821-B-05-005 

# Preliminary Engineering Report: Steam Electric Detailed Study

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Engineering and Analysis Division Office of Water 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20460

August 2005ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared with the technical support of Eastern Research Group, Inc. under the direction and review of the Office of Science and Technology. Neither the United States Governm e nt nor any of its em ployees, c ontractors, subcontractors, or their em ployees m a ke any warrant, expressed or im plied, or assum e any legal liability or responsibility for any third party’s use of, or the results of, such use of any inform ation, apparatus, product, or process discussed in this report, or represents that its use by such party would not infringe on privately owned rights. The prim ary contact regarding questions or com m e nts on this docum ent is: Martha Segall U.S. EPA Engineering and Analysis Division (4303T) 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue NW W a shington, DC 20460 (202) 566-1041 (telephone) (202) 566-1053 (fax) segall.m a rtha@epa.govTABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 I NTRODUCTION
........................................................ 1

- 1 2.0 E XISTING E FFLUENT G UIDELINES AND OTHER R EGULATIONS
.................... 2

- 1 2

. 1 S t e a m E l e c t r i c E f f l u e n t G u i d e l i n e s .................................. 2

- 1 2

. 2 C o o l i n g W a t e r I n t a k e S t r u c t u r e s .................................... 2

- 4 2

. 3 A i rR e g u l a t i o n s ................................................. 2

- 6 2.4 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

..................... 2

- 7 3.0 D ATA S OURCES
....................................................... 3

- 1 3

. 1 E n e r g y I n f o r m a t i o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n .................................. 3

- 2 3.1.1 Form EIA-860

............................................ 3

- 2 3.1.2 Form EIA-767

............................................ 3

- 3 3

. 2 P e r m i t C o m p l i a n c e S y s t e m ........................................ 3

- 3 3

. 3 T o x i c R e l e a s e I n v e n t o r y ( T R I )

..................................... 3

- 6 3.4 Econom ic Census

................................................ 3

- 7 3.5 Section 316(b) Cooling W a ter Intake Structures

........................ 3

- 7 3.6 Utility W a ter Act Group

.......................................... 3

- 8 3.7 1996 Prelim inary Data Sum m a ry for the Steam Electric Point Source Category ( P D S )

......................................................... 3

- 9 3.8 OECA Sector Notebook

........................................... 3

- 9 4.0 I NDUSTRY P ROFILE
..................................................... 4

- 1 4.1 Facility Types

.................................................. 4

- 1 4

. 2 P r o c e s s D e s c r i p t i o n a n d W a s t e w a t e rS o u r c e s .......................... 4

- 3 4.3 Industry Dem ographics

........................................... 4

- 7 4.3.1 Overall Steam Electric Industry

............................... 4

- 8 4.3.2 Utilities

................................................. 4

- 1 2 4.3.3 Nonindustrial Nonutilities

.................................. 4

- 1 4 4.3.4 Industrial Nonutilities

..................................... 4

- 1 7 4.3.5 Other Fuel Sources

........................................ 4

- 2 0 5.0 W ASTEWATER C HARACTERIZATION
........................................ 5

- 1 5.1 Utilities

........................................................ 5

- 2 5.1.1 PCS

.................................................... 5

- 2 5.1.2 TRI

.................................................... 5

- 1 2 5.2 Nonindustrial Nonutilities

........................................ 5

- 1 5 5.2.1 PCS

................................................... 5

- 1 5 5.2.2 TRI

.................................................... 5

- 2 0 5.3 Industrial Nonutilities

........................................... 5

- 2 4 6.0 A DDITIONAL I NFORMATION N EEDS AND N EXT S TEPS
.......................... 6

- 1 6.1 Pollution Prevention and W a stewater Treatm e nt Technologies

............ 6

- 2 6

. 2 U W A G I n f o r m a t i o n .............................................. 6

- 3 iTABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page 6.3 Industrial Nonutilities

............................................ 6

- 3 6

. 4 R e n e w a b l e / R e c y c l e d F u e l S o u r c e s .................................. 6

- 4 6

. 5 E m e r g i n g I s s u e s ................................................. 6

- 5 7.0 R EFERENCES
.......................................................... 7

- 1

iiLIST OF TABLES Page 2

- 1 P o l l u t a n t s R e g u l a t e d b y E x i s t i n g E f f l u e n t L i m i t a t i o n s G u i d e l i n e s a n d S t a n d a r d s .... 2

- 3 3-2 S team Electric Facilities Contacted to Verify PCS 2002 Data.

