July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 1 

## Date July 2, 2012 To The Section 316(b) Existing Facilities Rule Record From Erik Helm, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Subject 316(b) Stated Preference (SP) Survey – Northeast Survey Example

EPA published a Notice of Data Availability (NODA) on the 316(b) stated preference (SP) survey on June 12, 2012. EPA documented preliminary data, anal ysis, and results in the survey support document (DCN 11-4524) and the survey analysis memo to the record (DCN 11-4525). The SP survey included four survey regions and a separate national survey. Table 1 lists the states included in each survey region. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide state programs with an example of the Northeast SP survey. Examples for other survey regions are provi ded in separate memoranda to the record. 1



## Table 1—Target Sample Sizes and Geographic Stratification Design Survey Region States Included Northeast CT, DC, DE, MA, MD, ME, NH, NJ, NY, PA, RI, VT Southeast AL, FL, GA, LA, MS, NC, SC, TX, VA Inland AR, AZ, CO, ID, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, MI, MN, MO, MT, ND, NE, NM, NV, OH, OK, SD, TN, UT, WI, WV, WY 

## Pacific CA, OR, WA National Survey Version U.S. (excluding AK and HI)



## The 316(b) SP survey was designed as a choice experime nt in which each respondent is asked to answer three separate policy questions. Each policy question presents the current situation (no policy) and two new policy options (Option A and Option B). The res pondent is asked to choose his or her preferred policy option. The current situation and new policy opti ons are described in terms of five attributes: (1) commercial fish populations, (2) fish populations (a ll fish), (3) fish saved per year, (4) condition of aquatic ecosystems, and (5) household cost. EPA used an experimental design to specify attribute levels for the policy questions, to make the most efficient use of survey responses. 2 

## The first step in creating the experimental design was to develop the possible attribute levels for inclusion in the survey. Table 2 summarizes the attribute le vels used for the North east survey region. The experimental design included three different possible attribute levels for the environmental attributes (1 through 4 above) and six possible attribute levels for household cost under the new policy options (Option A and Option B). EPA then used the experimental de sign to “mix and match” the attribute levels and create 72 unique policy questions, each characterized by the current situation and two new policy options. The experimental design for the Northeast survey vers ion is presented in Table 3. Each row in Table 3 corresponds to one of the 72 different policy ques tions. EPA created 24 different versions of the Northeast survey because each indivi dual survey includes only three po licy questions (3×24=72). Table 3

1 

### The record also includes example memoranda for the Sout heast region (DCN 11-4537), Inland region (DCN 11-4538), Pacific region (DCN 11-4539), and national survey (DCN 11-4540).

2 

### Refer to Section A of the survey support document for additional detail regarding EP A’s method for generating the experimental design.July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 2 

## also lists the survey version to which each policy question was assigned. Choice questions 1, 2, and 3 correspond to survey questions 4, 5, and 6, respectivel y. The only difference between the versions is the attribute levels presented in survey qu estions 4, 5, and 6. Version 1 of the Northeast survey is attached to this memorandum. All versions for the Northeast survey are available in the docket for the Section 316(b) existing facilities rule (DCN 11-4500).

Table 2—Attribute Levels Assigned Across Policy Options and Survey Versions for the Northeast Survey Region

Attribute Baseline (Status Quo) a 

### Attribute Levels Assigned to Option A vs. Option B Pairs 1 2 3 4 5 6 Commercial Fish Populations 42% 43% 45% 48%

- - - Fish Populations (all fish) 26% 27% 28% 30%

- - - Fish Saved per Year 0% 5% 50% 95%

- - - Aquatic Ecosystem Condition 50% 51% 52% 54%

- - - Household Costs $0 $12 $24 $36 $48 $60 $72

a 

### Each question includes a “no polic y” option, characterized by th e baseline levels for each a ttribute and a household cost of $0. The baseline levels are the same for all choice que stions and all 24 versions of the Northeast survey.July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 3 

