May 16, 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 1

Date May 16, 2014

To The Final Section 316(b) Existing Facilities Rule Record

From Abt Associates

Subject Cost and Impacts for the Final Rule and Other Options Considered Under Alternative 

Assumptions of the Effect of the Impoundments Provision

1 Overview

As described in Section I. G. of the Preamble for the final existing facilities rule, and as defined at 

§125.92, Special definitions, (c) (2) of the final rule, CCRS includes a system with impoundments of 

waters of the United States where the impoundment was lawfully created for the purpose of serving as 

part of the cooling water system (hereafter referred to as the Impoundments Provision). Under this 

provision, facilities with qualifying impoundments of waters of the United States are subject to the final 

rule, but may meet the rule’s BTA standard for impingement mortality through operation of a CCRS in 

the baseline.1

EPA identified 64 facilities with cooling systems that contain impoundments that may qualify as CCRS

under the Impoundments Provision. This memorandum reports the costs and impacts of the final rule and 

other options EPA considered under alternative assumptions concerning with cooling water system 

impoundments would qualify as baseline CCRS:

1. All regulated facilities with an impoundment would qualify as baseline CCRS and meet the BTA 

standards for impingement mortality without installing additional compliance technology and 

would be assigned administrative activities commensurate with baseline CCRS (hereafter referred 

to as Assumption 1).

2

2. No regulated facilities with an impoundment would qualify as baseline CCRS (hereafter referred 

to as Assumption 2); these facilities may need to install compliance technology and meet 

additional administrative activities assigned to non-baseline CCRS facilities under the final rule

and other options considered.

3

For a number of analyses in the Economic Analysis (EA), EPA reported a range of costs and impacts 

based on these assumptions. For those analyses where EPA did not report a range in the EA, the tables for 

which values differ under the two assumptions are included in this memorandum (refer to the EA for 

 

1 The final rule also specifies that Permit Directors will determine whether an impoundment minimizes the withdrawal of 

water for cooling purposes and would therefore meet the CCRS definition. As a result, in some cases, facilities with cooling 

water system impoundments may not qualify as baseline CCRS and would need to install additional technology to meet the 

final rule’s BTA standard for impingement mortality.

2

For Proposal Option 2, EPA also assumed that these facilities will meet entrainment technology requirements, as applicable.

3

In the analysis for the final rule, it is possible that some facilities with cooling water system impoundments would not need 

to install additional compliance technology under the assumption that none of the facilities cooling water system 

impoundments qualify as baseline CCRS. This exception occurs because facilities may bypass the final rule’s compliance 

technology requirement for a different reason – e.g., being required to install sufficient technology by an existing State rule, 

such as New York State’s requirement that facilities with DIF of 20 mgd or greater install CCRS, a technology that would 

generally meet the final rule’s IM technology requirement. 

Memorandum

Environment and Resources
May 16, 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 2

more information on these tables). As discussed in the EA, costs and impacts under Assumption 2 are 

higher than under Assumption 1 because more facilities are expected to incur compliance-related costs 

(for the difference in facilities expected to incur technology costs under each assumption, see Table 2-1

and Table 2-2). The costs and impact tables are reported in the following sections:

 EA Chapter 3: Facilities Incurring Costs (Section 2)

 EA Chapter 3: Compliance Costs (Section 3)

 EA Chapter 8: Social Costs and Benefits (Section 4)

 EA Chapter 10: Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Analysis (Section 5)

 EA Chapter 11: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) Analysis (Section 6)