................... 3

- 5 4-1 W astewater Stream s f r om Steam Electric Facilities

........................... 4

- 6 4-2 D istribution of PCS Facilities by SIC Code

................................. 4

- 8 4-3 D istribution of TRI Facilities by SIC Code

.................................. 4

- 9 4-4 N um ber of Steam Electric Facilities, Generating Units, and Capacity, by Facility Type R e p o r t e d t o E I A

...................................................... 4

- 1 2 4-5 D istribution of Steam Electric Utilities by Size

.............................. 4

- 1 2 4-6 D istribution of Steam Electric Nonindustrial Nonutilities by Size

............... 4

- 1 5 4-7 D istribution of Industrial Nonutilities by NAICS Code

....................... 4

- 1 7 4-8 D istribution of Steam Electric Industrial Nonutilities by Size

.................. 4

- 1 9 4-9 S um m a ry of EIA Data f o r Other Fuel Sources f o r All Steam Electric Facilities Reporting to EIA 2002

......................................................... 4

- 2 1 5-1 N um ber of Facilities in the PCS and TRI Databases Matched to the EIA Database

. . 5-2 5-2 T he Top Pollutants Released From 327 Utilities in the PCS Database

............. 5

- 3 5-3 P ollutants W ithout TW Fs Discharged From 327 Utilities in the PCS Database

...... 5

- 4 5-4 P CS Discharges From 327 Utilities Distributed by Energy Source

............... 5

- 5 5-5 T op Five Pollutants From 327 Utilities by Fuel Source

........................ 5

- 6 5

- 6 P o l l u t a n t R e l e a s e s F r o m R E G i n n a N u c l e a rP l a n t i n O n t a r i o , N Y

................ 5

- 6 5

- 7 F l o w C a t e g o r i e s ....................................................... 5

- 7 5-8 T W P E From Utilities by Flow Range

...................................... 5

- 8 5-9 F low Distribution f o r the Top Five Pollutants Released by Utilities

.............. 5

- 8 5-10 Distribution of Cooling System s Used by Utilities

............................ 5

- 9 iiiLIST OF TABLES (Continued) Page 5-11 Distribution of PCS TW PE From 305 Utilities by Type of Cooling System 1

....... 5

- 1 0

5-16 The Top Pollutants Released From 163 Steam Electric Nonindustrial Nonutilities in the

5-17 Com p arison of Capacity Between Utilities and Nonindustrial Nonutilities Reporting in

5-18 Pollutants W ithout TW Fs Released From 163 Nonindustrial Nonutilities in the PCS

5-20 Com p arison of TW PE/Facility Between Utilities and Nonindustrial

5-21 Com p arison of TW PE/MW Between Utilities and Nonindustrial Nonutilities Reporting in

5-23 The Top Pollutants Released From 103 Steam Electric Nonindustrial Nonutilities in the

5-25 Com p arison of TW PE Between Utility a nd Nonindustrial Nonutility Facilities Reporting

5-26 Com p arison of TW PE/MW Between U tility and Nonindustrial Nonutility Facilities 5-12 PCS Concentration Inform ation From 309 Utilities for Top Pollutants in PCS

..... 5

- 1 1 5-13 Pollutants Released From 235 Utilities in the TRI Database

................... 5

- 1 3 5-14 TRI Discharges From 235 Utilities Distributed by Energy Source

............... 5

- 1 4 5-15 Top Five Pollutants From 235 Utilities for Each Fuel Source in the TRI Database

. . 5-15

P C S D a t a b a s e ........................................................ 5

- 1 6

t h e P C S D a t a b a s e ..................................................... 5

- 1 7

D a t a b a s e ............................................................ 5

- 1 7 5-19 PCS Discharges From 163 Nonindustrial Nonutilities Distributed by Energy Source 5-18
Nonutilities Reporting in the PCS Database

