1

SPILL PREVENTION, CONTROL AND COUNTERMEASURE (SPCC) 

PLANS

1. IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1(a) Title of the Information Collection

“Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans (Renewal)”. (EPA ICR 

No. 0328.16, OMB No. 2050-0021)

1(b) Short Characterization

The Oil Pollution Prevention regulation, 40 CFR Part 112, requires and establishes 

procedures for the preparation and implementation of Spill Prevention, Control, and 

Countermeasure (SPCC) Plans. SPCC Plans help minimize the potential for oil discharges from

non-transportation-related onshore and offshore facilities into or upon the navigable waters of 

the United States or adjoining shorelines that affect certain natural resources.

Owners and operators of regulated facilities must prepare SPCC Plans in accordance 

with good engineering practices and have them certified by a Professional Engineer (PE) or 

self-certified in the case of qualified facilities and approved by a person with the authority to 

commit the resources necessary to implement the SPCC Plan. SPCC Plans address the 

following three areas: (1) operating procedures that prevent oil spills; (2) control measures 

installed to prevent a spill from reaching navigable waters or adjoining shorelines; and (3) 

countermeasures to contain, clean up, and mitigate the effects of an oil discharge that could 

reach navigable waters. Each SPCC Plan, while unique to the facility it covers, must include 

certain standard elements to ensure compliance with the regulations. 

This ICR covers all provisions of 40 CFR part 112 relating to SPCC Plans, including the 

final rule published on April 18, 2011 (76 FR 21652) to exempt milk and milk products 

containers, associated piping and appurtenances. EPA expects that some facilities would no 

longer be subject to the SPCC requirements as a result of the milk and milk product containers 

exemption, because their total aggregate aboveground oil storage capacity would be 1,320 

gallons or less. Other facilities may become qualified facilities (allowing the owner or operator to 

self-certify the facility SPCC Plan) as a result of the milk and milk product container exemption. 

EPA estimated there were approximately 66,000 farms and milk product manufacturing facilities 

with milk containers in 2009. In aggregate, EPA estimated a total annualized savings of $146

million for the final rule. The estimated cost savings reflect a decrease in the number of dairy 

farms from about 75,000 farms to 65,000 farms between 2006 and 2009, as well as additional 

milk product manufacturing facilities with containers eligible for the exemption.

This supporting statement estimates paperwork-related burden for the ICR period, which 

covers three years. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that 

approximately 670,000 facilities will be covered by the SPCC regulations in 2014 and may incur 

paperwork-related burden in the first year of this ICR in response to existing and amended 
2

requirements.1 EPA estimates a total reporting and recordkeeping burden for all regulated 

facilities at approximately 8.8 million hours in each year of this ICR. The Agency estimates that 

there will be no increase or decrease in paperwork burden over the three year covered period, 

because we expect that there will be no amendments to the existing SPCC regulations. 

2. NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2(a) Need/Authority for the Collection

Section 311(j)(1)(C) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, or Clean Water Act 

(CWA), authorizes the President to issue regulations establishing procedures, methods, 

equipment, and other requirements to prevent discharges of oil from vessels and facilities and to 

contain such discharges.2 The President delegated the authority to regulate non-transportationrelated onshore facilities under §311(j)(1)(C) of the Act to EPA under Executive Order (E.O.) 

12777, §2(b)(1).3 By this same Executive Order, the President delegated 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 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), dated 

February 3, 1994, among EPA, DOT, and DOI, reallocated the responsibility for nontransportation-related offshore facilities that are landward of the coastline to EPA. An earlier 

MOU between the Secretary of Transportation and the EPA Administrator, dated November 24, 

1971 (36 FR 24080), established the definitions of non-transportation-related facilities and 

transportation-related facilities.

The Oil Pollution Prevention regulation, 40 CFR Part 112, outlines requirements for 

preventing, preparing, and responding to oil spills. The prevention part of this regulation at 

§112.1 through §112.12 is also known as the SPCC rule. It was originally promulgated on 

December 11, 1973, at 38 FR 34164, under the authority of §311(j)(1)(C) of the CWA. The 

regulation established spill prevention procedures, methods, and equipment requirements for 

non-transportation-related onshore and offshore facilities with aboveground oil storage capacity 

or completely buried underground oil storage capacity greater than certain thresholds and 

meeting other criteria (see §112.1). Regulated facilities are limited to those that, because of 

their location, could reasonably be expected to discharge oil in quantities that may be harmful 

into the navigable waters of the United States or adjoining shorelines.

On July 17, 2002, at 67 FR 47042, EPA published amendments to the SPCC rule. 

These amendments included new subparts outlining the requirements for different classes of oil, 

revised the applicability of the regulation, amended the requirements for completing SPCC 

Plans, and made other modifications. The amendments also contained a number of provisions 

designed to decrease the regulatory burden on facility owners and operators subject to the rule 

while preserving environmental protection. The rule was effective August 16, 2002, with 

compliance dates outlined in §112.3(a) and (b). However, the original compliance dates were 

 

1 While new facilities will incur significant paperwork-related burden by taking certain actions in the first year of the 

ICR (e.g., new facilities will prepare an SPCC Plan), existing facilities may not need to take any action except for 

maintaining records.

2

33 U.S.C. 1321(j)(1)(C).

3

56 FR 54757 (October 22, 1991), superseding Executive Order 11735, 38 FR 21243.
3

amended on January 9, 2003, for 60 days (68 FR 1348) and then extended for an additional 18 

months on April 7, 2003 (68 FR 18890). On August 11, 2004, EPA extended the compliance 

dates in §112.3(a) and (b) by an additional 18 months and amended the compliance dates in 

§112.3(c) (69 FR 48794). On February 17, 2006, EPA published an additional extension of the 

compliance dates in §112.3(a), (b), and (c) until October 31, 2007 for owners and operators to 

prepare, amend, and implement SPCC Plans (71 FR 8462). On May 16, 2007, EPA extended 

the compliance dates to July 1, 2009 (72 FR 27444). On June 19, 2009, EPA further extended 

the compliance dates for facility owners and operators to November 10, 2010 (74 FR 29136).

EPA again extended the compliance dates for certain facilities4by an additional year (to 

November 10, 2011) in a final rule published October 14, 2010 (75 FR 63093). The compliance 

date was later extended for farms to May 10, 2013 in a final rule published November 22, 2011 

(76 FR 72120).

On December 26, 2006, EPA published a final rule to amend 40 CFR part 112 (71 FR 

77266). EPA amended the SPCC rule to address a number of issues raised by the regulated 

community about the 2002 amendments, including those pertaining to facilities with smaller oil 

storage capacities, qualified oil-filled operational equipment, motive power containers, and 

mobile refuelers. EPA also removed sections of the rule that were not appropriate for facilities

with animal fats and vegetable oils. The Agency also issued an indefinite compliance date 

extension for farms.

On December 5, 2008, EPA published amendments to clarify, streamline and tailor the 

rule requirements to sectors of the regulated industries (e.g., oil production, farms). However, 

the effective date of the December 2008 rulemaking was delayed for 60 days from February 3, 

2009 to April 4, 2009, in accordance with the January 20, 2009, White House memorandum 

entitled, “Regulatory Review,” and the memorandum from the Office of Management and 

Budget entitled “Implementation of Memorandum Concerning Regulatory Review” (M-09-08, 

January 21, 2009 OMB memorandum). The Agency took this action to ensure that the rule 

properly reflects consideration of all relevant facts. EPA requested public comment on the delay 

of the effective date and its duration, and on the regulatory amendments contained in the final 

rule (74 FR 5900, February 3, 2009) and specifically on the requirements for produced water 

containers and qualified oil production facilities. 

On April 1, 2009, the Agency further delayed the effective date of the December 2008 

rulemaking until January 14, 2010 (74 FR 14736). The Agency took this action to allow sufficient 

time to address the comments received on the February 3, 2009 notice. 

In the November 2009 amendments, EPA confirmed that the following provisions 

finalized in the December 2008 final rule would become effective on January 14, 2010, without

further modification: 

 Exemption for hot-mix asphalt; 

 Exemption for pesticide application equipment and related mix containers; 

 Exemption for residential heating oil containers;

 

4

The extension applied to all facilities except drilling, production or workover facilities that are offshore or

that have an offshore component, or onshore facilities required to have and submit Facility Response 

Plans (FRPs).
4

 Amended definition of “facility” to clarify that contiguous or non-contiguous buildings, 

properties, parcels, leases, structures, installations, pipes, or pipelines may be 

considered separate facilities; 

 Amended facility diagram requirement at §112.7(a)(3); 

 Definition for the term “loading/unloading rack,” and clarification that this definition 

governs the applicability of the provisions for facility tank car and tank truck 

loading/unloading racks at §112.7(h); 

 Amended general secondary containment requirements at §112.7(c); 

 Extension of the exemption from the sized secondary containment requirement for 

mobile refuelers provided in the December 2006 SPCC rule amendments (71 FR 77266, 

December 26, 2006) to non-transportation-related tank trucks at a facility subject to the 

SPCC rule; 

 Amended facility security requirements at §112.7(g); 

 Amended integrity testing requirements at §§112.8(c)(6) and 112.12(c)(6) to allow 

greater flexibility in the use of industry standards; 

 Amended integrity testing requirements at §112.12(c)(6) for containers that store animal 

fats and vegetable oils (AFVOs) and meet certain criteria; 

 Amended definition of “production facility” to be consistent with the amended definition of 

“facility”; 

 Clarification that drilling and workover activities are not subject to the provisions at 

§112.9; 

 Alternative compliance option for flow-through process vessels at oil production facilities

to comply with only the general secondary containment requirements and additional oil 

spill prevention measures in lieu of the sized secondary containment requirements; 

 Definition for the term “produced water container”, and alternative compliance measures 

for these containers which require general secondary containment, a process or 

procedure certified by a PE designed to remove free-phase oil on the surface of the 

produced water in these containers and compliance with additional oil spill prevention 

measures in lieu of sized secondary containment requirements; 

 Exemption for certain intra-facility gathering lines subject to requirements of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation’s (DOT’s) pipeline regulations from the SPCC 

requirements; 

 More prescriptive requirements for a flowline/intra-facility gathering line maintenance 

program and an alternative compliance option of contingency planning for flowlines and 

intra-facility gathering lines in lieu of all secondary containment; and 

 Clarifying the definition of “permanently closed” as it applies to oil production facilities 

and containers present at an oil production facility.

In the November 2009 amendments, EPA also made the following technical corrections

to the following provisions that were finalized in the December 2008 final rule:

 Language related to the exemption of underground oil storage tanks that supply 

emergency diesel generators at nuclear power generation facilities;

 Clarifications and corrections of typographical and formatting errors related to the 

designation of a subset of qualified facilities (“Tier I qualified facilities”) with a set of 

streamlined SPCC rule requirements; and
5

 Amendment of the compliance date provision for new oil production facilities, so that it 

applies to new oil production facilities that begin operations after November 10, 2010. 

Based on comments received and consideration of all relevant facts in the November 2009 

amendments, EPA removed the following provisions:

 The exclusion of oil production facilities and farms from the loading/unloading rack 

requirements at §112.7(h); 

 The exemption for produced water containers at an oil production facility; 

 The alternative qualified facility eligibility criteria for an oil production facility. 

Finally, on April 18, 2011, EPA amended the SPCC rule to exempt all milk and milk product 

containers and associated piping and appurtenances from the SPCC requirements (76 FR 

21652). This supporting statement contains the paperwork-related burden of SPCC Plans as 

amended by the 2011 final amendments to exempt milk and milk product containers from the 

SPCC rule. 