2 EA Chapter 3: Facilities Incurring Costs

Table 2-1: Number of Electric Generators with and without Additional Technology Requirements 

for the Final Rule and Other Options Considereda

Facility Categories

Assumption 1c Assumption 2c

Proposal 

Option 4

Final 

RuleExisting 

Units

Proposal 

Option 2

Proposal 

Option 4

Final 

RuleExisting 

Units

Proposal 

Option 2

Total number of Electric Generators 544 544 544 544 544 544

Facilities meeting performance 

requirements in their baseline 254 239 203 223 202 163

 - Facilities with baseline closed-cycle 

recirculating systems 149 149 149 109 109 109

 - New York facilities with DIF≥20mgdb28 28 28 28 28 28

 - California facilities that use coastal and 

estuarine waters for power plant coolingb 16 16 16 16 16 16

 - Facilities with intake velocity equal to 

or less than 0.5 feet per second 35 35 8 39 39 9

 - Other facilities meeting performance 

requirements in the baseline 26 11 2 32 11 2

Number of Electric Generators with 

additional technology requirements 290 305 341 321 342 380

a. These are weighted facility counts estimated using facility count-based weights; these values are rounded to the nearest integer and may not 

sum to the reported totals due to rounding (see Appendix H).

b. These facilities are subject to State regulations that are at least as stringent as the final rule and the other options considered.

c. Assumption 1: All facilities with impoundments are considered baseline CCRS. Assumption 2: No facilities with impoundments are 

considered baseline CCRS.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this report

Table 2-2: Number of Manufacturers with and without Additional Technology Requirements for 

the Final Rule and Other Options Considereda

Facility Categories

Assumption 1c Assumption 2c

Proposal 

Option 4

Final 

RuleExisting 

Units

Proposal 

Option 2

Proposal 

Option 4

Final 

RuleExisting 

Units

Proposal 

Option 2

Total number of Manufacturers 521 521 521 521 521 521

Facilities meeting performance 

requirements in their baseline 419 224 214 418 201 191

 - Facilities with baseline closed-cycle 

recirculating systems 103 103 103 79 79 79

 - New York facilities with DIF≥20mgdb20 20 20 20 20 20

 - Facilities with intake velocity equal to 

or less than 0.5 feet per second 79 79 79 79 79 79

 - Other facilities meeting performance 

requirements in the baseline 218 23 13 241 24 14

Number of Manufacturers with additional 

technology requirements 101 297 307 102 320 330
May 16, 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 3

Table 2-2: Number of Manufacturers with and without Additional Technology Requirements for 

the Final Rule and Other Options Considereda

a. These are weighted facility counts estimated using technical weights; these values are rounded to the nearest integer and may not sum to the 

reported totals due to rounding (see Appendix H).

b. These facilities are subject to State regulations that are at least as stringent as the final rule and the other options considered.

c. Assumption 1: All facilities with impoundments are considered baseline CCRS. Assumption 2: No facilities with impoundments are 

considered baseline CCRS.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this report

3 EA Chapter 3: Compliance Costs

Table 3-1: Annualized Compliance Costs to Electric Generators and 

Manufacturers, for the Final Rule and Other Options Considered 

(Millions; $2011; at 2013)a

Facility Group Assumption 1b Assumption 2b

Proposal Option 4

Pre-Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $224.1 $265.0 

Manufacturers $55.2 $56.6 

Total - Existing Unitsa$279.4 $321.6 

New Units $1.7 $1.7 

Totala$281.1 $323.4

After-Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $147.0 $173.2 

Manufacturers $33.4 $34.2 

Total - Existing Unitsa$180.4 $207.5

New Units $1.1 $1.1 

Totala$181.4 $208.6

Final Rule

Pre-Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $224.9 $265.9 

Manufacturers $78.8 $81.1 

Total - Existing Unitsa$303.6 $347.0 

New Units $1.7 $1.7 

Totala$305.4 $348.7 

After-Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $147.6 $174.0 

Manufacturers $47.5 $49.0 

Total - Existing Unitsa$195.1 $223.0 

New Units $1.1 $1.1 

Totala$196.2 $224.0

Proposal Option 2

Pre-Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $3,763.5 $4,168.8 

Manufacturers $243.7 $249.6 

Total - Existing Unitsa$4,007.2 $4,418.4 

New Units $1.7 $1.7 

Totala$4,008.9 $4,420.2

After-Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $2,545.7 $2,818.7 

Manufacturers $146.7 $150.4 

Total - Existing Unitsa$2,692.3 $2,969.2

New Units $1.1 $1.1 

Totala$2,693.4 $2,970.2 

a. Values may not sum to reported totals due to independent rounding.

