Document ID: EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0027-0008
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2008-07-14T04:00Z

Information Collection Request for

Cooling Water Intake Structures New

Facility Rule (Renewal)

OMB Control No. 2040-0241, EPA ICR No. 1973.04

March 2008

Prepared for

United States Environmental Protection Agency

Office of Wastewater Management

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

EPA Contract Number EP-C-05-046

EPA Work Assignment Number 1-24

TABLE OF CONTENTS

  TOC \o "1-3" \h \z \u    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060704"  1
IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc190060704 \h 
1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060705"  1a	Title of the Information Collection	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060705 \h  1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060706"  1b	Short Characterization/Abstract	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060706 \h  1  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060707"  2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060707 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060708"  2a	Need/Authority for the Collection	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060708 \h  3  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060709"  2b	Practical Utility/Users of the Data	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060709 \h  4  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060710"  3	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND
OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA	  PAGEREF _Toc190060710 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060711"  3a	Nonduplication	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060711 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060712"  3b	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR
Submission to OMB	  PAGEREF _Toc190060712 \h  5  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060713"  3c	Consultations	  PAGEREF _Toc190060713
\h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060714"  3d	Effects of Less Frequent Collection	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060714 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060715"  3e	General Guidelines	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060715 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060716"  3f	Confidentiality	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060716 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060717"  3g	Sensitive Questions	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060717 \h  6  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060718"  4	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION
REQUESTED	  PAGEREF _Toc190060718 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060719"  4a	Respondents/SIC/NAICS	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060719 \h  7  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060720"  4b	Information Requested	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060720 \h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060721"  4b(i)	Data Items, Including Record
Keeping Requirements	  PAGEREF _Toc190060721 \h  9  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060722"  4b(ii) 	Respondent Activities	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060722 \h  16  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060723"  5	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED - AGENCY
ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION, 

METHODOLOGY AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT	  PAGEREF _Toc190060723 \h  24  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060724"  5a	Agency Activities	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060724 \h  24  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060725"  5b	Collection Methodology and
Information Management	  PAGEREF _Toc190060725 \h  24  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060726"  5c	Small Entity Flexibility	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060726 \h  25  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060727"  5d	Collection Schedule	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060727 \h  25  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060728"  6	ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST
OF COLLECTION	  PAGEREF _Toc190060728 \h  26  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060729"  6a	Estimating Respondent Burden	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060729 \h  26  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060730"  6b	Estimating Respondent Costs	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060730 \h  30  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060731"  6b(i) 	Estimating Labor Costs	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060731 \h  30  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060732"  6b(ii) 	Estimating Capital and Operation
and Maintenance Costs	  PAGEREF _Toc190060732 \h  31  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060733"  6c	Estimating Agency Burden and Costs	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060733 \h  34  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060734"  6d	Estimating the Respondent Universe
and Total Burden and Costs	  PAGEREF _Toc190060734 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060735"  6e	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs
Tables	  PAGEREF _Toc190060735 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060736"  6e(i) 	Respondent Tally	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060736 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060737"  6e(ii) 	Agency Tally	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060737 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060738"  6f	Reasons For Change In Burden	 
PAGEREF _Toc190060738 \h  36  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc190060739"  6g	Burden Statement	  PAGEREF
_Toc190060739 \h  36  

 

APPENDIX A Respondent Burden and Cost Analysis for the Information
Collection Requirements of the Section 316(b) New Facility Rule

APPENDIX B SIC Codes for Nonutility Power Producers 

LIST OF TABLES

  TOC \h \z \t "Table Title,1"    HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912652"  Table
4-1. Industry Categories and SIC and NAICS Codes	  PAGEREF _Toc192912652
\h  8  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912653"  Table 5-1. Number of Facilities Assumed
to Begin Compliance with Information Collection Requirements During the
ICR Period by Year	  PAGEREF _Toc192912653 \h  26  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912654"  Table 6-1. Burden and Costs per Facility
for NPDES Permit Application Activities	  PAGEREF _Toc192912654 \h  33  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912655"  Table 6-2. Burden and Costs per Facility
for Annual Monitoring and Reporting Activities	  PAGEREF _Toc192912655
\h  33  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912656"  Table 6-3. Burden and Costs per Facility
for NPDES Permit Renewal Activities	  PAGEREF _Toc192912656 \h  34  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912657"  Table 6-4. Estimating Director Burden
and Costs for Activities	  PAGEREF _Toc192912657 \h  34  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912658"  Table 6-5. Estimating Federal Burden and
Costs for Activities	  PAGEREF _Toc192912658 \h  35  

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912659"  Table 6-6. Summary of Average Annual
Respondents, Responses, Burden, and Costs for Facilities and Directors
for the 3-Year Period Covered by this ICR	  PAGEREF _Toc192912659 \h  35
 

  HYPERLINK \l "_Toc192912660"  Table 6-7. Summary of Average Annual
Respondents, Responses, Burden, and Costs for Federal Agency for the
3-Year Period Covered by this ICR	  PAGEREF _Toc192912660 \h  36  

 1	IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

1a	Title of the Information Collection

Cooling Water Intake Structures New Facility Final Rule (Renewal). EPA
ICR Number: 1973.04; OMB Control Number: 2040-0241

1b	Short Characterization/Abstract

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires the collection of
information from new facilities that use cooling water intake structures
(CWIS). Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act (CWA) requires that any
standard established under section 301 or 306 of the CWA and applicable
to a point source must require that the location, design, construction
and capacity of CWISs at that facility reflect the best technology
available (BTA) for minimizing adverse environmental impact. Such impact
occurs as a result of impingement (where fish and other aquatic life are
trapped on technologies at the entrance to cooling water intake
structures) and entrainment (where aquatic organisms, eggs, and larvae
are taken into the cooling system, passed through the heat exchanger,
and then pumped back out with the discharge from the facility). This
rule establishes standard requirements applicable to the location,
design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures at
new facilities. These requirements seek to minimize the adverse
environmental impact associated with the use of CWISs. 

Under the rule, a new facility is defined as any building, structure,
facility, or installation that meets the definition of a “new
source” or “new discharger” in 40 CFR 122.2 and 122.29(b),(1),(2)
and (4); commences construction after January 17, 2002; and uses either
a newly constructed cooling water intake structure or an existing
cooling water structure whose design capacity is increased to
accommodate the intake of additional cooling water (40 CFR 125.83).
According to the final rule, before a new facility is subject to this
regulation it must first be a point source (i.e., be subject to a
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit) that
uses or proposes to use a CWIS, has at least one cooling water intake
structure that uses at least 25 percent (measured on an average monthly
basis) of the water it withdraws for cooling purposes, and has a design
intake flow greater than two million gallons per day (MGD). Use of a
cooling water intake structure includes obtaining cooling water by any
sort of contract or arrangement with an independent supplier (or
multiple suppliers) of cooling water if the supplier or suppliers
withdraw(s) water from waters of the United States (40 CFR 125.81).

Generally, facilities that meet these criteria fall into two major
groups, new power producing facilities and new manufacturing facilities.
Power producers affected by the final rule could be either utility or
nonutility power producers since either typically have large cooling
water requirements. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
identified four categories of manufacturing facilities that also tend to
require large amounts of cooling water: paper and allied products,
chemical and allied products, petroleum and coal products, and primary
metals (see section 4a). However, the New Facility Rule is not limited
to manufacturers in these sectors; any new manufacturer that meets the
criteria above is subject to the rule.

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires several distinct types of
information collection as part of the NPDES application. In general, the
information is used to identify which of the standard requirements in
the final rule apply to the facility, how the facility is meeting these
requirements, and whether the facility is meeting the goal of minimizing
adverse environmental impact. Specific data requirements that would
apply to all facilities are:

source water physical data for evaluation of potential impact to the
water body in which the intake structure is placed

cooling water intake structure data consisting of intake structure
design and facility water balance diagram to evaluate the potential for
impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms

source water baseline biological characterization data that
characterizes the biological community in the vicinity of the cooling
water intake structure, along with a description of data sources and
data collection procedures

source waterbody flow data to demonstrate compliance with the
proportional flow (i.e., intake flow may not exceed a certain proportion
of source water body flow) requirements

Additional data requirements would apply to facilities, depending on
which of two alternative permitting tracks they choose. Specific data
requirements that would apply to facilities choosing to comply with the
requirements of Track I are:

flow reduction and velocity information to demonstrate compliance with
the flow reduction and velocity requirements

design and construction technology plan to demonstrate compliance with
the requirement to implement technologies to minimize impingement and
entrainment and maximize survival of impinged organisms

Specific data requirements that would apply to facilities choosing to
comply with the requirements of Track II are:

comprehensive demonstration study that characterizes the source water
baseline in the vicinity of the intake, characterizes operation of the
cooling water intake, and confirms that proposed technologies reduce the
level of impingement and entrainment mortality to a comparable level
that would be achieved by implementing the flow reduction, velocity and
technology requirements of Track I

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule also contains a provision for
alternative requirements (40 CFR 125.85) if a requestor can demonstrate
to the Director that data specific to the facility indicates that
compliance costs are wholly out of proportion to the costs EPA
considered in establishing the 316(b) New Facility Rule or would result
in significant adverse impacts on local water resources other than
impingement or entrainment, or significant adverse impacts on local
energy markets. EPA anticipates that most facilities will choose to
comply with either Track I or Track II. However, if a facility did
request alternative requirements it is anticipated that the burden would
be similar to that of Track II.

In addition to the information requirements of the NPDES permit
application, NPDES permits normally specify monitoring and reporting
requirements to be conducted by the permitted entity. New facilities
that fall within the scope of this rule are required to perform
biological monitoring of impingement and entrainment, monitoring of the
through-screen or through-technology velocity, and visual or remote
inspections of the CWIS and any design and construction technologies.
The results of each facility’s monitoring efforts are expected to be
analyzed and then published yearly in an annual status report to the
permitting Director. Finally, facilities are required to maintain
records of all submitted documents, supporting materials, and monitoring
results for at least three years.

Authorized States were required to update their programs to be
consistent with the cooling water intake requirements after they were
published as final regulations. State Directors are required to also
review all materials submitted to them by the facilities within the
scope of the regulation, and confirm their compliance with the section
316(b) New Facility Rule. Directors are also required to work with new
facilities to determine if design and construction technologies are
necessary and appropriate to minimize adverse environmental impact.

As suggested, the primary users of this information will be States
authorized to administer the NPDES permitting program and EPA. It is
anticipated that other government agencies, both at the State and
Federal level, as well as public interest groups, private companies, and
individuals will also use the data.

The first ICR approval period covering years 1 through 3 after
promulgation expired in February of 2005. The first ICR renewal period
covering years 4 through 6 after promulgation expires in June of 2008.
This Supporting Statement is for the second renewal ICR, covering years
7 through 9 after promulgation, being submitted to OMB for re-approval
of the section 316(b) New Facility Rule information collection. For the
second ICR renewal period after rule promulgation, the information
collection required by the rule will involve responses from an estimated
total of 68 facilities and 46 States and Territories and cost
approximately $25.5 million (including labor costs, capital costs, and
operation and maintenance costs), with an annual average of 106
respondents, 118,209 burden hours, and $8.5 million per year (including
labor costs, capital costs, and operation and maintenance costs). The
total annual average cost (including capital costs and operation and
maintenance costs) is $1.8 million per year (see Exhibit A11 in Appendix
A). 

