Estimating the Social Benefits of 316(b) Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures under the NPDES Permit Program

Focus Groups As Used By EPA For Economics Projects

Draft Survey Instrument 316b FG ICR

Estimating the Social Benefits of 316(b) Requirements for Cooling Water Intake Structures under the NPDES Permit Program

OMB: 2090-0028

⚠️ Notice: This form may be outdated. More recent filings and information on OMB 2090-0028 can be found here:

Document [pdf]

Download: pdf | pdf

Fish and Aquatic Habitat
A Survey of Northeast Residents
(CT, DE, MA, MD, ME, NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT)

DRAFT FOR PRETESTING ONLY
Do not quote or cite
Thank you for helping us to test and develop this important survey!

HUMAN ACTIVITIES, AQUATIC HABITAT
AND FISH
This survey asks for your opinions regarding policies that would affect fish and habitat
in the Northeast US. This section provides important background information.

Northeast fresh and salt waters support billions of fish. These include fish that are used
by humans, as well as forage fish that are not used by humans. Natural factors such
as weather have always influenced fish habitat, but in recent years human activities
have had an increasing effect.

Activities that affect fish include fishing,
pollution, commercial and residential
development, and the extraction of cooling
water at industrial facilities.

Declines in fish can affect the condition of
ecological systems, food webs, and related
human uses such as fishing.

This survey concerns proposed policies that would reduce fish losses caused by
cooling water use by industrial facilities, including factories and power plants.

HOW DOES COOLING WATER
AFFECT FISH?
The water that industrial facilities use to cool equipment is pumped from bays, rivers,
and lakes. The largest amount is used by power plants that produce electricity.

The equipment that pumps the cooling
water kills small fish and fish eggs.

Large fish may be injured or killed
against screens or filters.

Pumping warm water back into the
environment (called thermal discharge)
also affects ecological systems.
How Cooling Water Use Affects Fish

Cooling water use affects fresh and salt waters
throughout the Northeast US, but almost all fish
losses are in salt waters such as coastal bays.

WHAT KINDS OF FISH ARE AFFECTED?

Cooling water use is not the largest cause of fish loss in most areas (fishing causes
greater losses), but has affected some fish stocks.

About 1/3 of the fish lost are species caught by commercial and recreational
fishermen. Examples include striped bass, flounder, and cod.

The other 2/3 of the fish lost are species not caught by humans but are part of
the food web. Examples include killifish, silverside, and stickleback.

Question 1. When thinking about how industrial facilities use cooling water, please
rate the importance of the following to you. Check one box for each.
Not
Important

Somewhat
Important

Very
Important

1. Preventing the loss of fish that
are caught by humans

2. Preventing the loss of fish that
are not caught by humans

3. Maintaining the ecological health
of rivers, lakes and bays

4. Allowing facilities to produce
products and services at low cost

5. Reducing government
regulations on facilities

HOW MANY FISH ARE AFFECTED?
A NORTHEAST COASTAL EXAMPLE
SCIENTISTS KNOW THAT about 1.1 billion young fish are lost per year in Northeast
coastal waters due to cooling water use. But, scientists do not know the total number
of fish in Northeast coastal waters.
Studies of specific fish can provide some information on how many fish are lost,
compared to the total number of fish in the water.
• Sometimes the number of young fish lost is relatively small compared to the
total number of adult fish—an example is striped bass (see graph below).
• Sometimes the number of young fish lost is relatively large compared to the total
number of adult fish—an example is winter flounder (see graph below).
• For many types of fish, the number of young fish lost compared to the total
number of adult fish lies somewhere in between these extremes.

• Even though scientists can predict approximately the number of fish that will be
saved, the ultimate effects on fish populations (the number of fish in the water)
is uncertain.
25,000,000
20,000,000

Total Number of
Adult Striped
Bass
24 million

15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000

Young Fish Lost in
Cooling Water
Intakes
<0.2 million

Total Number of
Adult Winter
Flounder
18 million
Young Fish Lost in
Cooling Water
Intakes
7.5 million

0
Striped Bass

Winter Flounder

NEW REGULATIONS ARE BEING
PROPOSED TO PROTECT FISH

Under current regulations, about 1.1 billion
fish are lost in coastal waters.
The government is considering policies that
would require additional measures to protect
fish.

