Coversheet: 

Tab Tab Description

Table 6-5 (1) This table presents a summary of the key environmental improvements 

associated with Options 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 in immediate receiving waters 

evaluated in the Environmental Assessment (EA).

Table 6-5 (2) This table presents a summary of the key environmental improvements 

associated with Options 3a, 3b, and 4a in immediate receiving waters evaluated 

in the EA.

Table 6-15 (1) This table presents a summary of the key environmental improvements 

associated with Options 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 in downstream receiving waters 

evaluated in the EA.

Table 6-15 (2) This table presents a summary of the key environmental improvements 

associated with Options 3a, 3b, and 4a in downstream receiving waters 

evaluated in the EA.

WQ Calcs This tab contains summary tables generated from the Water Quality Model 

Summary Tables Database (DCN SE03505) used to calculate water quality 

improvements presented in Table 6-5.

WL Calcs This tab contains summary tables generated from the Wildlife Model Summary 

Tables Database (DCN SE03528) used to calculate wildlife improvements 

presented in Table 6-5.

Non-Cancer Calcs This tab contains summary tables generated from the Human Health Model 

Summary Tables Database (DCN SE03529) used to calculate human health 

improvements (non-cancer) presented in Table 6-5.

Cancer Calcs This tab contains summary tables generated from the Human Health Model 

Summary Tables Database (DCN SE03529) used to calculate cancer human 

health improvements (cancer) presented in Table 6-5.

This spreadsheet summarizes the key environmental improvements estimated using the water 

quality model, wildlife model, and human health model for baseline and the regulatory options 

under the current profile. These results are presented in Section 6 (Environmental Improvements 

under the Proposed Regulatory Options) of the Final Environmental Assessment for the Proposed 

Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source 

Category Report (DCN SE01995).
Table 6-5. Key Environmental Improvements Under the Evaluated Regulatory Options

No. %

Freshwater Acute NRWQC 31 10% 24 (23%) 24 (23%) 20 (35%) 5 (84%) 5 (84%)

Freshwater Chronic NRWQC 67 23% 62 (7%) 56 (16%) 54 (19%) 16 (76%) 16 (76%)

Human Health Water and Organism NRWQC 147 49% 147 (0%) 147 (0%) 120 (18%) 48 (67%) 50 (66%)

Human Health Organism Only NRWQC 99 33% 99 (0%) 99 (0%) 85 (14%) 28 (72%) 24 (76%)

Drinking Water MCL 59 20% 58 (2%) 54 (8%) 51 (14%) 5 (92%) 5 (92%)

Fish Ingestion NEHC for Mink 99 33% 91 (8%) 83 (16%) 69 (30%) 15 (85%) 15 (85%)

Fish Ingestion NEHC for Eagles 129 43% 118 (9%) 110 (15%) 97 (25%) 17 (87%) 17 (87%)

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Child (recreational) 124 42% 109 (12%) 106 (15%) 92 (26%) 12 (90%) 10 (92%)

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Adult (recreational) 128 43% 114 (11%) 109 (15%) 96 (25%) 12 (91%) 10 (92%)

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Child (subsistence) 196 66% 179 (9%) 173 (12%) 155 (21%) 39 (80%) 33 (83%)

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Adult (subsistence) 189 64% 170 (10%) 167 (12%) 149 (21%) 35 (81%) 30 (84%)

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Child (recreational) 5 2% 5 (0%) 5 (0%) 2 (60%) 1 (80%) 1 (80%)

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Adult (recreational) 12 4% 12 (0%) 12 (0%) 7 (42%) 2 (83%) 2 (83%)

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Child (subsistence) 9 3% 9 (0%) 9 (0%) 5 (44%) 2 (78%) 2 (78%)

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Adult (subsistence) 27 9% 25 (7%) 25 (7%) 19 (30%) 3 (89%) 2 (93%)

Number of total plant-receiving waters

297

Option 5

Percent Reduction Under Scenario Options

Option 4

Evaluation Criteria

Modeled Plant-Receiving 

Waters Exceeding Criteria 

Under Baseline

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3
Table 6-5. Key Environmental Improvements Under the Evaluated Regulatory Options (Continued)