2(b) Practical Utility/Users of the Data

EPA does not routinely collect SPCC Plans or related records from SPCC regulated 

facilities. Preparation, implementation, and maintenance of the SPCC Plan by the facility owner 

or operator helps prevent oil discharges and mitigate the environmental damage caused by 

such discharges. Therefore, the primary user of the data is the facility owner or operator. For 

example:

 Accumulating the necessary data requires that the facility staff analyze the facility measures 

and procedures for preventing oil discharges, facilitating safety awareness, and promoting 

appropriate modifications to facility design and operations;

 Having the required information in a single document promotes efficient response in the 

event of a discharge;

 Implementing the Plan according to the specifications of 40 CFR part 112 requires meeting 

certain design and operational standards that reduce the likelihood of an oil discharge; 

 Keeping inspection records promotes important maintenance, facilitates leak detection, and 

demonstrates compliance with the SPCC requirements; and

 Reviewing the Plan periodically ensures the implementation of more effective spill 

prevention control technology as it becomes available and is demonstrated to be effective.

Although facility personnel are the primary users of the data, EPA may use the data in 

certain situations. EPA’s primary use of the data contained in an SPCC Plan is through 

inspection to ensure that a facility is in full compliance with all elements of the SPCC rule, 

including design and operation specifications and inspection requirements. For example, EPA 

reviews SPCC Plans as part of EPA’s inspection program. However, inspection-related activities 

are not covered by this ICR. A Regional Administrator may require a facility owner or operator 
6

to amend an SPCC Plan if he/she finds that the facility has not met the requirements of the 

regulation, has an oil spill or if amendment of the Plan is necessary to prevent and contain 

discharges of oil.

State and local governments are also users of the data. The information provided in 

SPCC Plans (e.g., facility configuration and potential risks) is not necessarily available 

elsewhere and assists local emergency preparedness planning efforts. The Plan should be 

compatible and coordinated with local emergency plans, including those developed under Title 

III of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-499). 

Coordination with state governments is facilitated by the provision in §112.4(c) requiring that, 

after certain discharges, information on the discharge be sent to the relevant state and local 

agencies. The flexibility with respect to Plan formatting promotes greater coordination with state 

planning efforts by encouraging the use of plans prepared pursuant to state regulations.

3. NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

3(a) Non-duplication

For some facilities, certain requirements of the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation could 

be the same or substantially similar to regulations addressing underground storage tanks 

(USTs). The SPCC rule addresses this overlap by exempting completely buried tanks subject 

to all of the technical requirements of EPA’s UST program (40 CFR part 280) or a state program 

approved under 40 CFR part 281.

The regulation allows considerable flexibility in Plan preparation and recordkeeping. The 

regulation allows the use of alternative, appropriately cross-referenced formats based on other 

state or other federal requirements. Greater flexibility is also provided for facility recordkeeping 

practices, as records required pursuant to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 

(NPDES) program and API Standards may satisfy certain SPCC recordkeeping requirements. 

Records kept under usual and customary business practices are also accepted for inspections, 

tests, and records.

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

In compliance with the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Agency 

has notified the public of the renewal of this ICR through the Federal Register on December 17, 

2012 (77 FR 74659). Four comments (one Federal agency, one independent Federal agency, 

an attorney and an energy company) were submitted. 

One comment supported the collection of information as part of a comprehensive 

federal/state oil spill prevention program. Another comment stated that EPA should streamline 

the reporting process to reduce the administrative costs to the Agency and to private sector 

companies. The comment recommended that the Agency develop and use online reporting on 

standard forms that are clear, concise and allow information to be entered on multiple forms 

with the same key strokes. 
7

One comment agreed with EPA’s burden statement for the first year costs for plan 

development of 58 hours and 11 hours for annual plan maintenance. The comment stated that

while these are appropriate estimates for small facilities, for larger more complex facilities the 

regulatory burden should be estimated at approximately 100 hours for first year costs to develop 

the plan and 24 - 32 hours per year to maintain the plan. The comment also stated that these 

estimates include the costs to develop / revise word documents, develop / update drawings, to

complete PE amendments as necessary and to conduct site walk throughs to verify information 

for either new plans or changes to existing plans.

A comment was submitted to EPA staff and was not posted to the docket. EPA has 

decided to address this comment and has included the comment in the docket. The comment 

states that the average annual cost to maintain and update each of the commenter’s the plans 

is 47 hours and $5,600. The comment further states that when certain SPCC costs are added, 

such as plan certification costs, the hours and costs can double, bringing the average annual 

compliance cost for each plan to $8,400. Further, the comment asserts the costs for smaller 

facilities can be as much as 100 hours and $12,000. It concludes that the labor and costs for all 

aspects of SPCC compliance costs are larger than those in the Federal Register notice.

Response to Comments

EPA agrees with the comment that supports the ICR notice. EPA did not have sufficient 

information to respond to the comment on the reporting process. Finally, EPA recognizes that 

the hours and costs to develop and maintain SPCC Plans will vary among the regulated 

universe. The ICR reflects an estimated average of labor hours and costs to develop and 

maintain an SPCC Plan. EPA based the hours and costs to develop and maintain SPCC on the 

oil storage capacity of facilities. The average labor hours and costs reflect the estimates of more 

than fifty percent of the SPCC-regulated facilities are in Category 2 with oil storage capacity 

between 1,320 and 10,000 gallons (see Exhibit 2 for additional information). The Agency’s 

economic analysis contains costs for each of the four oil storage categories as described in this 

ICR. 

3(c) Consultations

As part of the effort to estimate the per-facility compliance cost with the SPCC 

paperwork requirements, EPA contacted seven affected facilities and professional engineering 

firms or associations that provide PE services directly to or represent regulated facilities about

EPA’s SPCC burden assumptions and estimates. The interviews were conducted to provide 

insight into the reasonableness of EPA’s estimates of the paperwork burden that facilities may

incur when complying with the SPCC rule. The names, companies, and telephone numbers of 

the representatives of those entities are given below.

Bob Nash, Prospect Iron and Steel, (617) 666-3405

Brian Klingler; Conoco Engineers, Scientists, and Surveyors; (508) 697-3191

Kelly Lamkin; P.E. Grayson SWD No. B-1, (870) 947-0415

Warner T. Smith, PE; Warner T. Smith Associates, Inc.; (870) 725-2550

Timothy Laughlin, PE; N.C. Petroleum and Convenience Marketers Association, and 

Gary Harris, Executive Director, (919) 782-4411 
8

Steve Wavro, PE; Exxon Mobil Baytown Complex; Otis Dickenson, Supervisor; and 

Raoul Lopez, Site Superintendent, (281) 834-0027

Henri deLaunay, Michael Schoch, Hilcorp Corporation, (713) 289-2671

The contacted facilities were from the following industries: bulk oil storage, oil 

production, petroleum refining, chemical manufacturing, iron and steel, and professional 

engineering firms that provide PE services to regulated facilities. The regulated facilities and PE 

firms represent facilities from the largest companies in the U.S. to the smallest companies and 

marginal oil production facilities. Estimates of the costs of compliance with paperwork 

requirements provided by the seven contacts are within the same range as the costs developed 

by EPA. The findings suggest the EPA hour and cost burden estimates to prepare and maintain 

an SPCC Plan used in the current ICR are reasonable.

3(d) Effects of Less Frequent Collection

The SPCC rule requires the development and maintenance of SPCC Plans. The Agency 

does not require the owners and operators of facilities to submit these Plans to EPA. The Plan 

must be available to the Regional Administrator (RA) (or an inspector) for onsite review during 

normal business hours. Section 112.4(a) requires that owners and operators submit certain 

critical information to EPA regarding a discharge and corrective actions. In order to conduct 

proper follow-up actions as necessary, Agency personnel may request the Plan itself or access 

a copy of the entire SPCC Plan by visiting the facility. Because collection is not periodic, less 

frequent collection is not possible.

The owner or operator of a facility is required to review and evaluate the facility Plan 

every five years. EPA’s experience in administering the SPCC regulation indicates that updating 

Plans to reflect currently available and proven technology and techniques for preventing and 

controlling oil discharges every five years is sufficient given the degree to which such 

technologies and techniques evolve over time.

3(e) General Guidelines

The information collection activities discussed in this ICR comply with the general 

Paperwork Reduction Act guidelines at 5 CFR 1320.5(d)(2).

3(f) Confidentiality

The nature of the data being gathered as part of this ICR is not confidential.

3(g) Sensitive Questions

The information gathering activities discussed in this ICR do not involve sensitive 

questions.
9

4. THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4(a) Respondents/NAICS Codes

The industries that are likely to be covered by the SPCC rule fall into many North 

American Industrial Classification System (NAICS) categories, including those associated with 

petroleum production, non-petroleum oil storage, processing (refining), distribution, storage, and 

consumption. The majority of regulated facilities fall under the industry sectors listed in Exhibit 1.

Exhibit 1

Primary Industry Sectors and NAICS Codes Covered by the SPCC Rule

Industry Category NAICS Code(s)

Oil and Gas Extraction 211

Farms 111, 112

Electric Utility Plants 2211

Petroleum Refining and Related Industries 324

Chemical Manufacturing 325

Food Manufacturing 311, 312

Manufacturing Facilities Using and Storing Animal Fats and 

Vegetable Oils 311, 325

Metal Manufacturing 331, 332

Other Manufacturing 31-33

Real Estate Rental and Leasing 531-533

Retail Trade 441-446, 448, 451-454

Contract Construction 23

Wholesale Trade 42

Other Commercial 492, 541, 551, 561-562

Transportation 481-488

Arts Entertainment & Recreation 711-713

Other Services (Except Public Administration) 811-813

Education 611

Petroleum Bulk Stations and Terminals 4247

Hospitals & Other Health Care 621-624

Accommodation and Food Services 721, 722

Fuel Oil Dealers 45431

Gasoline Stations 4471

Information Finance and Insurance 51, 52

Mining 212, 213

Warehousing and Storage 493

Pipelines 4861, 4869

Government 92

Military Installations 928110

Religiois Organizations 813110
10

4(b) Information Requested

(i) Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements

The primary data collection activities required by the SPCC rule are the preparation and 

maintenance of the SPCC Plan along with preparing records of inspections and tests. In 

preparing a Plan, a facility owner or operator must follow the provisions outlined in the 

regulation and include a discussion of the measures taken to meet the SPCC requirements,

some of which are listed below. For more detailed requirements, please refer to the Oil Pollution 

Prevention regulation itself.

 Potential equipment failure. Where experience indicates a reasonable potential for 

equipment failure (e.g., tank overflow, rupture, or leakage), the Plan must include a 

prediction of the direction, rate of flow, and total quantity of oil that could be discharged 

from the facility as a result of each major type of equipment failure (§112.7(b)).

 Containment/diversion or contingency planning. Appropriate containment and/or 

diversion structures or equipment must be provided to prevent a discharge (§§112.7(c), 

112.7(h)(1), 112.8(c)(2), 112.8(c)(11), 112.9(c)(2), 112.10(c), 112.12(c)(2), and/or 

112.12(c)(11), as applicable according to facility type). For onshore facilities, the owner 

or operator must use one of the following preventive systems or its equivalent: dikes, 

berms, or retaining walls sufficiently impervious to contain oil; curbing; culverting, 

gutters, or other drainage systems; weirs, booms, or other barriers; spill diversion ponds; 

retention ponds; or sorbent materials. The owner or operator of an offshore facility is 

subject to slightly different requirements due to the facility’s unique configuration. While 

§112.7(c) generally requires secondary containment to be appropriately sized (i.e., to 

address the most likely discharge so that the oil will not escape containment before 

cleanup occurs), the additional provisions listed above specify a required minimum size 

for secondary containment at particular areas of a facility (i.e., sized to contain the 

largest single oil compartment or container plus sufficient freeboard to contain 

precipitation). Where installation of these structures or equipment is determined by the 

owner or operator to be impracticable, a facility owner or operator must explain why, 

provide a contingency plan following 40 CFR part 109 (or a Facility Response Plan), 

conduct periodic integrity testing of the containers and periodic integrity and leak testing 

of valves and piping, and provide a written commitment of the manpower, equipment, 

and materials required to expeditiously control and remove any harmful quantity of oil 

discharged (§112.7(d)).