## Table 3—Experimental Design for the Northeast Survey Region

Survey Version Policy Question a 

### Option A Option B Com. Fish. b Fish. Pop. c Fish Saved Aq. Cond. d Cost Com. Fish. Fish. Pop Fish Saved Aq. Cond. Cost 1 1 45% 30% 5% 52% $48 48% 27% 5% 54% $48 1 2 48% 28% 50% 51% $60 48% 30% 95% 52% $72 1 3 48% 27% 50% 52% $72 45% 27% 50% 51% $12 2 1 48% 30% 5% 52% $48 43% 28% 50% 52% $12 2 2 45% 28% 50% 54% $24 48% 27% 50% 51% $36 2 3 43% 27% 5% 54% $36 45% 27% 95% 51% $24 3 1 48% 30% 5% 51% $48 48% 27% 5% 54% $72 3 2 45% 28% 95% 54% $60 45% 28% 95% 52% $12 3 3 43% 28% 5% 54% $12 43% 30% 50% 54% $24 4 1 45% 28% 95% 54% $72 43% 30% 5% 51% $72 4 2 48% 30% 95% 52% $36 45% 28% 50% 54% $36 4 3 45% 27% 50% 51% $60 43% 27% 95% 52% $48 5 1 48% 27% 50% 52% $24 45% 30% 50% 54% $48 5 2 45% 27% 5% 51% $36 43% 28% 5% 51% $36 5 3 43% 30% 50% 54% $12 45% 28% 5% 51% $60 6 1 43% 28% 95% 52% $36 43% 30% 5% 54% $72 6 2 48% 27% 95% 54% $60 48% 28% 95% 52% $36 6 3 43% 28% 50% 51% $48 45% 27% 50% 51% $24 7 1 43% 30% 50% 54% $48 43% 30% 95% 51% $12 7 2 48% 28% 95% 51% $24 45% 27% 5% 54% $60 7 3 45% 27% 5% 51% $36 48% 28% 50% 52% $72 8 1 45% 30% 5% 51% $36 45% 30% 95% 54% $72 8 2 43% 28% 95% 51% $60 48% 28% 50% 51% $72 8 3 45% 28% 50% 52% $60 43% 28% 5% 52% $24 9 1 48% 27% 5% 54% $72 48% 28% 50% 51% $48 9 2 43% 30% 50% 51% $24 45% 30% 95% 52% $72 9 3 43% 28% 95% 52% $12 43% 27% 95% 54% $48 10 1 48% 30% 50% 51% $60 43% 30% 50% 51% $24 10 2 45% 28% 95% 54% $48 45% 30% 95% 52% $48 10 3 43% 28% 50% 52% $36 48% 28% 95% 54% $72 11 1 45% 28% 5% 51% $12 48% 30% 95% 52% $60 11 2 48% 30% 95% 54% $60 43% 27% 5% 54% $24 11 3 43% 30% 50% 52% $36 45% 28% 5% 51% $12 12 1 48% 28% 95% 51% $36 48% 30% 50% 51% $48 12 2 43% 27% 5% 54% $60 45% 27% 95% 52% $60 12 3 43% 30% 50% 52% $72 43% 27% 50% 54% $72 13 1 48% 27% 95% 54% $24 48% 30% 5% 52% $24 13 2 45% 27% 50% 51% $12 43% 28% 95% 54% $48 13 3 43% 30% 5% 52% $60 45% 30% 5% 51% $60 14 1 45% 30% 50% 54% $36 48% 28% 95% 54% $24 14 2 48% 28% 5% 52% $60 45% 27% 95% 52% $72July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 4 

## Table 3—Experimental Design for the Northeast Survey Region

Survey Version Policy Question a 

### Option A Option B Com. Fish. b Fish. Pop. c Fish Saved Aq. Cond. d Cost Com. Fish. Fish. Pop Fish Saved Aq. Cond. Cost 14 3 48% 27% 95% 51% $48 43% 30% 50% 51% $60 15 1 43% 27% 5% 54% $36 45% 30% 50% 52% $12 15 2 45% 27% 50% 52% $48 48% 27% 5% 52% $24 15 3 45% 30% 95% 51% $72 43% 28% 50% 54% $60 16 1 43% 28% 5% 54% $48 48% 28% 50% 54% $60 16 2 48% 30% 50% 54% $48 45% 28% 5% 51% $36 16 3 45% 27% 5% 52% $72 43% 30% 95% 51% $24 17 1 45% 27% 95% 54% $48 45% 28% 95% 51% $72 17 2 45% 27% 95% 52% $24 45% 30% 50% 54% $12 17 3 48% 28% 5% 54% $12 48% 27% 50% 52% $60 18 1 43% 27% 95% 52% $48 43% 28% 5% 52% $36 18 2 45% 27% 50% 54% $12 48% 30% 5% 54% $72 18 3 43% 30% 5% 51% $24 48% 27% 95% 51% $12 19 1 43% 30% 95% 51% $12 48% 30% 5% 52% $36 19 2 45% 27% 95% 52% $60 43% 27% 95% 51% $36 19 3 48% 28% 5% 52% $72 45% 28% 5% 52% $24 20 1 43% 30% 5% 52% $60 48% 30% 5% 51% $48 20 2 45% 30% 95% 51% $12 45% 28% 50% 52% $24 20 3 48% 28% 50% 54% $36 43% 27% 5% 52% $12 21 1 48% 27% 95% 51% $72 48% 27% 5% 54% $12 21 2 45% 30% 5% 54% $24 43% 27% 50% 52% $36 21 3 43% 28% 95% 52% $24 48% 28% 95% 51% $24 22 1 43% 27% 50% 51% $60 43% 28% 5% 54% $12 22 2 43% 30% 95% 54% $72 45% 27% 50% 52% $48 22 3 48% 27% 5% 52% $12 43% 30% 95% 51% $36 23 1 43% 27% 5% 51% $24 43% 28% 5% 52% $48 23 2 48% 27% 95% 52% $12 48% 30% 95% 51% $12 23 3 48% 28% 50% 51% $48 45% 30% 95% 54% $36 24 1 45% 28% 50% 52% $12 48% 30% 50% 54% $60 24 2 43% 27% 50% 54% $72 45% 27% 5% 51% $36 24 3 48% 30% 5% 54% $24 43% 28% 95% 54% $72 Notes:

a Policy questions 1, 2, 3 correspond to survey questions 4,5, and 6, respectively. b “Com.fish” is an abbreviation for commercial fish populations score.

c “Fish Pop.” is an abbreviation for th e fish populations (all fish) score. d “Aq. Cond.” is an abbreviation for the aquatic ecosystem condition score.July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 5July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 6July 2, 201 2 3 16(b) SP Surv e y – Northeast S urvey Exampl e | pg 7July 2, 201 2 3 16(b) SP Surv e y – Northeast S urvey Exampl e | pg 8July 2, 201 2 3 16(b) SP Surv e y – Northeast S urvey Exampl e | pg 9July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 10July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 11July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 12July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 13July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 14July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 15July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 16July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 17July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 18July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 19July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 20July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 21July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 22July 2, 201 2 3 1 6(b) SP Surve y – Northeast S u rvey Example | pg 23July 2, 2012 316(b) SP Survey – Northeast Survey Example | pg 24