b. Assumption 1: All impoundments are considered baseline CCRS. Assumption 2: No impoundments are 

considered baseline CCRS.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this memorandum
May 16, 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 4

4 EA Chapter 8: Social Costs and Benefits

Table 4-1: Annualized Total Social Costs and Benefits for Final Rule and Other Options 

EPA Considered – Existing Units and New Units Provisions (Millions; $2011; at 2013)

Discount 

Rate Cost CategoryNew Units

Existing Units Existing and New Units

Proposal 

Option 4 Final Rule

Proposal 

Option 2

Proposal 

Option 4 Final Rule

Proposal 

Option 2

Assumption 1: All Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

3%

Total 

Monetized 

Benefits

-$0.2 $31.0 $33.0 -$1,542.6 $30.8 $32.8 -$1,542.4

Total Social 

Costs

$2.6 $251.8 $272.4 $3,643.2 $254.3 $274.9 $3,645.8

7%

Total 

Monetized 

Benefits

-$0.1 $27.2 $28.7 -$1,148.2 $27.1 $28.6 -$1,148.1

Total Social 

Costs

$2.0 $272.1 $295.3 $3,583.0 $274.1 $297.3 $3,585.0

Assumption 2: No Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

3%

Total 

Monetized 

Benefits

-$0.2 $31.7 $33.7 -$1,542.9 $31.5 $33.5 -$1,543.1

Total Social 

Costs

$2.6 $283.2 $304.8 $4,045.2 $285.7 $307.3 $4,047.7

7%

Total 

Monetized 

Benefits

-$0.1 $27.8 $29.3 -$1,148.4 $27.7 $29.2 -$1,148.5

Total Social 

Costs

$2.0 $306.9 $331.0 $3,949.5 $308.9 $333.0 $3,951.5

a. Values may not sum to reported totals due to independent rounding.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this memorandum
May 16, 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 5

5 EA Chapter 10: Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) Analysis

Table 5-1: Summary of Findings of the Small Entity Impact Analysis for the Final Rule and Other 

Options Considered, by Regulated Industry Segment and Overall

Regulatory 

Option and 

Regulated 

Industry 

Segment

Assumption 1e Assumption 2e

Cost ≥1% of Revenue Cost ≥3% of Revenue Cost ≥1% of Revenue Cost ≥3% of Revenue

Number 

of Small 

Entities

% of Small 

Entitiesb

Number 

of Small 

Entitiesc

% of Small 

Entitiesb

Number 

of Small 

Entities

% of Small 

Entitiesb

Number 

of Small 

Entitiesc

% of Small 

Entitiesb

Electric Generators

Proposal 

Option 4

0 to 3 0% to 10% 0 0% 2 to 4 4% to 13% 0 0%

Final Rule 0 to 3 0% to 10% 0 0% 2 to 4 4% to 13% 0 0%

Proposal 

Option 2

6 to 7 12% to 23% 1 to 3 2% to 10% 8 15% to 26% 3 to 4 6% to 13%

Manufacturersa

Proposal 

Option 4

0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0%

Final Rule 3 to 4 8% to 18% 0 to 1 0% to 6% 3 to 4 8% to 18% 0 to 1 0% to 6%

Proposal 

Option 2

3 to 4 8% to 18% 0 to 1 0% to 6% 3 to 4 8% to 18% 0 to 1 0% to 6%

Electric Generators and Manufacturersa,d

Proposal 

Option 4

0 to 3 0% to 6% 0 0% 2 to 4 2% to 8% 0 0%

Final Rule 3 to 7 4% to 13% 0 to 1 0% to 2% 5 to 8 6% to 15% 0 to 1 0% to 2%

Proposal 

Option 2

9 to 11 10% to 21% 1 to 4 1% to 8% 11 to 12 12% to 23% 3 to 5 3% to 10%

a. Entity counts used in these calculations exclude Manufacturers in Other Industries.