................................ 5

- 1 9

t h e P C S D a t a b a s e ..................................................... 5

- 2 0 5-22 Distribution of Cooling System s Used by Nonindustrial Nonutilities

............ 5

- 2 0

T R I D a t a b a s e ........................................................ 5

- 2 1 5-24 TRI Discharges From 103 Nonindustrial Nonutilities Distributed by Energy Source 5-22

i n t h e T R I D a t a b a s e ................................................... 5

- 2 3

R e p o r t i n g i n t h e T R I D a t a b a s e .......................................... 5

- 2 3 5-27 Industries Represented in the Analysis of 60 Industrial Nonutilities

............. 5

- 2 5

ivLIST OF TABLES (Continued) Page 5-28 Top Pollutants Released From 60 Industrial Nonutility Facilities Reporting in the PCS D a t a b a s e ............................................................ 5

- 2 6 5-29 Distribution of Cooling System s Used by 60 Industrial Nonutility Facilities

....... 5

- 2 7 5-30 Distribution of Energy Sources Used by Industrial Nonutility Facilities

.......... 5

- 2 7 6-1 P otential Pollution Prevention Options f o r Steam Electric Facilities

.............. 6

- 2

vLIST OF FIGURES Pages 4

- 1 S t e a m E l e c t r i c P r o c e s s F l o w D i a g r a m ...................................... 4

- 5 4-2 D istribution of Electricity Production in the Steam Electric Industry, 200 2 . . . . . . . . 4-11 4-3 D istribution of Utility Capacity by Energy Source

........................... 4

- 1 3 4-4 C apacity of Utilities by Fuel Type

........................................ 4

- 1 4 4-5 D istribution of Nonindustrial Nonutility Capacity by Energy Source

............ 4

- 1 6 4-6 C apacity of Nonindustrial Nonutilities by Fuel Type

......................... 4

- 1 6 4-7 D istribution of Industrial Nonutility Capacity by Energy Source

................ 4

- 1 9 4-8 C apacity of Industrial Nonutilities by Fuel Source

........................... 4

- 2 0

vi1.0 

### I NTRODUCTION
Every other year, Section 304(m ) of the Clean W a ter Act requires EPA to publish a plan establishing a schedule for the annual review a nd revision of effluent guidelines required by Section 304(b). Section 304(m ) also requires EPA to take public com m e nt on its plan prior to issuing a final plan. EPA published the latest bi ennial plan, the 2004 effluent guidelines program plan (“2004 Plan”), on Septem ber 2, 2004 (69 FR 53705). EPA selected the Steam Electric Point Source Category (40 CFR 423) for detailed investigation because it ranked second in term s of toxic and non-conventional toxic-weight ed discharges in the 2005 annual review.
During the developm ent of the 2004 Plan, EPA identified data gaps and issues that m a y affect the Agency' s estim ate of the potential hazards caused by discharges from steam electric f

acilities. To f ill these gaps, EPA is currently collecting inf o rm ation on the wastewater characteristics and treatm e nt technologies used at facilities in the steam electric point source category, including electric utilities and nonutilities that use fossil fuels or nuclear fuel to generate electricity for distribution in com m e rce. As part of the detailed study, EPA will also investigate data on facilities that are not currently regulated under Part 423 but that use a steam cycle to generate electricity. EPA will eval uate whether the point source category should be revised to include these f acilities.
This report presents the prelim inary results of EPA’s evaluation and outlines the additional data collection that will be conducted for the developm ent of the next biennial plan (“2006 Plan”). The report is organized into the following sections:

C Section 2.0 sum m a rizes the existing regulations for this industry;

C Section 3.0 discusses the data sources used in this profile;

C Section 4.0 presents a profile of the industry;

C Section 5.0 discusses wastewater characteristics;

1-1C Section 6.0 discusses the additional inform ation needs and next steps in the detailed review; and

C Section 7.0 presents the references used to date for the detailed study.

