Document ID: EPA-HQ-OPA-2014-0445-0004
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2020-08-20T04:00Z

RENEWAL OF INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST FOR THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE
OIL POLLUTION ACT FACILITY 

RESPONSE PLAN REQUIREMENTS (40 CFR PART 112)

(EPA # 1630.12)

IDENTIFICATION OF THE INFORMATION COLLECTION

Title of the Information Collection

Renewal of Information Collection Request (ICR) for the Implementation
of the Oil Pollution Act Facility Response Plan Requirements (40 CFR
Part 112). EPA ICR #1630.12. 

Short Characterization

This information collection request (ICR) renewal pertains to EPA’s
Facility Response Plan (FRP) requirements as codified in 40 CFR 112.20
and 112.21.  This regulation implements requirements mandated by the Oil
Pollution Act (OPA) of 1990.

The FRP rule incorporates requirements of Clean Water Act (CWA) section
311(j)(5), which was added by OPA section 4202.  The regulation requires
that owners and operators of facilities that could cause “substantial
harm” to the environment by discharging oil into or on the navigable
waters or adjoining shorelines prepare plans for responding, to the
maximum extent practicable, to a worst case discharge of oil, and to a
substantial threat of such a discharge.  Each FRP must be submitted to
EPA. The Agency reviews FRPs from facilities identified as having the
potential to cause “substantial harm” to the environment from oil
discharges.  In accordance with OPA statutory requirements, EPA reviews
and approves plans for certain FRP-regulated facilities that have the
potential to cause “significant and substantial harm.”

While EPA’s FRP rule addresses preparedness requirements for
non-transportation facilities, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) has authority
to establish requirements to prevent and contain discharges of oil from
vessels and marine transportation-related (MTR) facilities, and the
Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of Pipeline Safety, which is
part of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA), regulates many onshore pipelines and breakout facilities. Some
facilities must meet the requirements of two or more federal agencies,
because they engage in activities that fall under the jurisdiction of
those agencies; these facilities are called “complexes.”

Facilities regulated under the FRP rule represent a subset of facilities
covered by the Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasure (SPCC)
regulation at 40 CFR part 112.  EPA amended the SPCC rule on December 5,
2008 and November 13, 2009, but these amendments did not affect the FRP
rule.   (see 73 FR 74236 and 74 FR 58784).  Additionally, EPA finalized
a rule on October 14, 2010 that required SPCC facilities subject to the
FRP rule to amend existing plans, if necessary, to ensure compliance
with the SPCC rule by November 10, 2010.  Facilities subject to the SPCC
rule that became operational after August 16, 2002 through November 10,
2010 were required to prepare and implement an SPCC plan by November 10,
2010. (see 75 FR 63093).  This final rule did not affect the compliance
dates in the FRP rule.

Since the last ICR renewal, EPA has continued to review information
regarding facilities that have submitted an FRP to their EPA Regional
Administrator (RA).  The information was collected from each of EPA’s
ten regions and compiled into a national inventory of FRP-regulated
facilities.  The inventory was updated in May 2014 and reflects the
number of plan holders currently in operation at that time.  For the
last ICR renewal, EPA estimated the national inventory of FRP plan
holders would expand by December 2012 to about 4,535 facilities. 
Information available from EPA’s internal national database shows that
about 81 FRP facilities were owned and operated by the federal
government (e.g., military installations). These federal facilities are
excluded from the burden estimate analysis, given that they are not
considered “persons” under the Paperwork Reduction Act.
Consequently, the prior burden analysis projected that 4,454 existing
non-governmental facilities would be maintaining an FRP by the end of
2012.  To derive this estimate, EPA projected that between 2010 and
2012, approximately 307 new facilities would become subject to FRP
requirements over the three-year period, or approximately 102 new
facilities each year.  This estimate was based on annual
industry-specific growth rates used to project the number of new SPCC
facilities.  These 102 new FRP facilities represent approximately 0.5
percent of new facilities subject to the SPCC regulation annually.  The
remaining 99.5 percent of the estimated number of new SPCC facilities
(18,444 facilities) would only complete a certification form (Attachment
C-II in Appendix C of 40 CFR part 112), because they do not meet the
substantial harm criteria.  Based on the latest update to the FRP plan
holder universe dated May 2014, there are approximately 4,470 active FRP
facilities, and by removing the 81 governmental FRP facilities, a
non-governmental FRP universe of 4,389 plan holders is estimated as of
May 2014; this estimate is below the projected growth range estimated up
to December 2012 by 65 facilities.  Based on this result, the universe
of FRP facilities is not anticipated to change substantively for the
next ICR renewal period, sot EPA is retaining the estimate of 4,454
facilities, which could account for modest growth in the universe
estimate by the end of 2016.  Thus, the burden estimates for this ICR
renewal have not been substantially adjusted.

The total burden on the entire FRP regulated community over a three-year
period is estimated to be 1,367,230 hours (adjusted for burden
attributable to compliance with other Federal regulations and burden
that overlaps with State-level response planning requirements).  The
total burden is estimated to result in approximately $44,290 in capital
costs and $51,546,485 in total costs (including labor costs associated
with facility and contractor personnel).  EPA does not anticipate that
FRP facilities will incur operating and maintenance (O&M) costs, since
there are no anticipated substantive costs associated with hard copy or
electronic document storage.

NEED FOR AND USE OF THE COLLECTION

Need/Authority for the Collection

In 1990, Congress enacted the Oil Pollution Act (OPA, Public Law
101-380) to help prevent major oil spills and ensure efficient,
effective responses to spills when they occur. OPA contained significant
modifications to many provisions of section 311 of the Clean Water Act
(CWA).  OPA section 4202(a)(6) added CWA section 311(j)(5) to require
the owner or operator of a facility to prepare and submit “a plan for
responding, to the maximum extent practicable, to a worst case
discharge, and to a substantial threat of such a discharge, of oil...”
 This requirement applied to any onshore facility that, “because of
its location, could reasonably be expected to cause substantial harm to
the environment by discharging into or on the navigable waters,
adjoining shorelines, or the exclusive economic zone.” Certain
offshore facilities are also affected by OPA.

EPA incorporated OPA facility response planning requirements into an
existing regulation, 40 CFR part 112 as §§112.20 and 112.21 and
Appendices C through F on July 1, 1994 (see 59 FR 34070). Subparts A
through C of the regulation establishes procedures for the preparation
and implementation of SPCC Plans to help “minimize the potential for
oil discharges.”  Owners and operators of a subset of facilities that
meet the FRP applicability criteria must also prepare FRPs.  EPA amended
the FRP rule on June 30, 2000, to modify the requirements for an owner
or operator of a facility storing, processing, refining, or transferring
animal fat or vegetable oil (see 65 FR 40775).

The FRP requirements enhance EPA’s ability to protect navigable
waters, adjoining shorelines, fish and wildlife, and sensitive
environments when oil discharges occur and reduce the cost of oil
discharges to the regulated community and society.  Response planning
efforts reduce such costs by ensuring that discharges are controlled and
cleaned up swiftly and efficiently.  Facilities that are prepared to
respond to an oil discharge navigable waters are more effective in
containing the oil and mitigating the effects of a spill on the
environment.  A recent GAO emphasizes the importance of preparedness by
noting that the effectiveness of spill response preparedness can impact
the cost of spill cleanup: “The longer it takes to assemble and
conduct the spill response, the more likely it is that the oil will move
with changing tides and currents and affect a greater area, which can
increase costs.  Some officials also stated that the level of experience
of those involved in the incident command is critical to the
effectiveness of spill response, and they can greatly affect spill
costs.  For example, poor decision making during a spill response could
lead to the deployment of unnecessary response equipment, or worse, not
enough equipment to respond to a spill."

Per 40 CFR part 112.20(f)(1), facilities are determined to be
substantial harm facilities if one or both of the following criteria are
met:

The facility has a total oil storage capacity greater than or equal to
42,000 gallons and transfers oil over water to or from vessels.

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

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

The facility is located at a distance (as calculated using the
appropriate formula in Appendix C of 40 CFR part 112 or a comparable
formula) such that a discharge from the facility could cause injury to
fish and wildlife and sensitive environments, as described in Appendices
I, II, and III of the Department of Commerce’s “Guidance for
Facility and Vessel Response Plans: Fish and Wildlife and Sensitive
Environments” (59 FR 14713, March 29, 1994) and the applicable Area
Contingency Plan. 

The facility is located at a distance (as calculated using the
appropriate formula in Appendix C of 40 CFR part 112 or a comparable
formula) such that a discharge from the facility would shut down a
public drinking water intake.

The facility has experienced a reportable oil spill in an amount greater
than or equal to 10,000 gallons within the last five years.

Under the FRP rule, the Agency requires the preparation and submittal of
facility-specific response plans by substantial harm facilities.  EPA
reviews these plans to determine if the facility could cause significant
and substantial harm by discharging oil into or on navigable waters or
adjoining shorelines per 40 CFR part 112.20(f)(3).  If a facility is
deemed a significant and substantial harm facility, then the FRP is
subject to approval and periodic review.