Owners and operators of facilities with certain types of oil-filled operational equipment 

have the option of preparing an oil spill contingency plan and a written commitment of 

manpower, equipment, and materials in lieu of providing secondary containment for 

qualified oil-filled operational equipment, without making an individual impracticability 

determination as required in §112.7(d). Owners or operators who pursue this alternative 

are required to establish and document an inspection or monitoring program for this 

qualified oil-filled operational equipment to detect equipment failure and/or a discharge, 

in lieu of providing secondary containment. An owner or operator cannot pursue the 

option if that facility has had a single discharge as described in §112.1(b) from any oil-
11

filled operational equipment exceeding 1,000 U.S. gallons or two discharges as 

described in §112.1(b) from any oil-filled operational equipment each exceeding 42 U.S. 

gallons within any 12-month period in the three years prior to the SPCC Plan selfcertification date, or since becoming subject to 40 CFR part 112 if the facility has been 

operating for less than three years.

Owners and operators of oil production facilities have the option of preparing an oil spill 

contingency plan and a written commitment of manpower, equipment, and materials in 

lieu of providing secondary containment in accordance with §112.7(c) for flowlines and 

intra-facility gathering lines. These facility owners/operators may also choose alternative 

compliance options in lieu of sized secondary containment requirements of §112.9(c)(2) 

for flow-through process vessels and produced water containers.5 However, if the facility 

experiences discharges from flow-through process vessel or produced water container 

(excluding discharges that are the result of natural disasters, acts of war, or terrorism) as 

described below, then the facility if no longer eligible for the alternative requirements for 

this equipment and must comply with the sized secondary containment and inspection 

requirements of §112.9(c)(2) and (c)(3) within six months:

 A discharge of more than 1,000 U.S. gallons of oil in a single discharge as 

described in §112.1(b), or 

 Two discharges of more than 42 U.S. gallons of oil in each of two discharges as 

described in §112.1(b) within any twelve month period.

The alternative requirements for flow-through process vessels are described in 

§112.9(c)(5) and require visual inspection and/or test of flow-through process vessels 

and associated components (such as dump valves) for leaks, corrosion, or other 

conditions that could lead to a discharge as described in §112.1(b) on a periodic and 

regular schedule; corrective action or repairs to flow-through process vessels and any 

associated components as indicated by regularly scheduled visual inspections, tests, or 

evidence of an oil discharge; and prompt removal or actions initiated to stabilize and 

remediate any accumulations of oil discharges associated with flow-through process 

vessels.

The alternative requirements for produced water containers are described in 

§112.9(c)(6) and require:

 A procedure for each produced water container that is designed to separate the 

free-phase oil that accumulates on the surface of the produced water be 

implemented on a regular schedule. The SPCC Plan must describe the 

procedures, frequency, amount of free-phase oil expected to be maintained 

inside the container, and a Professional Engineer certification in accordance with 

§112.3(d)(1)(vi). Records of such events must be maintained in accordance with 

§112.7(e). 

 Visual inspection and/or test of the produced water container and associated 

piping for leaks, corrosion, or other conditions that could lead to a discharge as 

 

5

 Note that the secondary containment requirements of §112.7(c) still apply to these containers.
12

described in §112.1(b) in accordance with good engineering practice and on a 

regular schedule.

 Corrective action or repairs to the produced water container and any associated 

piping as indicated by regularly scheduled visual inspections, tests, or evidence

of an oil discharge.

 Prompt removal or actions initiated to stabilize and remediate any accumulations 

of oil discharges associated with the produced water container.

 Detailed requirements. In addition to secondary containment requirements, the Plan 

must include a discussion of the facility’s conformance with more detailed and specific 

requirements, as applicable according to facility type. These specific requirements 

concern facility diagrams and discharge reporting information and procedures 

(§112.7(a)); personnel, training, and discharge prevention procedures (§112.7(f)); 

security (§112.7(g)); facility tank car and tank truck loading/unloading rack (excluding 

offshore facilities) (§112.7(h)); brittle fracture issues related to certain field-constructed 

aboveground containers (§112.7(i)); other applicable federal, state, and local 

requirements (§112.7(j)), integrity testing and/or visual inspection (§112.8(c)(6), 

§112.9(c)(3) or §112.12(c)(6)); and flow-line maintenance programs (§112.9(d)(4)).

 Specific recordkeeping requirements. Every facility owner or operator must conduct 

inspections and tests required by 40 CFR part 112 in accordance with written 

procedures in the Plan and keep a record of the inspections and tests, signed by the 

appropriate supervisor or inspector, with the SPCC Plan for a period of three years 

(§112.7(e)). Records of inspections and tests may be kept under usual and customary 

business practices.

 Specific reporting requirements. As the result of an oil discharge, in accordance with 

§112.4 the following information must be provided to the Regional Administrator:

(1) Name of the facility; 

(2) Name of the owner or operator; 

(3) Location of the facility; 

(4) Maximum storage or handling capacity of the facility and its normal daily 

throughput;

(5) The corrective action or countermeasures taken, including an adequate 

description of equipment repairs and/or replacements;

(6) Description of the facility including maps, flow diagrams, and topographic 

maps;

(7) Cause(s) of the spill, including a failure analysis of the system or 

subsystem in which the failure occurred;

(8) Additional preventive measures taken or contemplated to minimize the 

possibility of recurrence; and

(9) Such other information as the Regional Administrator may reasonably 

require pertinent to the Plan or to the spill event.
13

In addition, a facility owner or operator must update his or her Plan as necessary, 

following a modification in the facility’s design or operations that materially affects its potential 

for a discharge and following the five-year review.

(ii) Respondent Activities

The Oil Pollution Prevention regulation requires an owner or operator to conduct the 

following compliance activities:

 Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan (§§112.3 and 112.7);

 Maintain the SPCC Plan and keep records (§§112.3 and 112.7(e));

 Revise the SPCC Plan following a material modification of the facility (§112.5(a)); and

 Conduct periodic reviews of the SPCC Plan (§112.5(b)).

Each of these compliance activities is summarized in more detail below:

Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan

The owner or operator of a new non-production facility must amend or prepare, and 

implement, an SPCC Plan in accordance with the guidelines set forth in 40 CFR part 112 before 

beginning operations.6 Farmers must amend or prepare, and implement, an SPCC Plan in 

accordance with the guidelines set forth in 40 CFR part 112 by May 10, 2013 or before 

beginning operations, whichever is later. The actual preparation of the Plan may involve several 

separate tasks, which could be conducted by the facility’s technical personnel or PEs. These 

tasks may include:

 Field investigations, which are conducted to fully understand the design of the facility 

and to accurately predict the areas or equipment most likely to discharge oil (this 

involves predicting the flow paths of spilled oil);

 A regulatory review conducted by management personnel, such that the technical 

personnel in charge of actually preparing the Plan are fully aware of all requirements in 

40 CFR part 112;

 A review of existing procedures conducted to determine the effectiveness of the current 

spill prevention and control practices employed by the facility;

 Preparation of the Plan, which involves both technical and clerical time, as well as a final 

review by facility management personnel prior to completion (could also be performed by 

an engineering firm).

 

6

In the November 2009 amendments, EPA allowed owners and operators of new oil production facilities a period of 

six months to prepare and implement an SPCC Plan.
14

Tier I qualified facilities - a subset of qualified facilities having no oil storage containers 

with a capacity greater than 5,000 gallons - are allowed to complete an SPCC Plan 

template (Appendix G to the 40 CFR part 112) in lieu of a full SPCC Plan. By 

completing the SPCC Plan template, an owner or operator of a Tier I qualified facility 

self-certifies that the facility complies with a set of streamlined SPCC rule requirements. 

The owner or operator is responsible for ensuring that the facility is in compliance with all 

SPCC rule requirements.

For facility diagrams required under §112.7(a)(3) the facility owner or operator must 

mark the location of fixed containers and mark the area on the diagram where mobile 

containers are stored, and can choose to indicate in the Plan the average number of 

mobile or portable containers maintained at the facility and the anticipated contents and 

capacities of those containers, rather than on the diagram itself. 

 Certification of the Plan must be conducted for each new Plan. For facilities that do not 

meet the “qualified facility” criteria set forth in §112.3(g), SPCC Plans and technical 

amendments to Plans must be certified by a licensed PE.

Owners and operators of “qualified” facilities have the option to self-certify that their 

SPCC Plan complies with 40 CFR part 112, in lieu of having a PE review and certify their 

Plan. According to §112.3(g), the self-certification option is available to the owners and 

operators of those facilities that store 10,000 gallons of oil or less and that have had no 

single discharge as described in §112.1(b) exceeding 1,000 U.S. gallons or no two 

discharges as described in §112.1(b) each exceeding 42 U.S. gallons within any 12-

month period in the three years prior to the SPCC Plan self-certification date, or since 

becoming subject to 40 CFR part 112 if the facility has been in operation for less than 

three years. Owners and operators of Tier II qualified facilities choosing this option may 

deviate from certain requirements of the SPCC rule as specified under §112.7(a)(2) and 

make impracticability determinations as described under §112.7(d) only if these portions 

of the Plan are certified by a licensed PE (see §112.6(b)(4)).7

Maintain the SPCC Plan and keep records

Section 112.3 requires the owner or operator to maintain a copy of the SPCC Plan at the 

facility, if the facility is normally attended for at least four hours per day or, if not, at the nearest 

field office. The Plan must be available to the Regional Administrator for review during normal 

working hours (§112.3(e)). In addition, as described in section 4(b)(i) of this document, a facility 

owner or operator is required to maintain (and update) Plan-specific records as outlined under 

§112.7(e). Plan maintenance and recordkeeping activities are estimated to involve almost 

entirely technical personnel time, although a small amount of clerical personnel time may also 

be required for these activities.

Submit information in the event of certain discharges of oil 

 

7

For the purposes of this ICR, EPA assumes that no facilities will require section-specific certification by a PE.
15

In the event of certain discharges of oil into navigable waters, a facility owner or operator 

must submit information described in §112.4(a) to the Regional Administrator within 60 days. A 

discharge of oil occurring within any 12-month period that triggers the §112.4 reporting 

requirements is: 

(1) A single discharge as described in §112.1(b) of more than 1,000 U.S. gallons; or

(2) Two or more discharges as described in §112.1(b), each of which is over 42 U.S. 

gallons.

Submission of information after a discharge of oil is estimated to require both technical 

personnel and management expertise/time for collecting the required information. Section 

112.4(c) also requires that the facility owner or operator submit a copy of this information to the 

state agency with regulatory authority over the facility. The Regional Administrator may require

the owner or operator of the facility to amend the SPCC Plan to prevent and contain discharges 

from the facility. Such amendments, if uncontested by the facility owner or operator, must 

become part of the Plan 30 days after the Regional Administrator responds to the facility owner 

or operator concerning the final amendments. The amended Plan must then be certified prior to 

implementation by a licensed PE, or self-certified in the case of qualified facilities. As required 

by §112.4(e), amendments to the Plan must be implemented as soon as possible, but no later 

than six months after the amendments become part of the Plan. Section 112.4(f) allows a facility 

owner or operator to appeal a decision made by the Regional Administrator requiring a Plan 

amendment.

Revise the SPCC Plan following modification of the facility

Section 112.5(a) requires the facility owner or operator to amend his Plan in accordance 

with §112.7 whenever there is a change in the facility’s design, construction, operation, and 

maintenance that materially affects the facility’s potential to discharge oil into navigable waters. 

Such facility changes may include the addition of a new or rebuilt container; a change in the 

service of a container; any physical changes or improvements to the facility; or, the construction 

of a new well and associated piping. The activities to amend the SPCC Plan as a result of these 

facility changes are estimated to involve facility technical personnel time, as well as some 

clerical time. The amended Plan must then be certified prior to implementation by a licensed 

PE, or self-certified in the case of qualified facilities. Such amendments to the SPCC Plan must 

be implemented as soon as possible, but not later than six months after the change occurs.