One policy would require advanced filters
that block fish from entering cooling water
facilities. Requiring advanced filters could
reduce fish losses about 25%.

Current Situation

1.1 Billion Fish Lost

With Advanced Filters
0.3 Billion Fish
Saved per Year

0.8 Billion Fish Lost

Another possibility is closed cycle cooling
that substantially reduces the need for
outside cooling water. Requiring closed
cycle cooling could reduce fish losses by
95%. However, costs are higher than for
advanced filters.

With Closed Cycle Cooling
>1.0 Billion Fish
Saved per Year

<0.1 Billion Fish Lost

Advanced filters and closed cycle cooling are already in use at many facilities and are
proven technologies. There are options being considered by the government that
would require these types of equipment at all facilities.
While these policies would reduce fish losses, they would also increase the
costs of producing many goods and services — these costs would be passed on
to consumers like you.

WOULD YOU VOTE FOR POLICIES TO
HELP PROTECT FISH AND FISH HABITAT?
The government needs to know whether households are willing to pay the costs
required to reduce fish losses and related ecological effects. This survey will help the
government decide which policies will be enacted, if any.

Question 2. Indicate the importance of the following issues to you. Check one box for
each.
Not
Important

1. Improving public safety
2. Protecting air quality
3. Reducing taxes
4. Improving homeland security
5. Protecting aquatic life and habitat
6. Maintaining industry and jobs
7. Reduce cost of living to
households
8. Protecting water quality

Somewhat
Important

Very
Important

THIS SURVEY IS SIMILAR TO A
PUBLIC VOTE
This survey asks you to compare policies with different effects on cooling water use,
fish, and costs to your household. You will be asked to vote for the options you prefer.
Effects of each project will be described using the following scores:

Effect of
Policy

Fish Saved
(per Year)

Commercial Fish
Sustainability
(Fish Used by People)

Fish Population
(All Fish)

Condition of
Aquatic
Ecosystems

$
Cost per Year

What It Means
The reduction in the number of fish lost: 0 to 100 score showing the
reduction in young fish losses because of the new policy. A score of 100
means that no fish are lost in cooling water intakes (all fish are saved). A
score of 0 represents the status quo.

A score between 0 - 100 that shows effects on the sustainability of
commercial fish. Higher scores mean that fishing is more sustainable
compared to fish population (see details on following pages). The current
score in the Northeast US is 65.

A score between 0 - 100 that shows the size of all fish populations
compared to the natural abundance without human influence. Higher
scores mean more fish (see details on following pages). The current score
in Northeast coastal waters is 37.
The effect on coastal ecosystems and food webs: 0 to 100 score
showing the ecological condition of affected areas, compared to the most
natural waters in the Northeast. Higher scores mean that the area is more
natural (see details on following pages). The current score in Northeast
coastal waters is 48.
How much the project will cost your household, in unavoidable price
increases for products you buy.

TWO SCORES SHOW EFFECTS ON FISH
1. Commercial Fish Sustainability Score

A score between 0 - 100 that shows effects on the sustainability of commercial fish.
Higher scores mean that the ecosystem can maintain current fishing levels without
compromising the ability of future generations to fish commercially.
A score of 100 means that scientists are fairly certain that all fish stocks are used
sustainably (e.g., fishing is within biological limits).
The lowest score anywhere in the US is approximately 25. A score this low means that
ecosystems can not maintain fish populations for half of all species, and that scientists
do not have reliable information on 4 out of every 10 species.
The current score in Northeast US waters is 651 — commercial fish sustainability is at
65% of maximum.

2. Fish Population Score

A score between 0 - 100 that shows the size of all fish populations compared to
population sizes without human influence. Higher scores mean more fish.
A score of 100 means that populations are at the largest natural size possible in the
ecosystem. This is the number of fish that existed before humans started fishing.
A score of 0 would mean that there are no fish at all.
The current score in Northeast US waters is 37 — current fish populations are at 37%
of the size they would be without human influence.

Technical Note: The scientific name for this score is the Fish Stock Sustainability Index (FSSI), calculated by the
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Three components combine to make the overall score: (1) the
size of commercial fish populations compared to the most productive biological size; (2) how many fish are caught
compared to sustainable levels; (3) whether scientists have good information regarding fish populations.