b. Percentage of small entities incurring a cost-to-revenue impact involves range estimates in both the numerator (number of affected entities) 

and denominator (number of regulated entities).

c. Entities with cost-to-revenue ratios of at least 3 percent are included in the number of entities with cost-to-revenue such ratios of at least 1 

percent.

d. For the firm-level cost-to-revenue analysis, EPA analyzed two cases for Electric Generators and two cases for Manufacturers. When 

combining the results for Electric Generators and Manufactures, this results in four potential combinations. EPA reported the range of number

of small entities and percentage of small entities across these four cases. Due to differences in firm counts across these four cases, the values 

reported as the range for number of small entities may not directly correspond to the values used to calculate the range reported for the 

percentage of small entities.

e. Assumption 1: All impoundments are considered baseline CCRS. Assumption 2: No impoundments are considered baseline CCRS.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this memorandum
May 16, 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 6

6 EA Chapter 11: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) Analysis4

Table 6-1: Compliance Costs to Government Entities that Own Electric Generators (Millions; 

$2011)

Ownership 

Type

Number of Regulated 

Facilities (weighted)a

Total Weighted, 

Annualized Pre-tax 

Cost

Average Annualized 

Cost per Facilityb

Maximum Annualized 

Cost per Facilityc

Assumption 1: All Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

Proposal Option 4

Municipality 38 $4.4 $0.1 $0.5 

State 9 $5.9 $0.6 $1.3 

Other Political 

Subdivision

7 $0.6 $0.1 $0.2 

All Facilities 54 $10.9 $0.2 $1.3 

Final Rule

Municipality 38 $4.8 $0.1 $0.5 

State 9 $5.9 $0.6 $1.3 

Other Political 

Subdivision

7 $0.6 $0.1 $0.2 

All Facilities 54 $11.3 $0.2 $1.3 

Proposal Option 2

Municipality 38 $28.9 $0.8 $4.3 

State 9 $78.1 $8.4 $16.0 

Other Political 

Subdivision

7 $4.6 $0.7 $1.4 

All Facilities 54 $111.5 $2.1 $16.0 

Assumption 2: No Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

Proposal Option 4

Municipality 31 $4.2 $0.1 $0.5 

State 10 $6.1 $0.6 $1.4 

Other Political 

Subdivision

7 $0.8 $0.1 $0.2 

All Facilities 48 $11.2 $0.2 $1.4 

Final Rule

Municipality 31 $4.6 $0.1 $0.5 

State 10 $6.1 $0.6 $1.4 

Other Political 

Subdivision

7 $0.9 $0.1 $0.2 

All Facilities 48 $11.6 $0.2 $1.4 

Proposal Option 2

Municipality 31 $29.4 $1.0 $4.4 

State 10 $80.9 $8.4 $15.3 

Other Political 

Subdivision

7 $4.7 $0.6 $1.6 

All Facilities 48 $114.9 $2.4 $15.3 

a. This table reports cost estimates, which are sample-weighted values, and therefore facility counts in this table also reflect sample weighting. 

For details on sample weights see Appendix H.

b. EPA calculated average cost per facility using the total number of regulated facilities owned by entities in a given ownership category.

c. Reflects maximum of un-weighted costs to explicitly analyzed facilities only.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this memorandum

 

4

 Note that the weighting scheme for Electric Generators differs under Assumption 1 and Assumption 2, leading to different 

facility counts. For more information on the sample weights used for Electric Generators under each assumption, refer to 

Appendix H of the EA.
May 16, 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 7

Table 6-2: Compliance Costs to Entities that Own Regulated Electric Generators by Ownership 

Type and Size (Millions; $2011)