No. % Pollutants Option 3a Option 3b Option 4a

Freshwater Acute NRWQC 31 10% 22 22 29% 22 22 29% 14 14 55% Arsenic -0.1670 -0.1295 0.2720

Freshwater Chronic NRWQC 67 23% 57 57 15% 56 56 16% 39 39 42% Cadmium -0.2839 -0.2338 0.2823

Human Health Water and Organism NRWQC 147 49% 127 127 14% 125 125 15% 86 86 41% Chromium VI -0.0861 -0.0745 0.2920

Human Health Organism Only NRWQC 99 33% 89 89 10% 88 88 11% 61 61 38% Copper -0.1736 -0.1361 0.2948

Drinking Water MCL 59 20% 53 53 10% 52 52 12% 36 36 39% Lead -0.1687 -0.1315 0.3040

Mercury -0.2720 -0.2237 0.2859

Fish Ingestion NEHC for Mink 99 33% 76 76 23% 75 75 24% 49 49 51% Nickel -0.2908 -0.2410 0.2974

Fish Ingestion NEHC for Eagles 129 43% 104 104 19% 103 103 20% 69 69 47% Selenium -0.3014 -0.2513 0.2410

Thallium -0.2578 -0.2099 0.3069

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Child (recreational) 124 42% 100 100 19% 98 98 21% 66 66 47% Zinc -0.2843 -0.2352 0.2865

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Adult (recreational) 128 43% 104 104 19% 102 102 20% 69 69 46%

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Child (subsistence) 196 66% 165 165 16% 163 163 17% 111 111 43%

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Adult (subsistence) 189 64% 159 159 16% 157 157 17% 106 106 44%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Child (recreational) 5 2% 3 3 40% 2 2 60% 1 1 80%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Adult (recreational) 12 4% 8 8 33% 8 8 33% 5 5 58%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Child (subsistence) 9 3% 6 6 33% 6 6 33% 4 4 56%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Adult (subsistence) 27 9% 20 20 26% 20 20 26% 14 14 48%

Number of total plant-receiving waters

297

3a 3b 4a

Freshwater Acute NRWQC -0.2158 -0.1757 0.2894

Freshwater Chronic NRWQC -0.2253 -0.1841 0.2840

Human Health Water and Organism NRWQC -0.2458 -0.2005 0.2831

Human Health Organism Only NRWQC -0.2602 -0.2134 0.2808

Drinking Water MCL -0.2138 -0.1738 0.2849

Fish Ingestion NEHC -0.2253 -0.1841 0.2840

Non-Cancer Reference Dose -0.2437 -0.2007 0.2859

Arsenic Cancer Risk -0.1670 -0.1295 0.2720

Correction Factors

Evaluation Criteria

Modeled Plant-Receiving 

Waters Exceeding Criteria 

Under Baseline

Option 3a

Percent Reduction Under Scenario Options

Option 3b Option 4a

Average Correction Factor

Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Zinc

Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Selenium, Zinc

Arsenic, Copper, Nickel, Selenium, Thallium, Zinc

Arsenic, Nickel, Selenium, Thallium, Zinc

Evaluation Criteria Applicable Pollutants

Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Selenium, Zinc

Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper, Mercury, Nickel, Selenium, Thallium, Zinc

Arsenic

Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper Lead, Mercury, Selenium, Thallium
Table 6-15. Key Environmental Improvements for Downstream Waters Under the Evaluated Regulatory Options

No. %

Freshwater Acute NRWQC 402 1% 228 43% 200 50% 160 60% 25.7 94% 25.7 94%

Freshwater Chronic NRWQC 1,140 3% 953 16% 797 30% 692 39% 152 87% 161 86%

Human Health Water and Organism NRWQC 11,200 31% 11,100 1% 11,100 1% 6,370 43% 854 92% 708 94%

