Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 3 June 2003 Exhibit D. 2 Baseline Implementation and Monitoring Activities for All System Types, Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 Implementation Monitoring for Initial Bin Classification Future Monitoring for Re Binning Baseline # PWSs Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment Prior to Rule Promulgation Plants Per System Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Percent of Plants Triggered to Monitor for Cryptosporidium Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for LT2 Compliance Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for Stage 2 Compliance Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring A B C D = A* C*( 1 B) E F = D* E G H I = D*( 1 G H) J = E* I CWSs £ 100 530 3.6% 1.0 511 100% 511 4.7% 15.0% 410 410 101 500 757 3.6% 1.1 803 100% 803 4.7% 6.3% 715 715 501 1000 456 3.6% 1.0 440 100% 440 14.9% 6.3% 346 346 1001 3,300 1,087 3.6% 1.0 1,048 100% 1,048 14.9% 1.8% 872 872 3,301 10,000 1,017 3.6% 1.2 1,176 100% 1,176 14.9% 1.8% 979 979 10,001 50,000 959 0.4% 1.1 1,051  1,051 24.1% 1.5% 783 783 50,001 100,000 193 0.4% 1.8 346  346 24.1% 1.5% 258 258 100,001 1 Million 205 0.4% 1.6 327  327 23.7% 1.5% 245 245 > 1 Million 13 0.4% 2.8 36  36 23.7% 1.5% 27 27 National Totals 5,217 5,738 5,738 4,634 4,634 System Size ( Population Served)

NTNCWSs £ 100 202 3.6% 1.0 195 100% 195 4.7% 15.0% 156 156 101 500 236 3.6% 1.0 228 100% 228 4.7% 6.3% 203 203 501 1000 84 3.6% 1.0 81 100% 81 14.9% 6.3% 64 64 1001 3,300 55 3.6% 1.0 53 100% 53 14.9% 1.8% 44 44 3,301 10,000 13 3.6% 1.0 13 100% 13 14.9% 1.8% 10 10 10,001 50,000 3 0.4% 1.0 3  3 24.3% 1.5% 2 2 50,001 100,000  0.4% 1.0   0 24.3% 1.5%   100,001 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 23.9% 1.5%   > 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 0.0% 1.5%   National Totals 593 572 572 479 479 TNCWSs £ 100 731 0.0% 1.0 731 100% 731 4.7% 0.0% 697 697 101 500 380 0.0% 1.0 380 100% 380 4.7% 0.0% 362 362 501 1000 57 0.0% 1.0 57 100% 57 14.9% 0.0% 48 48 1001 3,300 53 0.0% 1.0 53 100% 53 14.9% 0.0% 45 45 3,301 10,000 25 0.0% 1.0 25 100% 25 14.9% 0.0% 21 21 10,001 50,000 8 0.0% 1.0 8  8 24.3% 0.0% 6 6 50,001 100,000 3 0.0% 1.0 3  3 24.3% 0.0% 2 2 100,001 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   > 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   National Totals 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,182 1,182 Grand Totals 7,066 7,565 7,565 6,295 6,295 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Number of unlinked, non purchased SW & GWUDI systems from the Third Edition Baseline Handbook, which is based on data from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System ( USEPA 2000h). ( B) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment prior to rule promulgation. Percentage estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR. ( C) Estimate of the number of plants or entry points per system. Derived from 1995 Community Water System Survey data. ( E) Percent of plants triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring is estimated from the modeled Occurrence Distributions. ( G) Derived from Appendix F. This number is calculated by dividing the number of plants estimated to be achieving 5.5 log treatment by the total number of plants for the size ( H) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment as a result of the Stage 2 DBPR. Percent estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 4 June 2003 Exhibit D. 3 Baseline Implementation and Monitoring Activities for All System Types, Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 Implementation Monitoring for Initial Bin Classification Future Monitoring for Re Binning Baseline # PWSs Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment Prior to Rule Promulgation Plants Per System Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Percent of Plants Triggered to Monitor for Cryptosporidium Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for LT2 Compliance Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for Stage 2 Compliance Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring A B C D = A* C*( 1 B) E F = D* E G H I = D*( 1 G H) J = E* I CWSs £ 100 530 3.6% 1.0 511 100% 511 3.7% 15.0% 415 415 101 500 757 3.6% 1.1 803 100% 803 3.7% 6.3% 722 722 501 1000 456 3.6% 1.0 440 100% 440 11.7% 6.3% 361 361 1001 3,300 1,087 3.6% 1.0 1,048 100% 1,048 11.7% 1.8% 906 906 3,301 10,000 1,017 3.6% 1.2 1,176 100% 1,176 11.7% 1.8% 1,018 1018 10,001 50,000 959 0.4% 1.1 1,051  1,051 20.1% 1.5% 824 824 50,001 100,000 193 0.4% 1.8 346  346 20.1% 1.5% 271 271 100,001 1 Million 205 0.4% 1.6 327  327 19.7% 1.5% 257 257 > 1 Million 13 0.4% 2.8 36  36 19.7% 1.5% 29 29 National Totals 5,217 5,738 5,738 4,804 4,804 System Size ( Population Served)

NTNCWSs £ 100 202 3.6% 1.0 195 100% 195 3.7% 15.0% 158 158 101 500 236 3.6% 1.0 228 100% 228 3.7% 6.3% 205 205 501 1000 84 3.6% 1.0 81 100% 81 11.7% 6.3% 66 66 1001 3,300 55 3.6% 1.0 53 100% 53 11.7% 1.8% 46 46 3,301 10,000 13 3.6% 1.0 13 100% 13 11.7% 1.8% 11 11 10,001 50,000 3 0.4% 1.0 3  3 20.2% 1.5% 2 2 50,001 100,000  0.4% 1.0   0 20.2% 1.5%   100,001 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 19.8% 1.5%   > 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 0.0% 1.5%   National Totals 593 572 572 488 488 TNCWSs £ 100 731 0.0% 1.0 731 100% 731 3.7% 0.0% 704 704 101 500 380 0.0% 1.0 380 100% 380 3.7% 0.0% 366 366 501 1000 57 0.0% 1.0 57 100% 57 11.7% 0.0% 50 50 1001 3,300 53 0.0% 1.0 53 100% 53 11.7% 0.0% 46 46 3,301 10,000 25 0.0% 1.0 25 100% 25 11.7% 0.0% 22 22 10,001 50,000 8 0.0% 1.0 8  8 20.2% 0.0% 6 6 50,001 100,000 3 0.0% 1.0 3  3 20.2% 0.0% 2 2 100,001 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   > 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   National Totals 1,256 1,256 1,256 1,197 1,197 Grand Totals 7,066 7,565 7,565 6,489 6,489 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Number of unlinked, non purchased SW & GWUDI systems from the Third Edition Baseline Handbook, which is based on data from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System ( USEPA 2000h). ( B) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment prior to rule promulgation. Percentage estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR. ( C) Estimate of the number of plants or entry points per system. Derived from 1995 Community Water System Survey data. ( E) Percent of plants triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring is estimated from the modeled Occurrence Distributions. ( G) Derived from Appendix F. This number is calculated by dividing the number of plants estimated to be achieving 5.5 log treatment by the total number of plants for the size ( H) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment as a result of the Stage 2 DBPR. Percent estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 5 June 2003 Exhibit D. 4 Baseline Implementation and Monitoring Activities for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 Implementation Monitoring for Initial Bin Classification Future Monitoring for Re Binning Baseline # PWSs Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment Prior to Rule Promulgation Plants Per System Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Percent of Plants Triggered to Monitor for Cryptosporidium Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for LT2 Compliance Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for Stage 2 Compliance Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring A B C D = A* C*( 1 B) E F = D* E G H I = D*( 1 G H) J = E* I CWSs £ 100 530 3.6% 1.0 511 35% 178 5.3% 15.0% 407 142 101 500 757 3.6% 1.1 803 35% 279 5.3% 6.3% 710 247 501 1000 456 3.6% 1.0 440 35% 153 9.3% 6.3% 371 129 1001 3,300 1,087 3.6% 1.0 1,048 35% 365 9.3% 1.8% 931 324 3,301 10,000 1,017 3.6% 1.2 1,176 35% 409 9.3% 1.8% 1,045 364 10,001 50,000 959 0.4% 1.1 1,051  1,051 27.1% 1.5% 751 751 50,001 100,000 193 0.4% 1.8 346  346 27.1% 1.5% 247 247 100,001 1 Million 205 0.4% 1.6 327  327 25.5% 1.5% 239 239 > 1 Million 13 0.4% 2.8 36  36 25.5% 1.5% 26 26 National Totals 5,217 5,738 3,144 4,728 2,469 System Size ( Population Served)

NTNCWSs £ 100 202 3.6% 1.0 195 35% 68 5.3% 15.0% 155 54 101 500 236 3.6% 1.0 228 35% 79 5.3% 6.3% 201 70 501 1000 84 3.6% 1.0 81 35% 28 9.3% 6.3% 68 24 1001 3,300 55 3.6% 1.0 53 35% 18 9.3% 1.8% 47 16 3,301 10,000 13 3.6% 1.0 13 35% 4 9.3% 1.8% 11 4 10,001 50,000 3 0.4% 1.0 3  3 27.5% 1.5% 2 2 50,001 100,000  0.4% 1.0   0 27.5% 1.5%   100,001 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 26.0% 1.5%   > 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 0.0% 1.5%   National Totals 593 572 201 485 170 TNCWSs £ 100 731 0.0% 1.0 731 35% 254 5.3% 0.0% 693 241 101 500 380 0.0% 1.0 380 35% 132 5.3% 0.0% 360 125 501 1000 57 0.0% 1.0 57 35% 20 9.3% 0.0% 51 18 1001 3,300 53 0.0% 1.0 53 35% 18 9.3% 0.0% 48 17 3,301 10,000 25 0.0% 1.0 25 35% 9 9.3% 0.0% 22 8 10,001 50,000 8 0.0% 1.0 8  8 27.5% 0.0% 5 5 50,001 100,000 3 0.0% 1.0 3  3 27.5% 0.0% 2 2 100,001 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   > 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   National Totals 1,256 1,256 444 1,182 416 Grand Totals 7,066 7,565 3,789 6,395 3,056 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Number of unlinked, non purchased SW & GWUDI systems from the Third Edition Baseline Handbook, which is based on data from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System ( USEPA 2000h). ( B) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment prior to rule promulgation. Percentage estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR. ( C) Estimate of the number of plants or entry points per system. Derived from 1995 Community Water System Survey data. ( E) Percent of plants triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring is estimated from the modeled Occurrence Distributions. ( G) Derived from Appendix F. This number is calculated by dividing the number of plants estimated to be achieving 5.5 log treatment by the total number of plants for the size ( H) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment as a result of the Stage 2 DBPR. Percent estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 6 June 2003 Exhibit D. 5 Baseline Implementation and Monitoring Activities for All System Types, Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 Implementation Monitoring for Initial Bin Classification Future Monitoring for Re Binning Baseline # PWSs Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment Prior to Rule Promulgation Plants Per System Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Percent of Plants Triggered to Monitor for Cryptosporidium Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for LT2 Compliance Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for Stage 2 Compliance Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring A B C D = A* C*( 1 B) E F = D* E G H I = D*( 1 G H) J = E* I CWSs £ 100 530 3.6% 1.0 511 27% 139 2.9% 15.0% 419 114 101 500 757 3.6% 1.1 803 27% 218 2.9% 6.3% 728 198 501 1000 456 3.6% 1.0 440 27% 120 3.9% 6.3% 395 107 1001 3,300 1,087 3.6% 1.0 1,048 27% 285 3.9% 1.8% 988 269 3,301 10,000 1,017 3.6% 1.2 1,176 27% 320 3.9% 1.8% 1,109 302 10,001 50,000 959 0.4% 1.1 1,051  1,051 20.7% 1.5% 818 818 50,001 100,000 193 0.4% 1.8 346  346 20.7% 1.5% 269 269 100,001 1 Million 205 0.4% 1.6 327  327 19.3% 1.5% 259 259 > 1 Million 13 0.4% 2.8 36  36 19.3% 1.5% 29 29 National Totals 5,217 5,738 2,842 5,014 2,365 System Size ( Population Served)