Review the SPCC Plan

An owner or operator of an SPCC-regulated facility is required to review and evaluate 

his Plan at least once every five years. This review is expected to involve mostly technical 

personnel time to review spill prevention and control procedures being implemented under the 

current Plan, as well as a regulatory review involving management personnel time. Clerical 

personnel time is also involved to complete necessary paperwork. An owner or operator is 

required to amend his SPCC Plan within six months of the review to include more effective 

prevention and control technology if: (1) such technology will significantly reduce the likelihood 

of a discharge as described in §112.1(b) from the facility; and (2) such technology has been 

field-proven at the time of the review. Any technical amendments to the Plan must be certified 
16

prior to implementation by a licensed PE or, for qualified facilities, self-certified in accordance 

with §112.6(b). SPCC Plan review cost estimates are generated in this ICR for an existing

facility only, since a new facility that becomes operational after the beginning of the ICRapproval period will not be required to conduct its review until after the three-year period 

covered by this ICR.

5. INFORMATION COLLECTED - AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION 

METHODOLOGY, AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

5(a) Agency Activities

In the event that an SPCC-regulated facility discharges more than 1,000 gallons of oil 

into or upon the navigable waters of the United States in a single discharge as described in 

§112.1(b), or discharges more than 42 U.S. gallons of oil in each of two discharges as 

described in §112.1(b) within any 12-month period, EPA’s review of the information submitted 

by the facility under 40 CFR 112.4(a), may include the necessity to:

 Review facility characteristics;

 Review the cause of the discharge;

 Require any necessary amendments to the Plan to prevent and contain discharges from 

the facility; and

 Adjudicate any appeal of a final decision requiring an amendment.

In addition, EPA also conducts routine inspection, enforcement, and outreach activities 

as part of administering this program. Inspections may occur either after a discharge as part of 

the review of the submitted spill notification report or on a periodic basis. These inspections are

not covered by this ICR.

5(b) Collection Methodology and Management

Plans may be tailored to the unique characteristics of the facility. Due to the wide range 

of types and sizes of facilities subject to the regulation, EPA does not prescribe any specific 

information management technique or technology in preparing and maintaining SPCC Plans or 

records. The regulation allows flexibility and a performance based approach in Plan preparation 

and recordkeeping in a way that allows the use of additional, appropriately cross-referenced 

formats (§112.7). Greater flexibility is also provided for facility recordkeeping practices, as 

records kept under normal business practices, such as those required pursuant to the NPDES 

program and API Standards, may satisfy certain SPCC recordkeeping requirements.

EPA provides flexibility and a performance based approach in the development and use 

of user-friendly means of writing and maintaining SPCC Plans, such as electronic programs, 

provided the Plans continue to provide the required information and meet the administrative 

requirements listed in the SPCC rule. Whatever medium is used, the Plan should also be readily 

accessible to response personnel in an emergency.

EPA maintains the information submitted to regional offices by facilities following certain 

oil discharges to support ongoing program activities such as targeting inspections as well as to 
17

support response operations during spills, which are not covered by this ICR. However, EPA 

does not collect SPCC Plans or related records from facilities on a routine basis.

5(c) Small Entity Flexibility

In 2002, EPA promulgated revisions to the SPCC rule that provided flexibility for small 

entities in several ways. First, EPA no longer regulates, under 40 CFR part 112, a facility having 

a single container with an aboveground storage capacity greater than 660 gallons, and 

aggregate aboveground capacity of 1,320 gallons or less of oil. Second, EPA no longer 

regulates, under 40 CFR part 112, a completely buried container that is subject to all of the 

technical requirements of 40 CFR part 280 or a state program approved under 40 CFR part 281. 

Third, the 2002 rule includes a de minimis container size of less than 55 gallons. As a result, 

containers less than 55 gallons are no longer included in a facility’s aboveground total storage 

or use-capacity calculation and no longer need to be discussed in the SPCC Plan. Fourth, EPA 

no longer regulates, under 40 CFR part 112, wastewater treatment facilities or parts thereof 

(except at oil production, oil recovery, and oil recycling facilities) used exclusively for wastewater 

treatment and not used to meet any other requirement of the rule. Fifth, the rule was modified to 

allow the use of additional, appropriately cross-referenced formats that would encourage all 

regulated facilities, including smaller facilities, to take advantage of similar planning efforts 

conducted pursuant to state or other federal standards. The revisions, targeted towards 

reducing the recordkeeping burden to facilities, also decreased the burden to smaller facilities. 

The 2006 rule amendments further reduced the burden of the SPCC regulation, with 

expected flexibility for small entities. Specifically, the rule amendments reduced the regulatory 

burden on qualified facilities and facilities with qualified oil-filled operational equipment. 

Qualified facilities with 10,000 gallons or less of aggregate aboveground oil storage capacity no 

longer need a licensed PE to certify their Plans. The amendments also allow greater use of 

contingency plans without requiring an impracticability determination for facilities with qualified 

oil-filled operational equipment, a cost reduction measure. Facilities that store oil solely in 

motive power containers are no longer regulated, while other facilities with oil storage in addition 

to motive power containers may incur lower compliance costs. The rule also allows mobile 

refuelers to fall under the rule’s general containment requirement, which does not require 

specifically sized secondary containment.

The 2008/2009 final amendments to the SPCC rule reduced the burden on small 

businesses to the extent that these businesses are eligible for amended regulatory 

requirements offered to hot-mix asphalt facilities, oil production facilities, facilities that produce 

or process animal fats and vegetable oil, Tier I qualified facilities, and others.

The 2011 final amendment exempted milk and milk product containers, associated 

piping and appurtenances from the SPCC rule. Facilities that only have milk and/or milk product 

containers are no longer regulated, while other facilities with oil storage in addition to milk and/or 

milk product containers may incur lower compliance costs. 
18

5(d) Collection Schedule

The SPCC rule does not require a specific information collection schedule. However, a 

facility owner or operator must prepare, amend, and implement an SPCC Plan according to the 

compliance deadlines in §112.3(a), and (b). The current compliance dates under §112.3(a) and 

(b) apply to all SPCC-regulated facilities, as follows:

A farm, starting operation... Must...

On or before August 16, 2002

Maintain its existing SPCC Plan

Amend and implement the amended 

SPCC Plan no later than May 10, 2013

After August 16, 2002 through May 10, 2013 Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan 

no later than May 10, 2013

After May 10, 2013 Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan 

before beginning operations

A drilling, production or workover facility, including 

a mobile or portable facility, located offshore or with 

an offshore component; or an onshore facility that 

is required to have and submit FRPs starting 

operation...

Must...

On or before August 16, 2002

Maintain its existing SPCC Plan

Amend and implement the amended 

SPCC Plan no later than November 

10, 2010

After August 16, 2002 through November 10, 2010 Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan 

no later than November 10, 2010

After November 10, 2010 (excluding production 

facilities)

Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan 

before beginning operations

After November 10, 2010 (production facilities)

Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan 

within six months after beginning 

operations.

The December 2008 rule amendments (73 FR 74236, December 5, 2008) allow new oil 

production facilities a period of six months after the start of operations to prepare and implement 

an SPCC Plan. A “new” oil production facility is one that becomes operational after the 

applicable compliance date, not an existing production facility (in operation prior to the 

compliance date) that has changed name, owner, operator, or equipment. 
19

All other facilities starting operation... Must...

On or before August 16, 2002

Maintain its existing SPCC Plan

Amend and implement the amended 

SPCC Plan no later than November 

10, 2011

After August 16, 2002 through November 10, 2011 Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan 

no later than November 10, 2011

After November 10, 2011 (excluding production 

facilities)

Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan 

before beginning operations

After November 10, 2011 (production facilities)

Prepare and implement an SPCC Plan 

within six months after beginning 

operations.

The compliance date amendments described above affect only requirements of the rule 

amendments (67 FR 47042, July 17, 2002; 71 FR 77266, December 26, 2006; 73 FR 74236, 

December 5, 2008; and 74 FR 58784, November 13, 2009) that impose new or more stringent 

compliance obligations than did the original 1973 SPCC rule. Provisions in these amendments 

that provide regulatory relief are not affected by these compliance date amendments because 

they would not typically require amendments to existing Plans ‘‘to ensure compliance’’ (see

§112.3). Provisions in these amendments that provide regulatory relief to facilities are applicable 

as of the effective date of the amendment.

The owner or operator must review the SPCC Plan once every five years. A periodic 

review is necessary to ensure that SPCC Plans reflect currently available and proven 

technology and techniques for preventing and controlling oil discharges. 

6. ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

 

6(a) Estimating Respondent Burden

Facility Characteristics

For the purpose of this analysis, EPA divided regulated facilities into four size categories 

based on their aggregate oil storage capacity (see Exhibit 2). These size categories help to (1) 

account for differences in the potential compliance time burden and costs experienced by 

facilities of different sizes and (2) determine the number of facilities affected by each of the 

changes based on facility’s storage capacity. 
20

Exhibit 2

SPCC-Regulated Facility Size Categories

Size Category Aggregate Capacity

I 1,321 to 10,000 gallons

II 10,001 to 42,000 gallons

III 42,001 to 1 million gallons

IV greater than 1 million gallons

For the purposes of this ICR, facilities are also grouped into two categories: production

facilities (facilities whose operations primarily involve oil production) and storage facilities (all 

other industry groups). This categorization of facilities reflects differences in the estimated 

burden of compliance activities depending on the nature of the facility’s operations.

Additionally, facilities are divided into existing and new facilities, to reflect the differences 

in compliance activities between these two groups. Existing facilities include facilities that 

initiated operations prior to this ICR. All facilities in operation at the start of this ICR period are 

assumed to have prepared their SPCC Plans. Consequently, existing facilities are assumed to 

have incurred all costs associated with initially preparing and implementing their SPCC Plans, 

but some are expected to incur costs to perform a technical five-year review, revise their SPCC 

Plan, submit information in the event of certain oil discharges, and maintain the Plan and keep 

records. New facilities include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR period. 

For the purpose of this analysis, new facilities become existing facilities after the first year of 

operation.

Estimating Burden of SPCC Plan

For its Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), EPA developed a unit cost inventory with cost 

estimates for each of the 2002 SPCC rule requirements. The Agency also assessed paperworkrelated changes resulting from the 2006, 2008, 2009 and 2011 final amendments. EPA relied 

on the most recent cost estimates from the unit cost inventory. To complete the unit cost

inventory, the Agency developed a detailed list of the SPCC requirements that are expected to 

have a labor burden and cost impact, and obtained unit cost estimates for each of these 

requirements from a professional engineering firm with experience across a broad spectrum of 

industries, that serves the 48 contiguous states of the United States.8 In addition, EPA also 

conducted interviews of seven regulated entities to obtain data on compliance measures at 

facilities and their associated costs to crosscheck the estimates and develop a better 

understanding of the ranges of cost estimates.

Estimating Facility Labor Costs

To determine the per-facility costs to develop the SPCC Plan and comply with other 

paperwork-related requirements for typical new and existing respondents in each facility size 

category, unit labor estimates for management, technical, and clerical personnel were multiplied 

 

8

SCS Engineers adjusted with the June 2012 Bureau of Labor Statistics wage rates.
21

by the hourly wage rate for each labor category and were then added to paperwork-related 

capital and operating and maintenance (O&M) costs.

The labor wage rates for private industry were derived from the June 2012 U.S. 

Department of Labor’s Employment Cost Indexes and Levels.9 The June 2012 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 estimated by the 

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) based on a survey of 47,400 occupations within 9,500 

establishments in the private sector. These wage rates reflect industry averages, which may 

underestimate the actual wages received by some SPCC regulated facility personnel but 

overestimate the actual wages received by other facility personnel. EPA further adjusted these 

rates to reflect overhead costs of 17 percent.10 Following are the estimated loaded wage rates 

used in the analysis:

 Management: $ $69/hour;

 Technical: $58/hour; and

 Clerical: $30/hour.

