1

RENEWAL OF INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION 

OF THE OIL POLLUTION ACT FACILITY 

RESPONSE PLAN REQUIREMENTS (40 CFR PART 112)

(EPA # 1630.10)

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a) Title of the Information Collection

Renewal of Information Collection Request (ICR) for the Implementation of the Oil Pollution Act 

Facility Response Plan Requirements (40 CFR Part 112). EPA ICR #1630.10. 

1(b) Short Characterization

This information collection request (ICR) renewal pertains to EPA’s Facility Response Plan (FRP) 

requirements as codified in 40 CFR 112.20 and 112.21. This regulation implements requirements 

mandated by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990.

The FRP rule incorporates requirements of Clean Water Act (CWA) section 311(j)(5), which was

added by OPA section 4202. The regulation requires that owners and operators of facilities that could 

cause “substantial harm” to the environment by discharging oil into or on the navigable waters or adjoining 

shorelines prepare plans for responding, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst case discharge of 

oil, and to a substantial threat of such a discharge. Each FRP must be submitted to EPA, and the Agency

reviews the plans from facilities identified as having the potential to cause “substantial harm” to the 

environment from oil discharges. In accordance with OPA statutory requirements, EPA reviews and 

approves plans for certain FRP-regulated facilities that have the potential to cause “significant and 

substantial harm.”

While EPA’s FRP rule addresses preparedness requirements for non-transportation facilities, the 

U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) has authority to establish requirements to prevent and contain discharges of oil 

from vessels and marine transportation-related (MTR) facilities, and the Department of Transportation 

(DOT) Office of Pipeline Safety, which is part of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety

Administration (PHMSA), regulates many onshore pipelines. Some facilities must meet the requirements 

of two or more federal agencies, because they engage in activities that fall under the jurisdiction of those 

agencies; these facilities are called “complexes.”

Facilities regulated under the FRP rule represent a subset of facilities covered by the Spill 

Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) regulation at 40 CFR part 112. EPA amended the SPCC 
2

rule on December 5, 2008 and November 13, 2009, but these amendments did not affect the FRP rule. 

(see 73 FR 74236 and 74 FR 58784). Additionally, EPA finalized a rule on October 14, 2010 that 

required SPCC facilities subject to the FRP rule to amend existing plans, if necessary, to ensure 

compliance with the SPCC rule by November 10, 2010. For facilities subject to the SPCC rule that 

became operational between August 16, 2002 through November 10, 2010, these facilities were required 

to prepare and implement an SPCC plan by November 10, 2010. (see 75 FR 63093). This final rule did 

not affect the compliance dates in the FRP rule.

Since the last ICR, EPA has continued performed a review of information regarding facilities that 

have submitted an FRP to their EPA Regional Administrator (RA). The information was collected from 

each of EPA’s ten regions and compiled into a national inventory of FRP-regulated facilities. The 

inventory was updated in April 2010 and reflects the number of planholders currently in operation at that 

time. For the last ICR renewal, the national inventory of FRP planholders compiled by EPA in April 2007 

indicated that owners and operators of 4,132 facilities had developed and are maintaining FRPs. 

Information available about individual plan holders, however, shows that about 4.6 percent of active FRP 

facilities were owned and operated by the federal government (e.g., military installations). These federal 

facilities are excluded from the burden estimate analysis, given that they are not considered “persons” 

under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Consequently, the burden analysis uses 3,942 as the number of 

existing non-governmental facilities that are maintaining an FRP as of 2007. EPA projected that between 

2007 and 2010, approximately 286 new facilities will become subject to FRP requirements over the threeyear period, or approximately 95 new facilities each year. This estimate is based on annual industryspecific growth rates used to project the number of new SPCC facilities. These 95 new FRP facilities 

represent approximately 0.5 percent of new facilities subject to the SPCC regulation annually. The 

remaining 99.5 percent of the estimated number of new SPCC facilities (18,444 facilities) will only

complete a certification form because they do not meet the “substantial harm” criteria. Based on the latest 

update to the FRP planholder universe dated April 2010, there are 4,341 active FRP facilities, which is 

within the projected growth range for this period. The universe of FRP facilities is not anticipated to 

change substantively for the next ICR renewal period. Thus, the burden estimates for this ICR renewal 

have not been adjusted.

The total burden on the entire FRP regulated community over a three-year period is estimated to be 

1,297,880 hours (adjusted for burden attributable to compliance with other Federal regulations and burden 

that overlaps with State-level response planning requirements).1 The total burden is estimated to result in 

 

1

See section 6(d) for further details.
3

approximately $88,449 in capital costs and $52,283,484 in total costs (including labor costs associated 

with facility and contractor personnel). EPA does not anticipate that FRP facilities will incur operating 

and maintenance (O&M) costs since there are no anticipated costs associated with hard copy or electronic 

document storage.

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

In 1990, Congress enacted the Oil Pollution Act (OPA, Pubic Law 101-380) to help prevent major 

oil spills and ensure efficient, effective responses to spills when they occur. OPA contained significant 

modifications to many provisions of section 311 of the Clean Water Act (CWA). OPA section 4202(a)(6) 

added CWA section 311(j)(5) to require the owner or operator of a facility to prepare and submit “a plan 

for responding, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst case discharge, and to a substantial threat of 

such a discharge, of oil...” This requirement applied to any onshore facility that, “because of its location, 

could reasonably be expected to cause substantial harm to the environment by discharging into or on the 

navigable waters, adjoining shorelines, or the exclusive economic zone.”

2 Certain offshore facilities are 

also affected by OPA.

EPA incorporated OPA facility response planning requirements into an existing regulation, 40 

CFR part 112 as §§112.20 and 112.21 and Appendices C through F on July 1, 1994 (see 59 FR 34070) . 

Subparts A through C of the regulation establishes procedures for the preparation and implementation of 

SPCC Plans to help “minimize the potential for oil discharges.” Owners and operators of a subset of 

facilities that meet the FRP applicability criteria must also prepare FRPs. EPA amended the FRP rule on 

June 30, 2000, to modify the requirements for an owner or operator of a facility handling, storing, or 

transporting animal fat or vegetable oil (see 65 FR 40775).

The response plan requirements enhance EPA’s ability to protect navigable waters, adjoining 

shorelines, fish and wildlife, and sensitive environments when oil discharges occur and reduce the cost of 

oil discharges to the regulated community and society. Response planning efforts reduce such costs by

 

2

The President has delegated the authority to regulate non-transportation-related onshore facilities under sections 

311(j)(1)(C) and 311(j)(5) of the CWA to EPA. (See Executive Order (E.O.) 12777, section 2(b)(1), 56 FR 54757 

(October 22, 1991), superseding E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243.) By this same E.O., the President has delegated similar 

authority over transportation-related onshore facilities, deepwater ports, and vessels to the U.S. Department of 

Transportation (DOT), and authority over other offshore facilities, including associated pipelines, to the U.S. Department 

of the Interior (DOI). A 1994 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) among EPA, DOI, and DOT has redelegated the 

responsibility to regulate certain offshore facilities located in and along the Great Lakes, rivers, coastal wetlands, and the 

Gulf Coast barrier islands from DOI to EPA. Coast Guard vessels and marine transportation-related facility activities have 
4

ensuring that discharges are controlled and cleaned up swiftly and efficiently. Facilities that are prepared 

to respond to incidents are more likely to contain the spread of a spill before it reaches navigable waters 

and to mitigate the effects of a spill on the environment. A recent GAO report notes that the effectiveness 

of spill response can impact the cost of spill cleanup: “The longer it takes to assemble and conduct the spill 

response, the more likely it is that the oil will move with changing tides and currents and affect a greater 

area, which can increase costs. Some officials also stated that the level of experience of those involved in 

the incident command is critical to the effectiveness of spill response, and they can greatly affect spill 

costs. For example, poor decision making during a spill response could lead to the deployment of 

unnecessary response equipment, or worse, not enough equipment to respond to a spill."

3

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The FRP facility owners and operators are the primary users of the data collected under this ICR. 

Facility-specific response plans help facility owners and operators develop a response organization and 

identify the necessary resources to adequately respond to an oil spill in a timely manner. Successful plans 

are scenario-based and developed through the preparation of risk analyses of the areas in question (a model 

format for the plan is presented in Appendix F to 40 CFR part 112). Specifically, FRPs must include:

identification of small, medium and worst case discharge scenarios; development of strategies to respond 

to each scenario; and identification and provision of resources necessary to respond to each scenario per 

Appendix E of 40 CFR part 112. When FRP are implemented, they can aid in reducing the impact of oil 

spills.

