U.S. EPA – National Tribal Caucus OutreachSteam Electric Power Generating EffluentGuidelines RulemakingSteamElectricPowerGeneratingEffluentGuidelinesRulemakingto Revise Wastewater Discharge StandardsAugust 9 2011Office of WaterAugust9,2011Outline3⁄4Background3⁄4Regulated IndustryRegulatedIndustry3⁄4Outdated Discharge Standards3⁄4RulemakingScope3⁄4Rulemaking Activities3⁄4Tribal Considerations3⁄4Facilities Proximity to Tribal Lands3⁄4Participating in the Rulemaking Process3⁄4Cttonacs2 of 13Background3⁄4Effluent Limitations Guidelines (ELG)–National standards, based on performance of treatment and controltechnologies, for wastewater discharges to surface water andmunicipal sewage treatment plants–Developed on an industry-by-industry basis–Represent pollutant reductions that areeconomically achievableforan industry using the bestavailable technology.3⁄4ELG implementation–Direct dischargers: Implemented through National PollutantDischarge Elimination System (NPDES) programDischargeEliminationSystem(NPDES)program–Indirect dischargers: Implemented through national pretreatmentprogram3 of 13Regulated Industry3⁄4Steam Electric Power Generating effluent limitations guidelines(ELGs)and standards)– Apply to a subset of the electric power industry– Plants whose primary source of revenue is distribution & sale ofelectricityU ili lf ilf l ( l il )–Utilize nuclear- oross-fuels(coal, oil, gas)– Excludes:•Generating units using non-fossil & non-nuclear fuels (e.g.,biomass tires municipal solid waste etc )biomass,tires,municipalsolidwaste,etc.)•Generating units operated by industrial sites•Non-steam processes, such as hydroelectric, solar, wind, etc.4 of 13Outdated Discharge Standards3⁄4Clean Water Act (CWA) requires EPA to periodically revieweffluent guidelines to determine if revisions are warranted3⁄4Steam electric ELGs were last updated in 19823⁄4During the 2005 annual review– Steam electricpowergeneratingindustryranked as one of the highestg g y gdischargers of pollutants3⁄4Detailed Study completed in 2009– Current regulations fail to control pollutants that are causingi t li tenvironmentalimpacts– Regulations have not kept pace with the significant changes that haveoccurred•Development of new technologies for generating electric power (e.g.,Developmentofnewtechnologiesforgeneratingelectricpower(e.g.,coal gasification)•Implementation of air pollution controls have altered existing orcreated new wastewater streams5 of 13Rulemaking Scope3⁄4Focus on the following discharges from coal-, petroleum coke-,and oil-fired plantsFl d lf i ti (FGD) t t–Flue gasdesulfurization(FGD)wastewater– Ash pond discharges,– Leachate from ponds and landfills containing ash or FGD wastesGasification wastewater–Gasificationwastewater3⁄4Main pollutants of concern– Metals (e.g., mercury, arsenic, selenium)Nitrogen–– Total dissolved solids (TDS)3⁄4Environmental Concerns–Impacts to ground water and surface waterImpactstogroundwaterandsurfacewater– Contaminated sediments and drinking water– Fish mortality & non-lethal effects (e.g., altered populations)– Bioaccumulation inaquaticorganismsu at o aquat c o ga s s– Fish advisories6 of 13Rulemaking Activities3⁄4Data Collection Efforts– Industryquestionnairey ques o e•Collected operational and financial data for generator•Collected information on wastewater handling and treatment and itsassociated costsli l i– Wastewater sampng to evaluate performance of various wastewatertreatment and pollution prevention technologies3⁄4Analyses of regulatory optionsDischarge requirements–Dischargerequirements– Projected compliance costs and economic impacts– Projected Pollution reductions and environmental benefits3⁄4Schedule– Proposed Rule – July 2012– Final Action – January 20147 of 13Potential Tribal Considerations3⁄4Investigating whether any affected power plants are located on ornear tribal lands3⁄4Greater significance to plants that currently discharge FGDwastewater, ash wastewater, or leachate from ash ponds/landfills3⁄4Potential benefits and other considerations EPAplans to analyze:y– Reduction in fish contamination– Drinking water quality improvements– Possible changes to electricity bills– Possible effect on employment8 of 13FGD/Ash/Leachate Discharges on Tribal Lands9 of 129 of 13FGD/Ash/Leachate Discharges within 10 mileson Tribal Lands10 of 1210 of 1310 of 13Participating in the Rulemaking Process3⁄4Public comment period for proposed rulePubliccommentperiodforproposedrule3⁄4Additional tribal outreach meetings?3⁄4How would you like to be involved?Howwouldyouliketobeinvolved?11 of 13ContactsJezebele Alicea-VirellaEPA Office of WaterPhone #:202-566-1755Email:alicea jezebele@epa gov-alicea.jezebele@epa.govWebsite:http://water.epa.gov/scitech/wastetech/guide/steam_index.cfm12 of 13Appendix IFacilities on Tribal LandsFacility NameTribal LandJ.E. Corette Treatment Plant Crow ReservationlFour Corners Steam Eectric StationNavajo Nation ReservationHugo Choctaw OTSAFlint Creek Power Plant Cherokee OTSAGRDA Cherokee OTSAMuskogee Generating Station Cherokee OTSASooner Power Plant Otoe-Missouria OTSAMayo Electric Generating Plant Sappony SDTSAW H Weatherspoon Steam Electric Plant Lumbee SDTSAFacilities within 10 miles of Tribal LandsFacilityNameTribalLna dGeorge Neal North Winnebago ReservationBoswell Energy Center Leech Lake ReservationValley Power Plant Forest County Potawatomi Off-Reservation Trust LandPresque Isle Power Plant Sault Sainte Marie Off-Reservation Trust LandShirasSault Sainte Marie OffReservation Trust Land-San Juan Generation Plant Station Navajo Nation Off-Reservation Trust LandInnerstate Power & Light/Lansing Generating Station Ho-Chunk Nation Off-Reservation Trust LandBrame Energy Center Clifton Choctaw SDTSARoxboro Steam Plant Sappony SDTSAlAppendix 1C R HunteyGeneratingStationCayuga Nation TDSANote:Information presented in this table is based on data collected from the Steam Electric questionnaire and the American Tribal Land data sourcefrom the US Census Bureau.