EPA assumed the above labor rates would apply to all scenarios when facilities use inhouse personnel to satisfy requirements involving labor burden such as preparing the SPCC 

Plan. When required or needed, a facility owner/operator would contract a PE to develop and/or 

certify his Plans, however, not all facility owners and operators are expected to contract a PE for 

activities that can be conducted by in-house personnel. On the one hand, a small facility is more 

likely to hire outside engineers because it may not have the in-house expertise to comply with 

the SPCC requirements. On the other hand, a small facility may not have the resources to hire 

outside engineers and may be in a better position to use in-house labor because the owner may 

be closely involved with all the operations. A similar two-sided argument can also be made for 

larger facilities. Therefore, EPA assumed that 50 percent of the facilities of all size categories 

use in-house labor and the remaining 50 percent use outside professional labor. 

Overhead rates for SPCC paperwork-related activities can be calculated using various 

formulas. To see how overall costs might change under different overhead loading rate 

assumptions, EPA calculated alternative overhead rates based on recommendations in 

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. The appropriate overhead

loading rate is highly dependent on not only the industry in question, but also individual 

 

9 United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer Costs for Employee Compensation,

September 2012. BLS wage rates reported for June 2012 are final.

10 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.
22

businesses. The alternative rates are explored in the discussion of total respondent costs in 

Section 6(e) of this document.

Estimating Capital and Operating and Maintenance (O&M) Costs

EPA expects that facilities will incur paperwork-related capital and operating and 

maintenance (O&M) costs in complying with the SPCC requirements to maintain the Plan and 

keep records (40 CFR 112.3 and 112.7(e)) and to submit required information in the event of 

certain discharges of oil (40 CFR 112.4). EPA estimates that to maintain files, new facilities will 

purchase file cabinets at a cost of $300. In the event of certain discharges, the owner or 

operator is required to submit information to the Regional Administrator and the state agency in 

charge of oil pollution control activities for the area in which it is located. Consequently, the 

owner or operator will incur costs for photocopying and postage. For costing purposes, EPA 

assumes that facilities will submit no more than 10 pages for a small facility; 20 pages for a 

medium facility; and 40 pages for a large facility. Assuming the cost of photocopying to be 

$0.11 per page, photocopying costs are estimated to be $2.20 for a small facility; $4.40 for a 

medium facility; and $8.80 for a large facility, respectively. EPA estimates that the cost to 

submit the information through the Post Office is approximately $17.00, based on the cost to 

mail a two-pound package to two different recipients. Because only 0.15 percent of facilities are 

expected to incur oil discharges that trigger an information submission, the annual costs 

associated with submitting information to EPA are not measurable for the average facility.

EPA assumed that the cost to a facility owner or operator to retain an outside PE to 

certify the SPCC Plan varies by the size, complexity and location of the facility. EPA used this 

assumption because a larger facility likely has a more complex SPCC Plan, and more complex

Plan amendments, than a smaller facility. Unless facilities meet the “qualified facility” criteria, 

the burden associated with certifying SPCC Plans and their amendments requires a PE. The 

estimated wages for PE labor used in this analysis are as follows:

11

 Management: $158/hour; 

 Technical: $127/hour;

 Drafter: $79/hour; and

 Clerical: $58/hour.

Some facilities are expected to incur O&M costs associated with retaining a PE to certify 

their SPCC Plans, along with any subsequent technical amendments that are made to the Plan. 

In certifying the Plan, the engineer attests to have examined the facility and that the Plan has 

been prepared in accordance with good engineering practices that satisfy the SPCC 

requirements in 40 CFR part 112. Furthermore, a PE must certify any technical amendment to 

an SPCC Plan.

Exhibit 3 summarizes the average expected costs for facilities of different sizes for PE 

certification of a new Plan as well as any subsequent amendments.

 

11 Source: SCS Engineers, a professional engineering firm adjusted with BLS wage rates for June 2012 published 

September 2012.
23

Exhibit 3

Cost of PE Certification for the SPCC Plan (2009$)1

Size Category Facility Type New Plan Amendments

I

Storage $1,590 $2,130

Production $794 $1,070

II

Storage $3,170 $4,280

Production $1,590 $2,130

III

Storage $4,760 $6,410

Production $3,170 $4,280

IV

Storage $7,140 $9,700

Production $4,760 $6,410

Source: SCS Engineers adjusted with June 2012 BLS data published in 

September 2012.

1 One-time costs of compliance.

6(b) Burden and Costs per Facility

This section discusses the potential paperwork-related burden and costs to facilities that 

are regulated by the SPCC rule. Plan preparation and PE certification costs affect new facilities 

that become subject to the SPCC rule unless they meet the “qualified facility” criteria. New

facilities include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR period. Owners or 

operators of new facilities are assumed to incur the total cost of preparing a Plan and PE 

certification in their first year. In addition to preparing or reviewing SPCC Plans, owners or 

operators of all new and existing facilities will incur costs to prepare and maintain records.

EPA assumes that the formal five-year review of SPCC Plans will affect one-fifth of all 

existing facilities annually – i.e., owners or operators of one-fifth of all existing facilities will 

undergo their formal five-year review of their Plans in each year of the ICR period. 

Owners or operators of some new and existing facilities will submit information as a 

result of discharging oil and others will need to revise their Plan during the ICR period. For the 

2002 rule ICR, based on spill data obtained from the Emergency Response Notification System 

database, EPA estimated that approximately 0.15 percent of all facilities would incur costs each 

year due to reporting requirements related to an oil discharge (see §112.4(a)).

12

 In addition, 

based on conversations with EPA regional personnel involved with the SPCC program, EPA 

estimated that approximately 10 percent of all facilities would revise their Plan each year to 

address §112.5(a) or (c) or §112.4(d). 

Exhibit 4 through Exhibit 8 provides average burden and cost estimates for each existing 

and new facility. For existing facilities, the following activities are included: five-year review -

§112.5(b); information submission in the event of certain oil discharges - §112.4(c); Plan 

 

12 Information Collection Request for the final rule to amend the oil pollution prevention regulation (40 CFR part 112), 

May 2002.
24

modification - §112.5(a) and PE certifications of any technical amendment - §112.5(c); and 

recordkeeping. For newly regulated facilities, paperwork-related activities include SPCC Plan 

preparation - §112.3(a); oil spill contingency plan preparation - §112.7(d); information 

submission in the event of certain oil discharges - §112.4(c); Plan modification - §112.5(a) and 

PE certifications of any technical amendment - §112.5(c); and recordkeeping §112.7(e).

The option to self-certify a facility-specific SPCC Plan according to the requirements in 

§112.6 is available to any qualified facility having 10,000 gallons or less in storage capacity. 

EPA assumed that all new qualified facilities with storage capacity of 10,000 gallons or less 

would self-certify the Plan instead of having it certified by a PE. The Agency also assumed that 

under these requirements, owners and operators of all existing qualified facilities would not use 

a PE to certify a technical amendment to their Plan.

A qualified facility would be a facility subject to the SPCC rule that, as described in 

112.3(g), meets the storage capacity threshold and discharge history criteria. Additional 

flexibility is available for facilities with aggregate aboveground oil storage capacity of 10,000 

gallons or less and no single containers greater than 5,000 gallons capacity (i.e. Tier I qualified 

facilities). This option allows an owner/operator to complete the Tier I SPCC Plan template to 

serve as the SPCC Plan. 

The Agency assumed that owners and operators of existing facilities would not use the 

provided option, because they are expected to have an SPCC Plan in place and preparing a 

template would present an additional expense for those facilities. Correspondingly, EPA 

assumed that owners and operators of all new qualified facilities with no single containers 

greater than 5,000 gallons would take advantage of the reduced requirements and complete a 

Tier I template to serve as the facility SPCC Plan.

The costs presented in Exhibit 4 through Exhibit 8 represent the average costs for each 

facility of different sizes, accounting for the probability that certain facilities will incur those costs 

(e.g., five-year reviews affect one-fifth of existing facilities) and for the estimated overlap 

between federal and state requirements. Low probability costs (e.g., complying with §112.4(c)) 

distributed across many facilities yield only nominal per-facility average costs, particularly when 

state overlap is taken into consideration.

The state-overlap assumptions are based on research conducted for the 2002 SPCC 

rule13 and are described in the regulatory impact analysis for the SPCC final rule. Each state 

has its own regulations regarding the storage, handling, and containment of oil. In some cases, 

the effort required by these state regulations may be the same as what is required by SPCC. 

Overall, in 2002 EPA found that about 5.9 percent of facilities are in states with complete 

overlap; about 5.6 percent of facilities in states with substantial overlap; and about 5.7 percent 

of facilities in states with partial overlap. To develop the burden estimates, EPA multiplied the 

burden hours by both the percentage of facilities in each overlap category and the degree of 

overlap (i.e., 100 percent for complete overlap, 75 percent for substantial overlap, and 50 

percent for partial overlap). As part of the regulatory analysis for the 2009 final SPCC 

 

13 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Economic Analysis for the Final Revisions to the Oil Pollution Prevention 

Regulation (40 CFR part 112),” May 2002.
25

amendments, EPA analyzed the overlap of state regulations to determine whether an 

adjustment of the estimate would more accurately account for recent changes in state 

requirements and/or refine the previously generated estimates. As a result of this review, the 

Agency concluded that there was no compelling evidence to adjust the overlap estimate 

between the SPCC rule and state regulations. When estimating paperwork-related burden 

resulting from the SPCC requirements, EPA takes into account the estimated degree of overlap 

to avoid double counting. The reduced burden due to state overlap was estimated by applying 

the overlap percentages to the total burden associated with each paperwork compliance activity.

Total Annual Burden per Average Respondent

Once the unit per-facility burden hours were determined for each compliance activity 

undertaken by the average facility in each size category, EPA calculated the total annual burden 

by summing the unit estimates for all compliance activities. The annual burden for an average 

facility differs for each size category based on the assumed differences in the oil storage 

capacity and complexity of the facility and its operations. The estimated annual burden hours for 

an average respondent in each size category for existing and new facilities are presented in 

Exhibit 4 through Exhibit 8.

Total Annual Cost per Average Respondent

In estimating the per-respondent costs for existing and new facilities in each size 

category, EPA calculated the unit cost for each compliance activity performed by the average 

facility. These average per-facility costs are shown in the right-hand column of Exhibit 4 through 

Exhibit 8. To estimate the cost for each compliance activity performed by the average 

respondent facility in each size category under the rule, EPA multiplied the unit time estimates 

for management, technical, and clerical personnel by the hourly wage rate for each labor 

category and then added the result to the paperwork-related capital and O&M (PE) costs. 

Existing facilities include those facilities that have been in operation for longer than a 

year. Costs for existing facilities include activities that incur continuously such as recordkeeping 

or once every several years such as SPCC Plan review.14 For the average existing SPCCregulated facility, following are the estimated total annual costs for all information collection 

activities required by the final rule:

 Category I (Tier I): $970 per facility;

 Category I: $970 per facility;

 Category II: $1,295 per facility;

 Category III: $2,245 per facility; and

 Category IV: $4,211 per facility.

New facilities include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR period. 

For the purpose of this analysis, new facilities become existing facilities after the first year of 

operation. Therefore, each year a new set of facilities would incur the costs listed below. A

 

14

 The cost estimates in the tables present average annual costs for each facility, e.g., the annual cost estimate for 

Plan review represents the total cost for Plan review divided by five. 
26

typical SPCC-regulated facility would incur the costs for new facilities in Year 1 and incur the 

costs for existing facilities presented above in each subsequent year. For the average new

SPCC-regulated facility, following are the estimated total annual costs for all information 

collection activities required by the final rule:

 Category I (Tier I): $932 per facility;

 Category I: $4,410 per facility;

 Category II: $7,920 per facility;

 Category III: $14,180 per facility; and

 Category IV: $24,220 per facility.