EPA reviews all response plans submitted under 40 CFR part 112. Additionally, EPA reviews 

and approves response plans for those facilities whose discharges may cause “significant and substantial 

harm” to the environment, in order to ensure that facilities believed to pose the highest risk have adequate 

resources and procedures in place to respond to a spill. EPA promulgated FRP facility requirements so that 

facility owners and operators plan for adequate resources to respond to oil spills. EPA also uses the 

facility-specific information provided in the response plans to update Area Contingency Plans (ACPs) as 

required by OPA. Certain plan information, such as provisions for adequate response capability to respond 

to a worst case discharge, helps EPA and other government agencies to better understand the distribution 

and capacity of the spill response industry and more appropriately allocate government resources to 

complement existing private-sector capacity.

 

been moved to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

3 GAO report number GAO-07-1085: “Maritime Transportation: Major Oil Spills Occur Infrequently, 

but Risks to the Federal Oil Spill Fund Remain”, September 7, 2007, page 27.
5

Regional, State, and local response authorities also benefit from information contained in FRPs. 

OPA requires that response plans be consistent with the requirements of the National Oil and Hazardous 

Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) and ACPs. Area Committees, which are established by

OPA section 4202, make use of the FRPs in preparing and updating ACPs. Local Emergency Planning 

Committees under the direction of the State Emergency Planning Committee also use facility-specific 

information to help develop local contingency plans required under SARA Title III Community Right-toKnow provisions. This information allows local and regional response authorities to better understand the 

potential hazards and response capabilities in their area, thus reducing risk to communities. 

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION 

CRITERIA

3(a) Nonduplication

A substantial number of facilities that handle, store, or transport hazardous substances are subject 

to emergency planning requirements under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, the Comprehensive 

Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Occupational Safety and 

Health Act (OSHA), other Federal statutes, and state requirements. OPA response plans are intended to 

supplement, not duplicate, these other plans by specifically focusing on oil. EPA coordinated with the 

USCG, DOT, and DOI’s Minerals Management Service (MMS) throughout the 1994 and 2000 

rulemakings in order to promote consistency with response plan requirements mandated by other Federal 

agencies. Presently, EPA develops interagency contingency plans and then organizes interagency Area 

Planning Drills alongside Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP) drills and exercises with 

other Federal, State and local agencies.

EPA is committed to minimizing regulatory overlap and allows facility owners and operators to 

build upon, or draw from, the format and content of other response plans to develop their FRPs under 40 

CFR part 112. For example, facility owners and operators of onshore sites or installations that have both 

transportation-related and non-transportation-related components (i.e., complexes) are permitted to prepare 

one response plan with separate sections that address each component. Integrated Contingency Plans 

(ICPs) prepared in accordance with the notice published on June 5, 1996 provide an acceptable format for 

such consolidation (see 61 FR 28642). Owners or operators of facilities that are subject to more than one 

OPA jurisdiction, for example transportation-related and non-transportation related onshore facilities that 

are part of the same complex, may satisfy all requirements by submitting a copy of the ICP to each 

program in the agency that has review authority for specific regulations. In addition to related federal 
6

planning requirements, numerous States and the District of Columbia have their own regulations that 

require varying degrees of response planning. Because EPA is flexible on the format of the required 

response plans, owners or operators of certain facilities may be able to modify versions of their existing 

response plans to comply with the FRP rule. However, if another response plan is used, it must meet the 

requirements of the FRP rule, be equally stringent, be cross-referenced to the response plan format 

included in Appendix F to 40 CFR part 112, and include a self-contained Emergency Response Action 

Plan (ERAP) section.

3(b) Public Notice Required to Prior Submission to OMB 

Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), EPA is notifying the public 

through today’s Federal Register of this renewal ICR and is soliciting public comment concerning the 

burden estimates for respondents. EPA is specifically requesting comments on the Agency’s need for this 

information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing 

respondent burden, including through the use of automated collection techniques. .

3(c) Consultations

For the prior ICR renewal request, EPA consulted nine FRP facilities to verify that the burden 

assumption is reasonable. EPA contacted facilities of various sizes, geographical location, and industry

sectors, including facilities involved in extraction and production of crude oil and facilities that handle 

non-petroleum oils. Facility respondents provided information regarding the facility’s ICR burden, 

frequency and basis of plan amendments, format of FRP submittals to EPA, and overall comments and 

suggestions on the FRP program. The responses generally confirmed the reasonableness of the FRP ICR 

burden and unit costs estimates. 

The names, companies, and telephone numbers of the representatives of those facilities are given below.

Ercole Pagano, Rensselaer Terminal, (518) 436-1289;

Mike Schatz, Astoria Gas Turbine Operations Inc., (718) 274-8204;

Quinton Hancock, Eden Brewery, (336) 627-2592;

Doug Maska, Western Wisconsin Energy, (715) 643-2602;

Darryl Pierce, Clam Lake Production Facility, (814) 726-2130;

Denise Jett, Borger Refinery, (806) 275-1507;

Rodney Fenske, South Dakota Soybean Processors, (605) 627-9240;

Paul D. Fritz, Sinclair Oil Corp. - Sinclair, Wyoming Refinery, (307) 328-3543;

Mr. John Kwietniak, Tesoro Alaska, (907) 776-3569.
7

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Initial FRP preparation and submission is a one-time event. After FRPs are prepared, OPA section 

4202 requires that they be reviewed periodically and be consistent with the applicable ACP and NCP. 

Additionally, the owner or operator of a facility determined to have the potential to cause significant and 

substantial harm to the environment must resubmit revised portions of the plan to EPA after each material 

change. Material changes include changes in the amount or location of oil storage, changes in spill 

prevention equipment and capabilities, and other changes that affect the response to a discharge causing 

“substantial harm” to the environment. Less frequent collection of this information would not meet 

regulatory requirements and could jeopardize a facility owner’s or operator’s ability to respond 

appropriately to a significant oil spill.

As required by 40 CFR 112.20(g)(2), owners or operators of substantial harm facilities must 

review relevant portions of the NCP and the applicable ACP annually and update their FRP as appropriate. 

Also, FRPs should be revised based on evaluations of drills and exercises, as applicable.

3(e) General Guidelines

The information collection activities discussed in this ICR comply with all Paperwork Reduction 

Act regulatory guidelines (5 CFR 1320.6), with the exception that the retention period for records extends 

beyond three years. According to 40 CFR 112.20 (c)(4), the EPA Regional Administrator (RA) will 

review plans periodically on a schedule established by the RA provided that the period between plan 

reviews does not exceed five years. 

In addition, some facilities must meet the response planning requirements of two or more federal 

agencies, because they engage in activities that fall under the jurisdiction of those agencies. If a facility

owner or operator should file an ICP to fulfill both the FRP requirements and the requirements of another 

agency, that plan would be subject to the inspection requirements of both agencies. For example, a plan 

that fulfills both the EPA’s FRP requirements and the USCG’s response planning requirements would be 

subject to Coast Guard review every 5 years. In an effort to maintain consistency with the USCG 

requirements, EPA plans periodic reviews on a schedule similar to the USCG’s five-year review. 

Therefore, the records related to this information collection must be retained for at least five years.

The retention of records for at least five years is also necessary to maintain consistency with the 

Federal statute of limitations on assessment of civil penalties for violations of the Oil Pollution Prevention 

regulation.
8

3(f) Confidentiality 

None of the information collected under the FRP rule is believed to be confidential. One of the 

criteria necessary for information to be classified as confidential (40 CFR 2.208) is that a business must 

show that it has previously taken reasonable measures to protect the confidentiality of the information and 

that it intends to continue to take such measures. EPA has no evidence of such actions on the part of 

affected facilities; thus, EPA has provided no assurances of confidentiality to facility owners or operators 

when they file their FRPs.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

The information collection activities discussed in this document do not involve any sensitive 

questions.

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE CHANGE IN INFORMATION REQUESTED

4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes

The industries that are likely to be affected by the requirements in the FRP regulation fall into 

many North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) categories, including those associated with 

petroleum production, processing (refining), distribution and marketing, and consumption. 