NTNCWSs £ 100 202 3.6% 1.0 195 27% 53 2.9% 15.0% 160 43 101 500 236 3.6% 1.0 228 27% 62 2.9% 6.3% 206 56 501 1000 84 3.6% 1.0 81 27% 22 3.9% 6.3% 73 20 1001 3,300 55 3.6% 1.0 53 27% 14 3.9% 1.8% 50 14 3,301 10,000 13 3.6% 1.0 13 27% 3 3.9% 1.8% 12 3 10,001 50,000 3 0.4% 1.0 3  3 20.7% 1.5% 2 2 50,001 100,000  0.4% 1.0   0 20.7% 1.5%   100,001 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 19.4% 1.5%   > 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 0.0% 1.5%   National Totals 593 572 158 503 139 TNCWSs £ 100 731 0.0% 1.0 731 27% 199 2.9% 0.0% 710 193 101 500 380 0.0% 1.0 380 27% 103 2.9% 0.0% 369 100 501 1000 57 0.0% 1.0 57 27% 15 3.9% 0.0% 55 15 1001 3,300 53 0.0% 1.0 53 27% 14 3.9% 0.0% 51 14 3,301 10,000 25 0.0% 1.0 25 27% 7 3.9% 0.0% 24 6 10,001 50,000 8 0.0% 1.0 8  8 20.7% 0.0% 6 6 50,001 100,000 3 0.0% 1.0 3  3 20.7% 0.0% 2 2 100,001 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   > 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   National Totals 1,256 1,256 349 1,216 337 Grand Totals 7,066 7,565 3,349 6,733 2,840 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Number of unlinked, non purchased SW & GWUDI systems from the Third Edition Baseline Handbook, which is based on data from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System ( USEPA 2000h). ( B) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment prior to rule promulgation. Percentage estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR. ( C) Estimate of the number of plants or entry points per system. Derived from 1995 Community Water System Survey data. ( E) Percent of plants triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring is estimated from the modeled Occurrence Distributions. ( G) Derived from Appendix F. This number is calculated by dividing the number of plants estimated to be achieving 5.5 log treatment by the total number of plants for the size ( H) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment as a result of the Stage 2 DBPR. Percent estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 7 June 2003 Exhibit D. 6 Baseline Implementation and Monitoring Activities for All System Types, Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 Implementation Monitoring for Initial Bin Classification Future Monitoring for Re Binning Baseline # PWSs Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment Prior to Rule Promulgation Plants Per System Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Percent of Plants Triggered to Monitor for Cryptosporidium Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for LT2 Compliance Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for Stage 2 Compliance Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring A B C D = A* C*( 1 B) E F = D* E G H I = D*( 1 G H) J = E* I CWSs £ 100 530 3.6% 1.0 511 22% 114 2.2% 15.0% 423 94 101 500 757 3.6% 1.1 803 22% 179 2.2% 6.3% 734 164 501 1000 456 3.6% 1.0 440 22% 98 2.5% 6.3% 401 90 1001 3,300 1,087 3.6% 1.0 1,048 22% 234 2.5% 1.8% 1,003 224 3,301 10,000 1,017 3.6% 1.2 1,176 22% 263 2.5% 1.8% 1,126 252 10,001 50,000 959 0.4% 1.1 1,051  1,051 16.9% 1.5% 858 858 50,001 100,000 193 0.4% 1.8 346  346 16.9% 1.5% 283 283 100,001 1 Million 205 0.4% 1.6 327  327 15.7% 1.5% 271 271 > 1 Million 13 0.4% 2.8 36  36 15.7% 1.5% 30 30 National Totals 5,217 5,738 2,650 5,128 2,266 System Size ( Population Served)

NTNCWSs £ 100 202 3.6% 1.0 195 22% 44 2.2% 15.0% 161 36 101 500 236 3.6% 1.0 228 22% 51 2.2% 6.3% 208 47 501 1000 84 3.6% 1.0 81 22% 18 2.5% 6.3% 74 17 1001 3,300 55 3.6% 1.0 53 22% 12 2.5% 1.8% 51 11 3,301 10,000 13 3.6% 1.0 13 22% 3 2.5% 1.8% 12 3 10,001 50,000 3 0.4% 1.0 3  3 16.9% 1.5% 2 2 50,001 100,000  0.4% 1.0   0 16.9% 1.5%   100,001 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 15.7% 1.5%   > 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 0.0% 1.5%   National Totals 593 572 130 508 116 TNCWSs £ 100 731 0.0% 1.0 731 22% 163 2.2% 0.0% 715 160 101 500 380 0.0% 1.0 380 22% 85 2.2% 0.0% 372 83 501 1000 57 0.0% 1.0 57 22% 13 2.5% 0.0% 55 12 1001 3,300 53 0.0% 1.0 53 22% 12 2.5% 0.0% 51 11 3,301 10,000 25 0.0% 1.0 25 22% 6 2.5% 0.0% 24 5 10,001 50,000 8 0.0% 1.0 8  8 16.9% 0.0% 6 6 50,001 100,000 3 0.0% 1.0 3  3 16.9% 0.0% 2 2 100,001 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   > 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   National Totals 1,256 1,256 289 1,226 281 Grand Totals 7,066 7,565 3,069 6,862 2,662 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Number of unlinked, non purchased SW & GWUDI systems from the Third Edition Baseline Handbook, which is based on data from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System ( USEPA 2000h). ( B) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment prior to rule promulgation. Percentage estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR. ( C) Estimate of the number of plants or entry points per system. Derived from 1995 Community Water System Survey data. ( E) Percent of plants triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring is estimated from the modeled Occurrence Distributions. ( G) Derived from Appendix F. This number is calculated by dividing the number of plants estimated to be achieving 5.5 log treatment by the total number of plants for the size ( H) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment as a result of the Stage 2 DBPR. Percent estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 8 June 2003 Exhibit D. 7 Baseline Implementation and Monitoring Activities for All System Types, Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 Implementation Monitoring for Initial Bin Classification Future Monitoring for Re Binning Baseline # PWSs Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment Prior to Rule Promulgation Plants Per System Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Percent of Plants Triggered to Monitor for Cryptosporidium Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for LT2 Compliance Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for Stage 2 Compliance Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring A B C D = A* C*( 1 B) E F = D* E G H I = D*( 1 G H) J = E* I CWSs £ 100 530 3.6% 1.0 511 30% 155 2.2% 15.0% 423 128 101 500 757 3.6% 1.1 803 30% 243 2.2% 6.3% 734 223 501 1000 456 3.6% 1.0 440 30% 133 2.0% 6.3% 403 122 1001 3,300 1,087 3.6% 1.0 1,048 30% 318 2.0% 1.8% 1,008 305 3,301 10,000 1,017 3.6% 1.2 1,176 30% 356 2.0% 1.8% 1,131 343 10,001 50,000 959 0.4% 1.1 1,051  1,051 9.9% 1.5% 931 931 50,001 100,000 193 0.4% 1.8 346  346 9.9% 1.5% 307 307 100,001 1 Million 205 0.4% 1.6 327  327 9.4% 1.5% 291 291 > 1 Million 13 0.4% 2.8 36  36 9.4% 1.5% 32 32 National Totals 5,217 5,738 2,965 5,261 2,683 System Size ( Population Served)

NTNCWSs £ 100 202 3.6% 1.0 195 30% 59 2.2% 15.0% 161 49 101 500 236 3.6% 1.0 228 30% 69 2.2% 6.3% 208 63 501 1000 84 3.6% 1.0 81 30% 25 2.0% 6.3% 74 22 1001 3,300 55 3.6% 1.0 53 30% 16 2.0% 1.8% 51 15 3,301 10,000 13 3.6% 1.0 13 30% 4 2.0% 1.8% 12 4 10,001 50,000 3 0.4% 1.0 3  3 9.9% 1.5% 3 3 50,001 100,000  0.4% 1.0   0 9.9% 1.5%   100,001 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 9.4% 1.5%   > 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 0.0% 1.5%   National Totals 593 572 175 509 156 TNCWSs £ 100 731 0.0% 1.0 731 30% 222 2.2% 0.0% 715 217 101 500 380 0.0% 1.0 380 30% 115 2.2% 0.0% 372 113 501 1000 57 0.0% 1.0 57 30% 17 2.0% 0.0% 56 17 1001 3,300 53 0.0% 1.0 53 30% 16 2.0% 0.0% 52 16 3,301 10,000 25 0.0% 1.0 25 30% 8 2.0% 0.0% 24 7 10,001 50,000 8 0.0% 1.0 8  8 9.9% 0.0% 7 7 50,001 100,000 3 0.0% 1.0 3  3 9.9% 0.0% 3 3 100,001 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   > 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   National Totals 1,256 1,256 388 1,228 379 Grand Totals 7,066 7,565 3,529 6,999 3,217 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Number of unlinked, non purchased SW & GWUDI systems from the Third Edition Baseline Handbook, which is based on data from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System ( USEPA 2000h). ( B) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment prior to rule promulgation. Percentage estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR. ( C) Estimate of the number of plants or entry points per system. Derived from 1995 Community Water System Survey data. ( E) Percent of plants triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring is estimated from the modeled Occurrence Distributions. ( G) Derived from Appendix F. This number is calculated by dividing the number of plants estimated to be achieving 5.5 log treatment by the total number of plants for the size ( H) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment as a result of the Stage 2 DBPR. Percent estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 9 June 2003 Exhibit D. 8 Baseline Implementation and Monitoring Activities for All System Types, Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 Implementation Monitoring for Initial Bin Classification Future Monitoring for Re Binning Baseline # PWSs Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment Prior to Rule Promulgation Plants Per System Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Percent of Plants Triggered to Monitor for Cryptosporidium Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for LT2 Compliance Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for Stage 2 Compliance Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring A B C D = A* C*( 1 B) E F = D* E G H I = D*( 1 G H) J = E* I CWSs £ 100 530 3.6% 1.0 511 22% 110 1.4% 15.0% 427 92 101 500 757 3.6% 1.1 803 22% 173 1.4% 6.3% 741 159 501 1000 456 3.6% 1.0 440 22% 95 1.3% 6.3% 406 87 1001 3,300 1,087 3.6% 1.0 1,048 22% 225 1.3% 1.8% 1,015 218 3,301 10,000 1,017 3.6% 1.2 1,176 22% 253 1.3% 1.8% 1,140 245 10,001 50,000 959 0.4% 1.1 1,051  1,051 5.1% 1.5% 982 982 50,001 100,000 193 0.4% 1.8 346  346 5.1% 1.5% 323 323 100,001 1 Million 205 0.4% 1.6 327  327 4.8% 1.5% 306 306 > 1 Million 13 0.4% 2.8 36  36 4.8% 1.5% 34 34 National Totals 5,217 5,738 2,615 5,374 2,447 System Size ( Population Served)