Estimated annual costs for new facilities are higher than those for existing facilities 

because of the greater expenses associated with preparing a new SPCC Plan, including PE 

certification when necessary, and an oil spill contingency plan.
27

Exhibit 4

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection Activities

Average Category I Facility (Tier I)

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs

Annual

Cost

(2012) Management Technical Drafter Clerical 2

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 0.4 2.9 0.0 0.4 3.6 $0 $0 $324

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil3

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.3 1.9 0.0 0.2 2.4 $0 $0 $492

Maintain the SPCC Plan and 

Keep Records 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 2.6 $0 $0 $154

TOTAL 0.7 7.4 0.0 0.6 8.7 $0 $0 $970

New Facilities3

Prepare an SPCC Plan 0.0 3.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 $0 $0 $164

Prepare a Contingency Plan 0.7 3.5 0.0 1.0 5.1 $0 $0 $234

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil4

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $6

Maintain the SPCC Plan and 

Keep Records 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 3.8 $100 $0 $528

TOTAL 0.7 10.2 0.0 1.0 11.9 $100 $0 $932

1 Unit burden estimates are weighted averages, rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production facilities and the number of 

facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the nearest dollar.

3 New facilities include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR period. For the purpose of this analysis, new facilities become existing facilities after 

the first year of operation. As a result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities will become operational.

4

The unit burden for a facility that needs to submit information because of a discharge is estimated to be one hour of management labor and one hour of technical 

labor, resulting in a total unit cost of $139. Because only 0.15 percent of all facilities are expected to meet the discharge criteria and submit information, the average 

unit burden is less than 0.1 hours, and is therefore indicated here as 0. However, the actual unit burden and cost estimates are used in later calculations.
28

Exhibit 5

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection Activities

Average Category I Facility

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs

Annual

Cost

(2012) Management Technical Drafter Clerical 2

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 0.4 2.9 0.0 0.4 3.6 $0 $0 $324

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil3

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.3 1.9 0.0 0.2 2.4 $0 $0 $492

Maintain the SPCC Plan and 

Keep Records 0.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 2.6 $0 $0 $154

TOTAL 0.7 7.4 0.0 0.6 8.7 $0 $0 $970

New Facilities3

Prepare an SPCC Plan 1.8 27.4 10.1 3.7 43.0 $0 $0 $3,642

Prepare a Contingency Plan 0.7 3.5 0.0 1.0 5.1 $0 $0 $234

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil4

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $6

Maintain the SPCC Plan and 

Keep Records 0.0 3.8 0.0 0.0 3.8 $100 $0 $528

TOTAL 2.5 34.6 10.1 4.6 51.9 $100 $0 $4,410

1 Unit burden estimates are weighted averages, rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production facilities and the number of 

facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the nearest dollar.

3 New facilities include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR period. For the purpose of this analysis, new facilities become existing facilities after 

the first year of operation. As a result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities will become operational.

4

The unit burden for a facility that needs to submit information because of a discharge is estimated to be one hour of management labor and one hour of technical 

labor, resulting in a total unit cost of $139. Because only 0.15 percent of all facilities are expected to meet the discharge criteria and submit information, the average 

unit burden is less than 0.1 hours, and is therefore indicated here as 0. However, the actual unit burden and cost estimates are used in later calculations.
29

Exhibit 6

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection Activities

Average Category II Facility

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs

Annual

Cost

(2012$) Management Technical Drafter Clerical 2

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 0.3 4.1 0.0 0.3 4.6 $0 $0 $415

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil3

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.4 2.6 0.0 0.4 3.4 $0 $363 $666

Maintain the SPCC Plan and 

Keep Records 0.0 3.6 0.0 0.0 3.6 $0 $0 $214

TOTAL 0.7 10.3 0.0 0.6 11.7 $0 $363 $1,295

New Facilities3

Prepare an SPCC Plan 2.8 38.9 15.1 5.1 61.9 $0 $1,960 $7,290

Prepare a Contingency Plan 0.7 3.5 0.0 1.0 5.1 $0 $0 $234

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil4

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $4 $7

Maintain the SPCC Plan and 

Keep Records 0.0 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.4 $100 $0 $389

TOTAL 3.5 43.7 15.1 6.1 68.4 $100 $1,970 $7,920

1 Unit burden estimates are weighted averages, rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production facilities and the number of 

facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the nearest dollar.

3 New facilities include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR period. For the purpose of this analysis, new facilities become existing facilities after 

the first year of operation. As a result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities will become operational.

4

The unit burden for a facility that needs to submit information because of a discharge is estimated to be one hour of management labor and one hour of technical 

labor, resulting in a total unit cost of $139. Because only 0.15 percent of all facilities are expected to meet the discharge criteria and submit information, the average 

unit burden is less than 0.1 hours, and is therefore indicated here as 0. However, the actual unit burden and cost estimates are used in later calculations.
30

Exhibit 7

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection Activities

Average Category III Facility

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs Annual Cost(2012$)2

Management Technical Drafter Clerical

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 0.5 7.4 0.0 0.5 8.4 $0 $0 $763

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain 

Discharges of Oil3

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.8 4.8 0.0 0.6 6.3 $0 $661 $1,221

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0.0 4.5 0.0 0.0 4.5 $0 $0 $261

TOTAL 1.3 16.7 0.0 1.1 19.2 $0 $661 $2,245

New Facilities3

Prepare an SPCC Plan 5.5 72.7 30.0 6.0 114 $0 $3,650 $13,448

Prepare a Contingency 

Plan 0.7 3.5 0.0 1.0 5.1 $0 $0 $234

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain 

Discharges of Oil4

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 $0 $0 $0

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0.0 1.9 0.0 0.0 1.9 $126 $0 $498

TOTAL 6.2 78.1 30.0 6.9 121 $126 $3,650 $14,180

1 Unit burden estimates are weighted averages, rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production facilities and the number of 

facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the nearest dollar.

3 New facilities include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR period. For the purpose of this analysis, new facilities become existing facilities after the 

first year of operation. As a result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities will become operational.

4

The unit burden for a facility that needs to submit information because of a discharge is estimated to be one hour of management labor and one hour of technical 

labor, resulting in a total unit cost of $139. Because only 0.15 percent of all facilities are expected to meet the discharge criteria and submit information, the average 

unit burden is less than 0.1 hours, and is therefore indicated here as 0. However, the actual unit burden and cost estimates are used in later calculations.
31

Annual Burden and Unit Costs for All Required Information Collection Activities

Average Category IV Facility

Activity Annual Burden Hours1

Total Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs Annual Cost(2012$)2

Management Technical Drafter Clerical

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 0.9 13.1 0.0 0.9 14.8 $0 $0 $1,346

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil3

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 1.4 8.5 0.0 1.1 11.0 $0 $1,170 $2,156

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0.3 11.5 0.0 0.7 12.5 $0 $0 $790

TOTAL 2.6 33.1 0.0 2.7 38.4 $0 $1,170 $4,211

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan 10.9 126 40.8 13.6 192 $0 $6,520 $23,075

Prepare a Contingency Plan 0.7 3.5 0.0 1.0 5.1 $0 $0 $234

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil4

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 $0 $0 $0

Revise the SPCC Plan 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 $0 $13 $25

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0.0 7.1 0.0 0.0 7.1 $155 $0 $886

TOTAL 11.6 137 40.8 14.5 204 $155 $6,530 $24,220

1 Unit burden estimates are weighted averages, rounded to the nearest tenth of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production facilities and the number of 

facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the nearest dollar.

3 New facilities include those facilities that will initiate operations during the ICR period. For the purpose of this analysis, new facilities become existing facilities after the 

first year of operation. As a result, in each year of this ICR, a different set of new facilities will become operational.

4

The unit burden for a facility that needs to submit information because of a discharge is estimated to be one hour of management labor and one hour of technical labor, 

resulting in a total unit cost of $139. Because only 0.15 percent of all facilities are expected to meet the discharge criteria and submit information, the average unit burden 

is less than 0.1 hours, and is therefore indicated here as 0. However, the actual unit burden and cost estimates are used in later calculations.

Exhibit 8
32

6(c) Estimating Agency Burden and Costs

EPA incurs costs associated with the evaluation of information submitted in accordance 

with §112.4 as well as consideration of appeals. This section summarizes the estimated burden 

and cost of these activities to EPA. Burden estimates are based on input from EPA regional 

staff involved directly with the implementation of 40 CFR part 112. Exhibit 9 shows the total 

burden and labor cost to EPA. As described in Section 6(b), EPA assumed that 0.15 percent of 

regulated facilities would submit information to EPA for review. The costs to EPA are not 

included in the calculation of total cost and burden hours for regulated entities, because EPA is 

not considered a “person” as the term applies to regulated entities.

EPA labor costs are based on the January 2012 General Schedule (GS) pay schedule. 

EPA estimates an average hourly labor cost (labor plus overhead) of $63.40 for managerial staff 

(GS-13, Step-5), and $44.48 for technical staff (GS-11, Step-5). To derive hourly estimates, 

EPA divided annual compensation estimates by 2,080, which represents 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 were calculated as unit time estimates multiplied by the hourly labor 

rates for EPA personnel. 

Exhibit 9

Estimated Annual Burden and Cost to EPA

Activity

Burden Hours Total 

Cost

(2012$)

Managerial Technical

Clerical Total

($63.40) ($44.48)

Plans Evaluation 1,005 10,051 0 11,056 $511,000 

Review of 

Comments 503 503 0 1,005 $54,000 

Consideration of 

Appeals 804 0 0 804 $51,000 

Total 2,312 10,600 0 12,900 $616,000

Note: costs may not total due to rounding; January 2012 General Schedule.

6(d) Estimating the Respondent Universe

This section describes the universe of facilities subject to SPCC regulations. Estimating 

the number of regulated entities is not straightforward. The SPCC rule does not include a 

notification requirement and, with certain exceptions, owners and operators do not submit their 

SPCC Plans to EPA.

Previously Developed Estimates

In 1991, EPA published the “Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Facilities 

Study,” which summarized information on small, medium, and large facilities in 16 industry 

sectors that store oil aboveground and underground. For each of these sectors, EPA collected 

and evaluated data from ten states on medium and large facilities. Information on small facilities 
33

came from New York. In the end, the 1991 study estimated the number of facilities based on 

extrapolation of data from four state databases (Illinois, California, Maryland, and New York) to 

the nation.

In 1995, EPA conducted an OMB-approved statistically based, random sample survey of 

approximately 30,000 facilities in the industries covered by the 1991 study. The 1995 survey 

yielded detailed information about the oil storage characteristics of the surveyed facilities, and 

was designed to allow statistical extrapolation to a broader universe. EPA compared the results 

of the 1995 survey to the 1991 facility study and to a 1989 American Petroleum Institute report 

and calculated a 1996 Adjusted National Estimate, which has been the basis of EPA’s 

approximation of the number of facilities regulated by the SPCC Program.15

Current Estimation Methodology 

EPA has updated its estimates of the number of facilities regulated by the SPCC rule, 

based on recent federal, state, and proprietary data on facilities that store or handle oil.16 The 

estimates of the SPCC universe were developed for 30 industry sectors, including (but not 

limited to) those listed in Exhibit 1. For sectors without reliable national-level data, the basic 

estimation procedure involved extrapolating from eight state databases using information from 

the U.S. Census Bureau.17

Estimates based on state-level data

For many industry sectors affected by the SPCC rule, the basic estimation procedure 

used to update the regulated universe was similar to that used in the 1991 facilities study. EPA 

used eight primary state databases (Florida, Kansas, Maryland, Minnesota, New York, 

Oklahoma, Virginia, and Wisconsin) to determine the number of SPCC-regulated facilities in the 

state for each industry sector.