The FRP rule requires that all SPCC-regulated facility representatives conduct an initial screen 

using the flowchart in Appendix C of 40 CFR part 112 as a guide to determine whether their facility is

subject to the response plan requirements at §§ 112.20 and 112.21. EPA has found that only small 

percentages (approximately 0.5 percent) of the 18,540 new facilities that EPA estimates become regulated 

under SPCC each year meet the screening criteria and as a result must develop an FRP. The six industrial 

categories containing the greatest number of respondents required to develop an FRP are presented in 

Exhibit 1. The estimate of the total number of facility representatives required to prepare response plans is 

presented in section 6(a).
9

EXHIBIT 1

Primary Industry Sectors and NAICS Codes 

Covered by the FRP Regulation

CATEGORY NAICS Codes

Petroleum and Petroleum Products Wholesalers 4227

Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution 2211

Petroleum and coal products manufacturing 3241

Other Commercial Facilities miscellaneous

Heating Oil Dealers 454311

Manufacturing 31-33

4(b) Information Requested

(i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements

Only those facilities that could cause “substantial harm” to the environment must prepare and 

submit response plans. Representatives of newly regulated facilities that are subject to the Oil Pollution 

Prevention regulation are asked to refer to the flowchart shown in Appendix C of 40 CFR part 112 to 

determine whether they meet the “substantial harm” criteria. In addition, the RA has the authority to 

require the owner or operator of any facility subject to the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation to prepare a 

response plan. Under the FRP rule, facilities are screened as “substantial harm” if one or both of the 

following criteria are met:

(1) The facility’s total oil storage capacity is greater than or equal to 1 million gallons, and any of the 

following is true:

 The facility lacks adequate secondary containment for any aboveground storage tank area. 

 The facility is located at a distance (as calculated using the appropriate formula in Appendix C 

of 40 CFR part 112 or a comparable formula) such that a discharge from the facility could 

cause injury to fish and wildlife and sensitive environments, as described in Appendices I, II, 

and III of the Department of Commerce’s “Guidance for Facility and Vessel Response Plans: 

Fish and Wildlife and Sensitive Environments” (59 FR 14713, March 29, 1994) and the 

applicable Area Contingency Plan. 

 The facility is located at a distance (as calculated using the appropriate formula in Appendix C 

of 40 CFR part 112 or a comparable formula) such that a discharge from the facility would 

shut down a public drinking water intake.
10

 The facility has experienced a reportable oil spill in an amount greater than or equal to 10,000 

gallons within the last five years.

(2) The facility has a total oil storage capacity greater than or equal to 42,000 gallons and transfers oil 

over water to or from vessels.

Under the FRP rule, the Agency requires the preparation of facility-specific response plans by

“substantial harm” facilities. As required by section 311(j)(5)(c) of the CWA, which was added by section 

4202(a) of the OPA, the response plan shall:

 Be consistent with the requirements of the NCP and ACPs.

 Identify the qualified individual having full authority to implement removal actions, and 

require immediate communications with Federal officials and other response personnel.

 Identify, and ensure by contract or other means, private personnel and equipment 

necessary to remove, to the maximum extent practicable, a worst case discharge and to 

mitigate or prevent a substantial threat of such a discharge.

 Describe the training, equipment testing, periodic unannounced drills, and response 

actions of persons at the facility under the plan.

 Be updated periodically.

In order to fulfill the above requirements, the regulation requires that the response plan include the 

following elements:

 An emergency response action plan that consists of the information most pertinent to 

conducting an actual response, such as contact and equipment lists [§112.20(h)(1)].

 Information about the facility’s location, owner, operator, and qualified individual having 

full authority to implement removal actions [§112.20(h)(2)].

 Information about emergency response, including: notification procedures, equipment, 

personnel, evacuation plans, and duties of the qualified individual [§112.20(h)(3)].

 Evidence of availability of private personnel and equipment necessary to remove, to the 

maximum extent practicable, a worst case discharge and to mitigate or prevent a 

substantial threat of such a discharge [§112.20(h)(3)(i) and (ii)].

 An evaluation of potential oil spill hazards at the facility [§112.20(h)(4)].

 A discussion of specific oil spill scenarios and the steps facility personnel would follow to 

mitigate and respond to the spill described in each scenario [§112.20(h)(5)].

 Descriptions of the discharge detection systems, human or automated, in use at the facility

[§112.20(h)(6)].
11

 Information on plan implementation, including: response actions to be carried out by

facility or contracted personnel, disposal plans for contaminated cleanup materials, and 

measures to provide adequate containment and drainage of spilled oil [§112.20(h)(7)].

 Information on facility self-inspection, drills/exercises, and response training, including 

descriptions of training and drill/exercise programs and documentation of tank 

inspections, equipment inspections, training meetings, training sessions, and 

drills/exercises [§112.20(h)(8)].

 Diagrams, including the site plan and the drainage plan [§112.20(h)(9)].

 A description of facility security systems [§112.20(h)(10)].

EPA has included a model response plan in Appendix F to 40 CFR part 112. The model response 

plan was developed with the input of EPA’s On-Scene Coordinators (OSCs) and others actively engaged 

in oil spill response and covers those elements judged critical to an effective response. The response plan 

was based on Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning Guides NRT-1 and NRT-1A and the Handbook of 

Chemical Hazardous and Analysis Procedures. The model plan provides a depiction of the level of detail 

and organization for an effective response plan and provides sufficient flexibility to include certain items 

that are required by the CWA as amended by the OPA, the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation, and other 

Federal regulations. As noted, certain facilities may be regulated by more than one Federal agency (i.e., 

USCG and EPA). As discussed in section 3(a), owners or operators may avoid duplicating the work 

required under other regulations by preparing one response plan that covers the entire facility and 

referencing which sections meet the regulatory requirements of various agencies.

(ii) Respondent Activities

Owners or operators of all facilities affected by the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation must 

determine whether their facility meets the “substantial harm” criteria. EPA provides a flowchart included 

in Appendix C to 40 CFR part 112 (Attachment C-I) to assist in this determination. 

According to 40 CFR part 112, Appendix C, Section 3.0, owners or operators of facilities that do 

not meet the “substantial harm” criteria must complete and maintain at the facility, the certification form, 

Attachment C-II provided in Appendix C to 40 CFR part 112.

Owners or operators of facilities that do meet the “substantial harm” criteria must prepare and 

submit a response plan, which involves the following steps:

 Understanding the rule by reading and interpreting the rule, as well as reviewing available 

guidance on preparing response plans;
12

 Collecting the required information, performing a hazard analysis, developing spill 

scenarios, and ensuring the capability to respond to a worst case discharge;

 Organizing the information into a format consistent with the model plan included in 

Appendix F of 40 CFR part 112;

 Mailing the response plan to EPA;

 Implementing the response plan;

 Reviewing and updating the response plan periodically; and

 Maintaining records.

In preparing a response plan, facility personnel must gather background information such as the 

location, quantities, and types of material stored and a geographic description of the site (maps, schematic 

diagrams, and latitude and longitude). Much of this information should exist in the facility’s SPCC Plan. 

Such information will be used in the development of hazard assessments and response strategies. The 

response plan also must include a discussion of detection and notification procedures at the facility as well 

as a list of response equipment. A facility response coordinator will be chosen to meet the OPA 

requirement that the FRP designate a qualified individual who will have full authority to implement 

response actions. Roles and responsibilities of other members of the response team (both facility

responders and outside parties) must also be clearly established. A facility owner or operator may wish to 

enter into an arrangement with an outside response contractor. If so, that contractor’s role during a spill 

response must be clearly defined.

The facility owner or operator must perform a hazard evaluation, which involves identifying

potential hazards based on facility-specific information, determining the vulnerability of the surrounding 

area given the hazards, and assessing the risk of an oil discharge. The results of the hazard evaluation will 

then be used to develop spill scenarios. For the worst case scenario, the facility owner or operator will 

calculate the volume of a worst case discharge and will identify means to implement an effective response 

to such a discharge. All aspects of an effective response must be included in the response plan, including 

containment, countermeasure, and mitigation procedures for different types of incidents, and the provision 

for proper cleanup and disposal of contaminated material. The response plan is typically a written 

document sent to EPA and also kept at the facility. Once a plan is developed, it must be exercised on a 

regular basis through a facility program of self-inspections, drills or exercises, and personnel training that 

follows PREP or an equivalent approved by EPA [see §112.21(c)].
13

5. THE INFORMATION COLLECTED - AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION 

METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5(a) Agency Activities

The Agency activities related to FRPs are as follows:

 Log submitted response plans into a tracking database, sends postcards, emails or letters 

acknowledging receipt, and stores these plans on file at Regional offices.

 Review substantial harm facility FRPs.

 Identify for review and approval the facility response plans of facilities that could cause 

“significant and substantial harm” and notify facilities of this determination.

 Review, approve, and maintain FRPs for significant and substantial harm facilities based 

on guidance developed by EPA.

 Notify facilities of approval.

 Provide a list of deficiencies to those facility owners and operators whose plans are not 

approved.

 Inspect facilities to verify compliance.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

As noted, the primary beneficiaries of the facility response planning requirements are the facilities 

themselves. EPA estimates that representatives from 99.5 percent of SPCC-regulated facilities have 

determined that their facility could not “reasonably be expected to cause substantial harm” based on the 

criteria outlined in the flowchart in Attachment C-I of 40 CFR part 112. Consequently, the representatives 

of these facilities do not have to prepare response plans. On average, the owners or operators of an 

estimated 18,540 newly SPCC-regulated facilities will be required to perform the initial screening process 

using the flow chart in Appendix C of 40 CFR part 112 each year. Of these newly regulated facilities, 

approximately 95 (0.5 percent) facilities are expected to meet the substantial harm criteria and be required 

to prepare an FRP.