1-22.0 

### E XI S T I N G 

### E FFLUENT 

### G UIDELINES AND OTHER 

### R EGULATIONS
This section presents a brief overview of existing regulations f o r steam electric f acilities and is divided into the following sections:

C Section 2.1 discusses the current effluent guidelines for the steam electric point source category;

C Section 2.2 discusses the Cooling W a ter Intake Structure regulations;

C Section 2.3 discusses Clean Air Act requirem e nts; and

C Section 2.4 discusses Resource Conservation and Recovery Act requirem e nts (RCRA).

2.1 Steam Electric Effluent Guidelines

The steam electric point source category is currently regulated under 40 CFR 423. EPA first published effluent guidelines for this cat egory in 1974 with subsequent revisions in 1977 and 1982. The tim eline below describes the history of the effluent guideline:
October 8, 1974 (39 FR 36186): EPA prom ulgated effluent lim itations based on:

— B est practicable control technology currently available (BPT),

— B est available control technology econom ically achievable (BAT),

— N ew Source perform a nce standards (NSPS), and

— P retreatm e nt standards for new sources (PSNS). The prom ulgated regulations addressed therm a l and chem ical pollution. Am endm ents were issued February 19, 1975 (40 FR 23987) and June 4, 1978 (40 FR 23987). The chem ical lim itations covered the f o llowing wastestream s:

— O nce-through cooling water,

— C ooling tower blowdown,

— B ottom ash transport water,

— F ly ash transport water,

— B oiler blowdown,

— L ow volum e wastes,

— M etal cleaning wastes, and
2-1— M aterial storage and construction r unoff (including coal pile runoff). July 16, 1976: The U.S. Court of Appeals in the Fourth Circuit rem a nded (1) therm a l lim itations; 1 (2) NSPS for fly ash transport water; (3) rainfall run off lim itations; and (4) BPT variance clause. March 23, 1977 (42 FR 15695): EPA prom ulgated pretreatm e nt standards fo r existing sources (PSES). PSES covered copper in m e tal cleaning wastes, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and oil and grease. November 19, 1982 (47 FR 52290): EPA revised existing BAT, NSPS, PSES, a nd PSNS effluent lim itations guidelines and standards for the steam electric point s ource category, codified at 40 CFR 423. The regulations m odified the existing subcate gorization schem e and reserved effluent lim itations for four types of wastestream s for future rulem a king:

— N on-chem ical m e tal cleaning,

— F lue gas desulfurization waters,

— T herm al discharges, and

— R un off from m a terials storage and construction areas (other than coal storage). The 1982 guidelines are sum m a rized in Table 2-1 and are applicable to: discharges resulting from the operation of a generating unit by an establishm ent prim arily engaged in the generation of electricity for distribution and sale which results prim arily f r om a process utilizing f o ssil-type f u el (coal, oil, or gas) or nuclear f u el in conjunction with a therm a l cycle em ploying the steam water system as the therm odynam i c m e dium

.

1 Therm a l dischargers m a y still apply for a variance from st ated water quality standards under section 316(a) of the Clean W a ter Act. 2-2Table 2-1. Pollutants Regulated by Existing Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards

Wastestream B PT BAT N SPS P SES & PSNS All W a stestream s p H 6-9 PCBs: Zero discharge PCBs: Zero discharge pH 6-9 PCBs: Zero discharge PCBs: Zero discharge

Low Volum e W a stes TSS 100/30 Oil and Grease 20/15 No Lim itation = BPT N o Lim itation

Fly Ash Handling T SS 100/30 Oil and Grease 20/15 No Lim itation Z ero Discharge Z ero Discharge (PSNS only) No lim itation in PSES Bottom Ash Handling T SS 100/30 Oil and Grease 20/15 No Lim itation T SS 100/30 Oil and Grease 20/15 No Lim itation

Chem ical Metal Cleaning TSS 100/30 Oil and Grease 20/15 Cu 1.0/1.0 Fe 1.0/1.0 Cu 1.0/1.0 Fe 1.0/1.0 TSS 100/30 Oil and Grease 20/15 Cu 1.0/1.0 Fe 1.0/1.0 Cu 1.0 m a x