The information in state databases was matched with the Dun & Bradstreet (D&B) 

Market Spectrum database to assign industry sectors.18 To extrapolate the estimates to the 

entire country, these values were multiplied by a facility ratio. The facility ratio was estimated as 

the number of SPCC-regulated facilities in the eight states for an industry sector divided by the 

total number of facilities reported for that industry sector in those states.19 

 

15 “Analysis of the Number of Facilities Regulated by EPA’s SPCC Program”.

http://www.epa.gov/oilspill/pdfs/pap_tpop.pdf.

16 For details, see the regulatory impact analysis for the 2006 final rule (“Regulatory Impact Analysis of Revisions to 

the Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation (40 CFR 112) to Implement the Facility Response Planning Requirements of 

the Oil Pollution Act of 1990”)

17 Oil storage data are not available for all states.

18 In the matching process, the following facilities and tanks were dropped from the estimation: facilities with less 

than 1,320 gallons of aggregate storage, tanks with less than 55 gallons of storage, underground tanks subject to 

EPA UST requirements, inactive tanks, and tanks that do not store oil substances.

19

 The facility ratio is calculated using the eight state databases for all capacity categories except Category I. 

Because the Maryland database does not include information on Category I facilities, the ratio for Category I facilities 

is calculated using seven state databases (excluding Maryland). 
34

Estimates based on national-level data

Because of the availability of federal and proprietary data, EPA used a different 

estimation approach for the following industry sectors: petroleum bulk stations and terminals; 

fuel oil dealers; pipelines; petroleum refinery and related industries; oil and gas production; 

farms; electric utilities; and manufacturing facilities handling or storing animal fats and vegetable 

oils. These sectors represent 70 percent of the facilities affected by the SPCC rule.

The 2002 Economic Census was used to estimate the number of regulated facilities for 

the petroleum bulk stations and terminals, fuel oil dealers, pipelines, and petroleum refinery and 

related industries. As in previous analyses, all facilities in these industries were assumed to be 

regulated under the SPCC rule.

EPA assumed all oil production facilities are regulated under the SPCC rule. Certain gas 

production facilities may also be regulated, given that some gas wells have tanks for storing 

condensate oil generated during the gas-production process. EPA used Energy Information 

Administration (EIA) data to estimate the total number of oil-production wells as well as gas 

wells that produce condensate oil. All active wells that were producing in 2004 are considered in 

the analysis. The EIA database contains historical data on oil and gas wells, including marginal 

wells, compiled from government and commercial sources.20 EIA provides data on oil and oilcondensate produced at oil and gas production wells according to various production-rate 

classes. Gas wells that do not produce oil condensate are not included. To convert the number 

of wells that produce oil and oil condensate to the total number of SPCC-regulated production 

facilities, EPA assumed four wells per facility based on personal communication with industry 

experts.21 Under this assumption, EPA estimated that approximately 166,000 oil production 

facilities are SPCC-regulated.

The number of farms was calculated based on Census of Agriculture data on production 

expenses related to petroleum-related purchases from 2002 and 1997 and on diesel storage 

data from 1982. In the 2002 Census of Agriculture, expenditure data are available only in 

aggregate for all fuels. To arrive at the expenditure on diesel (gasoline) in 2002, EPA multiplied 

the total expenditure on fuels in 2002 by the ratio of diesel (gasoline) expenditure to total 

expenditure from the 1997 data. The Agency assumed that the percentage of diesel (gasoline) 

expenditure remained the same from 1997 through 2002. Finally, the total quantity of diesel 

(gasoline) purchased in 2002 was calculated by dividing the expenditure on diesel (gasoline) by 

diesel (gasoline) prices. Using 1982 data on fuel storage and expenditures on farms, the ratio of 

diesel (gasoline) storage with respect to the annual quantity of diesel (gasoline) purchased was 

calculated. On average approximately one-fifth of the annual quantity of diesel purchased and 

about one fourth of the annual quantity of gasoline purchased is stored on farms. Since no data 

were available on the type of storage (i.e., aboveground or underground) EPA assumed that the 

entire storage is aboveground. The expenditure ranges were converted to capacity ranges and 

assigned to a percentage of farms that are regulated within the capacity ranges.

 

20 U.S. Energy Information Administration, Distribution and Production of Oil and Gas Wells by State, data available 

from http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petrosystem/petrosysog.html.

21 Personal communication with a Federal On-Scene Coordinator for EPA Region 6 and Mark England, Texas 

Railroad Commission, 2005.
35

EPA calculated the number of SPCC-regulated electric utility plants as a combination of 

the number of substations and the number of power plants in the United States. All electricity 

generation facilities and substations are assumed to contain enough oil to be subject to SPCC 

requirements. The number of electric utility plants was estimated based on data reported by the 

Energy Information Administration (EIA). The number of substations was estimated based on 

the number of substations listed by each major utility reporting to the Federal Energy Regulatory 

Commission (FERC).22 A national estimate was extrapolated from these data using the ratio of 

the megawatt hours sold by utilities to the estimated total retail megawatt hours of electricity 

sold nationwide according to the EIA.

Facilities handling or storing non-petroleum oil are also subject to SPCC regulations. 

Non-petroleum oils include, but are not limited to, animal fats and oils and greases, or fish and 

marine mammal oils; and, oils of vegetable origin, including oils from seeds, nuts, fruits, and 

kernels. To estimate the number of facilities that could produce or store animal fat or vegetable 

oil, EPA used data on the number of manufacturing establishments from the 2005 U.S. Census 

of Manufacturing. Four possible types of AFVO facilities were considered: (1) industries that 

produce AFVO; (2) industries that use AFVO as a primary input; (3) industries that use AFVO in 

moderate amounts; and (4) industries that use AFVO as a minor component of their input. EPA 

assumed that all facilities that produce AFVO (group 1) are SPCC-regulated. Then, low, 

medium, and high estimates were developed using professional judgment for industries in the 

remaining three groups regarding the percentage of each industry group assumed to be 

regulated by the SPCC rule. EPA also identified a category of “other” facility types that may 

produce or use AFVO. For these facilities, specific information on the number of regulated 

facilities was available and was used instead of the assumed percentages. This methodology 

yielded estimates of the number of facilities that may be regulated based only on their storage of 

AFVO. Some of these facilities are probably regulated because they also store petroleum oils.

On April 18, 2011, EPA published a final rule that exempted milk and milk product 

containers and appurtenances from the SPCC regulations. As a result, a portion of the universe 

of dairy farms and milk manufacturing facilities became exempt from the SPCC regulations or 

shifted to a lower category. For example, a Category I facility that could self certify their SPCC 

plan may be eligible to use a Tier I qualified facility template plan. This change in the SPCC 

facility regulatory requirements is reflected in the adjustment to the farm universe in this ICR, 

that led to a lower number of farms for 2014. 

Industry Growth Rates

To project the number of existing and new facilities regulated under the SPCC rule over 

the 2014 through 2016 ICR period, EPA used industry-specific growth rates for new and existing 

facilities. EPA’s previous approach was to apply a uniform one-percent growth rate across all 

sectors, which did not account for significant variations (including negative growth rates) among 

the sectors.

 

22 Major regulated utilities must file FERC Form No. 1, on which utilities report information on their substations and 

electrical equipment. “Major” is defined as having (1) one million megawatt hours or more; (2) 100 megawatt hours of 

annual sales for resale; (3) 500 megawatt hours of annual power exchange delivered; or (4) 500 megawatt hours of 

annual wheeling for others (deliveries plus losses).
36

To estimate industry-specific growth rates for existing facilities of all SPCC-related 

industry categories except farms and oil production, EPA used 1992, 1997, and 2002 U.S. 

Economic Census data on the number of establishments in each industry. The use of an 

extended time period to estimate industry-specific growth rates attempted to account for diverse 

economic conditions under which SPCC-regulated industries operate. To estimate annual 

growth rates for agricultural establishments, EPA used data reported by the USDA National 

Agricultural Statistics Service on the number of farms in the United States over the past 10 

years (1996 through 2005). The data for the past 10 years were expected to be more 

representative of the latest developments in the agricultural business than data for years prior to 

1996. 

EPA estimated the growth rates for new facilities only using commercially available data 

obtained on the number of businesses (by NAICS code) in 2005 from the D&B Market Spectrum 

database. These data allowed for an estimation of the fraction of businesses that became 

operational in 2005 relative to the total number of businesses in that year. This analysis 

assumed that industry growth rates would be constant over the 10-year analytical period for all 

industries except oil production, which may or may not adequately represent the trends for 

individual sectors.

Because oil production facilities account for the largest fraction of SPCC-regulated 

facilities across all industry categories and represent a dynamic industry, an alternative 

approach was used for estimating future oil production industry growth rates. EPA relied on 

industry-specific forecasting information, which was expected to reflect growth rates better than 

an approach based on historical trends. EPA estimated annual growth rates for the oil 

production facilities relying on historical and forecasted U.S. oil production data and historical 

number of oil wells. The approach used to estimate the growth rates for oil production facilities 

is described in the regulatory impact analysis for the 2008 SPCC final rule. 

In total, EPA estimated that 640,000 facilities would be regulated by the SPCC rule in 

2010. Oil production facilities (34 percent), farms (23 percent), and electric utilities (10 percent) 

account for the majority of SPCC-regulated facilities.

Exhibit 10 and Exhibit 11 present the estimated number of existing and new SPCCregulated facilities that are expected to incur paperwork-related burden associated with the final

amendments to the SPCC rule. Exhibit 10 presents the number of facilities by facility type -

storage and production facilities - for the first year of the ICR, 2014. Exhibit 11 presents the 

number of facilities for the entire analysis period, 2014 - 2016.
37

Exhibit 10

Number of Existing and New Facilities

(First Year of ICR: 2014)

Facility Type

Category I 

(1,320-

10,000 

gallons)

Category II 

(10,001-

42,000 

gallons)

Category III 

(42,001 to 

1 million 

gallons)

Category IV 

(>1 million 

gallons)

Total

Storage 288,000 80,800 35,700 2,980 408,000

Existing Production 29,000 157,000 41,300 405 228,000

Total 317,000 238,000 77,000 3,380 636,000

Storage 5,750 2,400 1,070 80 9,300

New Production 1,540 8,270 2,170 21 12,000

Total 7,290 10,670 3,240 101 21,300

Total 324,000 249,000 80,200 3,480 657,000

Note: values may not total due to rounding.

Exhibit 11

Number of Existing and New Facilities

(ICR Period: 2014 - 2016)

Facility Type/ Year

Category I 

(1,320-

10,000 

gallons)

Category II 

(10,001-

42,000 

gallons)

Category III 

(42,001 to 

1 million 

gallons)

Category 

IV (>1 

million 

gallons)

Total

Existing

Year 1 - 2014 318,000 238,000 77,000 3,380 636,000

Year 2 - 2015 321,000 243,000 78,400 3,410 645,000

Year 3 - 2016 324,000 246,000 79,400 3,430 653,000

New

Year 1 - 2014 7,280 10,700 3,240 102 21,300

Year 2 - 2015 7,840 12,800 3,830 110 24,600

Year 3 - 2016 8,680 16,400 4,790 123 30,000

Total

Year 1 - 2014 325,000 249,000 80,200 3,490 657,000

Year 2 - 2015 329,000 256,000 82,000 3,520 670,000

Year 3 - 2016 333,000 262,000 84,000 3,550 683,000

Note: values may not total due to rounding.

6(e) Estimated Total Annual Burden for All Respondents

The total hour burden is estimated as the average per-facility burden multiplied by the 

number of affected facilities. Similarly, the total cost burden for all respondents is estimated by 

multiplying the number of facilities in each size category by the unit costs for each compliance 

activity. The total annual burden and costs for all respondents in each category are presented in 

Exhibit 13 through Exhibit 17 for each facility size. The annual average total burden is estimated 

at 8.8 million hours; the annual average total cost is estimated at $987 million.
38

Alternative Estimates

EPA also calculated alternative cost estimates based on higher overhead rates for labor 

costs, which are presented in Exhibit 12. The primary estimates are based on a 17 percent 

overhead rate and the alternatives are calculated assuming a 50 percent overhead rate and a 

100 percent overhead rate. The discussion of facility labor costs in section 6(a) describes how 

the overhead rates affect wage rates. Under the primary assumption, the estimated total 

annualized burden of the information collection is $987 million. Under the alternative 

assumptions, the estimated total burden ranges from $1,211 to $1,556 million.