Practical Utility/Users of the Data

The FRP facility owners and operators are the primary users of the data
collected under this ICR. Facility-specific FRPs help facility owners
and operators develop an internal response organization and identify the
necessary resources, either internal or external (or both) to adequately
respond to an oil spill in a timely manner.  FRPs must include: 1)
identification of small, medium and worst case discharge scenarios and
strategies to respond to each scenario; 2) development of a hazard
evaluation and a vulnerability analysis that addresses affected fish and
wildlife and sensitive environments as well as affected residential
areas, businesses, hospitals, and transportation routes; and
identification and provision of resources necessary to respond to each
scenario per Appendix E of 40 CFR part 112. Appendix F contains a model
FRP that lists the minimum essential elements for a compliant FRP.

EPA reviews all FRPs submitted under 40 CFR part 112.  Additionally, EPA
reviews and approves response plans for those facilities whose
discharges may cause significant and substantial harm to the
environment, in order to ensure that facilities believed to pose the
highest risk have adequate resources and procedures in place to respond
to a spill. EPA may also use the facility-specific information provided
in the response plans to update Area Contingency Plans (ACPs) as
required by OPA.  Certain plan information, such as provisions for
adequate response capability to respond to a worst case discharge, help
inform EPA and other government agencies about the distribution of
personnel and equipment of the spill response industry to evaluate
private-sector oil spill response capacity.

Regional, State, and local response authorities also benefit from
information contained in FRPs. OPA requires that FRPs be consistent with
the requirements of the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution
Contingency Plan (NCP) and applicable ACPs. Area Committees, which are
established by OPA section 4202, make use of the FRPs in preparing and
updating ACPs. Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs) under the
direction of the State Emergency Planning Committee (SEPCs) also use
facility-specific information to help develop local contingency plans
required under SARA Title III Community Right-to-Know provisions. The
rule requires that a planholder provide a copy of the FRP to the LEPC or
SEPC, if requested.  This information allows local and regional response
authorities to better understand the potential hazards and response
capabilities in their area to improve preparedness. 

NONDUPLICATION, CONSULTATIONS, AND OTHER COLLECTION CRITERIA

Nonduplication

A substantial number of facilities that handle, store, or transport
hazardous substances are subject to emergency planning requirements
under the Solid Waste Disposal Act, the Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), the Occupational
Safety and Health Act (OSHA), other Federal statutes, and state
requirements.  FRPs are intended to supplement, not duplicate, these
other plans by focusing on oil.  EPA coordinated with USCG, DOT, and DOI
throughout the 1994 and 2000 rulemakings in order to promote consistency
with response plan requirements mandated by other Federal agencies.  EPA
continues to coordinate with these agencies through participation in an
interagency workgroup on the National Preparedness for Response Exercise
Program (PREP) as well as participation in area exercises that involve
FRP planholders to improve preparedness.

EPA is committed to minimizing regulatory overlap and allows facility
owners and operators to build upon, or draw from, the format and content
of other response plans to develop their FRPs under 40 CFR part 112. 
For example, owners and operators of onshore facilities that have both
transportation-related and non-transportation-related components (i.e.,
complexes) are permitted to prepare one response plan with separate
sections that address each component.  Integrated Contingency Plans
(ICPs) prepared in accordance with the notice published on June 5, 1996
provide an acceptable format for such consolidation (see 61 FR 28642). 
Owners or operators of facilities that are subject to more than one OPA
jurisdiction, for example transportation-related and non-transportation
related onshore facilities that are part of the same complex, may
satisfy all requirements by submitting a copy of the ICP to each program
in the agency that has review authority for specific regulations.  In
addition to related federal planning requirements, numerous States and
the District of Columbia have regulations that require varying degrees
of response planning.  Because EPA is flexible on the format of the
required FRPs, owners or operators of certain facilities may be able to
modify versions of their existing FRPs to comply with the FRP rule. 
However, if another response plan is used, it must meet the requirements
of the FRP rule and must be cross-referenced to the format included in
Appendix F to 40 CFR part 112, and include a self-contained Emergency
Response Action Plan (ERAP).

Public Notice Required to Prior Submission to OMB 

Pursuant to the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), EPA is
notifying the public in the accompanying Federal Register notice of this
renewal ICR and soliciting  public comment concerning the burden
estimates for respondents.  EPA is requesting comments on the Agency’s
need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden
estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing respondent burden,
including through the use of automated collection techniques.  

Consultations

For prior ICR renewal requests, EPA consulted FRP facilities and
industry personnel to verify that the burden assumptions were
reasonable.  EPA had contacted facilities of various sizes, geographical
location, and industry sectors, including facilities involved in
extraction and production of crude oil and facilities that handle
non-petroleum oils. Facility respondents provided information regarding
the facility’s ICR burden, frequency and basis of plan amendments,
format of FRP submittals to EPA, and overall comments and suggestions on
the FRP program.  The responses generally confirmed the reasonableness
of the FRP ICR burden and unit costs estimates. For this ICR renewal,
EPA did not perform any additional consultations as prior consultations
with a representative of a large company with upstream production and
downstream bulk petroleum refining operations and marketing terminals
revealed that the previous ICR ranges to prepare, update and maintain an
FRP had not changed substantially from the consultations in the prior
ICR renewal.  Thus, no additional consultations were made for this
renewal request.

Effects of Less Frequent Collection

Initial FRP preparation and submission is a one-time event.  After FRPs
are prepared and submitted to EPA, OPA section 4202 requires that they
be reviewed periodically and be consistent with the applicable ACP and
NCP.  Per 40 CFR part 112.29(g)(2), a planholder is required to review
the NCP and the applicable ACP annually and revise their FRP to ensure
consistency.  Additionally, a planholder must resubmit revised portions
of the plan to EPA after each material change that could affect the
response to a worst case discharge of oil within 60 days.  Examples of
material changes include: changes in the amount or location of oil
storage; changes in the facility’s spill prevention and response
equipment and capabilities; changes in the capabilities of any
contracted oil spill removal organizations response equipment and
personnel that affect their ability to respond as per the plan; and
other changes that could materially affect the implementation of the
plan.  Additionally, 40 CFR part 112.20(g)(3) requires the planholder to
review and update their FRP periodically to reflect changes at the
facility.  Less frequent collection of this information would not meet
statutory and regulatory requirements and could affect a facility
owner’s or operator’s ability to respond appropriately to a worst
case discharge of oil.

General Guidelines

The information collection activities discussed in this ICR comply with
Paperwork Reduction Act regulatory guidelines (5 CFR 1320.6), with the
exception that the retention period for records extends beyond three
years.  According to 40 CFR 112, Appendix F, Section 1.8.1, planholders
are required to retain records of training, drills/exercises, and
inspections for a period of five years. For facilities classified as
significant and substantial harm facilities, the EPA Regional
Administrator (RA) reviews and approves these plans, and then
periodically reviews these plans on a schedule established by the RA,
provided that the period between plan reviews does not exceed five years
[see 40 CFR part 112.20(c)(4)].  Therefore, the records related to this
information collection must be retained for at least five years.

Certain FRP facilities must meet the response planning requirements of
two or more federal agencies (i.e., complexes), because they engage in
activities that fall under the jurisdiction of those agencies.  If a
facility owner or operator is required to submit an FRP to fulfill EPA
requirements and the requirements of another agency, this plan would be
subject to the inspection and exercise requirements of both agencies.
For example, a plan that fulfills both the EPA’s FRP requirements and
the USCG’s response planning requirements would be subject to Coast
Guard review.  In an effort to maintain consistency with the USCG
requirements, EPA plans periodic reviews on a schedule similar to the
USCG’s five-year review. Therefore, as indicated above, the records
related to this information collection must be retained for at least
five years.  Additionally, EPA Regions routinely coordinate with their
respective USCG sectors to ensure that facilities are not subjected to
duplicative inspections or exercises.

Confidentiality 

None of the information collected under the FRP rule is believed to be
confidential. One of the criteria necessary for information to be
classified as confidential (40 CFR 2.208) is that a business must show
that it has previously taken reasonable measures to protect the
confidentiality of the information and that it intends to continue to
take such measures.  EPA has provided no assurances of confidentiality
to facility owners or operators when they file their FRPs.

Sensitive Questions

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

THE RESPONDENTS AND THE CHANGE IN INFORMATION REQUESTED

Respondents/NAICS Codes

The industries that are likely to be affected by the requirements in the
FRP regulation fall into many North American Industry Classification
System (NAICS) categories, including those associated with petroleum
production, processing (refining), distribution and marketing, and
consumption as well as animal fat and vegetable oil processing,
distribution and marketing. 

The FRP rule requires that all SPCC-regulated facility representatives
conduct an initial screen using the flowchart (Attachment C-I) in
Appendix C of 40 CFR part 112 as a guide to determine whether their
facility is subject to the FRP requirements.  EPA has found that only a
small percentage of the approximately 18,500 new facilities that EPA
estimates become regulated under the SPCC rule each year may meet the
screening criteria and as a result must develop an FRP.  The six
industrial categories containing the greatest number of respondents
required to develop and submit an FRP to EPA are presented in Exhibit 1.
 The estimate of the total number of facility representatives required
to prepare response plans is presented in section 6(a).