Human Health Organism Only NRWQC 4,310 12% 4,290 0% 4,280 1% 2,610 39% 280 94% 215 95%

Drinking Water MCL 965 3% 953 1% 924 4% 836 13% 37.8 96% 31.5 97%

Fish Ingestion NEHC for Mink 9,710 27% 7,180 26% 7,100 27% 4,400 55% 475 95% 394 96%

Fish Ingestion NEHC for Eagles 15,300 42% 12,100 21% 11,900 22% 9,940 35% 1,200 92% 988 94%

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Child (recreational) 13,700 38% 10,900 20% 10,800 21% 8,520 38% 1,110 92% 934 93%

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Adult (recreational) 14,800 41% 11,500 22% 11,300 24% 9,400 36% 1,170 92% 980 93%

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Child (subsistence) 23,600 65% 21,400 9% 21,000 11% 19,200 19% 5,540 77% 5,050 79%

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Adult (subsistence) 22,400 62% 20,000 11% 19,500 13% 17,400 22% 4,640 79% 4,400 80%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Child (recreational) 6.25 0% 6.25 0% 6.25 0% 1.36 78% 1.36 78% 1.36 78%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Adult (recreational) 101 0% 101 0% 101 0% 43.2 57% 5.57 94% 5.57 94%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Child (subsistence) 68.5 0% 68.5 0% 68.5 0% 29.9 56% 1.36 98% 1.36 98%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Adult (subsistence) 266 1% 197 26% 199 25% 133 50% 18.2 93% 13.3 95%

Number of total river miles

36,200

Evaluation Criteria

Number of River Miles 

Exceeding Criteria Under 

Baseline Conditions

Number of River Miles Exceeding Criteria (Percent Reduction from Baseline Conditions)

Under the Regulatory Options

Option 1 Option 2 Option 3 Option 4 Option 5
Table 6-15. Key Environmental Improvements for Downstream Waters Under the Evaluated Regulatory Options (Continued)

No. % Pollutants Option 3a Option 3b Option 4a

Freshwater Acute NRWQC 402 1% 212 47% 203 50% 114 72% Arsenic -0.1670 -0.1295 0.2720

Freshwater Chronic NRWQC 1,140 3% 793 30% 774 32% 495 57% Cadmium -0.2839 -0.2338 0.2823

Human Health Water and Organism NRWQC 11,200 31% 7,557 33% 7,338 34% 4,567 59% Chromium VI -0.0861 -0.0745 0.2920

Human Health Organism Only NRWQC 4,310 12% 3,052 29% 2,973 31% 1,877 56% Copper -0.1736 -0.1361 0.2948

Drinking Water MCL 965 3% 864 11% 858 11% 598 38% Lead -0.1687 -0.1315 0.3040

Mercury -0.2720 -0.2237 0.2859

Fish Ingestion NEHC for Mink 9,710 27% 5,596 42% 5,377 45% 3,150 68% Nickel -0.2908 -0.2410 0.2974

Fish Ingestion NEHC for Eagles 15,300 42% 11,148 27% 10,927 29% 7,117 53% Selenium -0.3014 -0.2513 0.2410

Thallium -0.2578 -0.2099 0.3069

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Child (recreational) 13,700 38% 9,783 29% 9,560 30% 6,084 56% Zinc -0.2843 -0.2352 0.2865

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Adult (recreational) 14,800 41% 10,716 28% 10,484 29% 6,713 55%

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Child (subsistence) 23,600 65% 20,272 14% 20,083 15% 13,711 42%

Non-Cancer Reference Dose for Adult (subsistence) 22,400 62% 18,619 17% 18,403 18% 12,426 45%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Child (recreational) 6 0% 2 65% 2 68% 0.99 84%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Adult (recreational) 101 0% 53 48% 51 50% 31 69%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Child (subsistence) 69 0% 36 47% 35 49% 22 68%