Response plans, submitted by the owners or operators who determined that their facilities meet the 

“substantial harm” criteria, are sent to the appropriate EPA Regional office for Agency review. A copy of 

the FRP is kept at the facility to be used in the event of an oil spill response or drill. 

FRPs for facilities that meet the “significant and substantial harm” criteria must be reviewed and 

approved by the EPA Regional office. The response plan review and approval process is directed by
14

EPA’s RA’s based on national criteria and local conditions and considerations. EPA regional offices 

notify each owner or operator directly of the status of the facility’s response plan (i.e., approved or 

deficient). For deficient response plans, a list of these deficiencies is typically sent to the facility to be 

addressed prior to EPA’s approval of the plan. The review and approval process is tracked by the EPA 

Regional office.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

Based on the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis presented in the Regulatory Impact Analysis to the 

1994 FRP rule, small facilities generally do not meet the “substantial harm” criteria and, therefore, 

generally are not required to prepare response plans, except at the discretion of the RA [see §112.20(b)(1)].

5(d) Collection Schedule

The FRP regulation currently does not require a specific collection schedule. Development and 

submission of FRPs by owners or operators of facilities that have the potential to cause substantial harm is 

a one-time event. However, facility owners or operators are required to review and update their FRPs 

periodically to reflect changes at the facility. Certain plan revisions for facility changes that materially

affect the response to a worst case discharge must be submitted to EPA for review and incorporation into 

the FRPs on file with the Agency. The Agency reviews all plans and plan revisions when they are 

submitted and periodically thereafter.

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

6(a) Respondent Burden

This section presents estimates of the burden respondents incur when they undertake the 

information collection activities contained in the FRP rule. The burden to regulated facilities is estimated 

in terms of the time (in hours) spent by facility personnel to review the FRP regulation and complete a 

certification form or prepare an FRP and maintain the plan on an annual basis. Data from EPA regional 

offices were used to determine the number of facilities that are currently subject to the FRP requirements 

as well as estimates for facilities that are expected to meet the substantial harm screening criteria over the 

three-year ICR period. 

As section 3(c) explains, the current ICR (approved March 31 2008) estimates the time it takes the 

owners or operators of facilities to complete the compliance activities based on consultations with facility

engineers familiar with Oil Pollution Prevention program compliance, EPA Regional staff involved in the 

implementation of the program, and owners and operators of FRP-regulated facilities. Interviews 
15

conducted to support the ICR approved in 2004, and again for 2008 ICR renewal request, revealed that 

burden estimates were comparable (within the same order of magnitude). Further, the consultations 

conducted in 2004 and 2007 did not reveal any information regarding significant sources of burden not 

captured in prior ICR renewal requests (such as unaccounted for recordkeeping costs or other timeconsuming tasks associated with FRP regulatory compliance). EPA recognizes that the information from 

interviews with a limited number of individuals is not statistically representative of the burden experienced 

by all FRP facilities. Nevertheless, the results of the most recent consultations conducted in 2007 suggest 

that EPA’s burden estimates appear to adequately capture industry practices. Therefore, this renewal ICR 

does not change the hour or capital cost burden estimates used in the prior ICR renewal request.

Classification of Respondent Facilities Subject to the Information Collection

FRP-regulated facilities are a subset of the SPCC facility universe. As described in the FRP rule, 

owners or operators of facilities are required to prepare and maintain FRPs if they can reasonably be 

expected to cause substantial harm to the environment by discharging oil into or on navigable waters or 

adjoining shorelines. Example characteristics of a facility that could cause it to be considered a 

“substantial harm” facility are that: it transfers oil over water to or from vessels and has a total oil storage 

capacity greater than or equal to 42,000 gallons; its total oil storage capacity is greater than or equal to one 

million gallons and it does not have secondary containment for each aboveground storage area sufficiently

large to contain the capacity of the largest aboveground oil storage tank, or it is located such that a 

discharge could cause injury to fish, wildlife or sensitive environments, or would shut down a public 

drinking water intake, or has had a reportable oil discharge in an amount greater than or equal to 10,000 

gallons within the last five years. There is a wide variety of facility types and sizes among those that fit 

these characteristics. Because the costs of compliance activities associated with FRPs depend largely on 

the physical and operating characteristics of the facility, the 2007 FRP renewal ICR supporting statement 

included burden and cost estimates based on a representative facility approach that classifies facilities by

size (storage capacity in gallons) and facility type. This ICR renewal supporting statement follows the same 

approach. Three FRP facility size categories were defined as follows:

 Facilities having total storage capacity greater than 1,320 gallons, but less than or equal to 

42,000 gallons)

 Facilities having total storage capacity greater than 42,000 gallons but less than or equal to 

one million gallons

 Facilities having total storage capacity greater than one million gallons
16

Because FRP regulations apply only to facilities with an oil storage capacity of over one million 

gallons, or over 42,000 gallons if the facility transfers oil over water to or from vessels, the FRP burden 

analysis only considers facilities in the second and third facility categories.

The FRP facility type categories were based on how oil is used at the facility. Facilities were 

classified as using oil in one of three ways:

 Storage/consumption facilities: consumption of oil as a raw material or end-use product

 Storage/distribution facilities: marketing and distribution of oil as a wholesale or retail

 Production facilities: extracting oil from the ground as part of exploration or production 

activities

Based on these size and type characteristics, a total of six FRP model facilities were defined. 

For purposes of this analysis, the universe of regulated facilities is also divided into existing and 

new facilities, to reflect the differences in compliance activities among these two groups. Existing FRPregulated facilities include facilities that initiated operations prior to the approval of this ICR revision. This 

analysis focuses on existing facilities for which owners or operators have prepared FRPs and are assumed 

to have incurred all burden and costs associated with the initially preparing their FRPs, but are expected to 

incur annual maintenance burden and costs including occasional major revisions.4 New FRP facilities 

include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR approval period or prepare an FRP for 

the first time. New facility owners or operators are required to review the FRP rule, make a determination, 

and complete certification or prepare an FRP. New facility owners or operators required to prepare FRPs 

will incur first-year burden for plan preparation as well as subsequent-year burden for maintaining FRPs. 

Periodic information collected from each of EPA’s ten regional offices provides an inventory of 

facilities that have submitted and are currently maintaining an FRP. As of April 2010, there were 

approximately 4,341 such FRP facilities nationally. Information available about individual planholders 

shows that 81 FRP facilities were owned and operated by the federal government (e.g., military

installations). These federal facilities are excluded from the burden estimate analysis, given that they are 

not considered “persons” under the Paperwork Reduction Act. Since the FRP universe has not changed 

substantively since the last ICR renewal, the burden analysis for this ICR renewal uses 3,942 as the 

number of existing non-governmental facilities that are maintaining an FRP as of 2007 (4,130 as a threeyear average). This number represents approximately 0.7 percent of the estimate of facilities regulated 

 

4 Note that facilities may downsize their oil storage capacity and effectively “drop-out” of the FRP regulations. EPA does 

not attempt to characterize the number of existing facilities that will downsize over this renewal ICR period. 
17

under the SPCC rule (596,097 facilities).5 Using annual industry-specific growth rates, EPA is estimating 

that the annual number of new FRP facilities is approximately 95, or 0.5 percent of the number of new 

SPCC facilities. The remaining 18,444 new SPCC facilities (99.5 percent) are not subject to FRP

requirements and will complete the Attachment C-II certification form indicating that they are not 

substantial harm facilities.

EPA estimates the total number of respondents (as a three-year average) at 22,574, of which 4,130 

facilities are FRP-regulated and 18,444 facilities are not subject to FRP requirements. The Agency

identified state and local government owned entities based on the facility description available for 

individual FRP holders. As a result, EPA estimates 22,509 private and 65 state/local respondents.

Exhibit 2 provides estimates of the number of existing and new facilities subject to FRP 

requirements over the three-year period covered by the ICR. Exhibit 3 presents the distribution of 

regulated facilities by category. The number of facilities in each cross-tabulated category reflects the 2007 

estimated total number of existing facilities, apportioned to each category based on assumptions used in 

prior ICRs regarding the proportions of facilities within each industry sector and size category within the 

overall universe of facilities as well as facility-level data in the April 2010 FRP database. It should be 

noted that the estimate of FRP facilities in this supporting statement reflect a net decrease since the 2004

estimate because the 2007 and 2010 numbers are based on the actual number of FRPs submitted to EPA, 

rather than a fixed fraction of the SPCC universe, as was assumed in 2004.