Exhibit 12

Sensitivity Analysis for Total Cost 

Varying Overhead Rates

(2012$, Millions)

Assumption

Labor Capital O&M Total

Baseline Burden

17% Overhead $801 $3.0 $184 $987

50% Overhead $1,025 $3.0 $184 $1,211

100% Overhead $1,369 $3.0 $184 $1,556
39

Exhibit 13

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Facilities

Average Category I Facilities (Tier I)

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total 

Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs Annual Cost(2012$)2

Management Technical Drafter Clerical

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 92,000 707,000 0 92,00 861,000 $0 $0 $80,100,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil

370 370 0 0 741 $7,434 $0 $55,000

Revise the SPCC Plan 76,600 460,000 0 61,300 598,000 $0 $0 $121,515,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0 652,000 0 0 652,000 $0 $0 $38,066,000

TOTAL 169,000 1,819,000 0 153,000 2,141,000 $7,434 $0 $239,736,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan 0 18,300 0 0 18,300 $0 $0 $971,000

Prepare a Contingency 

Plan 3,980 21,100 0 5,850 31,000 $0 $0 $1,383,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil

9 9 0 0 18 $184 $0 $1,250

Revise the SPCC Plan 22 131 0 17 170 $0 $0 $34,600

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0 23,200 0 0 23,200 $698,000 $0 $3,203,000

TOTAL 4,020 62,800 0 5,870 72,700 $698,000 $0 $5,593,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest three significant figures of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production 

facilities and the number of facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to 

rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the three significant figures.
40

Exhibit 14

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Other Facilities

Average Category I Facilities

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total 

Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs

Annual

Cost

(2012$) Management Technical Drafter Clerical 2

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 27,500 211,000 0 27,500 266,000 $0 $0 $23,900,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil

111 111 0 0 221 $2,220 $0 $16,300

Revise the SPCC Plan 22,900 137,000 0 18,300 178,000 $0 $0 $36,300,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan and 

Keep Records 0 195,000 0 0 195,000 $0 $0 $11,400,000

TOTAL 50,500 543,000 0 45,800 639,000 $2,220 $0 $71,616,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan 3,360 50,000 18,500 6,750 78,500 $0 $0 $6,420,000

Prepare a Contingency Plan 1,190 6,320 0 1,750 9,250 $0 $0 $413,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil

3 3 0 0 5 $55 $0 $372

Revise the SPCC Plan 7 39 0 5 51 $0 $0 $10,300

Maintain the SPCC Plan and 

Keep Records 0 6,930 0 0 6,930 $209,000 $0 $957,000

TOTAL 4,560 63,000 18,500 8,500 94,800 $209,000 $0 $7,800,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest three significant figures of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production 

facilities and the number of facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to 

rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the three significant figures.
41

Exhibit 15

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Facilities

Average Category II Facilities

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total 

Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs Annual Cost(2012$)2

Management Technical Drafter Clerical

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 64,900 973,000 0 65,000 1,103,000 $0 $0 $100,500,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain 

Discharges of Oil

363 363 0 0 726 $7,288 $0 $53,700

Revise the SPCC Plan 105,000 633,000 0 84,400 823,000 $0 $87,029,000 $161,400,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0 887,000 0 0 887,000 $0 $0 $52,000,000

TOTAL 170,000 2,493,000 0 149,000 2,813,000 $7,288 $87,029,000 $314,000,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan 37,700 517,000 201,000 67,800 823,000 $0 $26,100,000 $93,600,000

Prepare a Contingency 

Plan 8,670 46,000 0 12,700 67,400 $0 $0 $3,000,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain 

Discharges of Oil

20 20 0 0 40 $440 $0 $2,940

Revise the SPCC Plan 61 366 0 49 476 $0 $50,000 $93,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0 18,600 0 0 18,600 $1.519,000 $0 $5,187,000

TOTAL 46,500 582,000 201,000 80,500 910,000 $1,519,000 $26,100,000 $102,000,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest three significant figures of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production 

facilities and the number of facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to 

rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the three significant figures.
42

Exhibit 16

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Facilities

Average Category III Facilities

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total 

Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs Annual Cost(2012$)2

Management Technical Drafter Clerical

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 38,600 578,000 0 38,600 655,000 $0 $0 $59,700,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain 

Discharges of Oil

117 117 0 0 235 $2,354 $0 $17,300

Revise the SPCC Plan 62,600 376,000 0 50,100 489,000 $0 $51,372,000 $95,500,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0 349,000 0 0 349,000 $0 $0 $20,400,000

TOTAL 101,300 1,303,000 0 88,700 1,493,000 $2,354 $51,372,000 $176,000,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan 22,400 287,000 119,000 23.700 452,000 $0 $14,430,000 $51,500,000

Prepare a Contingency 

Plan 2,579 13,700 0 3,786 20,100 $0 $0 $895,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain 

Discharges of Oil

6 6 0 0 12 $119 $0 $875

Revise the SPCC Plan 35 207 0 28 269 $0 $0 $0

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0 7,510 0 0 7,510 $570,000 $0 $1,990,000

TOTAL 25,000 309,000 119,000 27,500 480,000 $570,000 $14,430,000 $54,400,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest three significant figures of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production 

facilities and the number of facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to 

rounding. 

2

Annual costs are rounded to the three significant figures.
43

Exhibit 17

Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Facilities

Average Category IV Facilities

Activity

Annual Burden Hours1

Total 

Burden 

Hours

Capital/Startup 

Costs PE Costs

Annual

Cost

(2012$) Management Technical Drafter Clerical 2

Existing Facilities

Review the SPCC Plan 2,940 44,400 0 2,940 50,300 $0 $0 $4,600,000

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil

5 5 0 0 10 $102 $0 $754

Revise the SPCC Plan 4,880 28,700 0 3,830 37,400 $0 $3,960,000 $7,340,000

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 1,220 40,200 0 2,450 43,800 $0 $0 $2,400,000

TOTAL 9,050 113,300 0 9,220 131,600 $102 $3,960,000 $14,000,000

New Facilities

Prepare an SPCC Plan 1,216 14,100 4,580 1,520 21,400 $0 $727,000 $2,490,000

Prepare a Contingency 

Plan 73 386 0 107 566 $0 $0 $25,300

Submit Information in the 

Event of Certain Discharges 

of Oil

0 0 0 0 0 $3 $0 $25

Revise the SPCC Plan 2 10 0 1 14 $0 $1,450 $2,680

Maintain the SPCC Plan 

and Keep Records 0 792 0 0 792 $19,800 $0 $98,300

TOTAL 1,290 15,300 4,580 1,630 22,700 $19,800 $728,000 $2,610,000

1 Unit burden estimates are estimated totals, rounded to the nearest three significant figures of an hour, based on the distribution of storage and production 

facilities and the number of facilities estimated to perform each activity during the one-year period. The numbers in this exhibit may not add precisely due to 

rounding.

2

Annual costs are rounded to the three significant figures.
 44 

6(f) Bottom Line Burden and Cost Tables

The total estimated burden hours and costs incurred by all new and existing facilities are 

summarized in Exhibit 18. The exhibit shows the burden and cost components for each year of 

this ICR, along with total and annualized costs. 

Exhibit 18

Estimated Total Burden and Costs for Facilities

Year Total Burden 

(million hours)

Total Cost (2012$, millions)

Labor Capital O&M Total

First 8.4 $768 $2.2 $173 $944

Second 8.8 $797 $2.6 $183 $982

Third 9.2 $836 $3.1 $195 $1,034

TOTAL 26.4 $2,402 $8.0 $551 $2,961

ANNUALIZED 8.8 $801 $3.0 $184 $987

6(g) Reasons for the Change in Burden

Differences in burden and costs from the previous ICR are attributed to adjustments for 

wage rates and the projected universe of facilities over the covered period 2014 through 2016. 

Adjustments capture updates to the number of affected facilities and wages. The only program 

change that affected the ICR was the final rule to exempt milk and milk product containers and 

associated piping and appurtenances published in April 201123. As a result, EPA estimated that 

approximately 66,000 farms and milk product manufacturing facilities were affected by this 

amendment and this is reflected in the projections for farms over the 2014 – 2016 ICR period. 

EPA estimates that there will be a reduction of approximately 100,000 annual burden hours and 

savings of $4 million in costs as a result of this program change. These savings are accounted 

for in the March 24, 2011 RIA for the final milk and milk product container exemption rule. 

Exhibit 19 presents the annual burden hours and costs. In total, the burden hours 

presented in this ICR have increased relative to the current OMB inventory. The new burden 

estimate shows a net annual increase of approximately 760,000 hours. The Agency estimates 

that capital and O&M costs would increase by approximately $26 million due to a change in the 

universe of regulated facilities. This is partially offset by $4 million in savings from the milk and 

milk product container exemption, leaving a net increase of $22 million in capital and O&M. The 

increase in hours and capital and O&M is attributable to a small increase in wage rates and the 

population of facilities in the universe estimated over the 2014 through 2016 covered period.

 

23 April 18, 2011 (76 FR 21652)
 45 

Exhibit 19

Total Estimated Annual Burden Hours and Annualized Costs Comparison

Annual Burden Hours Annualized Capital and 

O&M Costs 

Previous ICR 0328.15 Burden 8,041,358 $161,008,709

Change in Burden +757,570 +$25,666,105

ICR 0328.16 Burden 8,798,928 $186,674,814

The exhibits below present the change in burden (hours and costs) as compared to the 

burden estimates currently approved by OMB.24 The exhibits show change in burden separately 

for Private facilities (Exhibit 20) and State and Local Government facilities (Exhibit 21). 

Exhibit 20

Total Estimated Annual Burden and Costs Comparison: Private

Total Requested Change from 

previous ICR Currently Approved

Annual Responses 669,445 +18,002 651,443

Annual Hour Burden 8,791,010 +757,125 8,033,885

Annual Cost Burden 

(Capital/StartUp and O&M costs) $186,506,819 +$25,647,748 $160,859,071 

Exhibit 21

Total Estimated Annual Burden and Costs Comparison: State and Local 

Government Facilities

Total Requested

Change for 

previous ICR Currently Approved

Annual Responses 603 -3 606

Annual Hour Burden 7,918 +445 7,473

Annual Cost Burden 

(Capital/StartUp and O&M costs) $167,995 +18,357 $149,638

 

24 OMB’s currently approved burden was estimated for 2010 – 2012, covering July 1, 2010 through June 30, 2013.
 46 

6(h) Burden Statement

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is 

estimated to average 13 hours per response. 

The annual public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information

for newly regulated facilities is estimated to range from 11.9 to 203.9 hours per facility, with an 

average burden of approximately 58 hours per response. The net annual public reporting and 

recordkeeping burden for facilities already regulated by the rule is estimated to range from 8.7

to 38.4 hours, with an average burden of approximately 11 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 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 chapter 15 of 48 CFR. 

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 Number [EPA-HQ-OPA-2007-0584], which is available for online viewing at 

www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Superfund Docket in the EPA Docket Center 

(EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C. The EPA 

Docket Center Public Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through 

Friday, excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is (202) 566-

1744, and the telephone number for the Superfund Docket is (202) 566-0276. An electronic 

version of the public docket is available at www.regulations.gov. This site can be used to submit 

or view public comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket, and to 

access those documents in the public docket that are available electronically. When in the 

system, select “search,” then key in the Docket ID Number identified above. Also, comments 

can be sent to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and 

Budget, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20503, Attention: Desk Officer for EPA. Please 

include the EPA Docket ID Number [EPA-HQ-OPA-2007-0584] and OMB Control Number 2050-

0021 in any correspondence.