Arsenic Cancer Risk for Adult (subsistence) 266 1% 155 42% 150 44% 97 64%

Number of total plant-receiving waters

36,200

3a 3b 4a

Freshwater Acute NRWQC -0.2158 -0.1757 0.2894

Freshwater Chronic NRWQC -0.2253 -0.1841 0.2840

Human Health Water and Organism NRWQC -0.2458 -0.2005 0.2831

Human Health Organism Only NRWQC -0.2602 -0.2134 0.2808

Drinking Water MCL -0.2138 -0.1738 0.2849

Fish Ingestion NEHC -0.2253 -0.1841 0.2840

Non-Cancer Reference Dose -0.2437 -0.2007 0.2859

Arsenic Cancer Risk -0.1670 -0.1295 0.2720

Evaluation Criteria

Number of River Miles 

Exceeding Criteria Under 

Baseline Conditions Correction Factors

Option 3a Option 3b Option 4a

Number of River Miles Exceeding Criteria (Percent Reduction from Baseline Conditions)

Under the Regulatory Options

Evaluation Criteria Applicable Pollutants

Average Correction Factor

Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Zinc

Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Selenium, Zinc

Arsenic

Arsenic, Copper, Nickel, Selenium, Thallium, Zinc

Arsenic, Nickel, Selenium, Thallium, Zinc

Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper Lead, Mercury, Selenium, Thallium

Arsenic, Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper, Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Selenium, Zinc

Cadmium, Chromium VI, Copper, Mercury, Nickel, Selenium, Thallium, Zinc
Rivers Lakes Rivers Lakes Rivers

Freshwater 

Acute 

NRWQC

27 4 21 3 21

Freshwater

Chronic

NRWQC

53 14 51 11 46

Human Health

Water and Organism

NRWQC

123 24 123 24 123

Human Health Organism Only

NRWQC

84 15 84 15 84

Drinking Water

MCL

47 12 46 12 43

Total Number of Unique PlantReceiving Watersc123 24 123 24 123

Directions: Automated based on values in Table 1.

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4

Freshwater 

Acute 

NRWQC

31 24 24 20 5

Freshwater

Chronic

NRWQC

67 62 56 54 16

Human Health

Water and Organism

NRWQC

147 147 147 120 48

Human Health Organism Only

NRWQC

99 99 99 85 28

Drinking Water

MCL

59 58 54 51 5

Directions: Automated based on values in Table 1.

Evaluation Criteria Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Freshwater 

Acute 

NRWQC

23 23 35 84 84

Freshwater

Chronic

NRWQC

7 16 19 76 76

Number of Plant-Receiving Waters

Table 1. Number of Plant-Receiving Waters that Exceeded a Standard by Receiving Water Type and Standard Type

Number of Exceedances

Under Scenario 2

Evaluation Criteria

Evaluation Criteria

Number of Exceedances

Under Baseline

Number of Exceedances

Under Scenario 1
Human Health

Water and Organism

NRWQC

0 0 18 67 66

Human Health Organism Only

NRWQC

0 0 14 72 76

Drinking Water

MCL

2 8 14 92 92

Directions: Transcribe the values in the table below.

Evaluation Criteria Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Freshwater 

Acute 

NRWQC

23 23 35 84 84

Freshwater

Chronic

NRWQC

7 16 19 76 76

Human Health

Water and Organism

NRWQC

0 0 18 67 66

Human Health Organism Only

NRWQC

0 0 14 72 76

Drinking Water

MCL

2 8 14 92 92
Lakes Rivers Lakes Rivers Lakes Rivers Lakes

3 18 2 5 0 5 0

10 44 10 16 0 16 0

24 99 21 40 8 45 5

15 71 14 27 1 23 1

11 40 11 5 0 5 0

24 99 21 40 8 45 5

Scenario 5

5

16

50

24

5

Number of Exceedances

Under Scenario 5

 Type and Standard Type

Number of Exceedances

Under Scenario 2

Number of Exceedances

Under Scenario 3

Number of Exceedances

Under Scenario 4
Table 7. Number of Plant-Receiving Waters that Exceed Wildlife Fish Ingestion Hazard Quotients for Mink, by Receiving Wa