2	NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

2a	Need/Authority for the Collection

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires the collection of
information from new facilities that use a cooling water intake
structure. The information requirements in this ICR are necessary to
ensure that new facilities are complying with the rule’s provisions,
and thereby minimizing adverse environmental impact resulting from
impingement and entrainment losses due to the withdrawal of cooling
water. 

Section 316 was included in the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of
1972 for the express purpose of regulating thermal discharges and to
address the environmental impact of cooling water intake structures.
Moreover, section 316(b) is the only provision in the CWA that focuses
exclusively on water intake. Section 316(b) provides that “[a]ny
standard established pursuant to [CWA section 301] or [CWA section 306]
and applicable to a point source shall require that the location,
design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures
reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse
environmental impact.” The requirements of section 316(b) are closely
linked to several of the core elements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit program established under
the CWA. Conditions implementing section 316(b) continue, under this
rule, to be included in NPDES permits issued under section 402 of the
CWA.

2b	Practical Utility/Users of the Data

This ICR covers information that must be submitted to permitting
authorities and data that must be collected and maintained on-site by
the facility. Each new facility maintains facility-level records of the
measurements, diagrams, and calculations submitted to the Director, as
well as the analytical results of monitoring actions. Facilities use the
data to:

monitor CWIS performance

monitor the performance of design and construction technologies.

Under the section 316(b) New Facility Rule rule, EPA and state NPDES
Directors are to maintain records compiled from the regulated
facilities. Much of the basic information obtained from the NPDES permit
application is stored in EPA’s Permit Compliance System (PCS) or the
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), the Agency’s old and
modernized NPDES program databases, respectively. PCS and ICIS are used
to track permit limits, permit expiration dates, monitoring data, and
other data, and provide EPA with a nationwide inventory of permit
holders. 

EPA Headquarters uses the information contained in PCS and ICIS
databases to develop reports on permit issuance, backlog, and compliance
rates. The Agency also uses the information to respond to public and
Congressional inquiries, develop and guide its policies, formulate its
budgets, assist States in acquiring authority for permitting programs,
and manage the NPDES program to ensure national consistency in
permitting. States use this permit information along with the additional
documentation and the annual reports to track facility monitoring,
compliance violations, and enforcement activities. 

Permittees must reapply for an NPDES permit every five years. The
re-application process is the primary mechanism for obtaining up-to-date
and new information concerning on-site conditions. Although under the
final rule, new facilities provide data from self-monitoring activities
in annual reports to the permitting authority, these reports are a less
comprehensive information gathering process than is the permit
application process. EPA and States will use re-application data to
identify new species at risk or other potential concerns that could lead
the permit writers to take the following actions:

specify additional permit limitations

assess compliance with applicable standard requirements

place appropriate special conditions in permits.

Environmental and citizen groups are expected to use the data collected
under the final rule to independently assess impingement and entrainment
rates for affected water bodies in their location. In addition, the data
will be useful for the scientific community for assessing the impact of
CWISs on recreational and commercial fisheries productivity and aquatic
ecosystem health. 

3	NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

The following sections verify and affirm that this Information
Collection Request satisfies the Office of Management and Budget’s
data-collection guidelines, has public support, and does not duplicate
another collection. 

3a	Nonduplication

EPA has examined all other reporting requirements contained in the Clean
Water Act and 40 CFR parts 122, 123, 124, 125, 403, 501, and 503. The
Agency also has consulted the following sources of information to
determine if similar or duplicate information is available elsewhere:
data collected by offices within EPA; data, reports, and analyses
published by other Federal agencies; reports and analyses published by
industry; and publicly available financial information compiled by
government and private organizations. From this effort, EPA has
determined that the information collection and reporting requirements
considered in this ICR are not contained or duplicated in other
routinely collected documents or reports. 

3b	Public Notice Required Prior to ICR Submission to OMB

In compliance with the 1995 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), any agency
developing a non-rule-related ICR must solicit public comments prior to
submitting the ICR to OMB. These comments, which are used partly to
determine realistic burden estimates for respondents, must be considered
when completing the Supporting Statement that is submitted to OMB.

This ICR was published in the Federal Register (73 FR 16669) on March
28, 2008. The notice included a request for comments on the content and
impact of the information collection on the respondent universe. No
comments were received.

3c	Consultations

EPA finalized the section 316(b) New Facility Rule after conducting
outreach activities and considering comments from the public and the
regulated community. EPA Headquarters staff responsible for program
oversight were contacted to provide revised information and data for
this ICR. 

3d	Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Permitted facilities must reapply for NPDES permits before their
existing permits expire, generally once every five years. The CWA
prohibits NPDES permits from having terms longer than five years. Less
frequent permit applications would not provide the permitting authority
with sufficiently current data to establish effective limitations or
conditions when reissuing permits and to identify in a timely manner,
adverse environmental impact resulting from the operation of new CWISs.
In addition, less frequent collection would also hinder the ability of
EPA, States, and facility operators to take advantage of technological
improvements in impingement and entrainment technologies as they occur,
or to track long-term trends. 

3e	General Guidelines

The information collection requirements of the final rule are in
accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act guidelines at 5 CFR
1320.5(d)(2). Requests for supplemental information for the purposes of
emergency response or enforcement activities are exempt from the
Paperwork Reduction Act requirements.

3f	Confidentiality

Applications for an NPDES permit may contain confidential business
information. However, EPA does not consider the specific information
being requested by the final rule to be typical of confidential business
or personal information. If a respondent does consider this information
to be of a personal nature, the respondent may request that such
information be treated as confidential. All confidential data will be
handled in accordance with 40 CFR 122.7, 40 CFR part 2, and EPA’s
Security Manual part III, chapter 9, dated August 9, 1976. 

3g	Sensitive Questions

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule does not require respondents to
divulge information pertaining to private or personal information, such
as sexual behavior or religious beliefs. Therefore, this section is not
applicable. 

4	THE RESPONDENTS AND THE INFORMATION REQUESTED

4a	Respondents/SIC/NAICS

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule defines a new facility as any
building, structure, facility, or installation that meets the definition
of a “new source” or “new discharger” in 40 CFR 122.2 and
122.29(b)(1), (2) and (4); commences construction after January 17,
2002; and uses either a newly constructed cooling water intake structure
or an existing cooling water structure whose design capacity is
increased to accommodate the intake of additional cooling water. For a
new facility to be subject to this regulation it must be a point source
(i.e., be subject to a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit) that uses or proposes to use a CWIS, has at least one
cooling water intake structure that uses at least 25 percent (measured
on an average monthly basis) of the water it withdraws for cooling
purposes, and has a design intake flow greater than two million gallons
per day (MGD). Use of a cooling water intake structure includes
obtaining cooling water by any sort of contract or arrangement with an
independent supplier (or multiple suppliers) of cooling water if the
supplier or suppliers withdraw(s) water from waters of the United States
(40 CFR 125.81).

While respondents would include any facilities that meet the applicable
requirements of the rule, EPA estimates that there are six primary
industrial sectors that account for more than 99 percent of all cooling
water used in the United States. The first two types of facilities that
use CWISs include traditional utilities and nonutility power producers.
Traditional utilities and nonutility power producers that use cooling
water were further limited to those plants that generate electricity by
means of steam as the thermodynamic medium (steam electric) because they
are associated with large cooling water needs. Facilities in the
traditional steam electric utility category are classified under
Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes 4911 and 493-, while
nonutility power producers are classified under the major code that
corresponds to the primary purpose of the facility (e.g., the primary
code may be SIC 49 if the primary purpose of the facility is to generate
electricity).

EPA identified four manufacturing industries that were found to use
large amounts of cooling water. These manufacturing industries are Paper
and Allied Products (SIC Major Group 26), Chemical and Allied Products
(SIC Major Group 28), Petroleum and Coal Products (SIC Major Group 29),
and Primary Metals (SIC Major Group 33). SIC and NAICS Codes associated
with facilities that may use a CWIS are provided in Table 4-1. A more
detailed accounting of SIC and NAICS codes for nonutility power
producers is provided in Appendix B.

Table 4-1. Industry Categories and SIC and NAICS Codes

Respondent Industry Categories	SIC Codes	NAICS Codes

Traditional Steam Electric Utilities	SIC codes 4911 and 493-	221111,
221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122

Steam Electric Nonutility Power Producers:1) Industrial Self-Generators;
and 2) Nonindustrial	See Appendix B SIC Major Group 49	See Appendix B

Other Industries:

Agricultural production	0133	111991, 11193

Metal mining	1011	21221

Oil and gas extraction	1311, 1321	211111, 211112

Mining and quarrying of nonmetallic minerals	1474	212391

Food and kindred products	2046, 2061, 2062, 2063, 2075, 2085	311221,
311311, 311312, 311313, 311222, 311225, 31214

Tobacco products	2141	312229, 31221

Textile mill products	2211	31321

Lumber and wood products, except furniture	2415, 2421, 2436, 2493
321912, 321113, 321918, 321999, 321212, 321219

Paper and allied products	2611, 2621, 2631, 2676	3221, 322121, 32213,
322121, 322122, 32213, 322291

Chemical and allied products	28-- (except 2895, 2893, 2851, and 2879)
325--- (except 325182, 32591, 32551, 32532)

Petroleum refining and related industries	2911, 2999	32411, 324199

Rubber and miscellaneous plastics products	3011, 3069	326211, 31332,
326192, 326299

Stone, clay, glass, and concrete products	3241	32731

Primary metal industries	3312, 3313, 3315, 3316, 3317, 3334, 3339, 3353,
3363, 3365, 3366 	324199, 331111, 331112, 331492, 331222, 332618,
331221, 22121, 331312, 331419, 331315, 331521, 331524, 331525

Fabricated metal products, except machinery and transportation equipment
3421, 3499	332211, 337215, 332117, 332439, 33251, 332919, 339914, 332999

Industrial and commercial machinery and computer equipment	3523, 3531 
333111, 332323, 332212, 333922, 22651, 333923, 33312

Transportation equipment	3724, 3743, 3764	336412, 333911, 33651, 336416

Measuring, analyzing, and controlling instruments; photographic,
medical, and optical goods; watches and clocks	3861	333315, 325992

Electric, gas, and sanitary services	4911, 4931, 4939, 4961	221111,
221112, 221113, 221119, 221121, 221122, 22121, 22133

Educational services	8221	61131

4b	Information Requested

The following sections provide details on data items requested and
associated activities that the section 316(b) New Facility rule requires
respondents to undertake to provide this information. The two principal
respondent categories are new facilities subject to the rule and NPDES
program Directors (i.e. States and Tribes authorized under CWA Section
402(b) to administer the NPDES permit program, and EPA regional
offices).

Information requirements for new facilities will differ depending on
criteria established by the rule. Certain information requirements are
applicable to all new permitted facilities to which the rule applies.
Other information requirements are based on which of two alternative
permitting tracks the facility chooses to comply with in the rule.

Since section 316(b) standards are implemented through NPDES permits,
the section 316(b) New Facility Rule affects Directors in a manner
similar to other changes to NPDES program requirements. There are
currently 45 States and one territory authorized under CWA Section
402(b) to implement the NPDES permit program; these new cooling water
intake structure requirements potentially affect authorized State NPDES
programs. 