Once Through Cooling F AC 0.5/0.2 T RC 0.20 m a x or = BPT if <25 MW TRC 0.20 m a x or = BPT if <25 MW No Lim itation Cooling Tower Blowdown FAC 0.5/0.2 F AC 0.5/0.2 126 Pr. Pol. No. Detect Cr 0.2/0.2 ZN 1.0/1.0 FAC 0.5/0.2 126 Pr. Pol. No. Detect Cr 0.2/0.2 ZN 1.0/1.0 126 Pr. Pol. No Detect Cr 0.2 m a x Zn 1.0 m a x
Coal Pile Runoff T SS 50 m a x N o Lim itation T SS 50 m a x N o Lim itation Source: Code of Federal Regulations <http://www.epa.gov/epahom e/cfr40.htm >
. Notes:

- Concentrations are in m g /l. If daily m a xim u m and 30- day average concentrations apply, they are given as “m axim um /average”.

- Total Residual Chlorine (TRC) = Free Available Ch lorine (FAC) + Com b ined Residual Chlorine (CRC).

- BCT is reserved for all wastestream s.

- Low Volum e W a stes include: clarifier blowdown, m a keup water filter backwash, lim e softener blowdown, ion exchange softener regeneration, dem i neralizer regenera tion, powdered resin dem i neralizer back flush, reverse osm o sis brine, boiler blowdown, evaporator blowdown, laborat ory drains, sanitary wastes, and diesel engine cooling system discharge.

2-3Region IV issued a policy guidance letter on Decem ber 19, 1989 stating that the steam electric unit of a facility em ploying com b ined-cycle technology is subject to the applicability of the steam electric effluent guidelines in 40 CF R 423. Region IV m a de the determ ination during a review of proposed new facilities at a Florida Power & Light plant. Because the steam electric portion of a facility em ploying com b ined-cycle technology uses fossil-type fuel in conjunction with a therm a l cycle, Region IV declared that Part 423 applies to the steam electric portion of these facilities. The Region IV letter also states that no operational, technological, econom ic, or cost factors distinguish the steam electric porti on of a com b ined cycle plant from a stand-alone steam electric unit. EPA has been following this guidance. (1)

The current applicability of Part 423 does not include facilities that m a y be using a renewable fuel source, such as biom ass or wood wastes, to generate steam to produce electricity, nor does it cover f acilities whose prim ary activity is not the distribution and sale of electricity. According to inform ation provided in the 1996 Preliminary Data Summary for the Steam Electric Point Source Category , perm its for the effluent wastestream s of an electric power generating unit which exists as an ancillary unit of a plant not subject to Part 423 are norm a lly written by best professional judgem e nt (BPJ) usi ng Part 423 regulations for sim ilar wastestream s (U.S. EPA, 1996). EPA does not have inform ation regarding the application of Part 423 lim its to f

acilities using renewable f u el sources.

2.2 Cooling Water Intake Structures
Section 316(b) of the Clean W a ter Act requires EPA to ensure that the location, design, construction, and capacity of cooling water intake structures reflect the best technology available to m i nim i ze adverse environm ental im pacts. Such im pacts include death or injury to aquatic organism s by im pingem e nt (being pinned against screens or other parts of a cooling water intake structure) or entrainm ent (being drawn into cooling water system s and subjected to therm a l, physical, or chem ical stresses). In response to section 316(b), EPA developed the regulation in three phases:
Phase I, prom ulgated on Decem ber 18, 2001 (66 FR 65256), covers new facilities that use cooling water intake structures to withdraw water from waters of the U.S. 2-4 Cand that have or require a National Pollutant Discharge Elim ination System (NPDES) perm it. New f acilities subject to the Phase I regulations include those that have a design intake f l ow of greater than two m illion gallons per day and that use at least 25% of the water withdrawn for cooling purposes;

C Phase II, prom ulgated on July 9, 2004 (69 FR 41576), covers large existing electric generating plants that use at least 50 m illion gallons of water a day f r om waters of the U.S., including existing utilities and nonindustrial nonutilities; and

C Phase III, proposed on Novem b er 24, 2004 (69 FR 68444), would cover certain existing facilities not covered under Phase II that withdraw cooling water above a certain threshold, and new of f

s hore and coastal oil and gas extraction f acilities.
Phase II establishes perform a nce standards and other requirem e nts for cooling water intake structures at large utility and nonutility power plants. Phase III proposes sim ilar requirem e nts that would be applicable to power generating f acilities co-located with m a nuf acturing f acilities (industrial nonutilities). The Phase II regulation applies to facilities that:

C Meet the def i nition of an existing steam electric power generating f acility;

C Use a cooling water intake structure or structures, or obtain cooling water by a contract or arrangem e nt with an independent supplier who has a cooling water intake structure;

C W ithdraw cooling water from waters of the U.S. and use at least 25% for contact or non-contact cooling purposes;

C Have a National Pollutant Discharge Elim ination System (NPDES) perm it or are required to obtain one; and

C Have a design intake flow of 50 MGD or greater.
The section 316(b) rulem a king focuses on reducing im pingem e nt, m o rtality, and entrainm ent. According to the Phase II rule, facilities m u st choose one of five alternatives for establishing the best technology available (BTA) to m i nim i ze adverse environm ental im pact. The im pacts of the section 316(b) regulations on wastewater character istics from steam electric facilities are not yet known. (U.S. EPA, section 316(b) W e b site)

2-52.3 Air Regulations
Electric utility boilers that fire fossil fuels are subject to num erous regulations under the Clean Air Act. These regulations include the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), Clean Air Visibility Rule (CAVR), Clean Air Mercury Ru le (CAMR), Acid Rain Program , New Source Perform a nce Standards (NSPS), and National Em i ssions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). The only regulations with the potentia l to create new wastewater stream s at electric utilities are those with SO 2 em ission lim its. Over tim e, new and revised SO 2 regulations are leading to the greater use of flue gas desulfur ization system s (FGD). W e t FGD system s create a sludge byproduct that m u st be de-watered for dis posal. Each regulation is sum m a rized briefly below.

C CAIR

. Published in 2005, CAIR will regulate SO 2 and NOx em issions to help states achieve the national am bient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone and fine particulate m a tter. The rule perm anently caps em issions (tons per year) across 28 eastern states and the District of Colum b ia. The cap for SO 2 will take effect in 2010 with a lower cap in 2015. States m u st m e et the caps by establishing em ission lim its or participating in a regional cap and trade program

.

C CAVR. On June 15, 2005, EPA finalized am endm ents to the July 1999 regional haze rule. These am endm ents apply to the provisions of the regional haze rule that require em ission controls known as best available retrofit technology, or BART, for industrial facilities em itting air pollutants that reduce visibility by causing or contributing to regional haze. The pollutants that reduce visibility include fine particulate m a tter, and com pounds which contribute to its form ation, including SO 2 and others. The am endm ents include final guidelines, known as BART guidelines, f o r states to use in determ ining which f acilities m u st install controls and the type of controls the facilities m u st use. States which adopt the CAIR cap and trade program for SO 2 and NOx are allowed to apply CAIR controls as a substitute for controls required under BART because the analysis concluded that CAIR controls are “better than BART” for electric generating units in the states subject to CAIR.

C CAMR

. Published in 2005, this rule established a national cap and trade program f

o r m e rcury em issions f r om power plants. Plants will be able to m e et the f i rst phase cap in 2010 using the SO 2 and NOx controls required to com p ly with CAIR. The second phase cap in 2018 is expected to require the use of m e rcuryspecific control technologies.

C Acid Rain

. The acid rain program established a national cap and trade program for SO 2 em issions from fossil fuel-fired power plants. Phase I began in 1995 and 2-6C affected 445, m o stly coal-fired electric utility plants located in 21 eastern and m i dwestern states. Phase II, which began in the year 2000, lowered the em ission caps on the Phase I plants and also capped em issions on all units nation-wide that serve generating units > 25 MW fired by coal, oil, or gas. The program also established em ission lim its f o r NOx. NSPS

. The NSPS lim it SO 2 , particulate m a tter, NOx, and m e rcury from new, m odified, or reconstructed electric utility boilers. EPA proposed am endm ents to the NSPS in February. The proposed SO 2 standard sets a single lim it that all f u els m u st achieve regardless of the fuel sulfur content. The SO 2 standard for units burning high sulfur coals requires approxi m a tely a 95% reduction of em issions, which requires FGD. Units burning low sulfur coals can achieve the standard with approxim a tely 80% reduction, which can be achieved with a spray dryer. Spray dryers do not generate a wastewater stream

. The NOx em ission lim its require the use of selective catalytic reduction or selective non-catalytic reduction. The m e rcury NSPS em ission lim its can be m e t using the sam e technologies used to m eet SO 2 and NOx NSPS em ission lim its. The particulate m a tter NSPS can be m e t using an electrostatic precipitator or bag house.