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Lakes, Ponds, and 

Reservoirs

22 19 16 15 1 0

Rivers and 

Streams

77 72 67 54 14 15

Table 8. Number of Plant-Receiving Waters that Exceed Wildlife Fish Ingestion Hazard Quotients for Eagles, by Receiving W

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Lakes, Ponds, and 

Reservoirs

28 25 22 20 1 0

Rivers and 

Streams

101 93 88 77 16 17

Number (%) of Plant-Receiving Waters with HQmink >1

Number (%) of Plant-Receiving Waters with HQeagle >1
tients for Mink, by Receiving Water Type

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Total number 99 91 83 69 15 15

Percent Reduction 8 16 30 85 85

tients for Eagles, by Receiving Water Type

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Total number 129 118 110 97 17 17

Percent Reduction 9 15 25 87 87
Directions: Transcribe the numbers in the table below.

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Total number 99 91 83 69 15 15

Percent Reduction 8 16 30 85 85

Directions: Transcribe the numbers in the table below.

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Total number 129 118 110 97 17 17

Percent Reduction 9 15 25 87 87
Table 9. Total Number of Plant/Receiving Waters Exceeding Human Health Evaluation Criteria (Oral Reference Doses)

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Child 

(recreational)

124 109 106 92 12 10

Adult 

(recreational)

128 114 109 96 12 10

Child 

(subsistence)

196 179 173 155 39 33

Adult 

(subsistence)

189 170 167 149 35 30

Table 10. Percent Reduction in Plant/Receiving Waters Exceeding Human Health Evaluation Criteria (Oral Reference Doses

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Child 

(recreational)

12 15 26 90 92

Adult 

(recreational)

11 15 25 91 92

Child 

(subsistence)

9 12 21 80 83

Adult 

(subsistence)

10 12 21 81 84

Directions: Transcribe the numbers in the table below.

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Child 

(recreational)

12 15 26 90 92

Adult 

(recreational)

11 15 25 91 92

Child 

(subsistence)

9 12 21 80 83

Adult 

(subsistence)

10 12 21 81 84

Number of Plant-Receiving Waters where HQ>1 for Non-Cancer 

Reference Doses

Percent Reduction in Number of Plant-Receiving Waters 

where HQ>1 for NonCancer Reference Doses

Cohort 

Description

Cohort 

Description

Cohort 

Description

Percent Reduction in Number of Plant-Receiving Waters 

where HQ>1 for NonCancer Reference Doses
eria (Oral Reference Doses)

n Criteria (Oral Reference Doses)
Table 11. Total Number of Plant/Receiving Waters Exceeding Human Health Evaluation Criteria (Life-time Excess Cancer Ri

Baseline Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Child 

(recreational)

5 5 5 2 1 1

Adult 

(recreational)

12 12 12 7 2 2

Child 

(subsistence)

9 9 9 5 2 2

Adult 

(subsistence)

27 25 25 19 3 2

Table 12. Percent Reduction in Plant/Receiving Waters Exceeding Human Health Evaluation Criteria (Life-time Excess Cance

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Child 

(recreational)

0 0 60 80 80

Adult 

(recreational)

0 0 42 83 83

Child 

(subsistence)

0 0 44 78 78

Adult 

(subsistence)

7 7 30 89 93

Directions: Copy and paste the numbers in the table below.

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 Scenario 4 Scenario 5

Child 

(recreational)

0 0 60 80 80

Adult 

(recreational)

0 0 42 83 83

Child 

(subsistence)

0 0 44 78 78

Adult 

(subsistence)

7 7 30 89 93

Cohort 

Description

Number (%) of Plant-Receiving Waters where LECR Exceeds 10-6

Percent Reduction in Number of Plant-Receiving Waters 

where LECR Exceeds 10-6

Percent Reduction in Number of Plant-Receiving Waters 

Cohort where LECR Exceeds 10-6

Description

Cohort 

Description
eria (Life-time Excess Cancer Risk) for Arsenic 

n Criteria (Life-time Excess Cancer Risk) for Arsenic