4b(i)	Data Items, Including Record Keeping Requirements

Data items required by the rule are gathered for either record keeping
or reporting purposes. There are several data items that are collected
only during the year(s) prior to the beginning of each permit cycle, and
others that are required to be collected on an annual basis. 

Reporting Requirements

The section 316(b) New Facility regulations do not require the Director
to prepare or submit any reports beyond what is currently required of
them under the NPDES program. However, Directors need to review,
maintain records of, and make permitting determinations based upon all
documents and reports submitted to them by new facilities.

At the time a new facility submits its NPDES application (180 days prior
to operation), the rule requires the facility to submit information
demonstrating that it is employing the best technology available for its
cooling water intake structure to minimize adverse environmental impact
in compliance with section 316(b) of the CWA. The information is used to
identify which of the requirements in the rule apply to the facility,
how the facility is meeting these requirements, and whether the facility
is meeting the goal of minimizing adverse environmental impact. Four
types of information are required to be included in the NPDES permit
applications for all new facilities: (1) source water physical data, (2)
cooling water intake structure data, (3) source water baseline
biological characterization data, and (4) source waterbody flow data.

Additional types of information are required to be included in the NPDES
permit applications for new facilities, depending on which of two
alternative permitting tracks they choose to comply with. The additional
types of information required to be included in the NPDES permit
applications for facilities choosing to comply with the requirements of
Track I are: (1) flow reduction information, (2) velocity information,
and (3) Design and Construction Technology Plan.

Facilities choosing to comply with the requirements of Track II must
perform a Comprehensive Demonstration Study. The additional types of
information required to be included in the NPDES permit application as
part of this study are: (1) an information collection proposal plan, (2)
a Source Water Biological Study, (3) an evaluation of potential cooling
water intake structure effects, and (4) a Verification Monitoring Plan.

INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL NEW FACILITIES

Source Water Physical Data

The final rule requires source water information to evaluate potential
impact to the water body in which the intake structure is placed.
Typically, intake structures are located offshore, at the shoreline or
at the end of an approach intake canal. The intake structure would be
affecting different species or life stages depending on its location in
the source water and source water type. For example, intakes located at
the shoreline could affect spawning and nursery areas and intakes
located offshore could affect migratory routes. In addition, the
proximity of the intake structures to sensitive aquatic ecological areas
may result in potential environmental impact. Specific source water
physical data items include: 

a narrative description and scale drawings showing the physical
configuration of all source water bodies used by the facility, including
areal dimensions, depths, salinity and temperature regimes, and other
documentation that support the determination of the water body type
where each CWIS is located (40 CFR 122.21(r)(2)(i))

identification and characterization of source waterbody hydrological and
geomorphological features, and methods used to conduct any physical
studies to determine the intake’s area of influence within the
waterbody and the results of such studies (40 CFR 122.21(r)(2)(ii))

locational maps (40 CFR 122.21(r)(2)(iii)).

Cooling Water Intake Structure Data

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires information on the intake
structure and the facility’s water balance to evaluate the potential
for impingement and entrainment of aquatic organisms. Information on the
design of the intake structure and its location in the water column
allows EPA to evaluate which species or life stages would potentially be
subject to impingement and entrainment. A diagram of the facility’s
water balance would be used to identify the proportion of intake water
used for cooling, make-up, and process water. The water balance diagram
also would provide a picture of the total flow in and out of the
facility, allowing EPA to evaluate compliance with the flow reduction
requirements. Specific intake structure data items include:

a narrative description of the configuration of each of the cooling
water intake structures and where it is located in the water body and in
the water column (40 CFR 122.21(r)(3)(i))

latitude and longitude in degrees, minutes, and seconds for each of the
cooling water intake structures (40 CFR 122.21(r)(3)(ii))

a narrative description of the operation of each of the cooling water
intake structures, including design intake flows, daily hours of
operation, number of days of the year in operation, and seasonal
changes, if applicable (40 CFR 122.21(r)(3)(iii))

a flow distribution and water balance diagram that includes all sources
of water to the facility, recirculating flows, and discharges (40 CFR
122.21(r)(3)(iv))

engineering drawings of the cooling water intake structure (40 CFR
122.21(r)(3)(v)).

Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data

This information is required to characterize the biological community in
the vicinity of the cooling water intake structure and to characterize
the operation of the cooling water intake structures. The Director may
use this information in subsequent permit renewal proceedings to
determine if the Design and Construction Technology Plan should be
revised. Supporting information must include existing data (if
available), which may be supplemented using actual field studies.
Specific source water baseline biological characterization data items
include:

a list of the data that are not available and efforts made to identify
sources of the data (40 CFR 122.21(r)(4)(i))

a list of species (or relevant taxa) for all life stages and their
relative abundance in the vicinity of the intake (40 CFR
122.21(r)(4)(ii)) 

identification of the species and life stages that would be most
susceptible to impingement and entrainment. Species evaluated should
include the forage base as well as those most important in terms of
significance to commercial and recreational fisheries. (40 CFR
122.21(r)(4)(iii))

identification and evaluation of the primary period of reproduction,
larval recruitment, and period of peak abundance for relevant taxa (40
CFR 122.21(r)(4)(iv))

data representative of the seasonal and daily activities of biological
organisms (for example feeding and water column migration) in the
vicinity of the intake (40 CFR 122.21(r)(4)(v))

identification of all threatened, endangered, and other protected
species that might be susceptible to impingement and entrainment at the
intake (40 CFR 122.21(r)(4)(vi))

documentation of any public participation or consultation with Federal
or State agencies undertaken in development of the plan (40 CFR
122.21(r)(4)(vii))

if the above information is supplemented with data collected using
actual field studies, a description of all methods and quality assurance
procedures for data collection, sampling, and analysis including a
description of the study area; identification of the biological
assemblages (including all life stages of fish and shellfish) to be
sampled and/or evaluated; data collection, sampling, and analysis
methods. The sampling and/or data analysis methods used must be
appropriate for a quantitative survey and based on a consideration of
methods used in other biological studies performed within the same
source water body. The study area should include, at a minimum, the area
of influence of the cooling water intake structure. (40 CFR
122.21(r)(4)(viii))

Source Waterbody Flow Information

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires information to demonstrate
that the facility is complying with proportional flow (i.e., intake flow
may not exceed a certain proportion of source water body flow)
requirements. Specific source water body flow data items are:

if the cooling water intake structure is located in a freshwater river
or stream, the annual mean flow and any supporting documentation and
engineering calculations to show that the cooling water intake structure
meets the flow requirements (40 CFR 125.86(b)(3)(i) or 125.86(c)(1)(i))

if the cooling water intake structure is located in an estuary or tidal
river, the mean low water tidal excursion distance and any supporting
documentation and engineering calculations to show that the cooling
water intake structure facility meets the flow requirements (40 CFR
125.86(b)(3)(ii) or 125.86(c)(1)(ii))

if the cooling water intake structure is located in a lake or reservoir,
a narrative description of the water body thermal stratification, and
any supporting documentation and engineering calculations to show that
the thermal stratification will not be altered by the total design
intake flow (40 CFR 125.86(b)(3)(iii) or 125.86(c)((1)(iii)).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR TRACK I

Flow Reduction Information

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires information to demonstrate
that the facility has reduced its flow to a level commensurate with that
which can be attained by a closed-cycle recirculating cooling water
system. Specific flow reduction data items include:

a narrative description of the system that has been designed to reduce
flow to a level commensurate with that which can be achieved by a
closed-cycle recirculating cooling water system and any engineering
calculations, including documentation demonstrating that make-up and
blowdown flows have been minimized (40 CFR 125.86(b)(1)(i))

if the flow reduction requirement is met entirely, or in part, by
reusing or recycling water withdrawn for cooling purposes in subsequent
industrial processes, documentation that the amount of cooling water
that is not reused or recycled has been minimized (40 CFR
125.86(b)(1)(ii)).

Velocity Information

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires information to demonstrate
that the facility is complying with the requirement to meet a maximum
through-screen design intake velocity of no more than 0.5 ft/s at each
cooling water intake structure. Specific velocity data items are:

a narrative description of the design, structure, equipment, and
operation used to meet the velocity requirement (40 CFR 125.86(b)(2)(i))

design calculations showing that the velocity requirement will be met at
minimum ambient source water surface elevations (based on best
professional judgment using available hydrological data) and maximum
head loss across the screens or other device (40 CFR 125.86(b)(2)(ii)).

Design and Construction Technology Plan

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires information to demonstrate
that the facility has implemented the design and construction
technologies necessary to minimize impingement and entrainment and
maximize survival of impinged organisms. The plan must contain
information on the technologies that the facility will implement based
on the results of the Source Water Biological Baseline Characterization.
Specific design and construction technology plan data items include:

Delineation of the hydraulic zone of influence for your CWIS (40 CFR
125.86(b)(4)(ii))

a narrative description of the design and operation of the design and
construction technologies, including fish-handling and return systems,
that the facility will use to maximize the survival of those species
expected to be most susceptible to impingement. This description should
include species-specific information that demonstrates the efficacy of
the technology (40 CFR 125.86(b)(4)(iii)(A))

a narrative description of the design and operation of the additional
design and construction technologies that the facility will use to
minimize entrainment of those species expected to be the most
susceptible to entrainment. This description should include
species-specific information that demonstrates the efficacy of the
technology (40 CFR 125.86(b)(4)(iii)(B))

design calculations, drawings, and estimates to support the above
descriptions (40 CFR 125.86(b)(4)(iii)(C)).

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REQUIREMENTS FOR TRACK II

Track II Comprehensive Demonstration Study

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule requires information in the form of
a Comprehensive Demonstration Study to characterize the source water
baseline in the vicinity of the intake, characterize operation of the
cooling water intake, and confirm that proposed technologies reduce the
level of impingement and entrainment mortality to the same level that
would be achieved by implementing the flow reduction, velocity and
technology requirements of Track I. The facility must develop and submit
a plan to the Director containing a proposal of how information will be
collected to support the study. Documentation of the results of the
study must also be submitted to the Director. Specific Track II
comprehensive demonstration study data items include:

a description of the proposed technologies to be evaluated in the study
(40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iii)(A))

a list and description of any historical studies characterizing the
physical and biological conditions in the vicinity of the proposed or
actual intakes and their relevancy to the proposed study. If the
facility proposes to rely on existing source water body data, it must be
no more than 5 years old, and the facility must demonstrate that the
existing data are sufficient to develop a scientifically valid estimate
of potential impingement and entrainment impacts, and provide
documentation showing that the data were collected using appropriate
quality assurance procedures. (40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iii)(B))

any public participation or consultation with Federal or State agencies
undertaken in development of the plan (40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iii)(C))

a sampling plan for data that will be collected using actual field
studies in the source water body. The sampling plan must document all
methods and quality assurance procedures for data collection, sampling,
and analysis. The proposed sampling and data analysis methods must be
appropriate for a quantitative survey and based on a consideration of
methods used in other studies performed in the source water body. The
sampling plan must include a description of the study area (which must
include the area of influence of the cooling water intake structure and
at least 100 meters beyond); identification of the biological
assemblages to be sampled (including all life stages of fish and
shellfish); data collection, sampling, and analysis methods. (40 CFR
125.86(c)(2)(iii)(D))

Source Water Biological Study. This must include:

a taxonomic identification and characterization of aquatic biological
resources to provide: a summary of historic and contemporary aquatic
biological resources; determination and description of the target
populations of concern (those species of fish and shellfish and life
stages that would be most susceptible to impingement and entrainment);
and a description of the abundance and temporal/spatial characterization
of the target populations based on the collection of multiple years of
data to capture the seasonal and daily activities (for example feeding
and water column migration) in the vicinity of the cooling water intake
structure (40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(A)(1))

an identification of all threatened and endangered species that might be
susceptible to impingement and entrainment by the cooling water intake
structures (40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(A)(2))

a description of additional chemical, water quality, and other
anthropogenic stresses on the source waterbody (40 CFR
125.86(c)(2)(iv)(A)(3)).