THE AQUATIC ECOSYSTEMS SCORE
The Aquatic Ecosystems Score is a 0 - 100 score showing the effects of
policies on the overall ecological condition of affected areas.
It measures how close affected Northeast waters are to the most natural, undisturbed
condition that is possible. Higher scores mean the area is more natural.

The following information is combined to make the final score:

Measurements Combined
to Form the Aquatic
Ecosystems Score

What Each Measure Means

Water Quality Score

The score indicates whether the water is suitable for
recreation and aquatic life. It is based on measures such as
dissolved oxygen, nitrogen and phosphorus pollution, water
clarity, temperature and algae.

Benthic Score (bay, river
or lake bottom)

The health of species that live on the bottom (e.g.,
mussels, crayfish). Measures such things as the number of
all species and presence of rare species.

Sediment Quality Score

Based on the survival of bottom dwellers, level of sediment
pollution and excessive organic material on the bottom.
Sediment quality will not be affected by the proposed
programs.

Coastal Habitat Score

Based on average historical changes of wetland areas
compared to changes in recent years. Wetland areas will
not be affected by the proposed programs.

Fish Tissue
Contamination

Contaminants measured in fish tissue are indicators of
contaminants present in surface waters. Fish tissue
contamination will not be affected by the proposed
programs.

HOW WOULD YOU RATE THE
IMPORTANCE OF THESE EFFECTS?
Question 3. When considering policies that affect how coastal facilities use cooling
water, how important to you are effects on each of the following scores? Check one
box for each. (For reminders of what the scores mean, please see page 8).
Not
Important

1. Effect on fish losses prevented

Somewhat
Important

Very
Important

2. Effect on commercial fish
sustainability

3. Effect on the fish populations
(for all fish)

4. Effect on the condition of
aquatic ecosystems

5. Effect on cost to my household

The next questions will ask you to choose between different policy options that would
affect fish losses in cooling water systems.
You will be given choices and asked to vote for the choice you prefer by checking the
appropriate box. Questions will look similar to the sample on the next page.

SAMPLE QUESTION
Questions will look like the sample below.
Policy Effect

Current
Situation

Option A

Option B

25%

50%

No change in status quo

0.3 billion fish saved

0.6 billion fish saved

65%

67%

69%

Out of 100% maximum

Fish Population

37%

40%

(all fish)

Out of 100% maximum

48%

50%

Out of 100% maximum

$24

$36

Increase in Cost of
Living for Your
Household

No cost increase

per year
($2 per month)

per year
($3 per month)

I would vote for
NO POLICY

I would vote for
OPTION A

I would vote for
OPTION B

(No policy)

Fish Saved per Year
(Out of 1.1 billion fish lost
in salt water intakes)

Commercial Fish
Sustainability
(in 3-5 Years)

(in 3-5 Years)

Condition of Aquatic
Ecosystems
(in 3-5 Years)

HOW WOULD
YOU VOTE?
(CHOOSE ONE
ONLY)

If you do not want A
or B, check this box

If you prefer Option A, If you prefer Option B,
check this box
check this box

AS YOU VOTE PLEASE REMEMBER
• The map below shows the coastal (salt water) facilities and areas that would
be affected by the proposed policies.
• Depending on the policies chosen, costs to your household could range from
$0 per month to a maximum of $6 per month.
• Depending on the type of technology required and other factors, effects on
fish and ecosystems may be different—even if the annual reduction in fish
losses is similar.
• Consider each pair of policy options separately—do not add them up or
compare programs from different pages.
• Scientists expect that effects on the environment and economy not shown
explicitly will be small.
• Your votes are important. Answer all questions as if this were a real,
binding vote.
Salt Water
Facilities

Coastal Facilities Affected by the Proposed Policies

Question 4. Assume that Options A and B would require different
technology to prevent fish losses in coastal facilities that use cooling water,
and that all types of fish would be affected. How would you vote?