EXHIBIT 1 

Primary Industry Sectors and NAICS Codes 

Covered by the FRP Regulation

CATEGORY	NAICS Codes

Petroleum and Petroleum Products Wholesalers	4227

Electric Power Generation, Transmission, and Distribution	2211

Petroleum and coal products manufacturing	3241

Other Commercial Facilities	miscellaneous

Heating Oil Dealers	454311

Manufacturing	31-33

Information Requested

Data Items, Including Recordkeeping Requirements

 Facilities that could cause substantial harm to the environment as a
result of a discharge of oil must prepare and submit response plans. As
required by section 311(j)(5)(c) of the CWA, which was added by section
4202(a) of the OPA, the response plan shall:

Be consistent with the requirements of the NCP and ACPs.

Identify the qualified individual having full authority to implement
removal actions, and require immediate communications with Federal
officials and other response personnel.

Identify, and ensure by contract or other means, private personnel and
equipment necessary to remove, to the maximum extent practicable, a
worst case discharge and to mitigate or prevent a substantial threat of
such a discharge.

Describe the training, equipment testing, periodic unannounced drills,
and response actions of persons at the facility under the plan.

Be updated periodically.

Be resubmitted for approval for each significant change.

In order to fulfill the above requirements, the regulation requires that
the response plan include the following elements per 40 CFR part
112.20(h):

An emergency response action plan (ERAP) that consists of the
information most pertinent to conducting an actual response, such as
contact and equipment lists [§112.20(h)(1)].

Information about the facility’s location, owner, operator, and
qualified individual having full authority to implement removal actions
[§112.20(h)(2)].

Information about emergency response, including: notification
procedures, equipment, personnel, evacuation plans, and duties of the
qualified individual [§112.20(h)(3)].

Evidence of availability of private personnel and equipment necessary to
remove, to the maximum extent practicable, a worst case discharge and to
mitigate or prevent a substantial threat of such a discharge
[§112.20(h)(3)(i) and (ii)].

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

A discussion of specific oil spill scenarios and the steps facility
personnel would follow to mitigate and respond to the spill described in
each scenario [§112.20(h)(5)].

Descriptions of the discharge detection systems, human or automated, in
use at the facility [§112.20(h)(6)].

Information on plan implementation, including: response actions to be
carried out by facility or contracted personnel, disposal plans for
contaminated cleanup materials, and measures to provide adequate
containment and drainage of spilled oil [§112.20(h)(7)].

Information on facility self-inspection, drills/exercises, and response
training, including descriptions of training and drill/exercise programs
and documentation of tank inspections, equipment inspections, training
meetings, training sessions, and drills/exercises [§112.20(h)(8)].

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

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

Response plan cover sheet with certification that submitted information
is true, accurate and complete [§112.20(h)(11)].

EPA has included a model response plan in Appendix F to 40 CFR part 112
that discusses the above required elements in more detail.  The model
response plan was developed with the input of EPA’s On-Scene
Coordinators (OSCs) and others actively engaged in oil spill response
and covers elements judged critical to an effective response. The model
response plan was based on Hazardous Materials Emergency Planning Guides
NRT-1 and NRT-1A and the Handbook of Chemical Hazardous and Analysis
Procedures.  The model plan provides a depiction of the level of detail
and organization for an effective FRP and provides sufficient
flexibility to include certain items that are required by the CWA as
amended by the OPA, the Oil Pollution Prevention regulation, and other
Federal regulations.  As noted, certain facilities may be regulated by
more than one Federal agency (i.e., USCG and EPA).  As discussed in
section 3(a), owners or operators may avoid duplicating the work
required under other regulations by preparing one response plan that
covers the entire facility and includes a cross-reference that
illustrates which sections meet the regulatory requirements of each
agency.

Respondent Activities

As discussed, owners or operators of all facilities subject to the Oil
Pollution Prevention regulation must determine whether their facility
meets the substantial harm criteria by reviewing the flowchart in
Attachment C-I in 40 CFR part 112, Appendix C.  This flowchart helps
guide owners or operators of facilities to complete the substantial harm
certification form, Attachment C-II, provided in Appendix C to 40 CFR
part 112.  For facilities that are not required to prepare an FRP, this
form is required to be maintained in the SPCC plan.

Owners or operators of facilities that do meet the substantial harm
criteria must complete Attachment C-II and then prepare and submit a
response plan, which involves the following steps:

Understanding the rule by reading and interpreting the rule, as well as
reviewing available guidance on preparing response plans;

Collecting the required information to complete the required elements,
including: calculating a volume of the worst case discharge and a
planning distance for discharged oil downstream of the facility;
completing a hazard evaluation and vulnerability analysis; developing
spill scenarios: consulting the applicable area contingency plan; and
ensuring the capability to respond to a worst case discharge;

Completing the response plan in a format consistent with the model plan
included in Appendix F of 40 CFR part 112 to complete the response plan;

Submitting the response plan to EPA and correcting any identified plan
deficiencies;

Implementing the response plan, including a personnel training and
drill/exercise program per the response plan;

Reviewing and updating the response plan periodically; and

Maintaining the required records for five years.

In preparing an FRP, facility personnel must gather background
information such as the location, quantities, and types of oil stored
and a geographic description of the site (maps, schematic diagrams, and
latitude and longitude).  Much of this information should already exist
in the facility’s SPCC Plan.  Such information will be used in the
development of oil discharge hazard assessments and response strategies.
 The FRP must include a discussion of oil discharge detection and
notification procedures at the facility as well as a list of
facility-owned response equipment.  The facility owner/operator is
required by OPA and the FRP regulation to designate a qualified
individual (QI) who will have full authority to implement response
actions and commit company resources to respond to a worst case
discharge of oil; QI contact information must be provided in the FRP. 
Roles and responsibilities of other members of the response team (both
facility responders and outside parties) must also be clearly
established.  A facility owner or operator typically enters into an
arrangement with an outside response contractor or multiple contractors
to meet the required response resource requirements outlined in 40 CFR
part 112, Appendix E. Each contractor’s role during a spill response
must be clearly defined.

As discussed, the facility owner or operator must perform a hazard
evaluation, which involves identifying potential hazards based on
facility-specific information, and must determine the vulnerability of
fish and wildlife and sensitive environments (as defined in 40 CFR part
112.2) and public drinking water intakes as well as surrounding
residential and business/medical areas plus transportation routes given
the hazards, and assessing the risk of an oil discharge.  The results of
the hazard evaluation and vulnerability analysis will then be used to
inform the response actions to the identified oil discharge scenarios
(small, medium and worst case discharge scenarios).  For the worst case
scenario, the facility owner or operator is required to calculate the
volume of a worst case discharge in accordance with 40 CFR part 112,
Appendix D and identify the means to implement an effective response to
this discharge planning level as well as the small and medium discharge
planning levels per 40 CFR part 112, Appendix E.  All aspects of the
planned response must be included in the FRP, including containment,
countermeasures, and mitigation procedures for the identified incidents,
and provisions for proper cleanup and disposal of contaminated material.
 The FRP is typically a written document sent to EPA and also kept at
the facility.  Once a plan is developed, it must be exercised on a
regular basis through a facility program of self-inspections, drills or
exercises, and personnel training that follows PREP or an equivalent
approved by EPA [see 40 CFR part 112.21(c)].

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

Agency Activities

Agency activities related to review of submitted FRPs are as follows:

Log submitted response plans into a national tracking database, send
postcards, emails or letters acknowledging receipt, and store the plans
at Regional offices.

Review the FRPs to identify any deficiencies and to determine whether
the facility warrants a “substantial harm” or a “significant and
substantial harm” designation.  Notify owner/operators of significant
and substantial harm facilities of this determination.

Review all submitted response plans and provide a list of deficiencies
to those facility owners and operators whose plans do not meet the
regulatory requirements.

Approve response plans for significant and substantial harm facilities
and notify facilities of plan approval.  Periodically review response
plans for these facilities.

Inspect or exercise these facilities periodically to verify compliance. 
The exercise is unannounced and designed to evaluate the planholder’s
ability to respond to a small discharge scenario identified in the
response plan.  Bring non-compliant facilities into compliance.

Collection Methodology and Management

As noted, the primary beneficiaries of the FRP’s are the facility
owners or operators.  EPA estimates that representatives from 99.5
percent of SPCC-regulated facilities have determined that their facility
“could not reasonably be expected to cause substantial harm” based
on the criteria outlined in the flowchart in Attachment C-I of 40 CFR
part 112.  Consequently, the owners or operators of these facilities do
not need to prepare and submit response plans.  On average, the owners
or operators of an estimated 18,500 newly SPCC-regulated facilities will
be required to perform the initial screening process using the
above-referenced flowchart each year. Of these newly regulated SPCC
facilities, approximately 49 (or approximately 0.3 percent of 18,500)
facilities are expected to meet the substantial harm criteria and be
required to prepare and submit an FRP.

FRPs, submitted by the owners or operators who determined that their
facilities meet the substantial harm criteria, are sent to the
appropriate EPA Regional office for Agency review.  A copy of the FRP is
kept at the facility to be used in the event of an oil spill response or
drill.  

All submitted FRPs are reviewed by the EPA Regional office.  FRPs for
facilities that meet the significant and substantial harm criteria must
be approved by the EPA Regional office.  The response plan review and
approval process is directed by EPA’s RAs based on national criteria
and local conditions and considerations.  EPA regional offices notify
each owner or operator directly of the status of the facility’s
response plan (i.e., approved or deficient).  For deficient response
plans (both substantial harm plans and significant and substantial harm
plans), a list of the deficiencies is sent to the facility to be
addressed.  The status of all FRPs (compliant for substantial harm plans
or approved for significant and substantial harm plans) is tracked by
each EPA Regional office.