NTNCWSs £ 100 202 3.6% 1.0 195 22% 42 1.4% 15.0% 163 35 101 500 236 3.6% 1.0 228 22% 49 1.4% 6.3% 210 45 501 1000 84 3.6% 1.0 81 22% 17 1.3% 6.3% 75 16 1001 3,300 55 3.6% 1.0 53 22% 11 1.3% 1.8% 51 11 3,301 10,000 13 3.6% 1.0 13 22% 3 1.3% 1.8% 12 3 10,001 50,000 3 0.4% 1.0 3  3 5.1% 1.5% 3 3 50,001 100,000  0.4% 1.0   0 5.1% 1.5%   100,001 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 4.8% 1.5%   > 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 0.0% 1.5%   National Totals 593 572 125   514 113 TNCWSs £ 100 731 0.0% 1.0 731 22% 157 1.4% 0.0% 721 155 101 500 380 0.0% 1.0 380 22% 82 1.4% 0.0% 375 81 501 1000 57 0.0% 1.0 57 22% 12 1.3% 0.0% 56 12 1001 3,300 53 0.0% 1.0 53 22% 11 1.3% 0.0% 52 11 3,301 10,000 25 0.0% 1.0 25 22% 5 1.3% 0.0% 24 5 10,001 50,000 8 0.0% 1.0 8  8 5.1% 0.0% 7 7 50,001 100,000 3 0.0% 1.0 3  3 5.1% 0.0% 3 3 100,001 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   > 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   National Totals 1,256 1,256 278 1,238 274 Grand Totals 7,066 7,565 3,019 7,126 2,834 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Number of unlinked, non purchased SW & GWUDI systems from the Third Edition Baseline Handbook, which is based on data from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System ( USEPA 2000h). ( B) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment prior to rule promulgation. Percentage estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR. ( C) Estimate of the number of plants or entry points per system. Derived from 1995 Community Water System Survey data. ( E) Percent of plants triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring is estimated from the modeled Occurrence Distributions. ( G) Derived from Appendix F. This number is calculated by dividing the number of plants estimated to be achieving 5.5 log treatment by the total number of plants for the size ( H) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment as a result of the Stage 2 DBPR. Percent estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 10 June 2003 Exhibit D. 9 Baseline Implementation and Monitoring Activities for All System Types, Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 Implementation Monitoring for Initial Bin Classification Future Monitoring for Re Binning Baseline # PWSs Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment Prior to Rule Promulgation Plants Per System Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Percent of Plants Triggered to Monitor for Cryptosporidium Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for LT2 Compliance Percent of Plants with > 5.5 Log Treatment for Stage 2 Compliance Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring Baseline # of Plants Conducting Cryptosporidium Monitoring A B C D = A* C*( 1 B) E F = D* E G H I = D*( 1 G H) J = E* I CWSs £ 100 530 3.6% 1.0 511 16% 82 1.0% 15.0% 429 69 101 500 757 3.6% 1.1 803 16% 128 1.0% 6.3% 744 119 501 1000 456 3.6% 1.0 440 16% 70 0.9% 6.3% 408 65 1001 3,300 1,087 3.6% 1.0 1,048 16% 168 0.9% 1.8% 1,019 163 3,301 10,000 1,017 3.6% 1.2 1,176 16% 188 0.9% 1.8% 1,144 183 10,001 50,000 959 0.4% 1.1 1,051  1,051 3.2% 1.5% 1,001 1001 50,001 100,000 193 0.4% 1.8 346  346 3.2% 1.5% 330 330 100,001 1 Million 205 0.4% 1.6 327  327 3.1% 1.5% 312 312 > 1 Million 13 0.4% 2.8 36  36 3.1% 1.5% 35 35 National Totals 5,217 5,738 2,397 5,421 2,277 System Size ( Population Served)

NTNCWSs £ 100 202 3.6% 1.0 195 16% 31 1.0% 15.0% 163 26 101 500 236 3.6% 1.0 228 16% 36 1.0% 6.3% 211 34 501 1000 84 3.6% 1.0 81 16% 13 0.9% 6.3% 75 12 1001 3,300 55 3.6% 1.0 53 16% 8 0.9% 1.8% 52 8 3,301 10,000 13 3.6% 1.0 13 16% 2 0.9% 1.8% 12 2 10,001 50,000 3 0.4% 1.0 3  3 3.2% 1.5% 3 3 50,001 100,000  0.4% 1.0   0 3.2% 1.5%   100,001 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 3.1% 1.5%   > 1 Million  0.4% 1.0   0 0.0% 1.5%   National Totals 593 572 94 516 85 TNCWSs £ 100 731 0.0% 1.0 731 16% 117 1.0% 0.0% 724 116 101 500 380 0.0% 1.0 380 16% 61 1.0% 0.0% 376 60 501 1000 57 0.0% 1.0 57 16% 9 0.9% 0.0% 56 9 1001 3,300 53 0.0% 1.0 53 16% 8 0.9% 0.0% 52 8 3,301 10,000 25 0.0% 1.0 25 16% 4 0.9% 0.0% 25 4 10,001 50,000 8 0.0% 1.0 8  8 3.2% 0.0% 7 7 50,001 100,000 3 0.0% 1.0 3  3 3.2% 0.0% 3 3 100,001 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   > 1 Million  0.0% 1.0   0 0.0% 0.0%   National Totals 1,256 1,256 210 1,243 207 Grand Totals 7,066 7,565 2,700 7,180 2,569 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Number of unlinked, non purchased SW & GWUDI systems from the Third Edition Baseline Handbook, which is based on data from EPA's Safe Drinking Water Information System ( USEPA 2000h). ( B) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment prior to rule promulgation. Percentage estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR. ( C) Estimate of the number of plants or entry points per system. Derived from 1995 Community Water System Survey data. ( E) Percent of plants triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring is estimated from the modeled Occurrence Distributions. ( G) Derived from Appendix F. This number is calculated by dividing the number of plants estimated to be achieving 5.5 log treatment by the total number of plants for the size ( H) EPA assumes only membrane plants will have > 5.5 log Cryptosporidium treatment as a result of the Stage 2 DBPR. Percent estimates are from the Economic Analysis for the Stage 2 DBPR.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 11 June 2003 Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 12 D. 3 Rule Implementation Activities This section presents the costs for systems and States/ Primacy Agencies to perform implementation activities associated with the LT2ESWTR. Activities performed by PWSs include reading and understanding the rule and training employees on rule requirements. The number of systems that must conduct implementation activities is the same for all occurrence distributions. State implementation activities include regulation adoption and program development, training State/ Primacy Agency staff, training PWS staff and providing technical assistance, and updating the data management systems. The cost and burden incurred as part of rule implementation are not expected to vary for the different regulatory alternatives.

Assumptions and cost estimates for rule implementation activities are presented in the following tables:

° Exhibit D. 10 Cost and Burden Estimates for Rule Implementation Activities ° Exhibit D. 11 State Cost and Burden Estimates for Rule Implementation Activities Exhibit D. 10 Cost and Burden Estimates for Rule Implementation Activities for All Regulatory Alternatives System Size ( Population Served) Read Hours per PWS Train Hours per PWS Total Hours per PWS Cost per Labor Hour Baseline # of Systems Conducting Implementation Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) A B C = A + B D E F = C* D* E G = C* E H = G/ 2080 CWSs £ 100 4 4 8 24.96 $ 530 105,830 $ 4,240 2.0 101 500 4 4 8 24.96 757 151,158 6,056 2.9 501 1000 4 4 8 28.95 456 105,610 3,648 1.8 1001 3,300 4 4 8 28.95 1,087 251,749 8,696 4.2 3,301 10,000 4 4 8 28.95 1,017 235,537 8,136 3.9 10,001 50,000 4 4 8 28.95 959 222,104 7,672 3.7 50,001 100,000 4 5 9 28.95 193 50,286 1,737 0.8 100,001 1 Million 4 5 9 28.95 205 53,413 1,845 0.9 > 1 Million 4 5 9 28.95 13 3,387 117 0.1 National Totals 5,217 1,179,075 $ 42,147 20.3 NTNCWSs £ 100 4 4 8 24.96 $ 202 40,335 $ 1,616 0.8 101 500 4 4 8 24.96 236 47,124 1,888 0.9 501 1000 4 4 8 28.95 84 19,454 672 0.3 1001 3,300 4 4 8 28.95 55 12,738 440 0.2 3,301 10,000 4 4 8 28.95 13 3,011 104 0.1 10,001 50,000 4 4 8 28.95 3 695 24 0.0 50,001 100,000 4 5 9 28.95     100,001 1 Million 4 5 9 28.95     > 1 Million 4 5 9 28.95     National Totals 593 123,358 $ 4,744 2.3 TNCWSs £ 100 4 4 8 24.96 $ 731 145,995 $ 5,849 2.8 101 500 4 4 8 24.96 380 75,904 3,041 1.5 501 1000 4 4 8 28.95 57 13,137 454 0.2 1001 3,300 4 4 8 28.95 53 12,189 421 0.2 3,301 10,000 4 4 8 28.95 25 5,744 198 0.1 10,001 50,000 4 4 8 28.95 8 1,737 60 0.0 50,001 100,000 4 5 9 28.95 3 782 27 0.0 100,001 1 Million 4 5 9 28.95     > 1 Million 4 5 9 28.95     National Totals 1,256 255,487 $ 10,050 4.8 Grand Totals 7,066 1,557,919 $ 56,941 27.4 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A & B) Burden estimates for each activity are based on EPA experience with similar rules. ( D) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics ( BLS) data. ( E) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities."

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 13 June 2003 Exhibit D. 11 State Primacy Agency Cost and Burden Estimates for Rule Implementation Activities Implementation Activities Cost per Labor Hour FTEs per State Hours per State Cost Per State A B C = B* 2080 D = A* C Regulation Adoption and Program Development 28.89 $ 0.50 1,040 30,046 $ Training State Staff 28.89 0.25 520 15,023 Training PWS Staff and Technical Assistants 28.89 1.00 2,080 60,091 Updating Data Management System 28.89 0.10 208 6,009 Public Notification 28.89 0.10 208 6,009 Totals per State 1.95 4,056 117,178 $ National Totals ( 57 States/ Primacy Agencies) 111.15 231,192 6,679,137 $

Notes: Detail may not add to totals due to independent rounding. All States/ Primacy Agencies are assumed to incur some costs for each activity. 1 FTE = 2,080 hours ( 40 hours/ week; 52 weeks/ year Sources: ( A) State labor rates based on the State Workload Model, updated to current dollar values. ( B) FTEs per State/ Primacy Agency based on EPA experience with previous regulations.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 14 June 2003 Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 15 D. 4 Monitoring Activities for Initial Bin Classification The purpose of bin classification is to determine what level of Cryptosporidium reduction will be required. Bin classification is determined by source water Cryptosporidium monitoring.

Monitoring costs for plants include the labor costs associated with collecting E. coli and Cryptosporidium samples, the laboratory costs of shipping and analyzing the samples, and costs for reporting results to the State/ Primacy Agency ( as noted in section D. 2, costs associated with turbidity monitoring are assumed to be negligible). State costs for analyzing PWS reports, responding to PWSs, and recordkeeping are also included in the bin classification monitoring costs. Cost estimates for each type of monitoring are described in detail in this section.