Ownership Type Entity Size

Number of 

Facilities 

(weighted)a,b

Total Annualized 

Pre-Tax 

Compliance 

Costsb

Average 

Annualized Pretax Compliance 

Cost per Facilityc

Maximum 

Facility 

Annualized Pretax Costd

Assumption 1: All Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

Proposal Option 4

Government 

(excluding 

Federal)

Small 16 $2.4 $0.1 $0.5 

Large 37 $8.5 $0.2 $1.3 

PrivateeSmall 53 $8.5 $0.2 $1.4 

Large 423 $183.8 $0.4 $5.0 

All Facilitiesf

544 $219.2 $0.4 $5.0 

Final Rule

Government 

(excluding 

Federal)

Small 16 $2.6 $0.2 $0.5 

Large 37 $8.6 $0.2 $1.3 

PrivateeSmall 53 $8.5 $0.2 $1.4 

Large 423 $184.3 $0.4 $5.0 

All Facilitiesf

$220.0 $0.4 $5.0 

Proposal Option 2

Government 

(excluding 

Federal)

Small 16 $2.6 $0.2 $0.5 

Large 37 $108.9 $2.9 $16.0 

PrivateeSmall 53 $84.5 $1.6 $11.9 

Large 423 $2,783.5 $6.6 $64.2 

All Facilitiesf

$3,339.3 $6.1 $64.2 

Assumption 2: No Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

Proposal Option 4

Government 

(excluding 

Federal)

Small 16 $2.3 $0.1 $0.5 

Large 32 $8.8 $0.3 $1.4 

PrivateeSmall 53 $10.0 $0.2 $1.4 

Large 429 $214.5 $0.5 $5.2 

All Facilitiesf

$252.6 $0.5 $5.2 

Final Rule

Government 

(excluding 

Federal)

Small 16 $2.6 $0.2 $0.5 

Large 32 $9.1 $0.3 $1.4 

PrivateeSmall 53 $10.1 $0.2 $1.4 

Large 429 $215.0 $0.5 $5.2 

All Facilitiesf

544 $253.6 $0.5 $5.2 

Proposal Option 2

Government 

(excluding 

Federal)

Small 16 $2.6 $0.2 $0.5 

Large 32 $112.3 $3.5 $15.3 

PrivateeSmall 53 $115.8 $2.2 $15.9 

Large 429 $3,098.8 $7.2 $62.2 

All Facilitiesf

544 $3,699.6 $6.8 $62.2 

a. This table reports cost estimates, which are sample-weighted values, and therefore facility counts in this table also reflect sample weighting. 

For details on sample weights see Appendix H.

b. Ten facilities are owned by a joint venture of two entities with equal ownership shares. For reporting total compliance costs to parent entities, 

EPA assigned 50 percent of facility costs to each entity that owns this facility.

c. EPA calculated average cost per facility using the total number of regulated facilities owned by entities in a given ownership category.

d. Reflects maximum of un-weighted costs to explicitly analyzed facilities only.

e. Facility counts and cost estimates reported for the private sector include facilities owned by rural electric cooperatives.

f. Facility counts and cost estimates reported for All Facilities include facilities owned by the Federal government and their costs.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this memorandum
May 16, 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 8

Table 6-3: Summary of UMRA Costs for the Final Rule (Millions; $2011) a,b

Sector Incurring 

Costs

Total Annualized Cost Maximum OneYear Cost

Compliance 

Costs

Government 

Admin. 

Costs

Total Total

Assumption 1: All Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

Government 

(excluding federal) $11.3 $1.0 $12.2 $72.3

Private $270.1 N/A $270.1 $1,145.2

Assumption 2: No Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

Government 

(excluding federal) $11.6 $1.0 $12.6 $72.9 

Private $304.7 N/A $304.7 $1,228.3 

a. Facility counts and cost estimates reported for the private sector include 28 facilities owned by rural electric 

cooperatives.

b. Ten facilities are owned by a joint venture of two entities with equal ownership shares. For reporting total

compliance costs to parent entities, EPA assigned 50 percent of facility costs to each entity that owns this facility.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this report