Small Entity Flexibility

Based on the Regulatory Flexibility Analysis presented in the Regulatory
Impact Analysis to the 1994 FRP rulemaking, small facilities generally
do not meet the substantial harm criteria and, therefore, generally are
not required to prepare and submit response plans, except at the
discretion of the RA [see 40 CFR part 112.20(b)(1)].

Collection Schedule

The FRP regulation currently does not require a specific collection
schedule. Preparation and submission of FRPs by owners or operators of
facilities that have the potential to cause substantial harm is a
one-time event. However, facility owners or operators are required to
review and update their FRPs periodically to reflect changes at the
facility.  Certain facility changes that materially affect the response
to a worst case discharge require revisions to the response plan and
resubmittal of the affected sections to EPA for review and incorporation
into the FRPs on file with the Agency.  The Agency reviews all plans and
plan revisions when they are submitted and periodically reviews plans
for significant and substantial harm facilities.

ESTIMATING THE BURDEN AND COST OF THE COLLECTION

Respondent Burden

This section presents estimates of the burden respondents incur when
they undertake the information collection activities contained in the
FRP rule. The burden to regulated facilities is estimated in terms of
the time (in hours) spent by facility personnel to review the FRP
regulation and complete a certification form or to prepare an FRP and
maintain the plan on an annual basis. Data from EPA regional offices
were used to determine the number of facilities that are currently
subject to the FRP requirements as well as estimates for facilities that
are expected to meet the substantial harm screening criteria over the
three-year ICR period. 

As section 3(c) explains, the current ICR, which expires on October 31,
2014 estimates the time it takes owners or operators of facilities to
complete the compliance activities based on consultations with facility
engineers familiar with Oil Pollution Prevention program, and EPA
Regional staff involved in the implementation of the program. 
Interviews conducted to support the ICR approved in 2011 revealed that
burden estimates were comparable (within the same order of magnitude) as
estimated in the prior renewal in 2008.  Consultations conducted in 2011
did not reveal any significant sources of new burden not captured in
prior ICR renewal requests (such as unaccounted for recordkeeping costs
or other time-consuming tasks associated with FRP regulatory
compliance).  EPA recognizes that the information from interviews with a
limited number of individuals is not statistically representative of the
burden experienced by all FRP facilities.  Nevertheless, the results of
the consultations conducted in 2007 and in 2011 suggest that EPA’s
burden estimates appear to adequately capture industry practices. 
Therefore, this renewal ICR does not change the hour or capital cost
burden estimates used in the prior ICR renewal request.

Classification of Respondent Facilities Subject to the Information
Collection

FRP-regulated facilities are a subset of the SPCC facility universe.  As
required by the FRP rule, owners or operators of facilities that are not
subject to the rule are required to complete and maintain the Attachment
C-II form in Appendix C.  Owners or operators that are subject to the
rule are required to prepare and submit  FRPs to EPA and maintain these
plans  The regulatory criteria for a facility to be  considered a
substantial harm facility and thus subject to the rule were discussed in
Section 2(a). Because the costs of compliance activities associated with
FRPs depend largely on the physical and operating characteristics of the
facility, the 2011 FRP renewal ICR supporting statement included burden
and cost estimates based on a representative facility approach that
classifies facilities by size (storage capacity in gallons) and facility
type.  This ICR renewal supporting statement follows the same approach. 
Three FRP facility size categories were defined as follows:

Facilities having total storage capacity greater than 1,320 gallons, but
less than 42,000 gallons.

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

Facilities having total storage capacity equal to or greater than one
million gallons.

Because FRP regulations apply only to facilities with an oil storage
capacity of 42,000 gallons or greater and transfer oil over water to or
from vessels or to facilities with a storage capacity of one million
gallons or greater, or, the FRP burden analysis of preparing, submitting
and maintaining FRPs only considers facilities in the second and third
facility categories.

The FRP facility type categories were based on how oil is used at the
facility.  Facilities were classified as using oil in one of three ways:

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

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

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

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

For purposes of this burden analysis, the universe of regulated
facilities is also divided into existing and new facilities, to reflect
the differences in compliance activities among these two groups. 
Existing FRP-regulated facilities include facilities that initiated
operations prior to this ICR renewal request.  This analysis focuses on
existing facilities for which owners or operators have prepared FRPs and
are assumed to have incurred burden and costs associated with the
initially preparing and submitting their FRPs, but are expected to incur
annual maintenance burden and costs including occasional major
revisions.  New FRP facilities include those facilities that will
initiate operations during the ICR approval period or prepare an FRP for
the first time.  New facility owners or operators are required to review
the FRP rule, make a determination, and complete the Attachment C-II
certification only or prepare and submit an FRP.  New facility owners or
operators required to prepare FRPs will incur first-year burden for plan
preparation and submission as well as subsequent-year burden for
maintaining FRPs. 

Based on EPA’s internal oil database that includes  information
provided by all  of EPA’s ten regional offices, the current  inventory
of FRP-subject facilities that have submitted and are currently
maintaining an FRP as of May 2014 is approximately 4,470 facilities
nationally, inclusive of governmental facilities.  Information available
about individual planholders shows that 81 FRP facilities were owned and
operated by the federal government (e.g., military installations). 
These federal facilities are excluded from the burden estimate analysis,
given that they are not considered “persons” under the Paperwork
Reduction Act.  Since the last ICR renewal, the anticipated FRP universe
based on the annual growth rates was estimated to be 4,454
non-governmental facilities by the end of 2012, based on the prior ICR
renewal supporting statement.  Consequently, the prior burden analysis
projected that 4,454 existing non-governmental facilities would be
maintaining an FRP by the end of 2012.  To derive this estimate, EPA
projected that between 2010 and 2012, approximately 307 new facilities
would become subject to FRP requirements over the three-year period, or
approximately 102 new facilities each year.  This estimate was based on
annual industry-specific growth rates used to project the number of new
SPCC facilities.  These 102 new FRP facilities represent approximately
0.5 percent of new facilities subject to the SPCC regulation annually. 
The remaining 99.5 percent of the estimated number of new SPCC
facilities (18,444 facilities) would only complete a certification form
(Attachment C-II in Appendix C of 40 CFR part 112), because they do not
meet the substantial harm criteria.  Based on the latest update to the
FRP plan holder universe dated May 2014, there are approximately 4,470
active FRP facilities, and by removing the 81 governmental FRP
facilities, a non-governmental FRP universe of 4,389 plan holders is
estimated as of May 2014; this estimate is below the projected growth
range estimated up to December 2012 by 65 facilities.  Based on this
result, the universe of FRP facilities is not anticipated to change
substantively for the next ICR renewal period, so EPA is retaining the
estimate of 4,454 facilities, which could account for modest growth in
the universe estimate by the end of 2016.  Thus, the burden estimates
for this ICR renewal have not been substantially adjusted.

The burden analysis for this ICR renewal uses 4,389 planholders as the
number of existing non-governmental facilities that are maintaining an
FRP as of May 2014.  This number represents less than one percent of the
estimate of facilities regulated under the SPCC rule (596,186
facilities).  Using annual industry-specific growth rates, EPA estimates
that approximately 18,496 new SPCC facilities per year are not subject
to FRP requirements and will complete the Attachment C-II certification
form indicating that they are not substantial harm facilities, EPA
estimates the total number of respondents (as a three-year average) to
be 22,966, of which 4,470 (4,421 plus 49 from Exhibit 15) facilities are
FRP-regulated and 18,496 facilities are not subject to FRP requirements.
 The Agency identified state and local government owned entities based
on the facility description available for individual FRP holders.  As a
result, EPA estimates approximately 22,901 private and 65 state/local
respondents.

Exhibit 2 provides estimates of the number of existing and new
facilities subject to FRP requirements over the three-year period
covered by the ICR.  Exhibit 3 presents the distribution of regulated
facilities by category.  The number of facilities in each
cross-tabulated category reflects the estimated total number of existing
facilities, apportioned to each category based on assumptions used in
prior ICRs regarding the proportions of facilities within each industry
sector and size category within the overall universe of facilities as
well as facility-level data as of May 2014 in  EPA’s internal oil
database.  

EXHIBIT 2

Estimate of Existing and New Facilities Subject 

to the FRP Rule1

Facility Type/ Year	FRP Facilities

Year 1 (2014)

Existing Facilities	4,389

New Facilities2	48 

Year 2 (2015)

Existing Facilities	4,437 

New Facilities2	49 

Year 3 (2016)

Existing Facilities	4,486

New Facilities2	49 

1 Numbers exclude 81 facilities owned and operated by the Federal
government.

2 The number of new facilities subject to the FRP regulations includes
facilities that have initiated operations over the period covered by the
renewal supporting statement. 