Policy Effect
NE Coastal

Current
Situation

Option A
NE Coastal

Option B
NE Coastal

25%

50%

No change in status quo

0.3 billion fish saved

0.6 billion fish saved

65%

Out of 100% maximum

Fish Population

37%

40%

(all fish)

Out of 100% maximum

48%

50%

Out of 100% maximum

$24

$36

Increase in Cost of
Living for Your
Household

No cost increase

per year
($2 per month)

per year
($3 per month)

I would vote for
NO POLICY

I would vote for
OPTION A

I would vote for
OPTION B

Fish Saved per Year
(Out of 1.1 billion fish
lost in salt water intakes)

Commercial Fish
Sustainability

(No policy)

(in 3-5 Years)

Condition of Aquatic
Ecosystems
(in 3-5 Years)

HOW WOULD
YOU VOTE?
(CHOOSE ONE
ONLY)

Now you will be asked to consider a new set of policy options for Northeast
waters. As you vote, please remember—
• Questions 5 and 6 present a new set of policy options. These options require
different technology in different areas.
• Each question is a separate vote. Questions 5 and 6 cannot be directly
compared to each other, or to Question 4.
• Do not add up effects or costs across different questions.
• Policy costs and effects depend on many factors. Saving more fish does not
necessarily mean that all effects will improve.

Question 5. Assume that Options A and B would require different
technology to prevent fish losses in coastal facilities that use cooling water,
and that all types of fish would be affected. How would you vote?

Policy Effect
NE Coastal

Current
Situation

Option A
NE Coastal

Option B
NE Coastal

25%

75%

No change in status quo

0.3 billion fish saved

0.8 billion fish saved

65%

67%

69%

Out of 100% maximum

Fish Population

37%

42%

(all fish)

Out of 100% maximum

48%

52%

Out of 100% maximum

$36

$40

Increase in Cost of
Living for Your
Household

No cost increase

per year
($3 per month)

per year
($5 per month)

I would vote for
NO POLICY

I would vote for
OPTION A

I would vote for
OPTION B

Fish Saved per Year
(Out of 1.1 billion fish
lost in salt water intakes)

Commercial Fish
Sustainability

(No policy)

(in 3-5 Years)

Condition of Aquatic
Ecosystems
(in 3-5 Years)

HOW WOULD
YOU VOTE?
(CHOOSE ONE
ONLY)

Question 6. Assume that Options A and B would require different
technology to prevent fish losses in coastal facilities that use cooling water,
and that all types of fish would be affected. How would you vote?

Policy Effect
NE Coastal

Current
Situation

Option A
NE Coastal

Option B
NE Coastal

95%

50%

No change in status quo

1.0 billion fish saved

0.6 billion fish saved

65%

72%

Out of 100% maximum

Fish Population

37%

45%

(all fish)

Out of 100% maximum

48%

52%

Out of 100% maximum

$72

$24

Increase in Cost of
Living for Your
Household

No cost increase

per year
($6 per month)

per year
($2 per month)

I would vote for
NO POLICY

I would vote for
OPTION A

I would vote for
OPTION B

Fish Saved per Year
(Out of 1.1 billion fish
lost in salt water intakes)

Commercial Fish
Sustainability

(No policy)

(in 3-5 Years)

Condition of Aquatic
Ecosystems
(in 3-5 Years)

HOW WOULD
YOU VOTE?
(CHOOSE ONE
ONLY)

Question 7. If you always voted for NO POLICY in questions 4-6, what was the
primary reason? Check one. (Skip this question if you voted for Option A or B in any
question above.)
____ The cost to my household was too high
____ Preventing fish losses is not important to me
____ I do not trust the government to fix the problem
____ I would rather spend my money on other things
____ I did not believe the choices were realistic
____ Since the problem was created by private facilities, they should fix it
without passing costs on to consumers

NATIONAL VERSUS NORTHEAST POLICIES
Now assume that the same types of policies were proposed for the entire
United States instead of only the Northeast, and that affected facilities
include all those shown on the map, including those in fresh and salt
waters. How would you vote?

Question 8. Now assume that the same types of policies were proposed for
the entire United States. Assume that all US households would pay for
these programs. How would you vote?

