United States
Environmental Protection Off ice of Water
L Agency 43037
EPA- 820-F-1 1-002
Proposed Regulations to Establish Requirements for Cooling
Water Intake Structures at Existing Facilities
Summary
EPA has proposed standards under the Clean
Water Act to follow through on a recent
settlement agreement with environmental groups
whereby EPA agreed to issue regulations to
reduce injury and death offish and other aquatic
life caused by cooling water intake structures
existing at power plants and factories. These
facilities pull in large volumes of cooling water
from lakes, rivers, estuaries or oceans to cool
their machinery. By setting flexible technology
standards, EPA's common sense proposal would
greatly reduce damage to ecosystems while
accommodating site-specific circumstances and
providing cost effective options.
This rule covers roughly 1,260 existing facilities
that each withdraw at least 2 million gallons per
day of cooling water. EPA estimates that
approximately 590 of these facilities are
manufacturers, and the other 670 are power
plants. The technologies required under the rule
have been in use for several decades and have
been implemented at a large number of facilities.
Background
Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act requires
that National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permits for facilities with
cooling water intake structures ensure that the
location, design, construction, and capacity of
the structures reflect the best technology
available to minimize harmful impacts on the
environment. The withdrawal of cooling water
by facilities removes billions of aquatic
organisms from waters of the United States each
year, including fish, fish larvae and eggs,
crustaceans, shellfish, sea turtles, marine
mammals and other aquatic life. Most impacts
are to early life stages offish and shellfish
through impingement and entrainment.
Rulemaking History
Under a consent decree with environmental
organizations, EPA divided the section 316(b)
rulemaking into three phases. All new facilities
except offshore oil and gas exploration facilities
were addressed in Phase I in December 2001; all
new offshore oil and gas exploration facilities
were later addressed in June 2006 as part of
Phase III. This proposed rule removes a portion
of the Phase I rule in response to judicial
findings.
Existing large electric-generating facilities were
addressed in Phase II in February 2004. Existing
small electric-generating and all manufacturing
facilities were addressed in Phase III (June
2006). However, Phase II and the existing
facility portion of Phase III were remanded to
EPA for reconsideration as a result of legal
proceedings. This proposal combines Phases II
and III into one rule, and provides a holistic
approach to protecting aquatic life impacted by
cooling water intakes.
Any facility not covered by these national rules
will continue to be subject to section 316(b)
requirements set by the EPA, state or territorial
NPDES Permitting Director on a case-by-case,
best professional judgment basis.
Summary of the Proposal
Provisions of the Rule
There are three components to the proposed
regulation.
First, existing facilities that withdraw at least 25
percent of their water from an adjacent
waterbody exclusively for cooling purposes and
have a design intake flow of greater than 2
million gallons per day (MGD) would be
subject to an upper limit on how many fish can
be killed by being pinned against intake screens
or other parts at the facility (impingement). The
-------
facility would determine which technology
would be best suited to meeting this limit.
Alternately, the facility could reduce their intake
velocity to 0.5 feet per second. At this rate,
most of the fish can swim away from the cooling
water intake of the facility.
Second, existing facilities that withdraw very
large amounts of water~at least 125 million
gallons per day—would be required to conduct
studies to help their permitting authority
determine whether and what site-specific
controls, if any, would be required to reduce the
number of aquatic organisms sucked into
cooling water systems (entrainment). This
decision process would include public input.
Third, new units that add electrical generation
capacity at an existing facility would be required
to add technology that is equivalent to closed-
cycle cooling (continually recycles and cools the
water so that minimal water needs to be
withdrawn from an adjacent waterbody). This
can be done by incorporating a closed-cycle
system into the design of the new unit, or by
making other design changes equivalent to the
reductions associated with closed-cycle cooling.
Closed-cycle cooling systems—often referred to
as cooling towers or wet cooling- are the most
effective at reducing entrainment.
For More Information
Please contact Paul Shriner
(shriner.paul(giepa.gov) at 202-566-1076. You
can also learn more about this rule by visiting
EPA's website at:
http://water.epa.gov/lawsregs/lawsguidance/cwa
/316b/.
------- |