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

EXHIBIT 3

Number of Facilities By Category Subject to the FRP Requirements by the
end of 2014

MODEL FACILITY CATEGORY	FACILITY SIZE	TOTAL2

	SMALL1	MEDIUM	LARGE

	Storage/Consumption	0	               140 	            1,549 	       
1,689 

Storage/Distribution	0	               336 	            2,044 	      
2,380 

Production	0	351 	                17 	368 

TOTAL	0	              827 	           3,610 	       4,437 

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

2 The total includes facilities existing at the start of 2014 and
facilities that become FRP-regulated over the course of the year (4,389
+ 48 = 4,437 end of year total as presented in Exhibit 2)

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

Estimated Annual Burden per Respondent

The owners or operators of all SPCC-regulated facilities must determine
whether they are subject to FRP requirements based on the substantial
harm flowchart presented in Attachment C-I in Appendix C to 40 CFR part
112.  EPA assumes that the owners or operators of all existing
SPCC-regulated facilities have completed the screening and that only new
facilities will need to review the substantial harm flowchart and
completed the certification form, Attachment C-II in Appendix C.  Owners
or operators at facilities that meet the substantial harm criteria will
need to prepare and submit FRPs.  Facility owners or operators that
already have prepared an FRP will be required to maintain their plans.

The total burden of the information collection on the regulated
community is determined by combining average per-facility (“unit”)
burden estimated for each facility category with the total number of
affected facilities in that category.  Unit burdens are based on
estimates of the labor required to adequately perform the necessary
activities.  Unit burden estimates include facility personnel in the
following labor categories:  management, technical, clerical, foreman,
and laborer.

As discussed previously, EPA assumes that the owners or operators of all
new SPCC-regulated facilities will only review the substantial harm
flowchart to determine and certify that they are not subject to the
requirements of the FRP rule.  Unit burden estimates for these new
facilities not subject to the FRP regulation are presented in Exhibit 4
for small, medium, and large facilities.  Owners or operators of
SPCC-regulated facilities that are not required to prepare a response
plan will have a minimal rule familiarization burden since the
information considered in the flowchart is readily available in the
facility’s SPCC Plan.  Owners or operators of facilities that fall
below the two total oil storage capacity substantial harm thresholds
(i.e., below 42,000 gallons, or  below 1 million gallons) will need only
to review the flowchart and prepare a certification form, requiring, on
average, an estimated 15 minutes of management time.  The certification
form will be retained at the facility with the SPCC Plan. Owners or
operators of larger facilities that have an aggregate oil storage
capacity of 42,000 gallons or more and transfer oil over water to and
from a vessel or an aggregate oil storage capacity of one million
gallons or more in oil storage capacity will have to examine the
substantial harm factors in greater detail to make the determination of
whether they need to prepare an FRP; this determination is estimated to
require 1.5 and 6.5 hours, respectively. 

For new FRP-subject facilities, unit burden and cost estimates for
preparing FRPs are based on a model-facility approach. The response plan
requirements include both a first-year burden to prepare the plan and a
smaller, subsequent-year burden to maintain the plan.  Response plans
must ensure that facility owners or operators have the equipment,
personnel, information, and procedures needed to respond to a worst-case
oil discharge as well as small and medium oil discharges.  Compliance
activities to prepare the FRP consist of personnel time to collect and
organize information about the facility and its operations; develop
scenarios and response strategies; and implement the measures described
in the plan. In subsequent years for plan maintenance, owners or
operators of facilities may need update the response plan to reflect
changes at the facility and are required to keep logs of response
training and exercises and records of inspections of secondary
containment, containers, and facility-owned response equipment.  EPA
assumes that the owners or operators of existing facilities currently
subject to FRP rule requirements have already developed FRPs (i.e., they
have already incurred the initial burden of plan preparation) and are
now maintaining those plans, since the majority of facilities were in
existence prior to August 30, 1994 (effective date of the FRP rule) or
July 31, 2000 for facilities storing, processing, or transferring animal
fats and/or vegetable oils.

EPA estimates that owners and operators of 4,389 existing facilities
will be required to maintain FRPs as of the start of 2014 (see Exhibit
2).  EPA estimates that owners or operators of an additional 146
facilities will be required to develop and maintain plans over a
three-year period ending December 2016.  Unit burden and cost estimates
for plan development and maintenance (unadjusted for overlap with other
Federal and State requirements) are shown in Exhibits 5 and 6 for new
and existing facilities, respectively. 

The first-year burdens of a new substantial harm facility for rule
familiarization and preparation of an FRP are shown in Exhibit 5 for
facilities in each of the six model facility categories. EPA estimates
that a consumption, distribution, or production facility with between
42,000 gallons and less than one million gallons in oil storage capacity
(and which transfers oil over water to and from vessels) will need 165,
181, or 145 hours of labor (including facility and contractor labor),
respectively, to prepare an FRP.  EPA assumes that response planning for
a consumption or distribution facility with one million gallons or more
in total oil storage capacity (and that meets one or more of the
substantial harm factors) will require 341, 384, or 304 hours,
respectively.  EPA did not estimate the preparation burden associated
with large production facilities, as we do not anticipate a substantive
change in the new large production facility universe.  Instead, this
analysis assumes that any new large production facility owners or
operators required to prepare an FRP for the first time would be
included in the burden estimates of new consumption and distribution
facilities, based on a review of recent oil production facility trends.

The subsequent-year burdens for existing substantial harm facilities for
plan maintenance are shown in Exhibit 6 for each of the five model
facility categories (medium and large consumption and distribution
facilities; medium production facilities). EPA estimates that
consumption, distribution, or production facility with between 42,000
gallons and less than one million gallons in oil storage capacity will
need 54, 55, or 54 hours of labor, respectively, to maintain an FRP. 
EPA assumes that response planning for a consumption or distribution
facility with one million gallons or more in oil storage capacity will
require 154, 171, or 154 hours, respectively. These labor-hour estimates
include facility and contractor labor hours. 

	EXHIBIT 4

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

Size Category of Facility	Hours Required to Read Rule, Make
Determination, and Complete Certification	Unit Cost

	Number of Facilities	Total Burden (hours)	Total Cost

	Management	Technical	Clerical	Total

Year 1	Year 2	Year 3	3-Year Total

Small	0.25	0	0	0.25	$17 	13,485 	16,015 	19,593 	49,093 	12,273 
$801,410 

Medium	1	0	0.5	1.5	$80 	1,703	2,022 	2,474 	6,199 	9,298 	$471,442 

Large	2	4	0.5	6.5	$361 	42 	58 	82	182 	1,185	$60,873 

TOTAL

15,230 	18,095 	22,149	55,474 	22,756 	$1,333,725

Note:  Annualized total burden of 22,756 hours = 7,586 hours (for
Exhibit 15)

EXHIBIT 5

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

Size	Model Facility Category	Unit Burden (hours)	Facility Labor Cost	O&M
Costs	Capital Cost	Total Unit Cost	Number of Facilities	Total Burden
(hours)	Total O&M Costs	Total Capital Cost	Total Cost

	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3

Medium	Consumption	165	$7,569	$0 	$245 	$7,814	3 	3 	3 	1,4871 	$0.00 
$2,205 	$70,324

	Distribution	181	$8,417 	$0 	$250 	$8,667	10 	10 	10 	5,423	$0.00 
$7,500 	$260,004

	Production	145	$6,593 	$0 	$240 	$6,833 	1 	1 	1 	436 	$0.00 	$720
$20,498

Large	Consumption	341	$14,848	$0 	$452 	$15,300	19 	20 	20 	20,119 
$0.00 	$26,668 	$902,671 

	Distribution2	384	$17,010 	$0 	$463 	$17,473	14 	14 	14 	16,128 	$0.00 
$19,446 	$733,865 

	Production2	304	$13,048	$0 	$443 	$13,491 	1 	1 	1 	794 	$0.00 	$1,158 
$35,273 

TOTAL	

48	49	49 	 44,387	$0.00   	$57,697 	$2,022,634 

1 Values presented in this table and other tables of this document are
calculated based on the estimated number of facilities and burden hours,
before rounding. Values in the tables, however, show rounded results.
Estimating the total burden using rounded values presented in the table
may not correspond to the total reported.  2 This analysis assumes that
half the number of large production facility owners or operators
required to prepare an FRP for the first time are included in the
estimate of new consumption facilities and will therefore incur the
consumption facility preparation burden. The other half will incur the
distribution facility preparation burden.