D. 4.1 E. coli Monitoring Number of Samples Under Alternatives A2 through A4, small plants are required to sample source water biweekly for one year for E. coli ( 26 total samples). Under the same regulatory alternatives, large and medium plants will carry out monitoring on a predetermined schedule for 24 months. The number of samples is based on one of two monitoring scenarios:

° Highest 12 month running annual average ( RAA) if monthly samples are taken ( 24 samples total)

° Two year mean if plant conducts twice per month monitoring for 24 months ( 48 samples total)

EPA estimates that most large and medium plants will use the maximum RAA for bin classification because it requires fewer samples. Therefore, this analysis assumes no monitoring costs for the two year mean option.

Laboratory Costs Systems may analyze their samples in house if they have the equipment to do so, or they may send the samples to a commercial laboratory. EPA estimates the cost per sample in house is $ 21.00 ( DynCorp 2000)), and to ship the sample to a commercial laboratory costs $ 70 ( includes shipping and commercial analysis) ( DynCorp 2002). The average cost per sample for various system sizes reflects the estimate of the percentage of plants that will do in house versus commercial analysis. The total laboratory cost of an E. coli sample ($ 57.75 for small plants, $ 33.25 for medium plants, and $ 21.00 for large plants) takes into account the percentage of systems with E. coli analysis capabilities. For those that do not have in house capabilities, overnight shipping costs ( based on FedEx rates) have been added to the laboratory fee. The estimate of plants with in house analytical capabilities for E. coli was generated using the Baseline Handbook. Total laboratory costs for E. coli monitoring are summarized in Exhibit D. 12 for each population size category of CWSs, NTNCWSs, and TNCWSs, respectively. The ICR, ICRSSM, and ICRSSL occurrence distributions do not affect the number of plants monitoring for E. coli. Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 16 Labor Costs In addition to the laboratory costs for E. coli monitoring, labor will be required for plant employees to take the samples.

Sampling points are at the source water intake; therefore, each sample was estimated to take 15 minutes. A technical labor rate ($ 24.96 per hour for all systems) is assumed for E. coli monitoring ( BLS 2001). Total labor costs per plant were estimated by multiplying the minutes required per sample ( converted into hours), the number of samples per plant per year, and the labor rate per hour. Total labor costs for E. coli monitoring are summarized in Exhibit D. 12 for CWSs, NTNCWSs, and TNCWSs, respectively. Once again, ICR, ICRSSM, and ICRSSL occurrence distributions do not affect the number of plants that have to monitor for E. coli. Exhibit D. 12 Labor Hours and Cost Estimates to Plants Associated with E. coli Monitoring for All Regulatory Alternatives Sampling Sample Analysis # of E. coli Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Commercial Analysis Cost per Sample ( Includes Shipping) Utility Analysis Hours per Sample ( Labor) Utility Analysis Cost per Sample ( O& M) Utility Analysis Cost per Sample Percent Utilities with E. coli Analysis Capabilities Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( Labor) Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M)

A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G H I = H+ G* D J K = D* G* J* A* B L = F* A* B*( 1 J)+ H* A* B* J M = E+ K+ L N = A* B* C+ A* B* G* J Total Burden ( Hours) Total Cost System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Conducting E. coli Monitoring CWSs £ 100 511 26 0.25 24.96 $ 82,892 $ 70.00 $ 0.5 8.52 $ 21.00 $ 25% 41,446 $ 725,701 $ 850,038 $ 4,981 101 500 803 26 0.25 24.96 130,234 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 65,117 1,140,171 1,335,522 7,827 501 1000 440 26 0.25 24.96 71,318 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 35,659 624,376 731,353 4,286 1001 3,300 1,048 26 0.25 24.96 170,006 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 85,003 1,488,371 1,743,380 10,217 3,301 10,000 1,176 26 0.25 24.96 190,870 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 95,435 1,671,028 1,957,333 11,471 10,001 50,000 1,051 24 0.25 24.96 157,403 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 75% 236,105 602,622 996,130 15,766 50,001 100,000 346 24 0.25 24.96 51,836 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 75% 77,754 198,456 328,046 5,192 100,001 1 Million 327 24 0.25 24.96 48,941 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 100% 97,883 66,824 213,648 5,882 > 1 Million 36 24 0.25 24.96 5,431 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 100% 10,863 7,416 23,710 653 National Totals 5,738 908,931 $ 0 745,264 $ 6,524,964 $ 8,179,159 $ 66,274 NTNCWSs £ 100 195 26 0.25 24.96 $ 31,593 $ 70.00 $ 0.5 8.52 $ 21.00 $ 25% 15,796 $ 276,588 $ 323,977 $ 1,899 101 500 228 26 0.25 24.96 $ 36,910 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 18,455 323,142 378,508 2,218 501 1000 81 26 0.25 24.96 $ 13,138 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 6,569 115,017 134,723 790 1001 3,300 53 26 0.25 24.96 $ 8,602 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 4,301 75,309 88,211 517 3,301 10,000 13 26 0.25 24.96 $ 2,033 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 1,017 17,800 20,850 122 10,001 50,000 3 24 0.25 24.96 $ 448 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 75% 671 1,714 2,833 45 50,001 100,000  24 0.25 24.96 $  70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 75%     100,001 1 Million  24 0.25 24.96 $  70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 100%     > 1 Million  24 0.25 24.96 $  70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 100%     National Totals 572 92,723 $ 46,809 $ 809,569 $ 949,102 $ 5,590 TNCWSs £ 100 731 26 0.25 24.96 $ 118,621 $ 70.00 $ 0.5 8.52 $ 21.00 $ 25% 59,310 $ 1,038,500 $ 1,216,431 $ 7,129 101 500 380 26 0.25 24.96 61,672 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 30,836 539,925 632,432 3,706 501 1000 57 26 0.25 24.96 9,203 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 4,601 80,567 94,371 553 1001 3,300 53 26 0.25 24.96 8,539 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 4,269 74,757 87,565 513 3,301 10,000 25 26 0.25 24.96 4,024 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 25% 2,012 35,225 41,261 242 10,001 50,000 8 24 0.25 24.96 1,123 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 75% 1,685 4,300 7,108 113 50,001 100,000 3 24 0.25 24.96 449 70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 75% 674 1,720 2,843 45 100,001 1 Million  24 0.25 24.96  70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 100%     > 1 Million  24 0.25 24.96  70.00 0.5 8.52 21.00 100%     National Totals 1,256 203,630 $ 103,387 $ 1,774,994 $ 2,082,012 $ 12,300 Grand Totals 7,565 1,205,284 $ 895,460 $ 9,109,528 $ 11,210,273 $ 84,164 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Bi weekly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) DynCorp study, Kevin Connell, June 2002. ( G) Based on expert opinion. ( H) The amount left over after the cost of half an hour of labor is subtracted from the cost of utility analysis provided in Column I. ( I) DynCorp study, Kevin Connell, December 2000.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 17 June 2003 Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 18 D. 4.2 Cryptosporidium Monitoring Number of Samples Small plants that are triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring based on E. coli monitoring results ( see section D. 2) will be required to collect and analyze 24 source water Cryptosporidium samples over 1 year. For costing purposes, EPA assumes that small plants will collect 24 samples and bin assignment will be based on the average concentration of all samples. Large and medium plants will carry out Cryptosporidium monitoring similar to E. coli monitoring on a predetermined schedule for 24 months.

For all plant sizes, EPA assumes two additional matrix spike samples will be collected during the monitoring period.

Although the sampling requirements for plants required to monitor Cryptosporidium are the same for Alternatives A2 through A4, the number of plants triggered to monitor will vary for each regulatory alternative.

Laboratory Costs The total cost of laboratory analysis of a Cryptosporidium sample ($ 529.50) is the sum of the laboratory costs, the shipping costs, and analysis of multiple subsamples.

The laboratory cost for Cryptosporidium analysis ($ 403.00) was estimated in an analysis by Dyncorp ( 2000). This estimate assumes that the laboratory filters the sample, so the PWS ships the entire 10 liter sample. A shipping cost ($ 88.70, based on FedEx rates) is added, assuming that all plants must ship samples overnight to private laboratories for analysis. Samples must be divided into subsamples for analysis if they have a pellet size greater than 0.5 ml. The proportion of samples being subdivided is based on results of the Supplemental Surveys. Laboratory and shipping costs per plant are summarized in Exhibits D. 13 through D15.

Total laboratory costs for Alternative A2 are shown in Exhibits D. 13a to D. 13c. The costs for Alternative A2 for each system type are identical for the ICR, ICRSSM, and ICRSSL occurrence distributions because under Alternative A2, all small plants are assumed to be triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring based on E. coli monitoring results. Because the cutoff level for the first bin under Alternative A2 is less than half the Cryptosporidium concentration cutoff for Bin 1 under Alternative A3, the E. coli trigger level would presumably also be much lower under Alternative A2. EPA estimated that these levels would be so low that all small plants would be triggered into Cryptosporidium monitoring.

Total laboratory costs for Cryptosporidium monitoring are summarized in Exhibits D. 14a through D. 14c for each population size category of CWSs, NTNCWSs, and TNCWSs, based on the ICR, ICRSSM, and ICRSSL occurrence distributions, respectively, for Alternative A3. Total laboratory Cryptosporidium analysis costs range from approximately $ 42.8 million ( based on the ICRSSL) to $ 51.6 million ( based on the ICR). Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 19 Total laboratory costs for Cryptosporidium monitoring are summarized in Exhibits D. 15a through D. 15c for each population size category of CWSs, NTNCWSs, and TNCWSs, based on the ICR, ICRSSM, and ICRSSL occurrence distributions, respectively, for Alternative A4. Total laboratory Cryptosporidium analysis costs range from approximately $ 58.7 million ( based on the ICRSSL) to $ 61.1 million ( based on the ICR).

