
Respondent
Costs
According
to
the
Bureau
of
Labor
Statistics,
the
average
hourly
wage
for
private
sector
workers
in
the
United
States
is
$
17.71
(
2004$).
7
Assuming
an
average
burden
estimate
of
2.66
hours
per
participant
and
an
average
hourly
wage
of
$
17.71,
the
total
cost
per
participant
will
be
$
47.23.

6(
c)
Estimating
Agency
Burden
and
Costs
This
project
is
being
undertaken
by
Abt
Associates
Inc.
with
funding
of
$
70,000
from
EPA's
contract
No.
68­
C99­
239,
which
provides
funds
for
the
purpose
of
analyzing
the
economic
benefits
of
the
proposed
rule
for
Phase
III
facilities
subject
to
the
section
316
(
b)
regulation.
Abt
Associates
Inc.
staff
are
expected
to
spend
520
hours
conducting
focus
groups
and
designing
and
pre­
testing
draft
survey
questions
that
can
be
used
to
estimate
the
social
value
of
changes
populations
of
forage,
recreational,
and
commercial
species
of
fish.
In
addition
to
the
effort
expended
by
Abt
Associates
Inc.,
EPA
staff
are
expected
to
spend
200
hours
managing
and
reviewing
this
project.
The
cost
of
this
EPA
staff
time
is
$
6,035.
Thus,
total
agency
and
17
contractor
burden
is
720
hours,
with
a
total
cost
of
$
76,035.

6(
d)
Respondent
Universe
and
Total
Burden
Costs
EPA
expects
the
total
cost
for
focus
group
participants
to
be
$
4,534
(
2004$),
based
on
a
total
burden
estimate
of
256
hours
and
an
hourly
wage
of
$
17.71.

6(
e)
Bottom
Line
Burden
Hours
and
Costs
The
following
table
presents
EPA's
estimate
of
the
total
bottom
line
burden
and
costs
of
the
focus
group
information
collection:

Table
A3:
Total
Estimated
Bottom
Line
Burden
and
Cost
Summary
Affected
Individuals
Total
Burden
Total
Cost
(
2004$)

Focus
Group
Participants
256
hours
$
4,534
EPA
staff
200
hours
$
6,035
EPA's
contractora
520
hours
$
70,000
Total
Costs
976
hours
$
80,569
a
The
total
cost
listed
for
EPA's
contractor
includes
the
incentive
fee
for
focus
group
participants.
This
fee
is
$
50
per
participant,
so
the
total
cost
of
this
fee
for
12
focus
groups
with
seven
to
nine
participants
each
is
$
4,800.

6(
f)
Reasons
for
Change
in
Burden
The
focus
groups
are
a
one­
time
data
collection
activity.

6(
g)
Burden
Statement
EPA
estimates
that
the
public
reporting
and
record
keeping
burden
associated
with
the
focus
groups
will
average
2.66
hours
per
respondent
(
i.
e.,
a
total
of
256
hours
of
burden
divided
among
96
focus
group
participants).
Burden
means
the
total
time,
effort,
or
financial
resources
18
expended
by
persons
to
generate,
maintain,
retain,
or
disclose
or
provide
information
to
or
for
a
Federal
agency.
This
includes
the
time
needed
to
review
instructions;
develop,
acquire,
install,
and
utilize
technology
and
systems
for
the
purposes
of
collecting,
validating,
and
verifying
information,

processing
and
maintaining
information,
and
disclosing
and
providing
information;
adjust
the
existing
ways
to
comply
with
any
previously
applicable
instructions
and
requirements;
train
personnel
to
be
able
to
respond
to
a
collection
of
information;
search
data
sources;
complete
and
review
the
collection
of
information;
and
transmit
or
otherwise
disclose
the
information.
An
agency
may
not
conduct
or
sponsor,
and
a
person
is
not
required
to
respond
to,
a
collection
of
information
unless
it
displays
a
currently
valid
OMB
control
number.
The
OMB
control
numbers
for
EPA's
regulations
are
listed
in
40
CFR
part
9
and
48
CFR
chapter
15.

To
comment
on
the
Agency's
need
for
this
information,
the
accuracy
of
the
provided
burden
estimates,
and
any
suggested
methods
for
minimizing
respondent
burden,
including
the
use
of
automated
collection
techniques,
EPA
has
established
a
public
docket
for
this
ICR
under
Docket
ID
No.
OW­
2004­
0020,
which
is
available
for
public
viewing
at
the
Water
Docket
in
the
EPA
Docket
Center
(
EPA/
DC),
EPA
West,
Room
B102,
1301
Constitution
Ave.,
NW,

Washington,
DC.
The
EPA
Docket
Center
Public
Reading
Room
is
open
from
8:
30
a.
m.
to
4:
30
p.
m.,
Monday
through
Friday,
excluding
legal
holidays.
The
telephone
number
for
the
Reading
Room
is
(
202)
566­
1744,
and
the
telephone
number
for
the
Water
Docket
is
(
202)
566­
2426.
An
electronic
version
of
the
public
docket
is
available
through
EPA
Dockets
(
EDOCKET)
at
http://
www.
epa.
gov/
edocket.
Use
EDOCKET
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.
Once
in
the
system,
select
"
search,"
then
key
in
the
docket
ID
number
identified
above.
Also,
you
can
send
comments
to
the
Office
of
Information
and
Regulatory
Affairs,
Office
of
Management
and
Budget,
725
17th
Street,
NW,
Washington,
DC
20503,
Attention:
Desk
Office
for
EPA.
Please
include
the
EPA
Docket
ID
No.
OW­
2004­
0020
and
OMB
control
number
(
2040­
XXXX)
in
any
correspondence.

Part
B
of
the
Supporting
Statement
The
primary
purpose
of
the
focus
groups
is
to
collect
qualitative
information
that
will
19
enable
EPA
to
design
a
survey
to
elicit
respondents'
values
for
changes
in
impingement
and
entrainment
losses
and
changes
in
populations
of
forage,
recreational,
and
commercial
species
of
fish.
Thus,
this
section
of
the
supporting
statement
is
not
necessary.