 

5

EPA used data obtained from state agencies to estimate the number of SPCC-regulated oil storage facilities (e.g, 

manufacturing; retail trade; construction; wholesale trade; etc) and federal sources such as EIA and USDA to estimate the 

number oil production facilities and farms. For detail, see the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the 2006 Final SPCC Rule, 

November 2006.
18

EXHIBIT 2

Estimate of Existing and New Facilities Subject to the SPCC and FRP Rules1

Facility Type/ Year FRP Facilities

Year 1 (2007)

Existing Facilities 3,942

New Facilities291

Year 2 (2008)

Existing Facilities 4,034

New Facilities295

Year 3 (2009)

Existing Facilities 4,128 

New Facilities2100

1 Numbers exclude facilities owned and operated by the Federal government.

2 The number of new facilities subject to the FRP regulations includes facilities that have 

initiated operations over the period covered by the renewal supporting statement.

Source: EPA inventory of FRP facilities compiled from regional data.

EXHIBIT 3

Number of Facilities in 2010 Subject to the FRP Requirements

MODEL FACILITY 

CATEGORY

FACILITY SIZE

TOTAL2

SMALL1 MEDIUM LARGE

Storage/Consumption 0 128 1,427 1,555

Storage/Distribution 0 427 1,893 2,320

Production 0 119 40 159

TOTAL30 674 3,360 4,034

1 EPA assumes that no small facilities currently regulated under 40 CFR part 112 are affected by response planning 

requirements.

2 The total includes facilities existing at the start of 2010 and facilities that become FRP-regulated over the course 

of the year (3,942 + 91 = 4,033 in Exhibit 2)

3 The total number of facilities in this table may differ slightly in other tables due to rounding.

Source: EPA inventory of FRP facilities compiled from regional data.

Estimated Annual Burden per Respondent

The owners or operators of all SPCC-regulated facilities must determine whether they are subject 

to FRP requirements based on the substantial harm flowchart (Attachment C-I in Appendix C to 40 CFR 
19

part 112). EPA assumes that the owners or operators of all existing SPCC-regulated facilities have 

completed the screening and that only new facilities will need to review the substantial harm flowchart. 

Owners or operators at facilities that meet the “substantial harm” criteria will need to prepare FRPs. In 

addition, facility owners or operators that already have prepared an FRP will be required to maintain their 

plan.

The total burden of the information collection on the regulated community is determined by

combining average per-facility (“unit”) burden estimated for each facility category with the total number of 

affected facilities in that category. Unit burdens are based on estimates of the labor required to adequately

perform the necessary activities. Unit burden estimates include facility personnel in the following labor 

categories: management, technical, clerical, foreman, and laborer.

As discussed previously, EPA assumes that the owners or operators of 99.5 percent of all new 

SPCC-regulated facilities will only review the “substantial harm” flowchart to determine and certify that 

they are not subject to the requirements of the FRP rule. Unit burden estimates for these new facilities are 

presented in Exhibit 4 for small, medium, and large facilities. Owners or operators of SPCC-regulated 

facilities that are not required to prepare a response plan will have a minimal rule familiarization burden

since the information considered in the flowchart is readily available in the facility’s SPCC Plan. Owners 

or operators of facilities that fall below the total oil storage capacity thresholds (i.e., below 42,000 gallons, 

and therefore also below 1 million gallons) will need only to review the flowchart and prepare a 

certification form, requiring, on average, an estimated 15 minutes of management time.

6

The certification 

form will be retained at the facility with the SPCC Plan. Owners or operators of larger facilities that have 

either 42,000 gallons or more or 1 million gallons or more in oil storage capacity will have to examine the 

criteria in greater detail to make the determination of whether they need to prepare an FRP, requiring an 

estimated 1.5 and 6.5 hours, respectively.

For other facilities, unit burden and cost estimates for preparing FRPs are based on a modelfacility approach. The response plan requirements include both a first-year burden to prepare the plan and a 

smaller, subsequent year burden to maintain the plan. Response plans must ensure that facility owners or 

operators have the equipment, personnel, information, and procedures needed to respond to a worst-case 

discharge as well as spills of smaller quantities. Compliance activities to prepare the FRP consist mostly of 

personnel time to collect and organize information about the facility and its operations; develop scenarios

and response strategies; and implement the measures described in the plan. In subsequent years for plan 

maintenance, owners or operators of facilities may update the response plan, including keeping logs of 

 

6

EPA views this burden estimate, which was used in the 2007 renewal ICR supporting statement, to be conservative.
20

response training and exercises. EPA assumes that the owners or operators of most facilities currently

subject to FRP rule requirements have already developed FRPs (i.e., they have already incurred the initial 

burden of plan preparation) and are now maintaining those plans.

EPA estimates that owners and operators of 3,942 existing facilities will be required to maintain 

FRPs in 2010 (see Exhibit 2). EPA estimates that owners or operators of an additional 286 facilities will 

be required to develop and maintain plans over a three-year period. Unit burden and cost estimates for 

plan development and maintenance (unadjusted for overlap with other Federal and State requirements) are 

shown in Exhibits 5 and 6 for new and existing facilities, respectively. 

The first-year burdens to a new “substantial harm” facility for rule familiarization and preparation 

of an FRP are shown in Exhibit 5 for facilities in each of the six model facility categories. EPA estimates 

that a consumption, distribution, or production facility with between 42,000 gallons and 1 million gallons 

in oil storage capacity (and which transfers oil over water to and from vessels) will need 165, 181, or 145 

hours of labor (including facility and contractor labor), respectively, to prepare an FRP. EPA assumes that 

response planning for a consumption or distribution facility with 1 million gallons or more in total oil 

storage capacity (and that meets other substantial harm criteria) will require 341, 384, or 304 hours, 

respectively. EPA does not have an estimate of the preparation burden associated with large production 

facilities. Instead, this analysis assumes that half the number of large production facility owners or 

operators required to prepare an FRP for the first time are included in the estimate of new consumption 

facilities, and will therefore incur the consumption facility preparation burden. The other half will incur the 

distribution facility preparation burden.

The subsequent-year burdens to an existing “substantial harm” facility for plan maintenance are 

shown in Exhibit 6 for facilities in each of the five model facility categories (medium and large 

consumption and distribution facilities; medium production facilities). EPA estimates that consumption, 

distribution, or production facility with between 42,000 gallons and 1 million gallons in oil storage 

capacity will need 54, 55, or 54 hours of labor, respectively, to maintain an FRP. EPA assumes that 

response planning for a consumption or distribution facility with 1 million gallons or more in oil storage 

capacity will require 154, 171, or 154 hours, respectively. These labor-hour estimates include facility and 

contractor labor hours. 
21

EXHIBIT 4

Burdens and Costs of Rule Familiarization and Certification for SPCC Facilities Not Required to Prepare FRPs

Size 

Category of 

Facility

Hours Required to Read Rule, Make 

Determination, and Complete Certification Unit Cost

Number of Facilities Total 

Burden 

(hours)

Total Cost

Management Technical Clerical Total Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

3-Year 

Total

Small 0.25 0 0 0.25 $15 13,485 16,015 19,593 49,093 12,273 $747,849

Medium 1 0 0.5 1.5 $74 1,686 2,003 2,452 6,141 9,212 $455,171

Large 2 4 0.5 6.5 $344 16 31 52 99 644 $33,948

TOTAL 15,187 18,049 22,097 55,333 22,129 $1,236,968
22

EXHIBIT 5

Estimated Total Burden and Total Cost for New Facilities Required to Prepare FRPs

Size

Model Facility 

Category

Unit 

Burden 

(hours)

Facility 

Labor 

Cost

O&M 

Costs

Capital 

Cost

Total 

Unit 

Cost

Number of Facilities Total 

Burden 

(hours)

Total 

O&M 

Costs

Total 

Capital 

Cost

Total Cost

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Medium

Consumption 165 $7,901 $0 $245 $8,146 3 3 3 1,4161

$0.00 $2,100 $69,822

Distribution 181 $8,750 $0 $250 $9,000 9 10 10 5,180 $0.00 $7,165 $257,953

Production 145 $6,897 $0 $240 $7,137 4 6 9 2,817 $0.00 $4,654 $138,419

Large

Consumption 341 $15,497 $0 $452 $15,949 31 32 33 32,677 $0.00 $43,314 $1,528,373

Distribution2

384 $17,782 $0 $463 $18,245 41 42 43 48,816 $0.00 $58,859 $2,319,427

Production2

304 $13,643 $0 $443 $14,086 3 2 3 1,964 $0.00 $2,862 $91,054

TOTAL

91 95 101 92,871 $0.00 $118,954 $4,405,048

1 Values presented in this table and other tables of this document are calculated based on the estimated number of facilities and burden hours, before rounding. Values in 

the tables, however, show rounded results. Estimating the total burden using rounded values presented in the table may not correspond to the total reported. For example, 

as shown in Exhibit 5, using the rounded values presented in the table suggests a total burden (hours) of 165*(3+3+3) = 1,485 for medium/consumption facilities, while the 

estimated total burden (hours) is actually calculated as 165.25*(2.79+2.86+2.92) = 1,416.