Evaluation of Potential Cooling Water Intake Structure Effects. This
must include:

calculations of the reduction in impingement mortality and entrainment
of all life stages of fish and shellfish that would need to be achieved
by the technologies the facility has selected to implement to meet
requirements under Track II. To do this, the facility must determine the
reduction in impingement mortality and entrainment that would be
achieved by implementing the requirements of 40 CFR 125.84(b)(1) and (2)
of Track I at the site. (40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(B)(1))

an engineering estimate of efficacy for the proposed and/or implemented
technologies in minimizing impingement and entrainment of all life
stages of fish and shellfish and to maximize survival of impinged life
stages of fish and shellfish. The facility must demonstrate that the
proposed technologies reduce impingement losses and entrainment of all
life stages of fish and shellfish to a comparable level to that which
would be achieved by meeting Track I requirements at that site. The
efficacy projection must include a site-specific evaluation of
technology suitability for reducing impingement and entrainment based on
the Source Water Biological Study. (40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(B)(2))

a characterization of impingement and entrainment estimates of the
proposed alternative technology based on case studies in the vicinity of
the CWIS and/or site-specific technology prototype studies (40 CFR
125.86(c)(2)(iv)(B)(2)).

Verification Monitoring Plan. This must include, at a minimum, two years
of monitoring to verify the full-scale performance of the alternative
technologies. The plan must describe the frequency of monitoring, the
parameters to be monitored, and the measures that the facility will take
if the proposed and/or implemented technologies do not achieve a
reduction in impingement and entrainment mortality for all life stages
of fish and shellfish equivalent to the level documented in the efficacy
projection described above. Verification monitoring must begin at the
start of operations of the CWIS and continue for a sufficient period of
time to demonstrate that the facility is reducing the level of
impingement and entrainment to the level documented in the Evaluation of
Potential Cooling Water Intake Structure Effects (40 CFR
125.86(c)(2)(iv)(B). (40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(D))

ANNUAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

In addition to the one-time reporting requirements, operators are
required to provide the following information in a yearly status report:

biological monitoring records for each CWIS as required by 40 CFR
125.87(a) (40 CFR 125.88(b)(1))

velocity and head loss monitoring records for each CWIS as required by
40 CFR 125.87(b) (40 CFR 125.88(b)(2))

records of visual or remote inspections as required in 40 CFR 125.87(c).
(40 CFR 125.88(b)(3)).

RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS

All operators of new facilities are required to keep records and to
report information and data to the permitting authority to show
compliance with any requirements they are subject to in the rule.
Records are required to be maintained for a period of at least three
years from the date of permit issuance unless extended by the request of
the Director. Each operator is required to maintain records of:

all the data used to complete the permit application and show compliance
(40 CFR 125.88(a))

any supplemental information developed under 40 CFR 125.86 (40 CFR
125.88(a)) 

compliance monitoring data submitted under 40 CFR 125.87 (40 CFR
125.88(a)). 

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule added several items to the list of
records previously maintained by Directors for the NPDES permit program.
The additional record keeping items include:

records of all narrative descriptions, scale drawings, location maps,
schematic diagrams, and engineering calculations submitted by new
facilities

records of source waterbody physical and flow information submitted by
facilities

records of source water baseline biological characterization data
submitted by facilities

records of design and construction technology plans submitted by
facilities

records of comprehensive design study plans and study results submitted
by new facilities

records of source water biological studies submitted by facilities

records of evaluations of potential cooling water intake structure
effects submitted by facilities

records of verification monitoring plans and monitoring results
submitted by facilities

a record of all yearly status reports

a list of determinations made for each facility

a list of facilities required to implement design and construction
technologies

a list of monitoring requirements for each system

a list of all facilities applying for a reduction in their monitoring
requirements

records of any other facility-by-facility and case-by-case decisions
made by that Director under the rule.

4b(ii) 	Respondent Activities

As mentioned above, respondents include both new facilities and NPDES
permit program Directors. Their information collection activities are
described below. 

Permit Application Activities

All facilities will need to perform start-up activities such as: reading
the rule, planning for the implementation of the rule, and training
staff to perform various tasks necessary to comply with the rule.
Activities performed during the permit application process are performed
only once during each ICR period. However, these application activities
are repeated again during the fifth year of the permit cycle as part of
the permit renewal process.

General Information

Before new facilities can begin operation of the CWIS, they must first
perform several data gathering activities as part of the permit
application process. Under the rule, all facilities are required to
gather source water physical, flow and baseline biological
characterization information and cooling water intake structure
information so that the Director can evaluate potential impact to the
water body in which the intake structure is placed. 

Activities that are required to report on source water physical
characteristics include: 

describing and drawing the physical configuration of the source water
body where the CWIS is located, including areal dimensions, depths,
salinity and temperature regimes

characterizing and documenting the hydrological and geomorphological
features of the source waterbody and the intake’s area of influence
within the waterbody

creating locational maps of the source waterbody

maintaining copies of these documents as well as copies of any
information used in their development for a period of three years after
submittal.

Activities that are required to report on source waterbody flow include:

developing a narrative describing the annual mean flow of the waterbody
if the CWIS is located in a freshwater river or stream, the mean low
water tidal excursion distance if the CWIS is located in an estuary or
tidal river, or the waterbody thermal stratification if the CWIS is
located in a lake or reservoir

gathering and producing supporting documentation

performing engineering calculations

maintaining a record of pertinent documents for three years after
submittal.

Activities that are required to report on source waterbody baseline
biological characterization include: 

collecting existing information to develop a list of species (or
relevant taxa) for all life stages and their relative abundance in the
vicinity of the CWIS

identifying which species and life stages would be most susceptible to
impingement or entrainment

identifying and evaluating the primary period of reproduction, larval
recruitment, and period of peak abundance for relevant taxa

collecting data that are representative of the seasonal and daily
activities of biological organisms (for example feeding and water column
migration) in the vicinity of the CWIS

identifying all threatened and endangered species that might be
susceptible to impingement and entrainment at the CWIS

documenting data that are not available and efforts made to identify
sources of data

documenting public participation or consultation with Federal or State
agencies

if existing data are supplemented with data collected using actual field
studies, developing a narrative description of all methods and quality
assurance procedures for data collection, sampling, and analysis,
including a description of the study area and the biological assemblages
to be sampled and/or evaluated

maintaining a copy of the characterization and the materials required to
produce it for three years after submittal.

Activities that are required to report on cooling water intake structure
characteristics include: 

preparing a narrative description of the configuration of the CWIS and
its location within the waterbody and in the water column

measuring and documenting the latitude and longitude of the CWIS

developing a flow distribution and water balance diagram for the
facility that includes all sources of water to the facility,
recirculating flows, and discharges

developing a narrative that describes the operation of the CWIS,
including design flows, daily hours of operation, number of days of the
year in operation, and seasonal changes if any

creating engineering drawings and locational maps in support of the CWIS
descriptions mentioned

maintaining copies of these documents as well as copies of any
information used in their development for a period of three years after
submittal.

Additional Information for Track I

New facilities are required to gather additional information, depending
on which of two alternative permitting tracks they choose. Facilities
choosing to comply with the requirements of Track I are required to
gather flow reduction information, velocity information, and design and
construction technology information.

Flow Reduction Information - Activities that are required to report on
flow reduction include:

developing a narrative description of the system that has been designed
to reduce the intake flow to a level commensurate with that which can be
attained by a closed-cycle recirculating cooling water system

producing the necessary engineering calculations to demonstrate that the
CWIS meets the flow reduction requirement

developing documentation to demonstrate that make-up and blowdown flows
have been minimized

if the flow reduction requirement is met entirely, or in part, by
reusing or recycling water withdrawn for cooling purposes in subsequent
industrial processes, developing documentation that the amount of
cooling water that is not reused or recycled has been minimized

maintaining a record of pertinent documents for three years after
submittal.

Velocity Information - Activities that are required to report on
velocity include:

developing a narrative description of the design, structure, equipment,
and operation used to meet the velocity requirement

producing the necessary engineering calculations to show the velocity
requirement will be met

maintaining a record of pertinent documents for three years after
submittal.

Design and Construction Technology Plan - The facility must submit
information to demonstrate that it will implement design and
construction technologies that meet the impingement and entrainment
requirements. Activities that are required to report on design and
control technology include:

providing narrative descriptions of the design and operation of the
technologies that will be used to maximize survival of those species
expected to be most susceptible to impingement and minimize entrainment
of those species expected to be the most susceptible to entrainment

collecting species-specific information to demonstrate the efficacy of
the technology

producing the necessary design calculations, drawings, and estimates to
support the narrative descriptions

maintaining records of all materials used to develop the narrative
descriptions for a period of three years after submittal.

Additional Information for Track II

Facilities choosing to comply with the requirements of Track II are
required to gather the Comprehensive Demonstration Study, including a
Source Water Biological Study, an evaluation of potential CWIS effects,
and a verification monitoring plan.

Comprehensive Demonstration Study - The facility must develop and submit
a plan for a Comprehensive Demonstration Study to characterize the
source water baseline in the vicinity of the cooling water intake
structure, characterize operation of the cooling water intakes, and
confirm that technologies proposed and/or implemented at the CWIS
achieve a comparable reduction in impingement and entrainment mortality
that would be achieved were the facility to implement the flow
reduction, velocity and technology requirements of Track I. The facility
must also develop and submit documentation of the results of the study.
Tasks include:

developing and submitting a plan containing a proposal for how
information will be collected to support the study

developing a description of the proposed and/or implemented technologies
to be evaluated in the study

developing a list and description of any historical studies
characterizing the physical and biological conditions in the vicinity of
the CWIS and their relevancy to the study

documenting any public participation or consultation with Federal or
State agencies undertaken in development of the plan

developing a sampling plan for data that will be collected using actual
field studies in the source water body, documenting all methods and
quality assurance procedures for data collection, sampling, and
analysis. The sampling plan must include a description of the study area
(which must include the area of influence of the cooling water intake
structure and at least 100 meters beyond); identification of the
biological assemblages to be sampled (both nekton and meroplankton);
data collection, sampling, and analysis methods.

documenting and submitting the results of the study

maintaining records of all materials used to develop the study plan and
document study results for a period of three years after submittal.