	

	EXHIBIT 6

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

Size	Model Facility Category	Unit Burden (hours)	Facility Labor Cost	O&M
Costs	Capital Cost	Total Unit Cost	Number of Facilities	Total Burden
(hours)

	Total O&M Costs	Total Capital Cost	Total Cost

	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3

Medium	Consumption	54	$2,186 	$0 	$0 	$2,186	137 	140 	143 	22,680 
$0.00 	$0.00 	$918,169 

	Distribution	55	$2,234	$0 	$0 	$2,234	326	336 	346 	55,440 	$0.00 
$0.00 	$2,252,100 

	Production	54	$2,186	$0 	$0 	$2,186 	336 	336 	336 	54,432 	$0.00 
$0.00 	$2,203,605 

Large	Consumption	154	$5,781 	$0 	$0 	$5,781 	1,530	1,549 	1,569 
715,729 	$0.00 	$0.00 	$26,869,894 

	Distribution	171	$6,580 	$0 	$0 	$6,580 	2,030 	2,044 	2,058 
1,0448,572 	$0.00 	$0.00 	$40,348,692 

	Production	154	$5,781 	$0 	$0 	$5,781 	16 	17 	18 	7,762 	$0.00 	$0.00 
$291,367 

TOTAL	

4,375 	4,422 	4,470 	1,904,678 	$0.00 	$0.00 	$72,883,827 

Estimating Respondent Costs

Estimating Facility Labor Costs

To determine the per-facility costs for typical new and existing
respondents in each size category, the unit time estimates for
compliance activities are multiplied by the hourly wage rates for the
appropriate categories of labor conducting these activities.  The labor
wage rates for private industry were derived from the May 2013 U.S.
Department of Labor’s Employment Cost Indexes and Levels.  The 2013
wage rates include wages and salaries; benefit costs, including paid
leave, supplemental pay, insurance, retirement and savings, legally
required benefits, severance pay, and supplemental unemployment
benefits.  These wage rates reflect private industry averages, which
were estimated by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) based on a survey
of 35,600 occupations within 8,200 establishments in the private sector.
 These wage rates reflect industry averages, which may under- or
overestimate the actual wages received by some FRP regulated facility
personnel.  EPA further adjusted these rates to reflect overhead costs
of 17 percent. Average wage rates could underestimate the actual wage
rates received by some FRP-regulated facility personnel, but may
overestimate the actual wage rate received by other facility personnel. 
The estimated wage rates used in this analysis are:

Facility Total Compensation Hourly Wage Rates

Management:		$65.36

Technical:		$48.11

Clerical:		$21.52

Foreman: 		$32.71

Laborer: 		$27.26

Multiplying these wage rates by the corresponding unit time estimates
yields the total facility labor unit cost for each facility in each
model category presented in Exhibits 4, 5, and 6.

The BLS data provides generally accepted information on industry base
wage rates and fringe benefits.  Overhead rates can be calculated using
various formulas.  The reasons for using a 17 percent overhead rate are
described in Footnote   NOTEREF _Ref177962434 \h  8 .  EPA has also
evaluated the impact of alternative overhead loading rate assumptions on
the total costs of this ICR.  Specifically, EPA considered
recommendations in an EPA document entitled Estimating Costs for the
Economic Benefits of RCRA Noncompliance (September 1997). This document
suggests that labor overhead and profit can be estimated at 50 to 100
percent of the base salary and fringe benefit costs.  EPA estimated that
raising the overhead rate to 50 percent would increase the wages listed
above by 28 percent.  If a 100-percent overhead rate were used, these
wages would increase by 71 percent.  The 50 percent and 100 percent
alternatives may be high because the rates include profit as well as
overhead.  Nevertheless, EPA reports the impact of these alternative
rates in section 6(d), under the discussion of total respondent costs.

Estimating Costs of Operating and Maintenance (O&M)

In prior ICR renewal requests, EPA assumed that O&M costs were
negligible, as was confirmed by consultations with facility
representatives in prior ICR renewals, which indicated that planholders
incurred no additional cost due to hard copy storage (e.g., in existing
file cabinets) or electronic storage (e.g., on a facility’s computer
network).  This renewal ICR assumes O&M costs continue to be negligible.

Estimating Capital/Startup Costs

 In addition to labor costs, facilities are expected to incur additional
capital costs and direct costs including expenses for telephone calls,
postage, photocopying, and other direct costs for FRP preparation. These
costs are one-time startup costs required to prepare and submit an FRP,
and as such are included with capital costs. Costs vary by model
facility category and are also presented in Exhibits 5 and 6.  The
estimated capital costs to maintain FRPs are negligible. 

Adding O&M costs and capital costs to the labor costs for facility
personnel yields the total annual compliance cost per model facility, as
presented in Exhibits 5 and 6.  As shown in Exhibit 5, preparation of an
FRP for a consumption, distribution, or production facility with an
aggregate oil storage capacity between 42,000 gallons and less than one
million gallons in total oil storage capacity is expected to cost
$7,814, $8,667, or $6,833, respectively. EPA estimates that the total
cost to a consumption/production or distribution/production facility
having an aggregate oil storage capacity of one million gallons or
greater in total oil storage capacity will be $15,300, $17,473, or
$13,491, respectively.  As shown in Exhibit 6, EPA estimates the cost
for maintaining plans at smaller capacity facilities to be $2,186,
$2,234, or $2,186 annually, and for the larger capacity facilities
$5,781, $6,580, or $5,781, annually. 

Estimating Agency Burden and Costs

This section summarizes the estimated burden and cost of the revised ICR
to the Agency.  Burden estimates are based on input from EPA regional
staff involved directly with the implementation of 40 CFR part 112.  EPA
will incur burdens and costs to receive, process, review, and approve
submitted response plans.  The number of response plans for existing
facilities at the end of the last ICR renewal period (2013) is estimated
to be 4,535 (all planholders). Processing submitted FRPs includes
entering information into EPA’s tracking system, filing the plan for
review or for use during an unannounced exercise, and review for
required elements per Appendix F. EPA must also approve plans from
facilities which are deemed as of significant and substantial harm
facilities per 40 CFR part 112.20(f)(3).

Exhibit 7 shows the unit burden and labor cost to EPA for processing
FRPs and for reviewing for approval response plans.  Based on program
experience, processing submitted plans is estimated to consist of
approximately 20 minutes of technical time. A substantial amount of
government resources is required to comprehensively evaluate the
adequacy of each response plan submitted by a facility representative. 
Program staff estimate that reviewing and approving a response plan,
including a site visit when necessary, requires 38 hours of technical
EPA staff time and two hours of management time.

For this revised ICR, Agency labor costs are based on the 2014 General
Schedule (GS) pay schedule.  EPA estimates an average hourly labor cost
(labor plus overhead) of $79.55 for managerial staff (GS-13, Step-5),
and $55.81 for technical staff (GS-11, Step-5).  To derive hourly
estimates, EPA divided annual compensation estimates by 2,080, which is
the number of hours in the Federal work year.  EPA then multiplied
hourly rates by the standard government overhead factor of 1.6. Unit
costs are unit time estimates multiplied by the hourly labor rates for
EPA personnel.  For example, the labor burden to EPA for review and
approval of each FRP is estimated to require one hour of management time
(1 hour x $79.55/hour) and 40 hours of technical time (40 hours x
$55.81/hour = $2,232.40) for a total of 41 hours per plan at a cost of
approximately $2,312 each. 

EXHIBIT 7

Estimated Unit Burden and Cost to EPA (2014)  

ACTIVITY	UNIT BURDEN (hours)	UNIT COST

	Managerial	Technical	Clerical	Total

	Process and Store Submitted Response Plans	0	0.5	0	1.5	$28 

Review and Approve Response Plans	1	40	0	42	$2,312 

Estimating the Respondent Universe and Total Burden and Costs

Estimated Total Annual Burden and Costs for All Respondents

The total burden of the information collection is the combined total
burdens of rule familiarization, completion of the substantial harm
certification form, and development and submittal of the FRP. Total
burden is calculated by multiplying unit burden estimates by the number
of facilities affected.  Total cost is derived in a similar manner. 

The total burden and costs associated with the development of FRPs shown
in Exhibits 5 and 6 must be adjusted to reflect both prior compliance
with similar State regulations, since data collection efforts for
compliance with similar State regulations may be useful in developing an
FRP.  Numerous States have regulations requiring varying degrees of
response planning.  To the extent that these response plan requirements
overlap with EPA’s FRP rule provisions, facility owners or operators
may use the information already prepared for the State in their FRPs. 
Consequently, facility owners or operators that already have prepared
response plans under State regulations may not incur all costs and
burdens estimated in Exhibits 5 and 6. State regulations vary
significantly both in terms of the level of response planning required
and the type of facilities covered. EPA evaluated the extent of
commonality between State response planning requirements and those in
the FRP rule to arrive at an estimated adjustment of 14 percent for
State-related burden overlap.

In addition, certain facility owners or operators may be required to
prepare response plans pursuant to the regulations of more than one
Federal agency as a result of the nature of their facilities.  The
owners or operators of these jointly regulated facilities are likely to
prepare one response plan that fulfills the requirements of all Federal
response planning regulations affecting them.  Certain response planning
activities and sections of the plan will be the same under all
regulations and therefore, the costs associated with these activities
are appropriately considered shared costs and are not attributed to any
single regulation. For purposes of this ICR revision, the total burden
and costs have been adjusted to reflect that only one-half of all shared
costs are attributed to EPA’s FRP rule.

Adjustment to Reflect Overlap with Other Federal Requirements

It is estimated that based on the presence of other Federal
requirements, the following percentages of response planning burdens, by
model facility category, are not attributable to the FRP rule: 

FIRST YEAR

Medium consumption 					0.0%

Medium distribution 					18.4%

Medium production					12.5%

Large consumption/production				0.0%

Large distribution/production				23.4%

SUBSEQUENT YEARS

Medium consumption  					0.0%

Medium distribution 					44.5%

Medium production					24.9%

Large consumption					0.0%

Large distribution					32.6%

The burdens and costs to facility owners or operators that prepare and
maintain FRPs (presented in Exhibits 5 and 6) were adjusted to reflect
State or other Federal requirements to obtain the estimates presented in
Exhibits 8 and 9. Percentage reductions were applied for prior State
compliance and overlapping Federal regulations, as appropriate, for each
model facility category. For example, the total burden to prepare an FRP
for a production facility having between 42,000 gallons and less than
one million gallons (medium category) in total oil storage capacity,
which is 145.25 hours, was adjusted by 24.7 percent [1- (1-0.14)
(1-0.125) where (1-0.14) accounts for the state-related burden overlap
of 14 percent discussed in Section 6(d)(i) and (1-0.125) accounts for
the overlap with other federal requirements as listed above, yielding an
adjusted burden of 109.4 hours]. Adjustment factors for other model
facility categories were similarly calculated using the 14 percent
state-related burden overlap and the estimated burden overlap with other
federal requirement listed above for each facility category. 