2 This analysis assumes that half the number of large production facility owners or operators required to prepare an FRP for the first time are included in the estimate of 

new consumption facilities and will therefore incur the consumption facility preparation burden. The other half will incur the distribution facility preparation burden.
23

EXHIBIT 6

Estimated Burden and Unit Cost for Existing Facilities Required to Maintain FRPs

Size

Model Facility 

Category

Unit 

Burden 

(hours)

Facility 

Labor 

Cost

O&M 

Costs

Capital 

Cost

Total 

Unit 

Cost

Number of Facilities Total 

Burden 

(hours)

Total 

O&M 

Costs

Total 

Capital 

Cost

Total Cost

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Medium

Consumption 54 $2,259 $0 $0 $2,259 125 128 130 20,678 $0.00 $0.00 $864,976

Distribution 55 $2,311 $0 $0 $2,311 417 427 436 70,418 $0.00 $0.00 $2,959,146

Production 54 $2,259 $0 $0 $2,259 115 119 125 19,406 $0.00 $0.00 $811,766

Large

Consumption 154 $5,991 $0 $0 $5,991 1,395 1,427 1,459 659,254 $0.00 $0.00 $25,647,941

Distribution 171 $6,846 $0 $0 $6,846 1,851 1,893 1,935 971,114 $0.00 $0.00 $38,880,606

Production 154 $5,991 $0 $0 $5,991 38 40 42 18,447 $0.00 $0.00 $717,688

TOTAL

3,941 4,034 4,127 1,759,317 $0.00 $0.00 $69,882,1234
24

6(b) Estimating Respondent Costs

(i) Estimating Facility Labor Costs

To determine the per-facility costs for typical new and existing respondents in each size category, 

the unit time estimates for compliance activities are multiplied by the hourly wage rates for the appropriate 

categories of labor conducting these activities. The labor wage rates for private industry were derived from 

the March 2007 U.S. Department of Labor’s Employment Cost Indexes and Levels.7 The 2007 wage rates 

include wages and salaries; benefit costs, including paid leave, supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and 

savings, legally required benefits, severance pay, and supplemental unemployment benefits. These wage 

rates reflect private industry averages, which were estimated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) based 

on a survey of 35,600 occupations within 8,200 establishments in the private sector. These wage rates 

reflect industry averages, which may under- or overestimate the actual wages received by some FRP

regulated facility personnel. EPA further adjusted these rates to reflect overhead costs of 17 percent.8

Average wage rates could underestimate the actual wage rates received by some FRP-regulated facility

personnel, but may overestimate the actual wage rate received by other facility personnel. The estimated 

wage rates used in this analysis are:

(ii) Facility Total Compensation Hourly Wage Rates

Management: $60.93

Technical: $52.35

Clerical: $26.35

Foreman: $34.01

Laborer: $27.54

Multiplying these wage rates by the corresponding unit time estimates yields the total facility labor 

unit cost for each facility in each model category presented in Exhibits 4, 5, and 6.

The BLS data provides generally accepted information on industry base wage rates and fringe 

benefits. Overhead rates can be calculated using various formulas. The reasons for using a 17 percent 

overhead rate are described in footnote 8. EPA has also evaluated the impact of alternative overhead 

 

7 United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation, June 2007.

8 Overhead costs were computed separately from BLS data and were assumed to be an additional 17 percent of the total 

wage rate, which is composed of direct wages and salaries and employee benefits, as reported by BLS.
25

loading rate assumptions on the total costs of this ICR. Specifically, EPA considered recommendations in 

an EPA document entitled Estimating Costs for the Economic Benefits of RCRA Noncompliance

(September 1997). This document suggests that labor overhead and profit can be estimated at 50 to 100 

percent of the base salary and fringe benefit costs. EPA estimated that raising the overhead rate to 50 

percent would increase the wages listed above by 28 percent. If a 100-percent overhead rate were used, 

these wages would increase by 71 percent. The 50 percent and 100 percent alternatives may be high 

because the rates include profit as well as overhead. Nevertheless, EPA reports the impact of these 

alternative rates in section 6(d), under the discussion of total respondent costs.

(iii) Estimating Costs of Operating and Maintenance (O&M)

In prior ICR renewal requests, EPA assumed that O&M costs were negligible, as was confirmed 

by consultations with facility representatives in 2004, which indicated that planholders incurred no 

additional cost due to hard copy storage (e.g., in existing file cabinets) or electronic storage (e.g., on a 

facility’s computer network). This renewal ICR assumes O&M costs continue to be negligible.

(iv) Estimating Capital/Startup Costs

In addition to labor costs, facilities are expected to incur additional capital costs and direct costs 

including expenses for telephone calls, postage, photocopying, and other direct costs for FRP preparation. 

These costs are one-time startup costs required to prepare and submit an FRP, and as such are included 

with capital costs. Costs vary by model facility category and are also presented in Exhibits 5 and 6. The 

estimated capital costs to maintain FRPs are negligible. 

Adding O&M costs and capital costs to the labor costs for facility personnel yields the total annual 

compliance cost per model facility, as presented in Exhibits 5 and 6. Preparation of an FRP is expected to 

cost a consumption, distribution, or production facility having between 42,000 gallons and 1 million 

gallons in total oil storage capacity $8,146, $9,000, or $7,137, respectively. EPA estimates that the total 

cost to a consumption/production or distribution/production facility having 1 million gallons or greater in 

total oil storage capacity will be $15,949, $18,245, or $14,085, respectively.

9 As shown in Exhibit 6, EPA 

 

9

These estimates include the burden of copying and submitting a plan to EPA. EPA estimated burden time required to 

reproduce the Plan and submit it to EPA at one-half hour of clerical and one-half hour of managerial time. Source: 

Regulatory Impact Analysis of proposed revisions to the Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation (40 CFR Part 112), February

1993. Additionally, EPA assumed that an owner/operator of an average medium size facility spends approximately $50 on

compiling, copying, and postage fees and that the owner/operator of an average large size facility spends about $100. 

Source: Facility Response Plans: Information Collection Request Burden Study. December 2003.
26

assumes that maintaining plans will cost the smaller capacity facilities $2,259, $2,311, or $2,259 annually, 

respectively, and will cost the larger capacity facilities $5,991, $6,846, or $5,991 annually, respectively.

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs

This section summarizes the estimated burden and cost of the revised ICR to the Agency. Burden 

estimates are based on input from EPA regional staff involved directly with the implementation of 40 CFR 

part 112. EPA will incur burdens and costs to receive, process, review, and approve submitted response 

plans. The number of response plans for existing facilities is estimated to be 3,942. Processing submitted 

FRPs includes entering information into EPA’s tracking system, filing the plan for review or for use during 

an unannounced exercise, and review for required elements per Appendix F.. EPA must also approve plans 

from facilities which are deemed as of significant and substantial harm facilities per §112.20(f)(3).

Exhibit 7 shows the unit burden and labor cost to EPA for processing FRPs and for reviewing for 

approval response plans from certain facilities. Based on program experience, processing submitted plans 

is estimated to consist of approximately 20 minutes of technical time. A substantial amount of government 

resources is required to comprehensively evaluate the adequacy of each response plan submitted by a 

facility representative.10 Program staff estimate that reviewing and approving a response plan, including a 

site visit when necessary, requires 38 hours of technical EPA staff time and 2 hours of management time.

For this revised ICR, Agency labor costs are based on the 2007 General Schedule (GS) pay

schedule. EPA estimates an average hourly labor cost (labor plus overhead) of $59.23 for managerial staff 

(GS-13, Step-5), and $41.55 for technical staff (GS-11, Step-5). To derive hourly estimates, EPA divided 

annual compensation estimates by 2,080, which is the number of hours in the Federal work year. EPA 

then multiplied hourly rates by the standard government overhead factor of 1.6. Unit costs are unit time 

estimates multiplied by the hourly labor rates for EPA personnel. For example, the labor burden to EPA 

for review and approval of each FRP is estimated to require two hours of management time 

(2 x $59.23 = $118.46) and 38 hours of technical time (38 x $41.55 =$1,578.90) for a total of 40 hours per 

plan at a cost of approximately $1,698 each.11

 

10 For previous ICRs, a survey of EPA regional offices was conducted to estimate the average burden (per plan) required 

to receive, process, review, and approve submitted response plans.