Labor Costs In addition to the laboratory costs for Cryptosporidium monitoring, labor will be required for plant employees to take samples. Samples are required at the source water intake. Collecting a sample was estimated to take 30 minutes, slightly higher than the time assumed for E. coli samples, because of the larger volume required. A technical labor rate ($ 24.96 per hour for all system sizes) was assumed for Cryptosporidium monitoring. Labor costs per plant were estimated by multiplying the number of hours per sample, the number of samples per plant per year, and the labor rate per hour. These costs and total costs are shown in Exhibit D. 13 through D. 15, based on the ICR, ICRSSM, and ICRSSL occurrence distributions for Alternatives A2 through A4, respectively. The labor costs for each system type are identical for the ICR, ICRSSM, and ICRSSL occurrence distributions for Alternative A2 because under that regulatory alternative, all plants are required to monitor Cryptosporidium. Exhibit D. 13a Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 511 803 440 1,048 1,176 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 165,783 $ 260,467 142,636 340,012 381,740 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 7,033,836 $ 11,051,085 6,051,753 14,425,999 16,196,402 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 7,199,619 $ 11,311,552 6,194,389 14,766,011 16,578,141 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 6,642 10,435 5,715 13,622 15,294 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 3.2 5.0 2.7 6.5 7.4 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 13,284 20,871 11,429 27,245 30,588 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 5,738 1,861,798 $ 78,992,141 $ 80,853,939 $ 74,591 35.9 149,183 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 195 228 81 53 13 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 63,185 $ 73,820 26,275 17,204 4,066 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 2,680,820 $ 3,132,048 1,114,797 729,926 172,528 41,150    2,744,006 $ 3,205,868 1,141,072 747,130 176,594 42,120    2,531 2,958 1,053 689 163 39    1.2 1.4 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0    5,063 5,915 2,105 1,379 326 78    National Totals 572 185,521 $ 7,871,269 $ 8,056,790 $ 7,433 3.6 14,865 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 731 380 57 53 25 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 237,241 $ 123,344 18,405 17,078 8,047 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 10,065,637 $ 5,233,208 780,895 724,579 341,422 103,253 41,301   10,302,878 $ 5,356,552 799,300 741,657 349,469 105,686 42,274   9,505 4,942 737 684 322 98 39   4.6 2.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0   19,010 9,883 1,475 1,368 645 195 78   National Totals 1,256 407,522 $ 17,290,294 $ 17,697,816 $ 16,327 7.8 32,654 Grand Totals 7,565 2,454,841 $ 104,153,704 $ 106,608,545 $ 98,351 47.3 196,702 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 20 June 2003 Exhibit D. 13b Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 511 803 440 1,048 1,176 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 165,783 $ 260,467 142,636 340,012 381,740 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 7,033,836 $ 11,051,085 6,051,753 14,425,999 16,196,402 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 7,199,619 $ 11,311,552 6,194,389 14,766,011 16,578,141 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 6,642 10,435 5,715 13,622 15,294 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 3.2 5.0 2.7 6.5 7.4 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 13,284 20,871 11,429 27,245 30,588 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 5,738 1,861,798 $ 78,992,141 $ 80,853,939 $ 74,591 35.9 149,183 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 195 228 81 53 13 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 63,185 $ 73,820 26,275 17,204 4,066 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 2,680,820 $ 3,132,048 1,114,797 729,926 172,528 41,150    2,744,006 $ 3,205,868 1,141,072 747,130 176,594 42,120    2,531 2,958 1,053 689 163 39    1.2 1.4 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0    5,063 5,915 2,105 1,379 326 78    National Totals 572 185,521 $ 7,871,269 $ 8,056,790 $ 7,433 3.6 14,865 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 731 380 57 53 25 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 237,241 $ 123,344 18,405 17,078 8,047 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 10,065,637 $ 5,233,208 780,895 724,579 341,422 103,253 41,301   10,302,878 $ 5,356,552 799,300 741,657 349,469 105,686 42,274   9,505 4,942 737 684 322 98 39   4.6 2.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0   19,010 9,883 1,475 1,368 645 195 78   National Totals 1,256 407,522 $ 17,290,294 $ 17,697,816 $ 16,327 7.8 32,654 Grand Totals 7,565 2,454,841 $ 104,153,704 $ 106,608,545 $ 98,351 47.3 196,702 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources:

( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) Cost per sample includes $ 403 in lab costs, $ 88.70 for shipping, and $ 37.80 in additional costs. Assume all plants must ship samples to private lab for Cryptosporidium analysis. Samples must be shipped overnight to meet 24 hour holding time requirements. Costs based on FedEx priority overnight rates for 10 L sample ( 22 LB) shipped in a 34 quart polyethylene cooler packed with wet ice, median cost for all zones. Samples generating a pellet volume of > 0.5 ml require multiple subsample processing at a cost of $ 140 each. During the ICR Supplemental Survey, approximately 27 percent of field samples required analysis of multiple subsamples, resulting in an additional per plant charge of $ 38 ($ 140 x 0.27).

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 21 June 2003 Exhibit D. 13c Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 511 803 440 1,048 1,176 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 165,783 $ 260,467 142,636 340,012 381,740 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 7,033,836 $ 11,051,085 6,051,753 14,425,999 16,196,402 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 7,199,619 $ 11,311,552 6,194,389 14,766,011 16,578,141 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 6,642 10,435 5,715 13,622 15,294 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 3.2 5.0 2.7 6.5 7.4 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 13,284 20,871 11,429 27,245 30,588 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 5,738 1,861,798 $ 78,992,141 $ 80,853,939 $ 74,591 35.9 149,183 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 195 228 81 53 13 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 63,185 $ 73,820 26,275 17,204 4,066 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 2,680,820 $ 3,132,048 1,114,797 729,926 172,528 41,150    2,744,006 $ 3,205,868 1,141,072 747,130 176,594 42,120    2,531 2,958 1,053 689 163 39    1.2 1.4 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.0    5,063 5,915 2,105 1,379 326 78    National Totals 572 185,521 $ 7,871,269 $ 8,056,790 $ 7,433 3.6 14,865 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 731 380 57 53 25 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 237,241 $ 123,344 18,405 17,078 8,047 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 10,065,637 $ 5,233,208 780,895 724,579 341,422 103,253 41,301   10,302,878 $ 5,356,552 799,300 741,657 349,469 105,686 42,274   9,505 4,942 737 684 322 98 39   4.6 2.4 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0   19,010 9,883 1,475 1,368 645 195 78   National Totals 1,256 407,522 $ 17,290,294 $ 17,697,816 $ 16,327 7.8 32,654 Grand Totals 7,565 2,454,841 $ 104,153,704 $ 106,608,545 $ 98,351 47.3 196,702  Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) Cost per sample includes $ 403 in lab costs, $ 88.70 for shipping, and $ 37.80 in additional costs. Assume all plants must ship samples to private lab for Cryptosporidium analysis. Samples must be shipped overnight to meet 24 hour holding time requirements. Costs based on FedEx priority overnight rates for 10 L sample ( 22 LB) shipped in a 34 quart polyethylene cooler packed with wet ice, median cost for all zones. Samples generating a pellet volume of > 0.5 ml require multiple subsample processing at a cost of $ 140 each. During the ICR Supplemental Survey, approximately 27 percent of field samples required analysis of multiple subsamples, resulting in an additional per plant charge of $ 38 ($ 140 x 0.27).

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 22 June 2003 Exhibit D. 14a Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 178 279 153 365 409 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 57,693 $ 90,643 49,637 118,324 132,845 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 2,447,775 $ 3,845,778 2,106,010 5,020,248 5,636,348 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 2,505,467 $ 3,936,420 2,155,647 5,138,572 5,769,193 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 2,311 3,632 1,989 4,741 5,322 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 1.1 1.7 1.0 2.3 2.6 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 4,623 7,263 3,977 9,481 10,645 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 3,144 1,020,301 $ 43,289,225 $ 44,309,526 $ 40,877 19.7 81,755 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 68 79 28 18 4 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 21,988 $ 25,690 9,144 5,987 1,415 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 932,925 $ 1,089,953 387,949 254,014 60,040 41,150    954,914 $ 1,115,642 397,093 260,001 61,455 42,120    881 1,029 366 240 57 39    0.4 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0    1,762 2,058 733 480 113 78    National Totals 201 65,194 $ 2,766,031 $ 2,831,225 $ 2,612 1.3 5,224 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 254 132 20 18 9 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 82,560 $ 42,924 6,405 5,943 2,800 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 3,502,842 $ 1,821,156 271,751 252,153 118,815 103,253 41,301   3,585,402 $ 1,864,080 278,156 258,097 121,615 105,686 42,274   3,308 1,720 257 238 112 98 39   1.6 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0   6,615 3,439 513 476 224 195 78   National Totals 444 144,039 $ 6,111,271 $ 6,255,310 $ 5,771 2.8 11,542 Grand Totals 3,789 1,229,534 $ 52,166,527 $ 53,396,061 $ 49,260 23.7 98,520 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) Cost per sample includes $ 403 in lab costs, $ 88.70 for shipping, and $ 37.80 in additional costs. Assume all plants must ship samples to private lab for Cryptosporidium analysis. Samples must be shipped overnight to meet 24 hour holding time requirements. Costs based on FedEx priority overnight rates for 10 L sample ( 22 LB) shipped in a 34 quart polyethylene cooler packed with wet ice, median cost for all zones. Samples generating a pellet volume of > 0.5 ml require multiple subsample processing at a cost of $ 140 each. During the ICR Supplemental Survey, approximately 27 percent of field samples required analysis of multiple subsamples, resulting in an additional per plant charge of $ 38 ($ 140 x 0.27).

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 23 June 2003 Exhibit D. 14b Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 139 218 120 285 320 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 45,093 $ 70,847 38,797 92,483 103,833 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 1,913,203 $ 3,005,895 1,646,077 3,923,872 4,405,421 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 1,958,296 $ 3,076,742 1,684,874 4,016,355 4,509,254 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 1,807 2,838 1,554 3,705 4,160 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 0.9 1.4 0.7 1.8 2.0 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 3,613 5,677 3,109 7,411 8,320 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 2,842 922,213 $ 39,127,535 $ 40,049,748 $ 36,948 17.8 73,895 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 53 62 22 14 3 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 17,186 $ 20,079 7,147 4,679 1,106 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 729,183 $ 851,917 303,225 198,540 46,928 41,150    746,370 $ 871,996 310,371 203,219 48,034 42,120    689 804 286 187 44 39    0.3 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0    1,377 1,609 573 375 89 78    National Totals 158 51,168 $ 2,170,942 $ 2,222,110 $ 2,050 1.0 4,100 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 199 103 15 14 7 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 64,530 $ 33,549 5,006 4,645 2,189 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 2,737,853 $ 1,423,433 212,403 197,085 92,867 103,253 41,301   2,802,383 $ 1,456,982 217,410 201,731 95,055 105,686 42,274   2,585 1,344 201 186 88 98 39   1.2 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0   5,171 2,688 401 372 175 195 78   National Totals 349 113,326 $ 4,808,195 $ 4,921,521 $ 4,540 2.2 9,081 Grand Totals 3,349 1,086,707 $ 46,106,672 $ 47,193,379 $ 43,538 20.9 87,076 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) Cost per sample includes $ 403 in lab costs, $ 88.70 for shipping, and $ 37.80 in additional costs. Assume all plants must ship samples to private lab for Cryptosporidium analysis. Samples must be shipped overnight to meet 24 hour holding time requirements. Costs based on FedEx priority overnight rates for 10 L sample ( 22 LB) shipped in a 34 quart polyethylene cooler packed with wet ice, median cost for all zones. Samples generating a pellet volume of > 0.5 ml require multiple subsample processing at a cost of $ 140 each. During the ICR Supplemental Survey, approximately 27 percent of field samples required analysis of multiple subsamples, resulting in an additional per plant charge of $ 38 ($ 140 x 0.27).