In documenting the results of the Comprehensive Demonstration Study, the
facility must also develop a Source Water Biological Study to identify
chemical and biological considerations as they relate to the
facility’s CWIS operations. Tasks include:

identifying and characterizing the taxonomy of aquatic biological
resources

developing a summary of historic and contemporary aquatic biological
resources

determining and describing the target populations of concern (those
species of fish and shellfish and life stages that would be most
susceptible to impingement and entrainment)

determining and describing the abundance and temporal/spatial
characterization of the target populations based on the collection of
multiple years of data to capture the seasonal and daily biological
activity in the vicinity of the CWIS

identifying all threatened and endangered species that might be
susceptible to impingement and entrainment at the CWIS

identifying and evaluating additional chemical, water quality, and other
anthropogenic stresses on the source waterbody

maintaining a copy of the characterization and the materials required to
produce it for three years after submittal.

In documenting the results of the Comprehensive Demonstration Study, the
facility must also develop an evaluation of potential cooling water
intake structure effects. Tasks include:

developing a statement of the baseline against which comparative
analyses will be made

calculating and documenting the impingement and entrainment baselines,
assuming a baseline design of a once-through cooling water system and a
shoreline CWIS employing a trash rack and traveling screens

developing an engineering estimate of the efficacy of proposed and/or
implemented technologies in minimizing impingement and entrainment of
all life stages of fish and shellfish and to maximize survival of
impinged life stages of fish and shellfish, and in reducing impingement
losses and entrainment of all life stages of fish and shellfish to a
level comparable to those expected to be achieved by implementing Track
I requirements. The efficacy projection must include a site-specific
evaluation of technology suitability for reducing impingement and
entrainment based on the Source Water Biological Characterization.

characterizing impingement and entrainment estimates of the alternative
technology based on case studies in the vicinity of the CWIS and/or
site-specific technology prototype studies

maintaining a copy of the evaluation and the materials required to
produce it for three years after submittal.

As part of the Comprehensive Demonstration Study, the facility must also
develop a Verification Monitoring Plan to conduct, at a minimum, annual
monitoring to verify the full-scale performance of the alternative
technologies. The facility must perform verification monitoring
beginning during the first year of operation of the CWIS. Tasks include:

developing a monitoring plan, including descriptions of the frequency of
monitoring, the parameters to be monitored, and the measures that the
facility will take if the proposed and/or implemented technologies do
not achieve a reduction in impingement and entrainment mortality for all
life stages of fish and shellfish equivalent to the level documented in
the efficacy projection described above

performing and document verification monitoring

maintaining copies of the Verification Monitoring Plan and verification
monitoring records, along with the materials required to produce them
for three years after submittal.

Annual Activities

Biological Monitoring 

All new facilities affected by the rule would need to perform biological
monitoring of the commercial and recreational fisheries and the forage
base species identified in either the Source Water Baseline Biological
Characterization or the Comprehensive Demonstration Study, for a minimum
of two years after permit issuance. The Director may approve a request
for less frequent sampling in the remaining years of the permit term,
following review of supporting data. Biological monitoring includes both
monitoring of impingement and entrainment. 

Impingement monitoring involves collecting data on aquatic organisms
trapped on the outer part of an intake structure or against screening
devices during periods of cooling water withdrawal, to determine the
taxa and abundance of impinged organisms. Specific monitoring tasks
include: 

collecting impingement samples over a 24-hour period no less than once
per month when the CWIS is in operation

identifying and enumerating impinged organisms

performing statistical analyses to summarize rates

maintaining records of impingement monitoring results for at least three
years.

Entrainment monitoring involves the collection of data on eggs, larvae,
and other plankton incorporated with cooling water flow (entering and
passing through a cooling water intake structure and into a cooling
water system), to determine the taxa and abundance of entrained
organisms. Specific tasks include:

collecting entrainment samples over a 24-hour period no less than
biweekly during the primary period of reproduction, larval recruitment,
and peak meroplankton abundance when the CWIS is in operation

identifying and enumerating entrained organisms

performing statistical analyses to summarize entrainment rates

maintaining records of entrainment monitoring results for at least three
years.

CWIS Operational Monitoring

Under the section 316(b) New Facilities Rule, all affected facilities
need to monitor the operation of their CWISs. The first type of
operational monitoring is the monitoring of the system’s velocity,
performed during initial facility startup and thereafter at a frequency
specified in the facility’s NPDES permit, but no less than once per
quarter. The second form of operational monitoring is through either
visual inspections conducted on at least a weekly basis or through the
use of remote monitoring equipment. Specific operational monitoring
tasks include:

if the facility uses intake screen systems, monitoring head loss across
the screens (measured at the minimum ambient source water surface
elevation) and correlating the measured value with the design intake
velocity

if the facility uses devices other than intake screens, monitoring
velocity at the point of entry through the device

analyzing data to determine if the CWIS is meeting the velocity
requirements

visually inspecting all installed technologies or, alternatively,
inspecting remote monitoring devices to confirm that the impingement and
entrainment technologies are functioning as designed

maintaining records of operational monitoring results for at least three
years.

Yearly Status Report

All new facilities subject to the rule are required to prepare and
submit an annual report that details compliance with requirements set by
the rule and with any additional provisions specified within the permit.
Preparation of the report requires:

compiling biological monitoring records for each CWIS

compiling velocity and head loss monitoring records for each CWIS

compiling records of visual or remote inspections

maintaining a copy of the report for a period of three years after its
submission.

Director Activities

NPDES program Directors ensure the implementation of the rule. The
Director should review materials submitted by the applicant during the
initial permit application process and prior to each renewal period
thereafter to determine if there have been any changes in facility
operations or physical and biological attributes of the source
waterbody. Any changes should be evaluated to determine the need for
additional or more stringent conditions in the permit.

Section 316(b) requirements are imposed on a facility through an NPDES
permit. The Director must determine, based on the information submitted
by the new facility in its permit application, the appropriate
requirements and conditions to include in the permit based on the track
(Track I or Track II) the new facility has chosen to comply with.
Specific activities include:

analyzing and reviewing facility data

making determinations concerning facilities such as: 

after receiving the initial permit application, Directors must determine
applicable standards in 40 CFR 125.84 to apply to the new facility and
determine compliance with the applicable standards

for each subsequent permit renewal, Directors must review the
application materials and monitoring data to determine whether
additional requirements for design and construction technologies should
be included in the permit if they are reasonably necessary to minimize
impingement and entrainment as a result of the effects of multiple
cooling water intake structures in the same body of water; seasonal
variations in the aquatic environment affected by the cooling water
intake structures controlled by the permit; or the presence of
regionally important species or threatened and endangered species

for Track II facilities, the Director may review the information
collection proposal plan required by 40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iii). The
facility may initiate sampling and data collection activities prior to
receiving comment from the Director. 

Directors must develop permit conditions that, at a minimum, include the
performance standards that implement the requirements of 40 CFR
125.84(b)(1), (2), (3) and (4) or 40 CFR 125.84(c)(1), (2) and (3). In
determining compliance with proportional flow requirement in 40 CFR
125.84(b)(2) and (3), the Director must consider anthropogenic factors
unrelated to the new facility’s cooling water intake structure that
can influence the occurrence and location of the thermocline, including
source water inflows, other water withdrawals, managed water uses,
wastewater discharges, and flow/level management practices.

for a facility that chooses Track I, the Director must review the Design
and Construction Technology Plan required in 40 CFR 125.84(b)(4) to
evaluate the suitability and feasibility of the technology proposed to
minimize impingement and entrainment of all life stages of fish and
shellfish, or to maximize survival of impinged life stages of fish and
shellfish. A condition requiring the facility to reduce impingement and
entrainment commensurate with the implementation of the technologies
must be placed in the permit. In addition, the Director must consider
whether more stringent conditions are reasonably necessary in accordance
with 40 CFR 125.84(d).

for a facility that chooses Track II, the Director must review the
information submitted with the Comprehensive Demonstration Study
information required in 40 CFR 125.86(c)(2), evaluate the proposed
suitability for the proposed technologies at the site, and determine
whether the technologies achieve a comparable level of impingement and
entrainment reduction as the facility would if it complied with 40 CFR
125.84(b)(1), (2) and (4) and used a shoreline intake. A condition
requiring the facility to implement the Technology Proposal Plan and to
reduce their impingement and entrainment to the level that can be
achieved by employing the implemented technologies must be placed in the
permit. In addition, the Director must review the Verification
Monitoring Plan in 40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(D) and require that the
proposed monitoring be performed within the first year of operations at
the facility.

Directors must determine frequency of the monitoring subject to minimum
requirements. The Director may modify the monitoring program when the
permit is reissued and during the term of the permit based on changes in
physical or biological conditions in the vicinity of the CWIS. The
Director may require continued monitoring based on the results of the
Verification Monitoring Plan in 40 CFR 125.86(c)(2)(iv)(D).

Directors must determine record keeping and reporting requirements for
each facility subject to minimum requirements

Directors have the discretion to include more stringent requirements in
the NPDES permits than those specified in the regulations if they
determine that more stringent conditions are reasonably necessary to
ensure the minimization of impingement and entrainment as a result of
the effects of multiple CWISs in the same water body; seasonal
variations in the aquatic environment effected by the presence of the
permitted CWIS; or the presence of regionally important species

facility compliance tracking

record keeping for all reports, documents, and supporting materials
submitted by facilities in fulfillment of their cooling water intake
requirements of their NPDES permit.

5	THE INFORMATION COLLECTED - AGENCY ACTIVITIES, COLLECTION, METHODOLOGY
AND INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

The following sections describe EPA activities related to analyzing,
maintaining, and distributing the information collected.

5a	Agency Activities

EPA is responsible for overseeing implementation of this rule.
Implementation of reporting and monitoring requirements would rely
extensively on State governments in those States that have authorization
under CWA section 402(b) to implement the NPDES permit program. In
States that do not have NPDES permitting authority, EPA is responsible
for administering the program. Under these circumstances, EPA performs
the same activities as those outlined for Directors in section 4. 

EPA is also involved in the review of State-issued NPDES permits for
compliance with section 316(b) New Facility Regulation requirements. EPA
typically reviews NPDES permits that are first issued after
implementation of new regulations.  Due to the complexity of these
requirements and the small numbers of permits issued, EPA assumes that
it will perform a detailed review, make comments, and follow up on
comments for the 316(b) portions of State issued NPDES permits, during
the three covered by this ICR. 

5b	Collection Methodology and Information Management

The section 316(b) New Facility Rule provides minimum requirements
regarding the type of information collected. Directors of NPDES programs
are primarily responsible for determining which collection method and
information management strategy is most appropriate. EPA maintains the
compliance data in its Permit Compliance System (PCS) database and the
Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS). PCS and ICIS are the
national computerized management information systems that automate
entry, updating, and retrieval of NPDES data and tracks permit issuance,
permit limits and monitoring data, and other data pertaining to
facilities regulated under NPDES. This technology reduces the burden to
the permitting authority of gathering, analyzing, and reporting national
permit and water quality data.

Permitting authorities are responsible for reviewing permit
applications, permits, monitoring reports, etc. to verify the accuracy
of the data. Permitting authorities are also responsible for entering
that data into PCS/ICIS. Different authorities have different approaches
for entering the data into PCS/ICIS and different approaches for
checking data quality. This includes the use of coding forms,
double-entry, technical review, etc. Many States have developed State
databases that are tailored to individual State needs. EPA is working on
processes to provide uploads directly to PCS/ICIS from the State
systems. Permit data can be accessed by the public in one of two ways: 

via the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by submitting a request to EPA
or the State.

via an on-line query using EPA’s Envirofacts Data Warehouse and
Applications website at http://www.epa.gov/enviro/index_java.html.
Accessing data via Envirofacts provides a method to combine PCS/ICIS
data with other EPA databases and mapping tools.