The total burden and O&M and capital costs to the entire regulated
community are presented in Exhibit 10. The burdens and costs over three
years are taken from Exhibits 4, 8, and 9. The total adjusted burden on
the regulated community over three years is estimated to be 1,390,257
hours. The total adjusted O&M costs for the three year period is $0 and
the total adjusted capital cost is $95,210 (see Exhibit 10).



EXHIBIT 8

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

Size	Model Facility Category	Adjusted Unit Burden (hours)	Facility Labor
Cost	O&M Costs	Capital Cost	Total Unit Cost	Number of Facilities	Total
Burden (hours)	Total O&M Costs	Total Capital Costs	Total Cost

	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3

Medium	Consumption	142 	$6,509 	$0 	$211 	$6,720 	3 	3 	3 	1,279 	$0 
$1,896	$60,479 

	Distribution	127 	$5,909	$0 	$176 	$6,084	10 	10 	10 	3,807	$0 	$5,265 
$182,522 

	Production	109 	$4,964	$0 	$181 	$5,145 	1 	1 	1 	328	$0 	$542 	$15,435

Large	Consumption2	293 	$12,769 	$0 	$389 	$13,158 	19	20 	20 	17,302 
$0 	$22,934 	$776,297 

	Distribution	253 	$11,210	$0 	$305 	$11,515 	14 	14 	14 	10,628 	$0 
$12,815 	$483,617 

	Production2	220 	$9,438 	$0 	$320 	$9,758 	1 	1 	1 	574 	$0 	$837
$25,513

TOTAL	

48 	49 	49 	35,919

 	$0	$44,290	$1,543,862 

Note:  Annualized total burden of 35,919 hours = 11,306 hours (for
Exhibit 15)

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

2 This analysis assumes that half the number of large production
facility owners or operators required to prepare an FRP for the first
time are included in the estimate of new consumption facilities, and
will therefore incur the consumption facility preparation burden. The
other half will incur the distribution facility preparation burden.

EXHIBIT 9

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

Size	Model Facility Category	AdjustedUnit Burden (hours)	Facility Labor
Cost	O&M Costs	Capital Cost	Total Unit Cost	Number of Facilities	Total
Burden (hours)	Total O&M Costs	Total Capital Costs	Total Cost

	Year 1	Year 2	Year 3

Medium	Consumption	46 	$1,880 	$0 	$0 	$1,880 	137 	140 	143 	19,505	$0 
$0 	$789,625 

	Distribution	26 	$1,066	$0 	$0 	$1,066	326 	336 	346 	26,445	$0 	$0 
$1,074,252 

	Production	35 	$1,412	$0 	$0 	$1412 	336 	336 	336	35,163	$0 	$0 
$1,423,529 

Large	Consumption	132 	$4,972	$0 	$0 	$54,972	1,530 	1,549 	1,569
615,581	$0 	$0 	$23,108,109 

	Distribution	99 	$3,816	$0 	$0 	$3,816	2,030 	2,044 	2,058 	608,172	$0 
$0 	$23,402,241

	Production	108 	$4,065	$0 	$0 	$4,065 	16 	17 	18 	5,458	$0 	$0 
$204,867 

TOTAL	

4,375 	4,422 	4,470 	1,310,323	$0 	$0 	$50,002,623 

Note:  Annualized burden of 1,310,323 hours = 436,774 hours (for Exhibit
15)

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

EXHIBIT 10

Total Burden and Costs Over Three Years

Activity	YEAR 1	YEAR 2	YEAR 3	TOTAL

	Burden (hours)	O&M Cost	Capital Cost	Burden (hours)	O&M Cost	Capital
Cost	Burden (hours)	O&M Cost	Capital Cost	Burden (hours)	O&M Cost
Capital Cost

Certification1	6,271	$0 	$0 	7,505 	$0 	$0 	9,211 	$0 	$0 	22,988	$0 	$0

Preparation	11,054 	$0 	$14,422 	11,432	$0 	$14,934 	11,432 	$0 	$14,934
	33,919	$0 	$44,290 

Maintenance	432,315 	$0 	$0 	436,730	$0 	$0 	441,278 	$0 	$0 	1,310,323 
$0 	$0 

TOTAL	449,641 	$0 	$14,422 	455,667 	$0 	$14,934 	461,921 	$0 	$14,934 
1,367,230 	$0 	$44,290 

1 According to 40 CFR 112(App. C)(3.0), owners or operators of
facilities that do not meet the “substantial harm” criteria must
complete and maintain at the facility the certification form provided in
Appendix C to 40 CFR part 112, Attachment C-II. 

EPA also calculated costs based on alternative overhead loading rates
on wages. Exhibit 11 shows a comparison of the annualized total cost for
the rule using the selected 17 percent overhead loading rate on wages
and costs based on two alternative overhead loading rate assumptions:
50 percent (Alternative 1) and 100 percent (Alternative 2). Alternative
1 yields 28 percent higher total costs, while Alternative 2 increases
total costs by 71 percent. 

EXHIBIT 11

Alternative Total Cost Measures

	Labor	Capital	O&M	Total

17% Overhead	$17,615,937 	$14,763 	$0 	$17,630,700 

50% Overhead	$22,548,399 	$14,763 	$0 	$22,563,162 

100% Overhead	$30,123,252	$14,763 	$0 	$30,138,015 

Estimated Total Annual Burden and Cost to EPA

The total annual burden and cost to EPA are presented in Exhibit 12. 
Total burden and costs are determined by multiplying the unit burden and
cost to EPA for each activity (see Exhibit 7) by the number of plans
processed, reviewed, and approved (shown in the second column in Exhibit
12).  EPA assumes it will receive on average of approximately 49 new
FRPs each year.  EPA estimates that the burden and cost for processing
new FRPs will be approximately 24 hours and $1,354 in labor costs per
year.  EPA also estimates that the burden and cost of reviewing the new
FRPs of substantial harm facilities, as well as reviewing and approving
the new FRPs of significant and substantial harm facilities, will
average approximately 2,014 hours and $113,575 in labor costs per year.

EPA will also incur costs in subsequent years to review and approve
response plans from facilities that undertake a major modification to
their FRP.  For example, EPA estimates that of the 4,389 existing
facilities with FRPs, approximately one-fifth, or about 878 planholders
will amend their FRPs triggering the need for EPA review and approval. 
The annualized burden and cost to review and approve existing response
plans are estimated to be 36,613 hours and $2,051,526 in labor costs. 

Total cost to EPA for processing, reviewing, and approving new and
existing plans are estimated at 115,185 hours and $6,495,304 in labor
costs over three years.  There are no significant capital or O&M costs
to the Agency for this ICR.  The annualized burden and cost to EPA over
three years are 38,395 hours and $2,165,101.

	EXHIBIT 12

	Estimated Total Burdens and Costs to EPA

ACTIVITY	YEAR ONE	YEAR TWO	YEAR THREE	TOTAL

	Number of Plans	Burden (Hours)	Cost	Number of Plans	Burden (Hours)	Cost
Number of Plans	Burden (Hours)	Cost	Burden (Hours)	Cost	Annualized Cost

Process and Store Newly Submitted Response Plans	 48 	24 	 $1,319 	49 	
25 	 $1,367 	 49	 25 	 $1,367 	73 	 $4,063 	 $1,354

Review and Approve New Response Plans	48	1,952 	 $110,085	49 	2,009 	
$113,289 	 49	 2,009 	 $113,289 	 5,970	 $336,663 	 $112,221 

Review and Approve Existing Response Plans	878 	 35,998 	$2,029,947 	
887 	 36,367	$2,050,755 	 897	 36,777 	$2,073,875 	19,142 	$6,154,578 	
$2,051,526 (on 36,381 hrs) 

Total	 N/A 	 37,763 	$2,141,361 	 N/A 	 38,401	$2,165,411 	 N/A 	 38,811
	$2,188,531 	115,185 	$6,495,304 	$2,165,101(on 38,395 hrs) 

Source: EPA regional personnel estimate.  Annualized burden hours is
2,014 hours and annualized costs are $112,221 + 1,354 = $113,575.

Bottom Line Burden and Cost Tables

Exhibit 10 summarizes the total estimated burden hours and cost incurred
by all respondents (existing and new facilities) to comply with the FRP
information collection requirements.  The estimated burden hour and
costs incurred by EPA are summarized in Exhibit 12.  Exhibit 13 below
summarizes the total burden and cost incurred by both respondent
facilities and government.  The average annual burden to respondents is
463,419 hours, there are no annualized O&M costs, and the annualized
capital cost is $31,736.