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 24 June 2003 Exhibit D. 14c Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 114 179 98 234 263 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 37,069 $ 58,241 31,893 76,027 85,357 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 1,572,766 $ 2,471,023 1,353,172 3,225,653 3,621,515 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 1,609,835 $ 2,529,263 1,385,065 3,301,680 3,706,872 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 1,485 2,333 1,278 3,046 3,420 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 0.7 1.1 0.6 1.5 1.6 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 2,970 4,667 2,556 6,092 6,840 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 2,650 859,746 $ 36,477,196 $ 37,336,941 $ 34,445 16.6 68,890 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 44 51 18 12 3 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 14,128 $ 16,506 5,875 3,847 909 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 599,431 $ 700,326 249,269 163,212 38,577 41,150    613,560 $ 716,832 255,144 167,058 39,487 42,120    566 661 235 154 36 39    0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0    1,132 1,323 471 308 73 78    National Totals 130 42,236 $ 1,791,964 $ 1,834,200 $ 1,692 0.8 3,384 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 163 85 13 12 6 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 53,047 $ 27,580 4,115 3,819 1,799 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 2,250,677 $ 1,170,145 174,608 162,016 76,342 103,253 41,301   2,303,724 $ 1,197,725 178,723 165,834 78,141 105,686 42,274   2,125 1,105 165 153 72 98 39   1.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0   4,251 2,210 330 306 144 195 78   National Totals 289 93,767 $ 3,978,341 $ 4,072,108 $ 3,757 1.8 7,513 Grand Totals 3,069 995,748 $ 42,247,501 $ 43,243,250 $ 39,894 19.2 79,788 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) Cost per sample includes $ 403 in lab costs, $ 88.70 for shipping, and $ 37.80 in additional costs. Assume all plants must ship samples to private lab for Cryptosporidium analysis. Samples must be shipped overnight to meet 24 hour holding time requirements. Costs based on FedEx priority overnight rates for 10 L sample ( 22 LB) shipped in a 34 quart polyethylene cooler packed with wet ice, median cost for all zones. Samples generating a pellet volume of > 0.5 ml require multiple subsample processing at a cost of $ 140 each. During the ICR Supplemental Survey, approximately 27 percent of field samples required analysis of multiple subsamples, resulting in an additional per plant charge of $ 38 ($ 140 x 0.27).

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 25 June 2003 Exhibit D. 15a Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 155 243 133 318 356 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 50,232 $ 78,922 43,219 103,024 115,667 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 2,131,252 $ 3,348,479 1,833,681 4,371,078 4,907,510 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 2,181,485 $ 3,427,400 1,876,900 4,474,101 5,023,177 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 2,013 3,162 1,732 4,128 4,634 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 1.0 1.5 0.8 2.0 2.2 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 4,025 6,324 3,463 8,255 9,268 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 2,965 962,223 $ 40,825,066 $ 41,787,289 $ 38,551 18.5 77,101 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 59 69 25 16 4 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 19,145 $ 22,368 7,961 5,213 1,232 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 812,289 $ 949,010 337,783 221,168 52,276 41,150    831,434 $ 971,378 345,745 226,380 53,508 42,120    767 896 319 209 49 39    0.4 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0    1,534 1,792 638 418 99 78    National Totals 175 56,889 $ 2,413,676 $ 2,470,565 $ 2,279 1.1 4,558 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 222 115 17 16 8 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 71,884 $ 37,373 5,577 5,175 2,438 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 3,049,888 $ 1,585,662 236,611 219,547 103,451 103,253 41,301   3,121,772 $ 1,623,035 242,188 224,722 105,889 105,686 42,274   2,880 1,497 223 207 98 98 39   1.4 0.7 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0   5,760 2,995 447 415 195 195 78   National Totals 388 125,854 $ 5,339,713 $ 5,465,567 $ 5,042 2.4 10,084 Grand Totals 3,529 1,144,965 $ 48,578,455 $ 49,723,420 $ 45,872 22.1 91,744 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) Cost per sample includes $ 403 in lab costs, $ 88.70 for shipping, and $ 37.80 in additional costs. Assume all plants must ship samples to private lab for Cryptosporidium analysis. Samples must be shipped overnight to meet 24 hour holding time requirements. Costs based on FedEx priority overnight rates for 10 L sample ( 22 LB) shipped in a 34 quart polyethylene cooler packed with wet ice, median cost for all zones. Samples generating a pellet volume of > 0.5 ml require multiple subsample processing at a cost of $ 140 each. During the ICR Supplemental Survey, approximately 27 percent of field samples required analysis of multiple subsamples, resulting in an additional per plant charge of $ 38 ($ 140 x 0.27).

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 26 June 2003 Exhibit D. 15b Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 110 173 95 225 253 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 35,643 $ 56,001 30,667 73,103 82,074 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 1,512,275 $ 2,375,983 1,301,127 3,101,590 3,482,226 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 1,547,918 $ 2,431,984 1,331,794 3,174,692 3,564,300 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 1,428 2,244 1,229 2,929 3,288 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 0.7 1.1 0.6 1.4 1.6 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 2,856 4,487 2,457 5,858 6,576 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 2,615 848,646 $ 36,006,268 $ 36,854,914 $ 34,000 16.3 68,001 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 42 49 17 11 3 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 13,585 $ 15,871 5,649 3,699 874 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 576,376 $ 673,390 239,681 156,934 37,094 41,150    589,961 $ 689,262 245,330 160,633 37,968 42,120    544 636 226 148 35 39    0.3 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0    1,089 1,272 453 296 70 78    National Totals 125 40,648 $ 1,724,625 $ 1,765,274 $ 1,629 0.8 3,257 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 157 82 12 11 5 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 51,007 $ 26,519 3,957 3,672 1,730 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 2,164,112 $ 1,125,140 167,892 155,784 73,406 103,253 41,301   2,215,119 $ 1,151,659 171,850 159,456 75,136 105,686 42,274   2,044 1,062 159 147 69 98 39   1.0 0.5 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0   4,087 2,125 317 294 139 195 78   National Totals 278 90,292 $ 3,830,888 $ 3,921,180 $ 3,617 1.7 7,235 Grand Totals 3,019 979,586 $ 41,561,781 $ 42,541,367 $ 39,246 18.9 78,493 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) Cost per sample includes $ 403 in lab costs, $ 88.70 for shipping, and $ 37.80 in additional costs. Assume all plants must ship samples to private lab for Cryptosporidium analysis. Samples must be shipped overnight to meet 24 hour holding time requirements. Costs based on FedEx priority overnight rates for 10 L sample ( 22 LB) shipped in a 34 quart polyethylene cooler packed with wet ice, median cost for all zones. Samples generating a pellet volume of > 0.5 ml require multiple subsample processing at a cost of $ 140 each. During the ICR Supplemental Survey, approximately 27 percent of field samples required analysis of multiple subsamples, resulting in an additional per plant charge of $ 38 ($ 140 x 0.27).

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 27 June 2003 Exhibit D. 15c Total Cost Estimates for Cryptosporidium Monitoring for All System Types, by System Size Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Baseline # of Plants Monitoring Cryptosporidium Sampling Sample Analysis Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) Responses # of Cryptosporidium Samples Hours per Sample Cost per Labor Hour Total Sampling Labor Cost Cost per Sample Total Laboratory Analysis Cost ( O& M) A B C D E = A* B* C* D F G = A* B* F H = E+ G I = A* B* C J = I/ 2080 K = A* B CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 82 128 70 168 188 1,051 346 327 36 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 26,525 $ 41,675 22,822 54,402 61,078 341,040 112,311 106,040 11,768 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 529.50 $ 1,125,414 $ 1,768,174 968,280 2,308,160 2,591,424 14,469,611 4,765,137 4,499,035 499,283 1,151,939 $ 1,809,848 991,102 2,362,562 2,652,503 14,810,651 4,877,448 4,605,075 511,051 1,063 1,670 914 2,180 2,447 13,663 4,500 4,248 471 0.5 0.8 0.4 1.0 1.2 6.6 2.2 2.0 0.2 2,125 3,339 1,829 4,359 4,894 27,327 8,999 8,497 943 National Totals 2,397 777,661 $ 32,994,519 $ 33,772,180 $ 31,156 15.0 62,313 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 31 36 13 8 2 3    26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 10,110 $ 11,811 4,204 2,753 651 970    529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 428,931 $ 501,128 178,367 116,788 27,604 41,150    439,041 $ 512,939 182,571 119,541 28,255 42,120    405 473 168 110 26 39    0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0    810 946 337 221 52 78    National Totals 94 30,498 $ 1,293,969 $ 1,324,467 $ 1,222 0.6 2,444 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 117 61 9 8 4 8 3   26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 24.96 $ 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 24.96 37,959 $ 19,735 2,945 2,732 1,288 2,434 973   529.50 $ 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 529.50 1,610,502 $ 837,313 124,943 115,933 54,627 103,253 41,301   1,648,461 $ 857,048 127,888 118,665 55,915 105,686 42,274   1,521 791 118 109 52 98 39   0.7 0.4 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0   3,042 1,581 236 219 103 195 78   National Totals 210 68,065 $ 2,887,872 $ 2,955,937 $ 2,727 1.3 5,454 Grand Totals 2,700 876,225 $ 37,176,359 $ 38,052,584 $ 35,105 16.9 70,210 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities." ( B) Semimonthly source water monitoring for one year for small systems and monthly samples for 24 months for medium and large systems, plus two matrix spike samples. ( C) Estimate of labor for collecting sample and shipping, based on expert opinion. ( D) All size categories were assumed to use a technical rate of $ 24.96/ hour, based on Bureau of Labor Statistics rates. ( F) Cost per sample includes $ 403 in lab costs, $ 88.70 for shipping, and $ 37.80 in additional costs. Assume all plants must ship samples to private lab for Cryptosporidium analysis. Samples must be shipped overnight to meet 24 hour holding time requirements. Costs based on FedEx priority overnight rates for 10 L sample ( 22 LB) shipped in a 34 quart polyethylene cooler packed with wet ice, median cost for all zones. Samples generating a pellet volume of > 0.5 ml require multiple subsample processing at a cost of $ 140 each. During the ICR Supplemental Survey, approximately 27 percent of field samples required analysis of multiple subsamples, resulting in an additional per plant charge of $ 38 ($ 140 x 0.27).

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 28 June 2003 Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 29 D. 4.3 PWS Reporting Costs For medium and large systems, EPA will collect data directly from the approved laboratories on an ongoing basis ( i. e., as data are generated they will be entered by laboratories into an EPA database). However, medium and large systems will still review the data. At the end of the 2 year monitoring period, EPA will give the results of the monitoring to the States/ Primacy Agencies, which will work with their systems to determine appropriate compliance steps.

Because small system monitoring is expected to occur after States achieve primacy, EPA assumes that small plants will report monitoring results to their State/ Primacy Agency. Costs associated with reporting would include the amount of time it takes for a plant to gather monitoring information and submit it to their State/ Primacy Agency for review. Since the exact schedule of reporting to States is not set in the rule, there may be some variation in reporting effort from State to State.

For this analysis, 0.25 hours per sample ( 6.5 hours for small plants and 6 hours for medium and large plants) is used to estimate costs.

