316(b) - COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURES. Molly Cagle

Transcription

1 316(b) - COOLING WATER INTAKE STRUCTURES Molly Cagle 2015

2 Clean Water Act 316(b) The location design construction capacity of cooling water intake structures reflect the best technology available for minimizing adverse environmental impact. 2

3 3 Chopper

4 4 Cooling Towers

5 5 Once Through Cooling System

6 6 Once through Cooling System

7 7 Impingement INCHES Age 1 and Older - Larger organisms - Caught against intake screens (3/8-inch mesh)

8 8 Entrainment Eggs Larvae - Smaller organisms - Pass through 3/8-inch mesh - Expressed as Age-1 equivalents Small Juveniles

9 9 Rule History 1970's - Much work done, especially coastal facilities Existing facility rules struck down on procedural grounds, regulated using BPJ on a case-by-case basis EPA enters consent decree establishing timeframe for rulemaking 2001 Phase I New facilities Effectively requires cooling towers 2004 Phase II Existing facilities >50 mgd Required technology performance standards, but allowed range of options

10 Rule History - Legal Challenge 2nd Circuit - Riverkeeper v. EPA Industry Loss Why reject closed cycle cooling as BTA? No restoration No cost consideration Supreme Court - Entergy v. EPA Industry Win Cost may be considered BTA greatest reduction of harm 10

11 BPJ during Remand Nationwide 559 electric generators 92 marine 117 lakes/reservoirs 306 streams/rivers 43 Great Lakes 593 manufacturers 51 marine 42 lakes/reservoirs 453 streams/rivers 47 Great Lakes 11

12 12 Texas-Area Power Plants Studied 22 Facilities

13 13 Texas-Area Impingement Results 500, , , , ,000 0

14 EPA Proposed Rule Impingement Applies to all facilities withdrawing > 2 mgd Design Standard 0.5 feet per second Design intake fps can vary No standard to measure actual intake fps Performance Standard Install technologies such as modified Ristroph screens with fish-friendly handling and return systems Measure impingement mortality Mortality cannot exceed a monthly average of 31% and an annual average of 12% Monitoring requirements set on a site-specific basis

15 EPA Proposed Rule Entrainment Applies to all facilities > 2 mgd Set on a site-specific basis by the permitting authority Numerous, detailed studies must be conducted and submitted EPA anticipates that in some cases no additional technologies will be required beyond impingement technologies. However, EPA also anticipates that in some cases cooling towers could be required to comply with sitespecific entrainment requirements 15

16 16 Intake Structure

17 17 Wedgewire Screen

18 18 Large Fixed Panel Screens

19 19 Traveling Screen

20 20 Geiger Screen Fish buckets divert fish to a holding trough.

21 21 Fish Deterrent Barrier Nets

22 22 Barrier Nets

23 23 Barrier Nets

24 24 Barrier Nets

25 25 Gunderboom

26 26 Gunderboom Perforations

27 27 Bio-Acoustic Fish Fence A wall of sound, in conjunction with a bubble curtain, diverts fish

28 28 Fish Returns

29 29 Fish Returns

30 30 Fish Returns

31 31 Fish Returns

32 32 Fish Returns

33 2014 Final 316(b) Rules for Existing facilities Applies to: 2 mgd or > NPDES permit 25% of water used for cooling Key Regulatory Concepts Impingement Entrainment Doesn't apply to: cooling water from a public water system intake to closed-cycle recirculating system intake in wastewater treatment system (even impoundment in WOTUS) 33

34 2014 BTA Impingement - 7 options closed cycle recirculating (including impoundment)* maximum design intake <.5 fps* maximum actual intake <.5 fps offshore velocity cap* approved modified travel screen Director BTA approval 12 month < 24% mortality for non fragile * Entrainment site Specific consider - variable speed pumps, water reuse, fine mesh screens, closed cycle recirculating closed-cycle may = BTA *essentially preapproved 34

35 Information Submittal and Reporting Cost = $37.7m annually, for 1,115 entities All must generate: source water physical data, including hydrological and geomorphological features of any and all source waterbodies source water physical data, including hydrological and geomorphological features of any and all source waterbodies baseline biological characterization data that characterized the biological community in the vicinity of the CWIS. 35

36 Information Submittal and Reporting cont. For facilities that actually withdraw 125 MGD or > an entrainment characterization study that includes a minimum of two years of entrainment data collection comprehensive technical feasibility and cost evaluation study that evaluates possible entrainment control technologies 36

37 FWS and NMFS Review 60-day Mandatory review State must consider federal agency recommendations. EPA will use "the full extent of its authority to object to state-issued permits that EPA finds are likely to jeopardize endangered or threatened species. If EPA s objections are not addressed, EPA may federalize the permit and issue it in consultation with the Services. 37

38 Schedule of Implementation Effective 60 days after publication Permit issued after effective date but applied for before the effective date BTA on site-specific basis using BPJ. Permit issued before 45 months after the effective date: BTA on a site-specific basis using BPJ if schedule for information submittal is altered, Final BTA requirements if schedule unaltered in the permit. Permit issues 45 months after effective date must meet all BTA requirements of new rule 38

39 316(b) Consolidated Rule Challenges

40 Environmental Groups - "CWA Says Best, Not One of the Seven Best" "BTA" means A national baseline standard that provides the highest level of protection (aka closed-cycle). Antiquated technology and case-by-case are not adequate (aka closedcycle). 40

41 41 Industry Groups - "Don't throw me in that briar patch" States, not EPA, should consult Services "Unduly burdensome" and "significant operational and compliance challenges." Economic benefits analysis flawed.

42 Confusion Lingers Waste Treatment System Exemption Many facilities withdraw cooling water from purposebuilt ponds or impoundments that satisfy waste treatment system exemption from WOTUS. Intakes on waste treatment systems are exempt from 316(b). NWF challenges the waste treatment system exemption in WOTUS. If successful- intake on cooling pond subject to 316(b). 42

43 43 Closed Cycle Recirculating System

44 44 Closed Cycle Recirculating System If impoundment is closed-cycle, is make-up intake subject to 316(b)?

45 Confusion Lingers Public Water Supply According to (c): "Obtaining cooling water from a public water system, does not constitute use of a cooling water intake structure for purposes of this subpart." Under WOTUS rule: many man-made ditches, canals, and off-river storage ponds are now WOTUS. 45

46 46 Confusion Lingers Public Water Supply

47 Confusion Lingers Catch all Even if NOT 2 mgd or > NPDES permit 25% of water used for cooling Still subject to BPJ 47

48 2nd Circuit Briefing Schedule 11/ Petitioners' Briefs 12/ Intervenor & Amicus in Support of Petitioners 4/ Respondents' Consolidated Brief 5/ Intervenor & Amicus in Support of Respondents 5/ Petitioners' Supplemental Briefs 6/ Petitioners' Reply Briefs 8/ Final Briefs 48

49 Other 316(b)-Related Litigation Soundkeeper, Inc. v. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation To compel action on a renewal Asserts closed cycle is necessary as BTA Sierra Club NOI to NJ re: alleged ESA violation 49

50