5c	Small Entity Flexibility

The final rule’s minimum intake requirements would exclude most new
small entities from the compliance requirements. As a result, the final
rule is expected to affect only a small absolute number of facilities
owned by small entities. In 2001, EPA estimated that over the next 20
years eleven facilities owned by small entities are projected to be
subject to the final 316(b) regulation. Of these, 8 are estimated to be
electric generators, and 3 will be manufacturing facilities.

EPA considers the information collection and reporting requirements to
be the minimum necessary to ensure that the section 316(b) goal of
“minimizing adverse environmental impact” is met. Because small
entities constitute a very small share of the potentially affected
facilities, providing them greater flexibility such as less frequent
data collection and reporting requirements would not have a large effect
on their overall burden, but could have an adverse impact on the
effectiveness of the rule. Furthermore, because the reporting
requirements differ by water type and permitting track, entities of all
sizes have the flexibility to minimize their total compliance costs
including the costs and burden of information collection requirements.

5d	Collection Schedule

EPA estimated that 16 new facilities fell within the scope of the final
rule during the first three years after promulgation and that an
additional 29 facilities fell within the scope of the rule during the
first ICR renewal period (years 4-6 after promulgation).

EPA estimates that an additional 23 facilities will fall within the
scope of the rule during the second ICR renewal period (years 7-9 after
promulgation). The permitting process is assumed to take less than one
year to complete for those facilities following Track I requirements.
For those facilities opting for Track II, EPA assumes it takes
approximately two years for facilities with intakes drawing from
freshwater sources, and three years for those facilities drawing from
marine waters to complete the permitting process. EPA assumes that four
of the facilities that began the permitting process during the first ICR
renewal period will receive their permits during the second ICR renewal
period and ten facilities will begin the process of renewing their
permits during the second ICR renewal period.

The 23 expected new facilities will undergo initial start-up activities
and submit information on CWIS design. Table 5-1 provides the estimated
implementation schedule for permit application process for these 23
facilities during the second ICR renewal period. There are 26 new
facilities that are expected to begin annual monitoring activities
during the second ICR renewal period covered by this supporting
statement. Of the 26 facilities that begin annual monitoring, 13
facilities began their permit application process during the previous
ICR, and 13 facilities will complete their permit applications during
this second ICR renewal period. Table 5-1 also provides the estimated
implementation schedule for monitoring activities for these facilities
during the second ICR renewal period.

Table 5-1. Number of Facilities Assumed to Begin Compliance with
Information Collection Requirements During the ICR Period by Year

Type of Activity	ICR Period

	12/2007-11/2008	12/2008-11/2009	12/2009-11/2010

Track I Facilities Beginning the NPDES Permit Application Process 	6	6	4

Track II Facilities Beginning the NPDES Permit Application Process 	2	1
4

Total Facilities Beginning the NPDES Permit Application Process 	8	7	8

Track I Facilities Beginning Annual Monitoring and Reporting of
Operations	8 *	6 **	6 **

Track II Facilities Beginning Annual Monitoring and Reporting of
Operations	3 *	2 *	1 **

Total Facilities Beginning Annual Monitoring and Reporting of Operations
11	8	7

* : These 13 facilities began their permit application process during
the previous ICR.

**: These 13 facilities will complete their permit applications during
this third ICR renewal period.

6	ESTIMATING RESPONDENT BURDEN AND COST OF COLLECTION

The following sections present rationale and results of EPA’s
estimation of burden and costs for the implementation of the section
316(b) New Facility Rule. The burden hours and cost in this section are
calculated by first estimating the annual burden, labor cost, and other
direct cost (ODC) per facility or Director for each activity. (See
Tables 6-1 through 6-5). The number of facilities or Directors required
to conduct each of the activities per year are then estimated and used
to calculate the yearly burden hours and costs. Not all facilities are
required to conduct all the activities, and not all activities occur
during all years of the ICR. The total yearly burden hours and costs are
then summed and averaged to compute the bottom line average annual
burden hours and costs shown in Table 6-6. See Appendix A for a more
detailed calculation.

6a	Estimating Respondent Burden

This section describes the burden estimates for facilities and
Directors, as well as the methods used to derive them. Respondent
activities are separated into those activities associated with the NPDES
permit application and those activities associated with monitoring and
reporting after the permit is issued. The reason for this is that the
permit cycle is every five years while ICRs must be renewed every three
years. Therefore, the application activities occur only once per
facility during an ICR period, and so they are considered one-time
burden for the purpose of this ICR. By contrast, the monitoring and
reporting activities that occur after issuance of the permit occur on an
annual basis. 

Facility Burdens

Information collection would require in-scope facilities to devote time
(i.e., as measured by staff hours) and resources (e.g., copies of
documents and report mailings) to produce the necessary NPDES permit
applications, implementation plans, and annual status reports. EPA
expects that facility employees, including managers, engineers,
engineering technicians, statisticians, draftsmen, and clerical staff,
will devote time toward gathering, preparing, and submitting the various
documents. To develop representative profiles of each employee’s
relative contribution, EPA assumed burden estimates that reflect the
staffing and expertise typically found in manufacturing facilities and
power generating plants. In doing this, EPA considered the time and
qualifications necessary to complete a variety of tasks: reviewing
instructions, planning responses, researching data sources, gathering
and analyzing data, typing or writing the information requested,
reviewing results, conferring with permitting authorities and expert
consultants, and sending documents. 

EPA anticipates that facilities will use the contracted services to
perform many of their required sampling and analysis tasks. The
contracted staff is likely to include project managers, biologists,
statisticians, and biological technicians. The work done by these
contracted employees will be done on-site on a regular basis. Therefore,
the hourly burdens associated with their work are included in the
overall burden estimates for each facility.

For each activity burden assumption, EPA selected time estimates to
reflect the expected effort necessary to carry out these activities
under normal conditions and reasonable labor efficiency rates. EPA
assumed that the majority of the actual work performed by facility
staff, such as researching, collecting, and analyzing data, as well as
writing the documents, will be carried out by junior technical staff.
Burdens associated with managerial and senior engineering staff include
time for actions such as occasional or seasonal visits to supervise
sampling efforts, as well as periodic review of lab results and
documentation. EPA assumed that the facilities will employ a drafter to
perform computer aided drafting (CAD) operations. For contracted
employees, EPA assumes that the majority of the work will be carried out
by the biologists and the biological technicians.

Tables 6-1 and 6-2 provide a summary of the hourly burden estimates for
facilities performing the NPDES permit application, annual monitoring,
and annual reporting activities associated with the final rule. For a
more detailed presentation of hourly burdens for facilities see Exhibits
A.1 and A.2 in Appendix A.

The activities listed in the first column of both Tables 6-1 and 6-2
correspond to the facility respondent activities outlined earlier in
section 4b(ii). Start-up burden includes reading the published
regulations, sample permits, and any guidance materials associated with
the rule; determining the required staff and resources necessary to
successfully complete the application process and meet all annual
monitoring and reporting requirements; and training staff to perform
tasks that they would not be required to conduct if the rule were not
implemented. General information activities refer to the development and
submittal of documentation on source waterbody characteristics and CWIS
location and design. 

As part of the permit application process, facilities will demonstrate
compliance with the proportional flow (i.e., intake flow may not exceed
a certain proportion of source water body flow) requirements. Facilities
will also collect Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization Data
to evaluate the condition of the biological community prior to operation
of the new facility and prior to each permit renewal application. The
level of effort needed for the study may vary considerably from one
facility to another, depending on the availability of existing
background information and the characteristics of the waterbody that the
CWIS will be located in. For the purpose of developing the ICR cost and
burden estimates, it is assumed that there is sufficient existing data
for facilities to develop a baseline characterization of the
contributing waterbody’s biological community. 

If a facility chooses Track I for meeting its permit obligations, the
facility also needs to comply with flow reduction, velocity and
technology requirements. Under the final rule, new facilities choosing
Track I must provide information to the permitting authority
demonstrating that they are in compliance with the flow reduction,
velocity and technology requirements that are applicable to their CWISs.
The facility hourly burdens for demonstrating compliance with these
requirements include developing and submitting narrative descriptions,
supporting documentation, and engineering calculations. Facility burden
for Design and Construction Technology Plans is comparable to the burden
for demonstrating compliance with one of the CWIS requirements.

Under Track II, the Comprehensive Demonstration Study evaluates the
condition of the biological community prior to operation of the new
facility and prior to each permit renewal application. The study entails
plan development, a source water biological study, projections of
anticipated impacts, and verification monitoring. As with the source
water baseline biological characterization, the required effort level
for the Track II source water biological study is likely to vary
considerably depending on the availability of existing data and the
complexity of the habitat that the CWIS will be located in.

For the purpose of developing the ICR cost and burden estimates it is
assumed that each Track II facility will perform sampling to develop the
Source Water Biological Study for the Comprehensive Demonstration Study.
The sampling required for the study is expected to take two years for
facilities with intakes drawing from freshwater sources, and three years
for facilities drawing from marine sources. Therefore, the entire
application process can take up to three years to complete. EPA assumes
that start-up activities and general information activities are
accomplished during the first year of the permitting process. The Source
Water Biological Study activities will be performed over the three years
prior to the issuance of the NPDES permit to Track II facilities. The
study to evaluate CWIS impacts will be conducted the year just prior to
operation of the CWIS to allow the facility time to incorporate
information from the Source Water Biological Study already underway. For
those Track II facilities beginning operation during the first year of
the ICR period, EPA assumes that they do not actually begin operating
the CWIS until the end of the year, allowing them enough time to conduct
the pilot study.

EPA anticipates that start-up, general information, and the Track I
activities will be performed by facility staff. For those facilities
taking Track II, EPA assumes that the sampling and statistical analyses
will be conducted by the contracted employees, although some of the
taxonomic identification, enumeration, and characterization will be
performed by a sub-contracted laboratory. 

After both Track I and II facilities receive their NPDES permits and
commence operations, they have annual monitoring and reporting
requirements as well. Velocity monitoring and the inspection of
installed technology will be carried out by facility staff. For
impingement and entrainment monitoring, EPA assumes that the actual
monitoring will be conducted by the contracted employees, while the
facility manager and junior technical staff will spend some time
reviewing the results in preparation for the yearly status report.

In the first year of permitted operation, Track II facilities are
required to use impingement and entrainment monitoring data to perform a
verification study, confirming that the CWIS technology is achieving
impingement and entrainment rates commensurate to that obtained through
closed-cycle recirculation technology. EPA assumes that each year
approximately 25% of the Verification Studies will show that the
facilities have not achieved the required impingement and entrainment
level that they predicted in their Comprehensive Demonstration Studies.
As a result, EPA assumes that these facilities will take measures to
improve their impingement and entrainment rates and submit another
Verification Study the following year.