11 A fraction of these plans will be judged inadequate and require revision before being approved. The estimated cost to 

EPA reflects this possibility.
27

EXHIBIT 7

Estimated Unit Burden and Cost to EPA (2007) 

ACTIVITY

UNIT BURDEN (hours)

UNIT COST

Managerial Technical Clerical Total

Process and Store Submitted 

Response Plans 0 0.3 0 0.3 $12 

Review and Approve Response 

Plans 2 38 0 40 $1,698 

6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

(i) Estimated Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Respondents

The total burden of the information collection is the combined total burdens of rule familiarization, 

substantial harm certification, and development of the facility response plan. Total burden is calculated by

multiplying unit burden estimates by the number of facilities affected. Total cost is derived in a similar 

manner. 

The total burden and costs associated with the development of FRPs shown in Exhibits 5 and 6

must be adjusted to reflect both prior compliance with similar State regulations, since data collection 

efforts for compliance with similar State regulations may be useful in developing a facility response plan, 

and shared costs with overlapping Federal regulations. Numerous States have regulations requiring 

varying degrees of response planning. To the extent that these response plan requirements overlap with 

EPA’s FRP rule provisions, facility owners or operators may use the information already prepared for the 

State in their FRPs. Consequently, facility owners or operators that already have prepared response plans 

under State regulations may not incur all costs and burdens estimated in Exhibits 5 and 6. State regulations 

vary significantly both in terms of the level of response planning required and the type of facilities covered. 

EPA evaluated the extent of commonality between State response planning requirements and those in the 

FRP rule to arrive at an estimated adjustment of 14 percent for State-related burden overlap.

In addition, certain facility owners or operators may be required to prepare response plans pursuant 

to the regulations of more than one Federal agency as a result of the nature of their facilities. The owners 

or operators of these jointly regulated facilities are likely to prepare one response plan that fulfills the 

requirements of all Federal response planning regulations affecting them. Certain response planning 

activities and sections of the plan will be the same under all regulations and therefore, the costs associated 

with these activities are appropriately considered shared costs that should not be attributed to any single 
28

regulation. For purposes of this ICR revision, the total burden and costs have been adjusted to reflect that 

only one-half of all shared costs are attributed to the FRP rule.

(ii) Adjustment to Reflect Overlap with Other Federal Requirements

It is estimated that based on the presence of other Federal requirements, the following percentages 

of response planning burdens, by model facility category, are not attributable to the FRP rule: 12

FIRST YEAR

Medium consumption 0.0%

Medium distribution 18.4%

Medium production 12.5%

Large consumption/production 0.0%

Large distribution/production 23.4%

SUBSEQUENT YEARS

Medium consumption 0.0%

Medium distribution 44.5%

Medium production 24.9%

Large consumption 0.0%

Large distribution 32.6%

The burdens and costs to facility owners or operators that prepare and maintain FRPs (presented in 

Exhibits 5 and 6) were adjusted to reflect State or other Federal requirements to obtain the estimates 

presented in Exhibits 8 and 9. Percentage reductions were applied for prior State compliance and 

overlapping Federal regulations, as appropriate, for each model facility category. For example, the total 

burden to prepare FRPs for a production facility having between 42,000 gallons and 1 million gallons

(medium category) in total oil storage capacity, which is 145.25 hours, was adjusted by 24.7 percent [1- (1-

0.14) (1-0.125) where (1-0.14) accounts for the state-related burden overlap of 14 percent discussed in 

Section 6(d)(i) and (1-0.125) accounts for the overlap with other federal requirements as listed above 

yielding an adjusted burden of 109.4 hours]. Adjustment factors for other model facility categories were 

 

12 The methodologies for determining the extent of overlap with other Federal regulations as well as the percentage of

prior compliance with State regulations are described in more detail in Chapter 4 of the Regulatory Impact Analysis 

supporting the 1994 final rule.
29

similarly calculated using the 14 percent state-related burden overlap and the estimated burden overlap

with other federal requirement listed above for each facility category. 

The total burden and O&M and capital costs to the entire regulated community are presented in 

Exhibit 10. The burdens and costs over three years are taken from Exhibits 4, 8, and 9. The total adjusted 

burden on the regulated community over three years is estimated to be 1,297,880 hours. The total adjusted 

O&M costs for the three year period is $0 and the total adjusted capital cost is $88,449 (see Exhibit 10).
30

EXHIBIT 8

Adjusted Burden and Unit Cost for New Facilities Required to Prepare FRPs1

Size

Model 

Facility 

Category

Adjusted 

Unit 

Burden 

(hours)

Facility 

Labor 

Cost

O&M 

Costs

Capital 

Cost

Total 

Unit Cost

Number of Facilities Total 

Burden 

(hours)

Total 

O&M 

Costs

Total 

Capital 

Costs

Year Total Cost

1

Year 

2

Year 

3

Medium

Consumption 142 $6,794 $0 $211 $7,005 3 3 3 1,218 $0 $1,806 $60,047

Distribution 127 $6,143 $0 $176 $6,318 9 10 10 3,637 $0 $5,030 $181,083

Production 109 $5,194 $0 $181 $5,375 4 6 9 2,121 $0 $3,505 $104,230

Large

Consumption2293 $13,328 $0 $389 $13,716 31 32 33 28,102 $0 $37,250 $1,314,400

Distribution 253 $11,718 $0 $305 $12,024 41 42 43 32,170 $0 $38,788 $1,528,502

Production2220 $9,868 $0 $320 $10,188 1 2 3 1,420 $0 $2,070 $65,858

TOTAL 91 95 100 68,669 $0 $88,449 $3,254,120

1 Burdens and costs are adjusted to reflect prior compliance with State Regulations and overlapping Federal regulations (see Section 6(d)(ii)).

2 This analysis assumes that half the number of large production facility owners or operators required to prepare an FRP for the first time are included in the estimate 

of new consumption facilities, and will therefore incur the consumption facility preparation burden. The other half will incur the distribution facility preparation 

burden.
31

EXHIBIT 9

Adjusted Burden and Unit Cost for Existing Facilities Required to Maintain FRPs1

Size Model Facility 

Category

Adjusted

Unit 

Burden 

(hours)

Facility 

Labor 

Cost

O&M 

Costs

Capital 

Cost

Total 

Unit 

Cost

Number of Facilities Total 

Burden 

(hours)

Total 

O&M 

Costs

Total 

Capital 

Costs

Total Cost

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Medium

Consumption 46 $1,943 $0 $0 $1,943 125 128 130 17,783 $0 $0 $743,880

Distribution 26 $1,102 $0 $0 $1,102 417 427 436 33,590 $0 $0 $1,411,513

Production 35 $1,459 $0 $0 $1,459 115 119 125 12,536 $0 $0 $524,401

Large

Consumption 132 $5,153 $0 $0 $5,153 1,395 1,427 1,459 566,959 $0 $0 $22,057,229

Distribution 99 $3,971 $0 $0 $3,971 1,851 1,893 1,935 563,246 $0 $0 $22,550,751

Production 108 $4,213 $0 $0 $4,213 38 40 42 12,971 $0 $0 $504,624

TOTAL 3,941 4,034 4,127 1,207,085 $0 $0 $47,792,398

1 Burden and costs are adjusted to reflect prior compliance with State Regulations and overlapping Federal regulations. (See Section 6(d)(ii))
32

EXHIBIT 10

Total Burden and Costs Over Three Years

Activity

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 TOTAL

Burden 

(hours)

O&M 

Cost

Capital 

Cost

Burden 

(hours)

O&M 

Cost

Capital 

Cost

Burden 

(hours)

O&M 

Cost

Capital 

Cost

Burden 

(hours)

O&M 

Cost

Capital 

Cost

Certification1 6,004 $0 $0 7,208 $0 $0 8,915 $0 $0 22,127 $0 $0 

Preparation 22,045 $0 $28,298 22,839 $0 $29,405 23,784 $0 $30,746 68,669 $0 $88,449

Maintenance 393,317 $0 $0 402,256 $0 $0 411,512 $0 $0 1,207,084 $0 $0 

TOTAL 421,366 $0 $28,298 432,303 $0 $29,405 444,211 $0 $30,746 1,297,880 $0 $88,449

1 According to 40 CFR 112(App. C)(3.0), owners or operators of facilities that do not meet the “substantial harm” criteria must complete and maintain at the 

facility the certification form provided in Appendix C to 40 CFR part 112, Attachment C-II.
33

EPA also calculated costs based on alternative overhead loading rates on wages. Exhibit 11 shows 

a comparison of the annualized total cost for the rule using the selected 17 percent overhead loading rate 

on wages and costs based on two alternative overhead loading rate assumptions: 50 percent (Alternative 1) 

and 100 percent (Alternative 2). Alternative 1 yields 28 percent higher total costs, while Alternative 2 

increases total costs by 71 percent. 

