United States                Office of Water                    EPA-820-F-10-005
           Environmental Protection         4303T                         July 2010
           Agency	
           Fact  Sheet
           Proposed Information Collection Request for a

           General Population Survey to Allow the Estimation

           of Benefits for the Clean Water Act Section 316(b)

           Cooling Water Intake Structures Rulemaking

Summary

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is planning to submit a proposed
Information Collection Request (ICR) to the Office of Management and Budget.  This
will be a new collection, and EPA is requesting public comment. EPA is seeking
approval to implement a national stated preference survey instrument to value the
benefits of the proposed regulation of cooling water intake structures (CWIS) at Clean
Water Act (CWA) section 316(b) existing facilities. These facilities include electric
generators and manufacturing facilities that use more than 25 percent of their water
withdraws for cooling purposes. The survey will allow EPA to estimate total benefits for
the proposed regulatory options and fulfill Executive Order 12866 which requires the
estimation of the potential benefits and costs to society of the rulemaking.

Background on CWA Section 316(b)

The withdrawal of cooling water harms billions of aquatic organisms each year,
including fish, shellfish, and marine mammals. Most damage is done to early life stages
offish and shellfish. Technology-based standards for intakes respond to the C WA
mandate to minimize environmental impacts. Impacts are defined as impingement
(where aquatic organisms are pinned against screens or other parts of a CWIS) and
entrainment (when  organisms are killed or injured as they are drawn through cooling
water systems). EPA is currently developing section 316(b) regulations for CWISs at
existing facilities.

Regulations for existing facilities under section 316(b) were previously promulgated in
both 2004 and 2006.  Litigation followed both of these actions, and now EPA is looking
to combine and re-promulgate rules for all existing CWIS facilities.

As part of the litigation process from the previous 316(b) rules the U.S. Supreme Court,
in 2009, held that the Agency may consider cost-benefit analysis in choosing among
regulatory options,  but did not hold that the Agency must consider it.

EPA is required by  Executive Order 12866 to estimate the social costs and benefits of
this rule.

Proposed Stated Preference Survey

This stated preference survey will utilize the conjoint (or choice experiment) framework.

-------
The target population for this stated preference survey is all individuals from continental
U.S.  households who are 18 years of age or older.  The population of households will
be stratified by the geographic boundaries of five study regions: California, Great Lakes,
Inland, Northeast, and Southeast.  Survey participants will be recruited through random
digit  dialing and asked to complete a voluntary questionnaire.  EPA's intention is to
obtain 2,000 completed household surveys.

Data from the stated preference survey will be used to estimate values (willingness to
pay) derived by households from changes related to the reduction of fish losses at
CWIS.  EPA has designed the survey to provide data to support the following specific
objectives:
   • the estimation of the total values that individuals place on preventing losses offish
      and other aquatic organisms caused by 316(b) facilities;
   • to understand how much individuals value preventing fish losses, increasing fish
      populations, and increasing commercial and recreational catch rates;
   • to understand how such values depend on the current baseline level offish
      populations and fish losses, the scope of the change in those measures, and the
      certainty level of the predictions; and
   • to understand how such values vary with respect to individuals' economic and
      demographic characteristics.

Data analysis and interpretation is grounded in a  standard random utility model and will
be statistically estimated using either a fixed or random effects mixed logit framework.

Additional Information

For further information about this ICR, please write to:

Mr. Erik Helm
U.S.  Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Water (4303T)
Engineering and Analysis Division
1200 Pennsylvania Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20460
E-mail: helm.erik(S)epa.qov You can view or download the complete text of the Federal
Register notice, the survey instrument, and the ICR Support Statement on the Internet
at: http://www.epa.qov/waterscience/316b.

-------