Approval periods for ICRs are for three years while NPDES permits are
renewed on a five year cycle. Due to the shorter time frame for the ICR
approval period, there were no permit renewals during the first ICR
approval period. However, EPA anticipated that seven previously
permitted facilities renewed their permits during the second ICR renewal
period and ten currently permitted facilities will renew their permits
during the second ICR renewal period. EPA assumes that for Track I
facilities, all of the activities performed during the initial
permitting process would be repeated for the permit renewal. Track II
facilities will need to revise their Comprehensive Demonstration Study
and repeat the Sourcewater Baseline Characterization Study. They do not
have to perform another Evaluation of Cooling Water Intake Structure
Effects or Verification Monitoring Plan. EPA anticipates that the level
of effort required to repeat many of these tasks will be considerably
less than what was initially required. Facilities will be able to rely
on much of the information gathered during the first permitting process.
As a result the hourly burden estimates for activities are assumed to be
50% to 70 % less than those for the initial permitting process.

Table 6-3 provides a summary of the hourly burden estimates for
facilities performing the NPDES permit renewal activities associated
with the rule. For a more detailed presentation of hourly burdens for
facilities see Exhibit A.12 in Appendix A.

Director Burdens

Each Director’s actual burden associated with reviewing submitted
materials, writing permits, and tracking compliance will depend on the
number of new in-scope facilities that will be built in the Director’s
State during the ICR period. EPA expects that State senior technical,
junior technical, and clerical staff will devote time toward gathering,
preparing, and submitting the various documents. EPA assumed burden
estimates that reflect the staffing and expertise used by States for the
NPDES permit administration process. In doing this, EPA considered the
time and qualifications necessary to complete various tasks such as:
reviewing submitted documents and supporting materials, verifying data
sources, planning responses, determining specific permit requirements,
writing the actual permit, conferring with facilities and the interested
public, and entering the permit information into the PCS/ICIS databases.
Table 6-4 provides a summary of the hourly burden estimates for
Directors performing various activities associated with the final rule.
EPA assumes that the directors will spend a significant amount of time
reviewing the Sourcewater Biological Characterization Data. The
additional effort devoted to reviewing the study is due to the fact that
the studies cover three years worth of data collected at the site. For a
more detailed presentation of Director hourly burdens see Exhibits A.3
and A.13 in Appendix A.

6b	Estimating Respondent Costs

This section describes the cost estimates for facilities and Directors,
as well as the methods used to derive them.

6b(i) 	Estimating Labor Costs

The costs to the respondent facilities associated with these time
commitments can be estimated by multiplying the time spent in each labor
category by an appropriately loaded hourly wage rate. All base wage
rates used for facility labor categories were derived from the Bureau of
Labor Statistic’s (BLS) Occupational Employment and Wages, 2006. These
reported labor rates were based upon data from May 2006, and required
adjustment for inflation. Inflation factors ranging from 3.5% to 5.7%,
depending on the labor category, were derived from the BLS Employment
Cost Index for adjusting the Occupational Employment and Wages, 2006
labor rates to reflect labor rates as of December of 2007. Compensatory
loading factors ranging from 39% or 50%, depending on the labor
category, were used to account for any paid leave, supplemental pay,
insurance, retirement and savings, and required and non-required
benefits received by employees. EPA assumed an additional loading factor
of 15% to account for general overhead costs directly attributable to
facility employees performing work in support of the permit process.
Expenses for contracted employees, typically include higher overhead
costs, as well as fees to ensure profit for the contracting company. EPA
assumes that the overhead for the contracted employees will be 50% and
the fee will be 8%. 

To represent the base labor rate for facility management, EPA used the
median engineering manager in management occupations of $50.69 per hour.
After adjusting this rate for inflation, compensation, and overhead the
rate is $90.40 per hour. The median wage of $22.40 per hour for an
engineering technician was used to represent the base labor rate junior
technical staff. After adjusting for inflation and other factors this
labor rate was $39.30 per hour. The median annual salary for a drafter
performing CAD work was reported to be $20.17 per hour, and after
adjusting and loading the rate it is $36.00. The reported median wage
for clerical workers was $11.40 per hour and the fully adjusted and
loaded hourly rate is $20.60 per hour.

The base labor rate for a contracted manager of monitoring work done
on-site is assumed to be the median natural science manager in
management occupations, with a fully loaded rate of $114.20 per hour.
The median wage for a statistician was $31.60 per hour, with an adjusted
hourly rate of $75.40 per hour. Biologists and biological technicians
have an average hourly pay of $26.75 and $18.31, and a fully loaded rate
of $63.80 and $43.70, respectively.

Director Labor Costs

For Director costs, all of the base labor rates and compensation factors
were derived from published employment cost trends for State and local
government workers for the second quarter of 2006. These labor rates
were adjusted to reflect labor rates for December 2007. EPA chose the
BLS labor category of white-collar General Operations Manager to
represent the senior administrative and technical staff that will
oversee and manage the NPDES permit program. The base hourly rate for
this category was approximately $39.59 per hour, and after adjusting for
compensation and inflation it is $68.40 per hour. Similarly, EPA chose
the BLS labor category of mechanical engineering technician to represent
the junior technical staff that EPA expects to perform the majority of
the actual NPDES permitting work. The reported base pay for this
category was approximately $22.50 per hour, which becomes $38.90 per
hour after being adjusted for compensation, overhead, and inflation. The
hourly wage for State government clerical workers was $13.03 per hour
before adjustment, and $25.70 afterward.

6b(ii) 	Estimating Capital and Operation and Maintenance Costs

Facility O&M Costs

A facility incurs capital/start-up costs when it purchases equipment or
builds structures that are needed for compliance with the rule’s
reporting and record keeping requirements that the facility will not use
otherwise. EPA assumed that some facilities would incur capital/startup
costs as a result of this rule.

A facility incurs operation and maintenance (O&M) costs when it uses
services, materials, or supplies needed to comply with the rule’s
reporting and record keeping requirements that the facility will not use
otherwise. Any cost for the operation and upkeep of capital equipment is
considered O&M costs. Another type of O&M cost is for the purchase of
contracted services such as laboratory analyses. The purchase of
supplies such as filing cabinets and services such as photocopying or
boat rental, are also considered O&M costs, and are referred to as other
direct costs (ODCs).

EPA assumes that samples taken for the Source Water Baseline Biological
Characterization Study will be analyzed by a contracted laboratory. The
outside laboratories will perform taxonomic classification, data
tabulation, and then deliver the data back to the facility. For the two
to three years of monitoring required by the Source Water Baseline
Biological Characterization Study, this service is estimated to cost
$78,000 for facilities located adjacent to freshwater waterbodies and
$198,000 for facilities drawing from either estuaries, oceans, or the
Great Lakes. 

For the evaluation of CWIS effects, EPA anticipates that facilities will
perform pilot studies to determine the effectiveness of the technology
they will be using to minimize impingement and entrainment. EPA assumes
that the facility will be willing to spend approximately 10% of the
anticipated costs of installing and operating the proposed technology.
For costing purposes, EPA is assuming that a pilot study will be
performed using a Gunderboom system. The range of costs for a floating
Gunderboom system for a 150 MGD intake structure is $1.8 to $2.5 million
in capital costs, and $150 to $300 thousand in annual O&M costs
(Campbell, George, & Strong, 2001). Using 10% of the high end of this
range, EPA estimates the Track II facility spends $250,000 to purchase
and install a pilot Gunderboom system, and $30,000 to operate and
maintain it for the study. EPA assumes the pilot study impingement
samples will be analyzed on-site by the biologists due to the difficulty
of preserving impingement samples for shipment to an outside laboratory.
Entrainment analysis of pilot study monitoring samples will be performed
by an outside laboratory, at a cost of $41,600 for facilities drawing
from freshwater, and $70,200 for facilities drawing from estuaries and
the Great Lakes.

For visual inspections, EPA assumes that the Track I facilities will
employ remote monitoring devices to monitor the equipment performance.
The cost for the remote monitoring device includes $33,250 (Haught and
Panguluri, 1998) for purchase of equipment and $16,750 for installation
and testing of equipment.

For annual O&M costs, EPA assumes again that the analysis of impingement
monitoring samples will be done on-site, while entrainment monitoring
samples will be performed by an outside laboratory. Entrainment samples
are estimated to cost $7,800 per year for freshwater facilities, and an
estimated $10,140 per year for facilities drawing from estuaries or the
Great Lakes.

In general, the labor costs and O&M costs reported in this analysis are
assumed to represent typical average national cost estimates that are
likely to be incurred by new facilities and by permitting authorities.
EPA attempted to take into account various factors such as decreases in
labor efficiency that occur during extreme climate conditions, equipment
down time, and the occasional sample that might need to be replaced
because it was lost or spoiled during transport. The Tables 6-1 and 6-2
provide a summary of both the estimated labor costs and ODCs per
facility. For a more detailed presentation of all compliance costs for
facilities see Exhibits A.1 and A.2 in Appendix A.

Table 6-1. Burden and Costs per Facility for NPDES Permit Application
Activities

Activities	Burden (hrs)	Labor Cost ($)	ODC ($)

Start-up Activities	43	$2,554 	$50 

General Information Activities	146	$6,595 	$500 

CWIS Flow Requirement	104	$4,047 	$100 

Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization	265	$13,640 	$750 

CWIS Velocity Requirement (Track I)	138	$6,508 	$1,000 

CWIS Flow Reduction Requirement (Track I)	108	$4,548 	$400 

Design and Construction Technology Plan (Track I)	108	$5,271 	$50 

Comprehensive Study Plan (Track II)	271	$14,703 	$750 

Source Water Biological Characterization-Freshwater (Track II)*	5,196
$294,207 	$5,200 

Source Water Biological Characterization-Estuary & Great Lake (Track
II)*	9,368	$520,492 	$13,000 

Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects - Freshwater (Track II)*	1,626
$99,312 	$1,000 

Evaluation of Potential CWIS Effects - Estuary & Great Lake (Track II)*
1,950	$116,421 	$1,000 

Verification Monitoring Plan	128	$7,101 	$400 

*This activity also has contracted service costs associated with it

Table 6-2. Burden and Costs per Facility for Annual Monitoring and
Reporting Activities

Activities	Burden (hrs)	Labor Cost ($)	ODC ($)

Verification Monitoring- Freshwater (Track II)	92	$6,236 	$500 

Verification Monitoring- Estuary (Track II)	122	$8,348 	$500 

Biological Monitoring (impingement) Freshwater	379	$22,137 	$500 

Biological Monitoring (entrainment)Freshwater*	482	$28,187 	$650 

Biological Monitoring (impingement) Estuary	614	$36,373 	$1,000 

Biological Monitoring (entrainment) Estuary*	776	$45,534 	$1,150 

Velocity Monitoring	163	$6,614 	$100 

Visual Inspection of CWIS Technology	253	$11,285 	$100 

Yearly Status Report Activities	348	$21,441 	$750 

*This activity also has contracted service costs associated with it.

Table 6-3. Burden and Costs per Facility for NPDES Permit Renewal
Activities

Activities	Burden (hrs)	Labor Cost ($)	ODC ($)

Start-up Activities	13	$818	$50

General Information Activities	72	$3,472	$500

CWIS Flow Requirement	31	$1,190	$100

Source Water Baseline Biological Characterization	79	$4,129	$750

CWIS Velocity Requirement (Track I)	75	$3,490	$1,000

CWIS Flow Reduction Requirement (Track I)	108	$4,548	$400

Design and Construction Technology Plan (Track I)	43	$2,082	$50

Comprehensive Study Plan (Track II)	80	$4,288	$750

Source Water Biological Characterization - Freshwater (Track II)*	2,808
$155,550	$3,120

Source Water Biological Characterization - Estuary & Great Lake (Track
II)*	5,268	$288,385	$7,800

*This activity also has contracted service costs associated with it.