Policy Effect
ALL of US

Current
Situation

Option A
ALL of US

Option B
ALL of US

25%

50%

No change in status quo

0.7 billion fish saved

1.4 billion fish saved

61%

Out of 100% maximum

Fish Population

42%

44%

(all fish)

Out of 100% maximum

46%

48%

Out of 100% maximum

$72

$120

Increase in Cost of
Living for Your
Household

No cost increase

per year
($6 per month)

per year
($10 per month)

I would vote for
NO POLICY

I would vote for
OPTION A

I would vote for
OPTION B

Fish Saved per Year
(Out of 2.7 billion fish
lost in salt water intakes)

Commercial Fish
Sustainability

(No policy)

(in 3-5 Years)

Condition of Aquatic
Ecosystems
(in 3-5 Years)

HOW WOULD
YOU VOTE?
(CHOOSE ONE
ONLY)

Question 9. Indicate how strongly you agree with the following statements about
questions 4 - 8 and the information provided. Check one box for each.
Strongly
Disagree
The survey provided enough
information for me to make
informed choices

Disagree

Neutral

Agree

Strongly
Agree

I feel confident about my
answers

Information in the survey was
easy to understand

Information in the survey was
fair and balanced

Questions were easy to
answer

I would vote the same way in
an actual public vote

The effect of the proposed
policies depends on many
factors
Future ecological conditions
are never 100% guaranteed

Question 10. How much did the following factors affect your answers to questions 4 –
8? Check one box for each.
Effect on my answers to questions 4-8

Very Small
Effect

Moderate
Effect

Very Large
Effect

Wanting to reduce taxes or costs
to my household.

Wanting to prevent the loss of
industrial jobs.

Wanting to preserve fish for
commercial fishing.

Wanting to preserve fish for
recreation (fishing, etc.).

Wanting to preserve fish to benefit
aquatic ecosystems.

Wanting to know that fish exist in
local lakes, rivers and bays.

Wanting to pay my fair share for
government programs.

Wanting to increase the
competitiveness of US business

Wanting to preserve fish as a
source of food for people.

Wanting to preserve fish and
ecosystems for future generations.

Wanting to send a message that
all environmental issues are
important regardless of cost.

Question 11. How many days did you participate in the following during the last year?
Please include activities in ALL LOCATIONS. Remember to count each day
separately for trips longer than one day. Check one box for each.
Number of days you did the activity during the past year
0

Boating / Canoeing / Kayaking
Swimming / Going to the Beach
Recreational Fishing (Fresh Water)
Recreational Fishing (Salt Water)

1-5

6-10

11-15

16+

Shellfishing / Crabbing
Scuba Diving / Snorkeling

Question 12. How many days did you participate in each of the following activities
during the last year, IN THE NORTHEASTERN US ONLY? Northeastern states
include: CT, DE, MA, MD, ME, NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT. Remember to count each day
separately for trips longer than one day.Check one box for each.
Number of days you did the activity during the past year
0

Boating / Canoeing / Kayaking
Swimming / Going to the Beach
Recreational Fishing (Fresh Water)
Recreational Fishing (Salt Water)

1-5

6-10

11-15

16+

Shellfishing / Crabbing

Scuba Diving / Snorkeling

Question 13. For each of the following activities, indicate whether the activity is better
or worse if there are more fish in the water. Check one box for each statement.
Activity is
worse if there
are more fish

Boating / Canoeing / Kayaking
Swimming / Going to the Beach
Recreational Fishing (Fresh Water)
Recreational Fishing (Salt Water)

Activity is not
better or
worse if there
are more fish

Activity is
better if there
are more fish

N/A
I do not
participate in
this activity

Shellfishing / Crabbing
Scuba Diving / Snorkeling

The following questions ensure that all groups are fairly represented.
All answers are anonymous and confidential.

14. What is your age? ___ years
15. What is your gender?

Male

Female

16. What is the highest level of education that you have completed?
Less than high school

One or more years of college

High school or equivalent

Bachelor’s Degree

High school + technical school

Graduate Degree

16. How many people live in your household? _____________
17. How many of these people are 16 years of age or older? ____
18. How many of these people are 6 years of age or younger? ____
19. What is your zip code?_____________________________
20. What town and state do you live in? Town: _____________

State:____

21. Are you currently employed? ___ Yes _____ No
22. What category comes closest to your total household income?
Less than $10,000
$10,000 to $19,999
$20,000 to $39,999
$40,000 to $59,999

$60,000 to $79,999
$80,000 to $99,999
$100,000 to $249,999
$250,000 or more

23. If you have any comments on this survey, please write them below:

Thank you for your participation in this important survey!

File Type	application/pdf
File Title	Microsoft Word - WA2-15_T4_316b_Instrument.post OIRA changes. 6.22.10
Author	Ehelm
File Modified	2010-06-24
File Created	2010-06-24