Reporting costs for small plants serving up to 500 people are based on the full technical rate ($ 24.96 per hour). For those plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80/ 20 percent split between technical and managerial labor rates ( the split was between $ 24.96 per hour and $ 44.91 per hour) ( BLS 2001). The costs of reporting are presented in Exhibit D. 16 for CWSs, NTNCWSs, and TNCWSs, respectively. The number of plants reporting is the same for the ICR, ICRSSM, and ICRSSL occurrence distributions. Exhibit D. 16 Reporting Cost and Labor Estimates for Bin Classification Monitoring for All Regulatory Alternatives System Size ( Population Served) Hours per Plant Cost per Labor Hour Baseline # of Plants Reporting Total Cost Total Burden ( Hours) Total Burden ( FTEs) A B C D = A* B* C E = A* C F = E/ 2080 CWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6 6 6 6 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 511 803 440 1,048 1,176 1,051 346 327 36 82,892 $ 130,234 82,719 197,183 221,381 182,565 60,122 56,765 6,300 3,321 5,218 2,857 6,811 7,647 6,306 2,077 1,961 218 1.6 2.5 1.4 3.3 3.7 3.0 1.0 0.9 0.1 National Totals 5,738 1,020,160 $ 36,416 17.5 NTNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6 6 6 6 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 195 228 81 53 13 3 0 0 0 31,593 $ 36,910 15,238 9,977 2,358 519    1,266 1,479 526 345 81 18    0.6 0.7 0.3 0.2 0.0 0.0    National Totals 572 96,595 $ 3,715 1.8 TNCWSs £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6.5 6 6 6 6 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 731 380 57 53 25 8 3 0 0 118,621 $ 61,672 10,674 9,904 4,667 1,303 521   4,752 2,471 369 342 161 45 18   2.3 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0   National Totals 1,256 207,361 $ 8,158 3.9 Grand Totals 7,565 1,324,115 $ 48,289 23.2 Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. Sources: ( A) Hours per plant reporting to the State/ Primacy Agency for bin classification exemption and to report E. coli and Cryptosporidium monitoring data and bin classification. Assumes 15 minutes per sample. Based on 24 monthly E. coli and Cryptosporidium samples for medium and large systems and 26 biweekly E. coli and 24 semimonthly Cryptosporidium samples for small systems. Although small systems will not report E. coli and Cryptosporidium results at the same time, the additional reporting burden is assumed to be negligible. The decrease in burden for small plants that report E. coli but are exempt from Cryptosporidium monitoring is also assumed to be negligible. ( B) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

( C) Taken from " Baseline for Implementation and Monitoring Activities," column D.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 30 June 2003 Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 31 D. 4.4 Initial and Future Monitoring Costs for States/ Primacy Agencies States/ Primacy Agencies will incur costs as a result of the small system E. coli and Cryptosporidium monitoring. To estimate State/ Primacy Agency costs, the number of FTEs required per activity is multiplied by the number of labor hours per FTE, the State/ Primacy Agency labor hour cost, and the number of States and Territories.

The number of FTEs required per activity was estimated by EPA based on similar rules. States/ Primacy Agencies are expected to work with the small systems conducting monitoring to review data and make bin classification determinations. State/ Primacy Agency activities include:

° Analyzing monitoring reports and determining bin classification   0.3 FTEs for initial E. coli monitoring, 0.2 FTEs for initial Cryptosporidium monitoring and future E. coli monitoring, and 0.1 FTEs for future Cryptosporidium monitoring.

° Consultation with PWSs   same number of FTEs as for analyzing monitoring reports and determining bin classification.

° Conducting recordkeeping   0.25 FTEs.

State/ Primacy Agency labor rates, as stated in Chapter 6, section 6.1.1, are $ 28.89. The number of States and Territories is estimated as the sum of the 50 States in the United States, 6 Territories, and 1 Indian Tribe. EPA estimates the national total monitoring cost for States/ Primacy Agencies to be $ 10.4 million for initial and future monitoring combined. State costs are expected to be minimal during the initial phase of monitoring for large and medium systems because EPA will be analyzing the data.

The initial monitoring costs for States/ Primacy Agencies are presented in Exhibit D. 17a. The future ( rebinning) monitoring costs for States/ Primacy Agencies are presented in Exhibits D. 17b. Exhibit D. 17a State Reporting Costs and Labor Estimate for Initial E. coli and Cryptosporidium Monitoring for Small Systems State Activity FTEs per State for E. coli Monitoring Total Hours for E. coli FTEs Per State for Cryptosporidium Monitoring Total Hours for Cryptosporidium Total FTEs Per State Total Hours Cost per Labor Hour Total Cost A B = A* 2080 C D = C* 2080 E = A+ C F = B+ D G H = F* G Analyze PWS Report and Make Bin Classifications 0.3 624 0.2 416 0.5 1040 28.89 $ 30,046 $ Respond to PWS 0.3 624 0.2 416 0.5 1040 28.89 30,046 Recordkeeping 0.25 520 0.25 520 0.5 1040 28.89 30,046 Totals per State 0.9 1,768 0.7 1,352 2 3,120 90,137 $ National Totals ( 57 States/ Primacy Agencies) 48.5 100,776 37.1 77,064 86 177,840 5,137,798 $ Notes: Detail may not add to totals due to independent rounding. All States/ Primacy Agencies are assumed to incur some costs for each activitiy. 1 FTE = 2,080 hours ( 40 hours/ week; 52 weeks/ year) Sources: ( A), ( C) EPA estimated FTEs based on experience with similar regulations. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Exhibit D. 17b State Reporting Costs and Labor Estimate for Future E. coli and Cryptosporidium Monitoring State Activity FTEs per State for E. coli Monitoring in Small Systems Total Hours for E. coli in Small Systems FTEs Per State for Cryptosporidium Monitoring in Small Systems Total Hours for Cryptosporidium in Small Systems FTEs Per State for Cryptosporidium Monitoring in Medium & Large Systems Total Hours for Cryptosporidium in Medium & Large Systems Total FTEs Per State Total Hours Cost per Labor Hour Total Cost A B = A* 2080 C D = C* 2080 E F = E* 2080 G = A+ C+ E H = B+ D+ F I J = H* I Analyze PWS Report and Make Bin Classifications 0.2 416 0.1 208 0.1 208 0.4 832 28.89 $ 24,036 $ Respond to PWS 0.2 416 0.1 208 0.1 208 0.4 832 28.89 24,036 $ Recordkeeping 0.25 520 0.25 520 0.25 520 0.75 1560 28.89 45,068 $ Totals per State 0.7 1,352 0.5 936 0.5 936 1.6 3,224 93,141 $ National Totals ( 57 States/ Primacy Agencies) 37.1 77,064 25.7 53,352 25.7 53,352 88.4 183,768 5,309,058 $ Notes: Detail may not add to totals due to independent rounding. All States/ Primacy Agencies are assumed to incur some costs for each activity. 1 FTE = 2,080 hours ( 40 hours/ week; 52 weeks/ year) Sources: ( A), ( C), ( E) EPA estimated FTEs based on experience with similar regulations. ( I) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 32 June 2003 Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 33 D. 5 Technology Compliance Reporting D. 5.1 State Burden for Reviewing Technology Compliance Reports PWSs of all sizes that install new technology as a result of their bin classifications will be required to demonstrate compliance with certain criteria for each technology. States and Primacy Agencies are expected to review the data PWSs submit for this purpose. This burden is estimated to be 0.5 hours per plant reviewed per month, or 6 hours per year per plant. The number of plants reporting is expected to vary with the occurrence distribution used and the regulatory alternative chosen. The labor rate for States and Primacy Agencies is the same as for other exhibits calculating State costs   $ 28.89. The State burden and cost for reviewing reports on compliance with each technology are shown in Exhibits D. 18 to D. 20. Exhibit D. 18a Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 157 134 131 253 286 364 132 120 23 118 69 36 22 21 23 6 6 1   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      3 1 1 0 275 204 168 276 309 391 139 128 24 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 1,649 1,222 1,007 1,658 1,857 2,346 836 766 145 47,632 $ 35,305 29,088 47,914 53,644 67,784 24,146 22,124 4,185 Totals 1,600 302 7 6 1,914 11,486 331,821 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 34 June 2003 Exhibit D. 18b Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 88 77 94 181 207 299 108 99 20 118 69 36 21 20 20 5 5 0   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      3 1 1 0 206 147 130 203 230 323 114 105 21 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 1,236 881 780 1,220 1,379 1,937 687 631 127 35,716 $ 25,464 22,523 35,254 39,831 55,966 19,840 18,222 3,672 Totals 1,172 295 7 5 1,480 8,878 256,487 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 35 June 2003 Exhibit D. 18c Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 70 63 74 144 167 252 91 83 18 118 69 36 21 20 19 5 5 0   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      3 1 1 0 188 132 111 166 189 275 97 89 19 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 1,130 794 664 998 1,136 1,651 582 536 115 32,659 $ 22,939 19,190 28,825 32,817 47,696 16,825 15,485 3,312 Totals 963 293 7 5 1,268 7,606 219,747 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 36 June 2003 Exhibit D. 19a Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 100 87 60 117 138 333 121 106 21 118 69 36 21 20 20 5 5 0   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      3 1 1 0 218 156 97 140 160 358 127 112 22 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 1,305 938 581 837 961 2,149 764 674 133 37,703 $ 27,105 16,788 24,195 27,764 62,076 22,067 19,486 3,838 Totals 1,083 296 7 5 1,390 8,343 241,022 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 37 June 2003 Exhibit D. 19b Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 56 51 29 57 72 260 94 82 18 118 69 36 21 20 18 4 4 0   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      2 1 1 0 174 120 65 79 94 282 99 88 19 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 1,042 721 392 472 563 1,691 597 525 113 30,092 $ 20,819 11,320 13,649 16,258 48,843 17,243 15,168 3,270 Totals 717 291 7 4 1,019 6,115 176,660 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 38 June 2003 Exhibit D. 19c Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 43 40 21 40 54 215 78 68 16 118 69 36 21 20 17 4 4 0   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      2 1 1 0 161 110 57 63 76 236 83 73 17 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 966 658 341 375 456 1,417 497 438 102 27,907 $ 19,015 9,860 10,834 13,187 40,928 14,357 12,663 2,940 Totals 575 290 7 3 875 5,251 151,691 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 39 June 2003 Exhibit D. 20a Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 42 39 18 35 48 133 48 43 13 118 69 36 21 20 17 4 4 0   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      1 0 0 0 160 109 54 57 70 153 53 48 14 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 958 652 324 342 421 918 315 286 82 27,682 $ 18,829 9,370 9,889 12,155 26,519 9,103 8,276 2,363 Totals 419 289 7 2 716 4,299 124,186 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 40 June 2003 Exhibit D. 20b Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 28 27 14 27 40 76 27 25 10 118 69 36 21 20 17 4 4 0   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      1 0 0 0 145 97 50 49 62 95 31 30 11 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 873 581 300 295 370 568 187 177 67 25,218 $ 16,793 8,669 8,536 10,679 16,397 5,411 5,122 1,948 Totals 274 288 7 1 570 3,419 98,773 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 41 June 2003 Exhibit D. 20c Burden and Cost to States Associated with Reviewing Plants' Reports on Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Unfiltered Plants Installing Ozone Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D E = A+ B+ C+ D F G H = E* F I = G* H £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 20 21 12 23 35 54 19 18 9 118 69 36 21 20 16 4 4 0   1 1 2 1 0 1 1      0 0 0 0 138 91 48 45 57 73 23 23 10 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 28.89 $ 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 28.89 828 544 287 271 343 436 139 136 62 23,930 $ 15,730 8,302 7,829 9,908 12,595 4,025 3,924 1,790 Totals 213 287 7 1 508 3,047 88,033 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR. ( F) Based on an estimate of 0.5 hours per month needed to review each plant's reports. ( G) Based on information gathered during the development of the State Workload Model.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 42 June 2003 Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal June 2003 D 43 D. 5.2 Technology Compliance Reporting for Plants In order to get log removal credit for Cryptosporidium, PWSs will be required to demonstrate that they are complying with design and operational criteria for any new toolbox technologies they install. For some technologies the demonstration of compliance will be similar to that required for existing technologies, and no additional burden will be incurred. For instance, the combined filter performance toolbox option requires monitoring of turbidity of the effluent from each filter; systems are already required to do the same monitoring under the IESWTR and the LT1ESWTR. No new burden is assumed for these systems. Other technologies are assumed to be implemented by few systems ( based on technology distributions modeled for the LT2ESWTR EA), so burden for demonstrating compliance for them is negligible. Few systems, for example, are expected to implement watershed control programs for log removal credit.