Director O&M Costs

EPA does not anticipate any operation and maintenance costs for
Directors under this rule. Table 6-4 provides estimates of Director ODCs
and labor costs. For a more detailed explanation of Director costs see
Exhibit A.3.

Table 6-4. Estimating Director Burden and Costs for Activities

Activities	Burden (hrs)	Labor Cost ($)	ODC ($)

Director Permit Issuance Activities for Track I Facility	188	$9,752	$300

Director Permit Issuance Activities for Track II Facility	646	$39,309
$300

Verification Study Review (per Facility)	21	$981	$50

Annual Director Activities (per Facility)	50	$2,374	$50

Director Repermitting Activities for Track I Facility	55	$2,925	$300

Director Repermitting Activities for Track II Facility	143	$8,542	$300

6c	Estimating Agency Burden and Costs

As mentioned previously, there are 46 States and Territories authorized
to administer the NPDES permitting program. For new in-scope facilities
applying for permits in the 10 unauthorized States and Territories, EPA
will incur the costs and burdens similar to those incurred by States
with permitting authority. This analysis, however, assumes that
facilities complying with the rule during the ICR period will be in
NPDES authorized States. 

EPA typically reviews NPDES permits that are first issued after
implementation of new regulations. Based on historical reports submitted
for 316(b) demonstrations, EPA assumes that it will take approximately
30 hours to perform a detailed review, make comments, and follow up on
comments for the 316(b) portions of a State issued NPDES permit. Table
6-5 summarizes Federal burden and cost estimates. Further detail is
provided in Exhibit A.4.

Table 6-5. Estimating Federal Burden and Costs for Activities

Activities	Burden (hrs)	Labor Cost ($)	ODC($)

Federal Permit Program Oversight Activities for Track I Permitted
Facility	28	$1,299	$50

Federal Permit Program Oversight Activities for Track II Permitted
Facility	42	$1,991	$50

6d	Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

During the three years of the second ICR renewal period, there are an
estimated 68 facilities along with 46 States and Territories that the
section 316(b) New Facility Rule will affect. The rule would require
each respondent to comply with one or more provisions. In turn, each
provision has numerous activities associated with it. Exhibits A.5 and
A.6 in Appendix A provide an estimate of the number of respondents and
responses expected for each provision of the rule during each year
covered by this ICR. The annual estimates are based on the compliance
schedule used to estimate the cost of the final rule. In addition,
Exhibits A.7-A.10 provide a summary of the respondent burdens and costs
for each year covered by this ICR. These estimates were calculated by
multiplying facility and Director level burden and cost estimates in
A.1-A.3 by the number of respondents in A.5.

6e	Bottom Line Burden Hours and Costs Tables

This section provides a description of bottom line data collection and
record keeping burden and cost estimates for implementation of the final
rule.

6e(i) 	Respondent Tally

The bottom line burden hours and costs for facilities and Directors are
the total annual hours and costs collectively incurred for all
activities during the 3-year period covered by this ICR. Table 6-6
provides a summary of the average annual number of respondents, burden
hours, and costs. A more detailed summary can be found in Exhibit A.11. 

Table 6-6. Summary of Average Annual Respondents, Responses, Burden, and
Costs for Facilities and Directors for the 3-Year Period Covered by this
ICR

	Average Annual Respondents*	Average Annual Burden (hours) 	Average
Annual Labor Costs (2007$)	Average Annual Capital Costs (2007$)	Average
Annual O&M Costs (2007$)	Total Average Annual Costs (2007$)

Facilities*	60	113,084	$6,444,757 	$793,274 	$977,353 	$8,215,384 

State Directors	46	5,125	$265,646 	$0 	$4,933 	$270,579 

Totals	106	118,209	$6,710,403 	$793,274 	$982,287 	$8,485,963 

* Facilities for each year are 53, 60, and 68 (181/3=60.33). State
Director for each year is 46

6e(ii) 	Agency Tally

The bottom line burden hours and costs for the Federal agency are the
total annual hours and costs collectively incurred for all activities
during the period covered by this ICR. Table 6-7 provides a summary of
the average annual agency burden hours, and costs. A more detailed
summary can be found in Exhibit A.11. 

Table 6-7. Summary of Average Annual Respondents, Responses, Burden, and
Costs for Federal Agency for the 3-Year Period Covered by this ICR

	Average Annual Burden (hours) 	Average Annual Labor Costs (2007$)
Average Annual O&M Costs (2007$)	Total Average Annual Costs (2007$)

Agency Totals	228	$10,661 	$350 	$11,011 

6f	Reasons For Change In Burden

The respondent average annual burden increased from 76,268 to 118,209
hours which represents a 55.0% increase and the total average annual
number of respondents increased from 69 to 106 respondents, for a 53.6%
increase. The increase is due to the addition of the newly built
facilities, as well as the continued performance of annual activities by
facilities that received their permit during the previous ICR periods.
In addition, this ICR includes additional repermitting burdens and costs
which were not in the first renewal ICR because more facilities are
entering the renewal phase of their permits. EPA also revised the labor
rates in this ICR. 

6g	Burden Statement

The annual average reporting and record keeping burden for the
collection of information by facilities responding to the section 316(b)
New Facility Rule is estimated to be 1,885 hours per respondent (i.e.,
an annual average of 113,084 hours of burden divided among an
anticipated annual average of 60 facilities). The Director reporting and
record keeping burden for the review, oversight, and administration of
the rule is estimated to average 111 hours per respondent (i.e., an
annual average of 5,125 hours of burden divided among an anticipated 46
States on average per year). 

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, 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 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
number for EPA’s regulations are listed in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR
chapter 15.

To comment on EPA’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,
the Agency has established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0027, which is available for public viewing at the
Water Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room 3334,
1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. 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 Water Docket is
202-566-2426. An electronic version of the public docket is available
through http://www.regulations.gov/. Use www.regulations.gov to submit
or view public comments, to access the index listing of the contents of
the public docket, and to access documents in the public docket that are
available electronically. Once in the system, key in the docket ID
number identified above. You can also send comments to the Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 725
17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503, Attention: Desk Office for EPA.
Please include the EPA Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2004-0027 and OMB Control
No. 2040-0241 in any correspondence

Part B of the Supporting Statement is not applicable because no
statistical methods were used in collecting this information.



Appendix A

Respondent Burden and Cost Analysis Spreadsheets

ICR for Cooling Water Intake Structures New Facility Rule



Appendix B

NAICS and SIC Codes for Nonutility Power Producers



	Steam Electric Nonindustrial Nonutility Power Producers1

This industrial sector contains various reported NAICS and SIC codes2.
The following table documents the specific industry sectors covered and
their associated NAICS and SIC code.

3 to 6 Digit NAICS Code	2 Digit SIC Code	3 or 4 Digit SIC Code	Industry
Sector

111---	01	0100	Agriculture Production – crops

112---	02	0200	Agriculture Production – livestock

2122--	10	1000	Metal Mining

211---	13	1300	Oil and Gas Extraction

2123--	14	1400	Nonmetallic minerals, except fuels

311---, 312---

3115--3113--	20	2000

202-

206-	Food and Kindred Products

3122--	21	2100	Tobacco Manufacturers

313---, 315---	22	2200	Textile and Mill Products

3152--, 3159--, 314---	23	2300	Apparel and other textile products

321---

3211--, 3219-- 	24	2400

242-	Lumber and Wood Products, Except Furniture

337---

3371---, 3372---	25	2500

251-	Furniture and fixtures

322---

32212-322130	26	2600

2621

2631	Paper and Allied Products, Paper Mills, Except Building Paper
Paperboard Mills

325---

32541-3251--3251--325211325---325311	28	2800

283- 286-2819

2821

2869

2873	Chemicals and Allied Products, Industrial Inorganic Chemicals,
Plastic Materials and Resins, Industrial Organic Chemicals, Nitrogenous
Fertilizers

324---

32411-324110	29	2900

291-

2911	Petroleum Refining and Related Industries, Petroleum Refining

326---, 339---

32622-, 33999-	30	3000

305-	Rubber and miscellaneous plastics

316---	31	3100	Leather and leather products

327---

327310	32	3200

3241	Stone, Clay, Glass, and Concrete Products, Cement, Hydraulic

331---

331---331111, 331221, 324199331312	33	3300

331-

3312

3334	Primary Metals Industries, Blast Furnaces and Steel Mills, Primary
Aluminum

332---, 333---, 336---	34	3400	Fabricated metal products

333---, 332---, 334---, 336---	35	3500	Industrial machinery and
equipment

334---, 335---	36	3600	Electrical and electronic equipment

336---	37	3700	Transportation equipment

334---, 339---	38	3800	Instruments and related products

339---, 332---	39	3900	Miscellaneous manufacturing industries

482---	40	4000	Rail transportation

483---, 488---	44	4400	Water transportation

481---, 488---	45	4500	Transportation by air

488---	47	4700	Transportation services

221---, 562---

2213--, 562---	49	4900

495-	Electric, Gas, and Sanitary Services (except 4911)

221310

4941	Water Supply

221320

4952	Sewerage System

56221-

4953	Refuse System

531---	65	6500	Real estate

561---, 532---, 541---, 711---, 812---	73	7300	Business services

621---, 622---, 623---	80	8000	Health Services

611---6112--, 6113--	82	8200

822-	Educational Services

624---, 813---	83	8300	Social services

541---	87	8700	Engineering and management services

814---	88	8800	Private households

541---	89	8900	Miscellaneous services

921---	91	9100	Public Administration

1 Source of data is Form EIA-867

2 In changing from an SIC code-based system to an NAICS code-based one,
all industries were restructured and redefined. As a result, there may
not be a direct conversion of some industries, as portions of an
industry may be restructured to another category. This table identifies
the primary NAICS codes for the listed industry sectors, but EPA notes
that the NAICS codes for some industries may not be included.

 Director means the Regional Administrator or the State Director, as the
context requires. When there is no “approved State program,” and
there is an EPA administered program, “Director” means the Regional
Administrator. When there is an approved State program, “Director”
normally means the State Director. In some circumstances, however, EPA
retains the authority to take certain actions even when there is an
approved State program. (For example, when EPA has issued an NPDES
permit prior to the approval of a State program, EPA may retain
jurisdiction over that permit after program approval) In such cases, the
term “Director” means the Regional Administrator and not the State
Director.

 BLS Occupational Employment and Wages, 2006,
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/ocwage.pdf

 BLS Employment Cost Index, http://www.bls.gov/web/echistrynaics.pdf

 Compensation factors are from the BLS Employment Cost Trends Tables 4
and 10 as of September 2007.
http://stats.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t04.htm and
http://stats.bls.gov/news.release/ecec.t10.htm

 May 2006 National Industry-Specific Occupational Employment and Wage
Estimates, http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/naics3_999000.htm

 BLS Employment Cost Index, http://www.bls.gov/web/echistrynaics.pdf

March 2008	316(b) New Facility Final Rule Information Collection Request
 PAGE  ii 

March 2008	316(b) New Facility Final Rule Information Collection Request
 PAGE  36 

March 2008	316(b) New Facility Final Rule Information Collection Request