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 Impoundm ents 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 i dentified 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 un der 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 tec hnology and

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

to as Assumption 1)

. 2



### 2. N o regulated facilities with an impoundment would qualify as baseline CCRS (hereafter referred

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

additional administrative activities assigned to non

- baseline CCRS facili ti es 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 Director s will determine whether an impoundment minimizes the withdraw al 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 coo ling 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 St ate 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 ResourcesMay 16 , 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 2



### more inf ormation on t hese tables ). As discussed in the EA, costs and impacts under Assumption 2 are

h igher 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 Mand ates 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 Considered a

Facility Categories Assumption 1 c Assumption 2 c

Proposal

Option 4 Final

Rule

Existing

Units Proposal

Option 2 Proposal

Option 4 Final

Rule

Existing

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≥20mgd b 28 28 28 28 28 28

- California facilities that use coastal and

estuarine waters for power plant cooling b 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 ba seline 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 Considered a

Facility Categories Assumption 1 c Assumption 2 c

Proposal

Option 4 Final

Rule

Existing

Units Proposal

Option 2 Proposal

Option 4 Final

Rule

Existing

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≥20mgd b 20 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 330May 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 Considered a

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.

So urce: 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 1 b Assumption 2 b

Proposal Option 4

Pre

- Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $224.1 $265.0

Manufacturers $55.2 $56.6

Total

- Existing Units a $279. 4 $321.6

New Units $1.7 $1.7

Total a $281. 1 $ 323

. 4

After

- Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $147.0 $173.2

Manufacturers $33.4 $34.2

Total

- Existing Units a $180. 4 $ 20 7

. 5

New Units $1.1 $1.1

Total a $181.4 $208. 6

Final Rule

Pre

- Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $224.9 $265.9

Manufacturers $78.8 $81.1

Total

- Existing Units a $303. 6 $347.0

New Units $1.7 $1.7

Total a $305.4 $348.7

After

- Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $147.6 $174.0

Manufacturers $47.5 $49.0

Total

- Existing Units a $195.1 $223.0

New Units $1.1 $1.1

Total a $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 Units a $4,007.2 $4,418.4

New Units $1.7 $1.7

Total a $4,008.9 $4,420. 2

After

- Tax Compliance Costs

Generators $2,545.7 $2,818.7

Manufacturers $146.7 $150.4

Total

- Existing Units a $2,692. 3 $2,969. 2

New Units $1.1 $1.1

Total a $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 memorandumMay 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 Category New 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

- $1,5 42.6 $ 30.8 $3 2.8

- $1,5 42.4

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 $2 7 .2 $2 8.7

- $1,14 8.2 $2 7.1 $2 8.6

- $1,14 8.1

Total Social

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

Assum ption 2: No Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

3 % Total

Monetized

Benefits - $0.2 $3 1.7 $3 3.7

- $1,5 42.9 $3 1.5 $3 3.5

- $1,54 3 .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 $2 7 .8 $ 29.3

- $1,14 8.4 $2 7 .7 $ 29.2

- $1,14 8.5

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 memorandumMay 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 1 e Assumption 2 e

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

Number

of Small

Entities % of Small

Entities b Number

of Small

Entities c % of Small

Entities b Number

of Small

Entities % of Small

Entities b Number

of Small

Entities c % of Small

Entities b

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

Manufacturers a

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 Manufacturers a,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 th e 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 fo ur 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 memorandumMay 16 , 2014 Abt Associates | Costs and Impacts for Regulation Under Alternative Impoundment Assumptions | pg 6



## 6 EA Chapter 11: Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) Analysis 4



### 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 Facility b Maximum Annualized

Cost per Facility c

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 tabl e also reflect sample weighting

. For details on sample weights see Appendix H

. b. EPA calculated average cost per facility using the total nu mber 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 differ s 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

Costs b Average

Annualized Pre

tax Compliance

Cost per Facility c Maximum

Facility

Annualized Pre

tax Cost d

Assumption 1: All Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

Proposal Option 4

Government

(excluding

F ederal) Small 16 $2.4 $0.1 $0.5

Large 37 $8.5 $0.2 $1.3

Private e Small 53 $8.5 $0.2 $1.4

Large 423 $183.8 $0.4 $5.0

All Facilities f 544 $219.2 $0.4 $5.0

Final Rule

Government

(excluding

F ederal) Small 16 $2.6 $0.2 $0.5

Large 37 $8.6 $0.2 $1.3

Private e Small 53 $8.5 $0.2 $1.4

Large 423 $184.3 $0.4 $5.0

All Facilities f $220.0 $0.4 $5.0

Proposal Option 2

Government

(excluding

F ederal) Small 16 $2.6 $0.2 $0.5

Large 37 $108.9 $2.9 $16.0

Private e Small 53 $84.5 $1.6 $11.9

Large 423 $2,783.5 $6.6 $64.2

All Facilities f $3,339.3 $6.1 $64.2

Assumption 2: No Facilities with Impoundments Qualify as Baseline CCRS

Proposal Option 4

Government

(excluding

F ederal) Small 16 $2.3 $0.1 $0.5

Large 32 $8.8 $0.3 $1.4

Private e Small 53 $10.0 $0.2 $1.4

Large 429 $214.5 $0.5 $5.2

All Facilities f $252.6 $0.5 $5.2

Final Rule

Government

(excluding

F ederal) Small 16 $2.6 $0.2 $0.5

Large 32 $9.1 $0.3 $1.4

Private e Small 53 $10.1 $0.2 $1.4

Large 429 $215.0 $0.5 $5.2

All Facilities f 544 $253.6 $0.5 $5.2

Proposal Option 2

Government

(excluding

F ederal) Small 16 $2.6 $0.2 $0.5

Large 32 $112.3 $3.5 $15.3

Private e Small 53 $115.8 $2.2 $15.9

Large 429 $3,098.8 $7.2 $62.2

All Facilities f 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 tabl e 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 i nclude facilities owned by the F ederal government and their costs.

Source: U.S. EPA analysis for this memorandu mMay 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 One

Year 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 analysi s for this report