The labor for filtered plants for each regulatory alternative and occurrence distribution is shown in Exhibits D. 21 through D. 23. For filtered plants, new burden is predicted to be incurred only by systems switching to UV, microfiltration/ ultrafiltration, and bank filtration.

For unfiltered plants, reporting costs are predicted to be incurred only by systems ( CWSs only) installing UV or ozone for disinfection ( on top of their existing disinfectants). No unfiltered plants are predicted to add chlorine dioxide disinfection. The reporting costs for unfiltered plants are shown in D. 24. There is only one exhibit for unfiltered plants because they have only one regulatory alternative and one occurrence distribution ( for the ICR).

Reporting costs for small plants serving up to 500 people are based on the full technical rate ($ 24.96 per hour). For those plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80/ 20 percent split between technical and managerial labor rates ( the split was between $ 24.96 per hour and $ 44.91 per hour) ( BLS 2001).

The reporting and recordkeeping burden for each plant is assumed to be 3 hours per month, or 36 hours per year. Exhibit D. 21a Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 33 66 87 212 251 342 125 114 15 73 51 29 21 21 23 6 6 1      3 1 1 0 106 116 116 232 272 368 133 121 16 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 3,825 4,189 4,169 8,366 9,777 13,240 4,775 4,353 567 95,462 $ 104,548 120,681 242,192 283,054 383,297 138,241 126,021 16,410 National Totals 1,245 229 6 1,479 53,260 1,509,905 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 20 22 21 14 5 2 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  65 41 28 16 5 3 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,332 1,489 996 565 183 92 12 11  58,218 $ 37,158 28,835 16,346 5,295 2,668 333 330  National Totals 85 73 0 158 5,680 149,183 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 103 40 17 14 7 3 1     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   103 40 17 14 7 3 1   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 3,699 1,457 624 517 239 112 34   92,334 $ 36,365 18,078 14,953 6,919 3,241 972   National Totals 185 0 0 186 6,682 172,862 $ Grand Totals 1,515 302 6 1,823 65,622 1,831,950 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR. ( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 44 June 2003 Exhibit D. 21b Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 18 37 61 148 175 278 102 93 12 73 51 29 20 20 20 5 5 0      3 1 1 0 92 87 89 168 195 301 108 98 13 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 3,301 3,143 3,220 6,049 7,031 10,828 3,890 3,545 460 82,387 $ 78,459 93,231 175,118 203,560 313,457 112,622 102,625 13,323 National Totals 924 222 5 1,152 41,468 1,174,783 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 11 13 14 10 3 2 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  56 31 21 11 4 2 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,013 1,133 769 408 132 74 9 9  50,244 $ 28,271 22,276 11,819 3,829 2,132 267 263  National Totals 54 72 0 126 4,548 119,101 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 57 23 12 10 5 2 1     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   57 23 12 10 5 2 1   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,068 814 436 360 167 88 27   51,613 $ 20,328 12,616 10,436 4,829 2,560 768   National Totals 110 0 0 110 3,960 103,150 $ Grand Totals 1,088 295 5 1,388 49,976 1,397,033 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR.

( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 45 June 2003 Exhibit D. 21c Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A2 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 15 29 47 115 137 232 85 77 10 73 51 29 20 20 19 5 5 0      3 1 1 0 88 80 76 135 157 254 91 83 11 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 3,166 2,875 2,739 4,872 5,637 9,137 3,270 2,978 385 79,033 $ 71,766 79,292 141,058 163,193 264,513 94,668 86,212 11,158 National Totals 749 220 5 974 35,060 990,893 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 9 10 11 8 3 2 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  54 29 18 9 3 2 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 1,931 1,041 654 329 107 62 8 8  48,199 $ 25,991 18,946 9,520 3,084 1,791 224 220  National Totals 43 72 0 115 4,139 107,976 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 46 18 9 8 4 2 1     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   46 18 9 8 4 2 1   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 1,649 650 340 281 130 73 22   41,167 $ 16,213 9,843 8,142 3,767 2,126 638   National Totals 87 0 0 87 3,146 81,896 $ Grand Totals 879 293 5 1,176 42,346 1,180,764 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR. ( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 46 June 2003 Exhibit D. 22a Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 21 42 38 92 109 312 115 100 13 73 51 29 20 20 20 5 5 0      3 1 1 0 94 92 66 112 129 335 121 106 14 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 3,388 3,318 2,392 4,025 4,633 12,076 4,348 3,807 495 84,568 $ 82,809 69,251 116,525 134,117 349,599 125,880 110,206 14,323 National Totals 841 223 5 1,069 38,481 1,087,279 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 13 14 9 6 2 2 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  57 33 16 8 2 2 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,066 1,192 572 272 88 83 10 10  51,574 $ 29,753 16,547 7,864 2,548 2,393 299 284  National Totals 47 72 0 119 4,292 111,262 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 65 26 7 6 3 3 1     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   65 26 8 6 3 3 1   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,340 922 271 224 104 100 30   58,404 $ 23,002 7,845 6,489 3,003 2,892 868   National Totals 111 0 0 111 3,990 102,503 $ Grand Totals 998 296 5 1,299 46,764 1,301,044 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR. ( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 47 June 2003 Exhibit D. 22b Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 12 23 16 39 46 240 88 76 10 73 51 29 20 20 18 4 4 0      2 1 1 0 85 74 45 58 65 260 93 81 10 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 3,054 2,650 1,602 2,095 2,345 9,372 3,356 2,912 377 76,216 $ 66,144 46,385 60,651 67,897 271,308 97,161 84,311 10,907 National Totals 548 219 4 771 27,763 780,979 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 7 8 4 3 1 2 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  52 27 11 4 1 2 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 1,862 965 383 141 46 63 8 7  46,481 $ 24,076 11,083 4,093 1,326 1,836 229 215  National Totals 24 72 0 97 3,476 89,340 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 36 14 3 3 1 2 1     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   36 14 3 3 1 2 1   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 1,298 511 114 94 44 75 23   32,393 $ 12,758 3,296 2,726 1,261 2,182 655   National Totals 60 0 0 60 2,159 55,271 $ Grand Totals 632 291 4 928 33,397 925,590 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR. ( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 48 June 2003 Exhibit D. 22c Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A3 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 9 18 10 24 29 196 72 62 8 73 51 29 20 19 17 4 4 0      2 1 1 0 82 68 39 44 48 215 77 66 9 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,957 2,458 1,391 1,580 1,735 7,753 2,762 2,393 308 73,819 $ 61,361 40,281 45,738 50,223 224,442 79,969 69,289 8,925 National Totals 428 217 3 648 23,339 654,048 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 5 6 2 2 1 1 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  50 25 9 3 1 1 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 1,804 899 332 107 35 52 7 6  45,019 $ 22,447 9,625 3,087 1,000 1,518 190 178  National Totals 18 72 0 90 3,242 83,063 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 28 11 2 2 1 2 1     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   28 11 2 2 1 2 1   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 999 393 72 59 28 61 18   24,929 $ 9,818 2,082 1,722 797 1,777 533   National Totals 45 0 0 45 1,631 41,657 $ Grand Totals 490 290 3 784 28,211 778,768 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR. ( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 49 June 2003 Exhibit D. 23a Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICR Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 9 17 8 20 23 115 42 37 5 73 51 29 20 19 17 4 4 0      1 0 0 0 82 68 37 39 42 133 47 41 5 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,948 2,439 1,321 1,407 1,530 4,805 1,681 1,485 188 73,572 $ 60,869 38,232 40,730 44,288 139,113 48,669 42,977 5,453 National Totals 276 216 2 495 17,803 493,903 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 5 6 2 1 0 1 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  50 25 9 3 1 1 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 1,798 893 316 95 31 33 4 4  44,869 $ 22,280 9,135 2,749 890 944 118 112  National Totals 16 72 0 88 3,172 81,097 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 27 11 2 1 1 1 0     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   27 11 2 1 1 1 0   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 968 381 58 48 22 36 11   24,160 $ 9,515 1,674 1,385 641 1,047 314   National Totals 42 0 0 42 1,524 38,736 $ Grand Totals 334 289 2 625 22,499 613,736 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR. ( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 50 June 2003 Exhibit D. 23b Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSM Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 6 11 5 13 15 59 22 19 3 73 51 29 19 19 16 4 4 0      1 0 0 0 79 62 34 32 34 76 26 23 3 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,839 2,222 1,219 1,159 1,236 2,735 922 831 102 70,868 $ 55,472 35,299 33,564 35,794 79,164 26,678 24,061 2,957 National Totals 152 216 1 369 13,266 363,857 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 3 4 1 1 0 0 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  48 23 8 2 1 1 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 1,732 819 291 78 25 19 2 2  43,219 $ 20,441 8,434 2,265 734 542 68 65  National Totals 10 72 0 82 2,969 75,769 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 18 7 1 1 0 1 0     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   18 7 1 1 0 1 0   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 631 248 38 31 14 18 6   15,738 $ 6,198 1,090 902 417 535 160   National Totals 27 0 0 27 986 25,040 $ Grand Totals 189 288 1 478 17,221 464,667 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR. ( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

Economic Analysis for the LT2ESWTR Proposal D 51 June 2003 Exhibit D. 23c Filtered Plant Burden and Cost for Preparing Reports Demonstrating Technology Compliance Based on ICRSSL Occurrence Distribution, Alternative A4 System Size ( Population Served) Number of Plants Installing UV Number of Plants Installing MF/ UF Number of Plants Installing Bank Filtration Total Plants Annual Labor Hours per Plant Labor Rate Total Annual Labor Hours Total Annual Costs A B C D= A+ B+ C E F G= D* E H= F* G CWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 4 8 4 9 11 38 14 12 2 73 51 29 19 19 16 4 4 0      0 0 0 0 77 59 32 29 30 54 18 16 2 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 2,783 2,109 1,166 1,030 1,083 1,957 636 583 69 69,455 $ 52,653 33,767 29,819 31,356 56,650 18,419 16,875 2,009 National Totals 101 215 1 317 11,417 311,004 $ NTNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 2 3 1 1 0 0 0 0  45 19 7 1 0 0 0 0       0 0 0  47 22 8 2 1 0 0 0  36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 1,697 780 279 70 23 14 2 2  42,358 $ 19,481 8,068 2,013 652 391 49 48  National Totals 7 72 0 80 2,865 73,059 $ TNCWS £ 100 101 500 501 1000 1001 3,300 3,301 10,000 10,001 50,000 50,001 100,000 100,001 1 Million > 1 Million 13 5 1 1 0 0 0     0 0 0 0 0        0 0   13 5 1 1 0 0 0   36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 36 24.96 $ 24.96 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 28.95 454 179 27 22 10 12 4   11,337 $ 4,465 785 650 301 343 103   National Totals 20 0 0 20 708 17,982 $ Grand Totals 128 287 1 416 14,991 402,045 $

Notes: Detail may not add exactly to totals due to independent rounding. UV stands for ultraviolet disinfection and MF/ UF stands for microfiltration/ ultrafiltration. Sources: ( A), ( B), ( C) Taken from Appendix G of the LT2ESWTR. ( E) Based on an estimate of 3 hours per month to prepare each report. ( F) For plants serving up to 500 people, the full technical rate ($ 24.96/ hour) was applied. For plants serving more than 500 people, costs are based on an 80%/ 20% split between technical and managerial ($ 44.91/ hour) rates. Rates are based on Bureau of Labor Statistics data.