EXHIBIT 13

Total Burden and Cost Estimates

	Facilities	EPA	Total

	Burden (hours)	Non-Labor Total Cost	Burden (hours)	Total Non-Labor Cost
Burden (hours)	Total Non-Labor Cost

O&M Cost	Capital Cost

Year 1	449,641 	$0.00 	$14422	37,974 	$0.00 	487,615 	$14,422 

Year 2	455,667 	$0.00 	$14,934 	38,401 	$0.00 	494,068 	$14,934

Year 3	461,291 	$0.00 	$14,934	38,811	$0.00 	500,732 	$14,934

Total	1,367,230	$0 	$44,290 	115,185 	$0.00 	1,482,415 	$44,290 

Annualized for respondents	455,743

14,763

Reasons for the Change in Burden

Differences in burden and costs from the previous ICR are attributed to
adjustment changes. Adjustments are caused by updating information
(e.g., number of affected facilities, burden estimates, and labor rates)
in the absence of changes to the FRP regulatory requirements.  Program
changes, burden and cost effects directly associated with revisions to
the FRP rule are not applicable to this renewal ICR.

The prior ICR renewal reflected a change in the number of affected
facilities, due to the availability of more detailed inventory of
planholders. This renewal ICR includes adjustments to the number of
affected facilities, since the number of planholders did not increase at
the projected rate estimated in the last ICR renewal.    The latest
update to inform this ICR renewal was completed in May 2014 and contains
the list of 4,470 active FRP facilities that currently maintain an FRP,
including 4,389facilities not owned and operated by the Federal
government.  Thus, the current FRP universe is lower than the 4,535 FRP
facilities projected for the endo of 2012 for last ICR renewal To
estimate the number of new facilities that will develop an FRP during
the three-year period of 2014 through 2016 of this ICR renewal, EPA
estimated a reduced growth rate for this period. EPA estimates that
approximately 146 new facilities will prepare FRPs during the three-year
period covered by this ICR.

In total, the burden hours presented in the last renewal ICR decreased
relative to the current OMB inventory (see Exhibit 14).  The burden
estimate showed an annualized decrease of 7,676 hours due to adjustments
in the estimated number of affected facilities since the last ICR
approval (October 2011)().    EPA provided a projected growth rate of
affected facilities in the last ICR renewal that resulted in an estimate
of 4,427 non-governmental planholders alongside 81 governmental
planholders for a total FRP planholder universe of 4,535 facilities at
the end of the prior ICR renewal period.  As of May 2014, EPA counted
4,470 total FRP planholders in our national inventory.  As such, EPA
maintained the number of non-governmental planholders for this ICR
renewal period.

EXHIBIT 14

Estimated Annualized Burden and Costs Comparison

	Annualized Burden (hours)	Annualized Capital and O&M Costs 

Prior OMB Burden Inventory	463,419 	$31,736

Change in Burden 	(7,676)	($16,973) 

Current Burden Estimate	455,743 	$14,763 

Burden Statement

The public reporting and recordkeeping burden to all respondents are
presented in Exhibit 15. These burdens include the time required to
review instructions, search existing data sources, gather and maintain
the data needed, estimate the information required and complete and
review the collection of information.  The average public reporting and
recordkeeping burdens to a newly regulated facility where the owners or
operators are not required to prepare FRPs (i.e., facilities where the
owner or operators certify that they do not meet the substantial harm
criteria) are estimated at 0.4 hours per year.  The average annual
reporting and recordkeeping burdens to a newly regulated facility where
the owners or operators are required to prepare FRPs (i.e., first-year
costs for plan development) are estimated at 232.9 hours per year.  The
average annual reporting and recordkeeping burdens to a facility where
the owners or operators maintain FRPs (i.e., subsequent year costs for
annual plan maintenance) are estimated at 98.8 hours. 

Burden means the total time, effort, or financial resources expended by
persons to generate, maintain, retain, or disclose or provide
information to or for a Federal agency.  This includes the time needed
to review instructions; develop, acquire, install, and utilize
technology and systems for the purposes of collecting, validating, and
verifying information, processing and maintaining information, and
disclosing and providing information; adjust the existing ways to comply
with any previously applicable instructions and requirements; train
personnel to be able to respond to a collection of information; search
data sources; complete and review the collection of information; and
transmit or otherwise disclose the information. An agency may not
conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to respond to, a
collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB
control number. The OMB control numbers for EPA's regulations are listed
in 40 CFR part 9 and 48 CFR chapter 15. 

EXHIBIT 15

Recordkeeping and Reporting Burden for Affected Facilities

	Total Average Annual Burden (hours)	Number of Facilities per Year
(Respondents)	Average Annual Burden per Respondent (hours)

Certification1	 7,663 	 18,496 	 0.4 

Preparation	 11,306 	49 	232.9 

Maintenance	 436,774 	 4,421 	98.8 

1 According to 40 CFR 112(App. C)(3.0), owners or operators of
facilities that do not meet the “substantial harm” criteria must
complete and maintain at the facility the certification form provided in
Appendix C to 40 CFR part 112, Attachment C-II.

To receive comments on the Agency's need for this information, the
accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for
minimizing respondent burden, including the use of automated collection
techniques, EPA established a public docket for this ICR under Docket ID
No. EPA-HQ-OPA-2014-0445, which is available for online viewing at
www.regulations.gov, or in person viewing at the Office of Emergency
Management Docket in the EPA Docket Center (EPA/DC), EPA West, Room
B102, 1301 Constitution Ave., NW, Washington, DC. The EPA/DC Public
Reading Room is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday,
excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Reading Room is
202-566-1744, and the telephone number for the Office of Emergency
Management Docket is 202-566-2426.  Use www.regulations.gov to obtain a
copy of the draft collection of information, submit or view public
comments, access the index listing of the contents of the public docket,
and to access those documents in the public docket that are available
electronically.  Once in the system, select “search,” then key in
the docket ID number identified above. 

 See section 6(d) for further details.

 The President has delegated the authority to regulate
non-transportation-related onshore facilities under sections
311(j)(1)(C) and 311(j)(5) of the CWA to EPA. (See Executive Order
(E.O.) 12777, section 2(b)(1), 56 FR 54757 (October 22, 1991),
superseding E.O. 11735, 38 FR 21243.)  By this same E.O., the President
has delegated similar authority over transportation-related onshore
facilities, deepwater ports, and vessels to the U.S. Department of
Transportation (DOT), and authority over other offshore facilities,
including associated pipelines, to the U.S. Department of the Interior
(DOI). A 1994 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) among EPA, DOI, and DOT
has redelegated the responsibility to regulate certain offshore
facilities located in and along the Great Lakes, rivers, coastal
wetlands, and the Gulf Coast barrier islands from DOI to EPA. Coast
Guard vessels and marine transportation-related facility activities have
been moved to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

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

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

 Note that facilities may downsize their oil storage capacity and
effectively “drop-out” of the FRP regulations. EPA does not attempt
to characterize the number of existing facilities that will downsize
over this renewal ICR period. 

 EPA used data obtained from state agencies to estimate the number of
SPCC-regulated oil storage facilities (e.g, manufacturing; retail trade;
construction; wholesale trade; etc) and federal sources such as EIA and
USDA to estimate the number oil production facilities and farms. For
details, see the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the 2006 Final SPCC
Rule, November 2006.

 EPA views this burden estimate, which was used in the 2011 renewal ICR
supporting statement, to be conservative.

 United States Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employer
Costs for Employee Compensation, May 2013.

 Overhead costs were computed separately from BLS data and were assumed
to be an additional 17 percent of the total wage rate, which is composed
of direct wages and salaries and employee benefits, as reported by BLS.

 These estimates include the burden of copying and submitting a plan to
EPA. EPA estimated burden time required to reproduce the Plan and submit
it to EPA at one-half hour of clerical and one-half hour of managerial
time. Source: Regulatory Impact Analysis of proposed revisions to the
Oil Pollution Prevention Regulation (40 CFR Part 112), February 1993. 
Additionally, EPA assumed that an owner/operator of an average medium
size facility spends approximately $50 on compiling, copying, and
postage fees and that the owner/operator of an average large size
facility spends about $100. Source: Facility Response Plans: Information
Collection Request Burden Study. December 2003.

 For previous ICRs, a survey of EPA regional offices was conducted to
estimate the average burden (per plan) required to receive, process,
review, and approve submitted response plans.

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

 The methodologies for determining the extent of overlap with other
Federal regulations as well as the percentage of prior compliance with
State regulations are described in more detail in Chapter 4 of the
Regulatory Impact Analysis supporting the 1994 FRP final rule.

 Actions such as personnel or title changes, phone number or contact
address changes are not considered major modifications and do not
require further EPA review.

 EPA believes this is a conservative estimate of the number of
facilities in a region with a large number of facilities that undergo a
major FRP modification. Some regional EPA personnel have stated that the
owners or operators of as few as 5% of facilities in their region
undertake a major FRP modification annually, while others in regions
with fewer facilities or different types of facilities stated that
approximately half of the FRP revisions over a seven month period could
be considered major.

 PAGE  21 

 PAGE  24 

 PAGE  30 

 PAGE  33 

 PAGE  35 

 PAGE  36 

 PAGE  38