EXHIBIT 11

Alternative Total Cost Measures

Labor Capital O&M Total

17% Overhead $17,398,345 $29,483 $0 $17,427,828

50% Overhead $22,269,882 $29,483 $0 $22,299,365

100% Overhead $29,751,170 $29,483 $0 $29,780,653

(iii) Estimated Total Annual Burden and Cost to EPA

The total annual burden and cost to EPA are presented in Exhibit 12. Total burden and costs are 

determined by multiplying the unit burden and cost to EPA for each activity (see Exhibit 7) by the number 

of plans processed, reviewed, and approved (shown in the second column in Exhibit 12). EPA assumes it 

will receive on average of approximately 95 new FRPs each year. EPA estimates that the burden and cost 

for processing new FRPs will be approximately 29 hours and $1,189 in labor costs per year. EPA also 

estimates that the burden and cost of reviewing the new FRPs of substantial harm facilities, as well as 

reviewing and approving the new FRPs of significant and substantial harm facilities, will be approximately

3,814 hours and $161,856 in labor costs per year.

EPA will also incur costs in subsequent years to review and approve response plans from facilities 

that undertake a major modification to their FRP.13 EPA estimates that of the 3,942 existing facilities with 

FRPs, approximately one-fifth, or 788 undertake an FRP modification that triggers the need for EPA 

review and approval.14 Annualized burden and cost to review and approve existing response plans are 

estimated to be 32,280 hours and $1,369,906 in labor costs. 

 

13 Actions such as personnel or title changes, phone number or contact address changes are not considered major 

modifications and do not require further EPA review.

14 EPA believes this is a conservative estimate of the number of facilities in a region with a large number of facilities that 

undergo a major FRP modification. Some regional EPA personnel have stated that the owners or operators of as few as 

5% of facilities in their region undertake a major FRP modification annually, while others in regions with fewer facilities 

or different types of facilities stated that approximately half of the FRP revisions over a seven month period could be 

considered major.
34

Total cost to EPA for processing, reviewing, and approving new and existing plans are estimated 

at 108,368 hours and $4,598,851 in labor costs over three years. There are no capital or O&M costs to the 

Agency for this ICR. The annualized burden and cost to EPA over three years are 36,123 hours and 

$1,532,950.
35

EXHIBIT 12

Estimated Total Burdens and Costs to EPA

ACTIVITY

YEAR ONE YEAR TWO YEAR THREE TOTAL

Number 

of Plans

Burden 

(Hours) Cost Number of Plans

Burden 

(Hours) Cost Number of Plans

Burden 

(Hours) Cost Burden (Hours) Cost Annualized Cost

Process and Store 

Newly Submitted 

Response Plans

91 27 $1,132 95 28 $1,184 100 30 $1,250 86 $3,566 $1,189

Review and 

Approve New 

Response Plans

91 3,631 $154,078 95 3,800 $161,255 100 4,011 $170,234 11,442 $485,567 $161,856

Review and 

Approve Existing 

Response Plans

788 31,520 $1,337,653 807 32,280 $1,369,906 826 33,040 $1,402,159 96,840 $4,109,718 $1,369,906

Total N/A 35,178 $1,492,863 N/A 36,108 $1,532,345 N/A 37,081 $1,573,643 108,368 $4,598,851 $1,532,951

Source: EPA regional personnel estimate.
36

6(e) Bottom Line Burden and Cost Tables

Exhibit 10 summarizes the total estimated burden hours and cost incurred by all respondents 

(existing and new facilities) to comply with the FRP information collection requirements. The estimated 

burden hour and costs incurred by EPA are summarized in Exhibit 12. Exhibit 13 below summarizes the 

total burden and cost incurred by both respondent facilities and government. The average annual burden to 

respondents is 432,627 hours, there are no annualized O&M costs, and the annualized capital cost is 

$29,483.

EXHIBIT 13

Total Burden and Cost Estimates

Facilities EPA Total

Burden 

(hours)

Non-Labor Total Cost Burden 

(hours)

Total NonLabor CostBurden 

(hours)

Total NonO&M Cost Capital Cost Labor Cost

Year 1 421,366 $0.00 $28,298 35,178 $0.00 456,544 $28,298

Year 2 432,303 $0.00 $29,405 36,108 $0.00 468,411 $29,405

Year 3 444,211 $0.00 $30,746 37,081 $0.00 481,292 $30,746

Total 1,297,880 $0 $88,449 108,367 $0.00 1,406,247 $88,449

6(f) Reasons for the Change in Burden

Differences in burden and costs from the previous ICR are attributed to adjustment changes. 

Adjustments are caused by updating information (e.g., number of affected facilities, burden estimates, and 

labor rates) in the absence of changes to the FRP regulatory requirements. Program changes, burden and 

cost effects directly associated with revisions to the FRP rule are not applicable to this renewal ICR.

The prior ICR renewal reflected a change in the number of affected facilities, due to the 

availability of more detailed inventory of planholders. This renewal ICR does not include and adjustments 

to the number of affected facilities, since the number of plan holders has not changed substantively since 

the last ICR approval. In 2006, EPA initiated an effort to compile data from each of its ten regional 

offices on facilities that had submitted an FRP to update our knowledge of the FRP universe. The latest 

update to inform this ICR renewal was completed in April 2010 and contains the list of all 4,341 active

facilities that currently maintain an FRP, including 4,260 facilities not owned and operated by the Federal 

government. Thus, the FRP universe is lower than the 6,183 FRP facilities presented in the 2004 renewal 
37

ICR as it was based on a fixed proportion of the estimated number of facilities subject to SPCC.15 To 

estimate the number of new facilities that will develop an FRP during the three-year period of 2007 

through 2009, EPA used annual industry-specific growth rates. EPA estimates that 286 new facilities will 

prepare FRPs during the three-year period covered by this ICR.

In total, the burden hours presented in the last renewal ICR decreased relative to the current OMB 

inventory (see Exhibit 14). The burden estimate showed an annualized decrease of 202,367 hours due to 

adjustments in the estimated number of affected facilities since the last ICR approval (November 30, 

2004). No significant change in the burden estimate is anticipated for this ICR renewal.

EXHIBIT 14

Estimated Annualized Burden and Costs Comparison

Annualized Burden (hours) Annualized Capital and O&M 

Costs

Prior OMB Burden Inventory 634,994 $20,716

Change in Burden (202,367) $8,768

Current Burden Estimate 432,627 $29,484

6(g) Burden Statement

The public reporting and recordkeeping burden to all respondents are presented in Exhibit 15. 

These burdens include the time required to review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and 

maintain the data needed, estimate the information required and complete and review the collection of 

information. The average public reporting and recordkeeping burdens to a newly regulated facility where 

the owners or operators are not required to prepare FRPs (i.e., facilities where the owner or operators 

certify that they do not meet the “substantial harm” criteria) are estimated at 0.4 hours per year. The

average annual reporting and recordkeeping burdens to a newly regulated facility where the owners or 

operators are required to prepare FRPs (i.e., first-year costs for plan development) are estimated at 240.1

hours per year. The average annual reporting and recordkeeping burdens to a facility where the owners or 

operators maintain FRPs (i.e., subsequent year costs for annual plan maintenance) are estimated at 99.7

hours. 

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by persons to generate, 

maintain, retain, or disclose or provide information to or for a Federal agency. This includes the time 

 

15 In setting terms of clearance for the 2004 ICR request, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) had 

requested that EPA provide a change worksheet, if applicable, updating the burden estimate for the FRP ICR to 

reflect revisions to the SPCC respondent universe. The current FRP burden estimate, however, considers the actual 

number of FRP planholders instead of a fixed proportion of SPCC respondents. 
38

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. 

EXHIBIT 15

Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Affected Facilities

Total Average Annual 

Burden (hours)

Number of Facilities per 

Year (Respondents)

Average Annual Burden 

per Respondent (hours)

Certification1

7,376 18,444 0.4 

Preparation 22,890 95 240.1 

Maintenance 402,361 4,034 99.7 

1 According to 40 CFR 112(App. C)(3.0), owners or operators of facilities that do not meet the “substantial harm” 

criteria must complete and maintain at the facility the certification form provided in Appendix C to 40 CFR part 112, 

Attachment C-II.

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. EPA-HQSFUND-2007-0559, which is available for online viewing at www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at 

the Office of Emergency Prevention, Preparedness, and Response Oil Program Docket in the EPA Docket 

Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA/DC 

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 

Office of Emergency Prevention, Preparedness, and Response Oil Program Docket is 202-566-2426. Use 

www.regulations.gov to obtain a copy of the draft collection of information, 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.