C NESHAP

. The NESHAP regulates hazardous air pollutant em issions from stationary gas turbines and reciprocating internal com bustion engines. The controls to m eet these standards will not create wastewater stream s.

2.4 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)
In 1993, EPA issued a regulatory determ ination addressing large volum e wastes (fly ash, bottom ash, boiler ash, boiler slag, and flue gas em ission control wastes) generated by coal-fired utility power plants, including independent power producers. This determ ination stated that these wastes should not be regulated as Subtitle C wastes. Therefore, no Federal regulations exist f o r solid wastes f r om steam electric f acilities; instead, they are m a naged by state solid waste program s or specific program s for foss il fuel com bustion wastes (U.S. EPA, 1997).

2-73.0 

### D ATA 

### S OURCES
This section describes the data sources EPA used, to date, for its detailed study of the Steam Electric Point Source Category. EPA used calendar year 2002 data from three prim ary data sources: the Departm e nt of Energy’s Energy Inform ation Adm i nistration (EIA), the Perm it Com p liance System (PCS), and the Toxic Release Inventory (TRI). 1 EPA also reviewed data from other regulations im pacting steam electric sources, and data provided by trade associations.

The rem a inder of this section presents inform ation on the following sources as they pertain to the steam electric industry detailed study:

C Section 3.1 discusses EIA data;

C Section 3.2 discusses PCS data;

C Section 3.3 discusses TRI data;

C Section 3.4 discusses data obtained from the 2002 Econom ic Census;

C Section 3.5 discusses data obtained from records supporting EPA’s section 316(b) Cooling W a ter Intake Structure Guidelines;

C Section 3.6 discusses data provided by the Utilities W a ter Act Group (UW AG);

C Section 3.7 discusses inform ation obtained from the 1996 Prelim inary Data Sum m a ry for the Steam Electric Point Source Category; and

C Section 3.8 discusses inform ation obtaine d from EPA’s Office of Enforcem ent and Com p liance Assurance (OECA) Profile of the Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation Industry (Sector Notebook).

1 Note that the m o st recent TRI data available when EPA began this study was for calendar year 2002. 3-13.1 Energy Information Administration
The EIA is a statistical agency of the Departm e nt of Energy that collects inform ation on existing electrical generating plants and associated equipm ent to evaluate the current status and potential trends in the electric power industry. EPA used inform ation from two of EIA’s data collection form s:

C Form EIA-860, Annual Electric Generator Report (discussed in Section 3.1.1); and

C Form EIA-767, Steam Electric Plant Operation and Design Report (discussed in Section 3.1.2).

3.1.1 Form EIA-860

Form EIA-860 collects data for all electric generating plants that have or will have a
nam e plate rating of one m e gawatt or m o re, and ar e operating or plan to be operating within five years of the filing of the report. The data coll ected in Form EIA-860 are associated only with the design and operation of the generators at f acilities. EPA used the f o llowing inf o rm ation f r om Form EIA-860 to characterize the steam electric industry:

C C o mp a n y N a me ;

C Facility Nam e;

C Plant ID (Assigned by EIA);

C North Am erican Industry Classi fication System (NAICS) code;

C Generator ID;

C Nam e plate Capacity - The m a xim u m rated output of a generator;

C Prim e Mover - The engine, turbine, water wheel, or sim ilar m achine that drives an electric generator;

C Energy Source - The prim ary source providing the power that is converted to electricity through chem ical, m echanical, or other m e ans;
3-2C Month and year of initial operation; and

C Type - A code identifying whether the parent com p any is a regulated or unregulated com p any.

3.1.2 Form EIA-767

Form EIA-767 collects inform ation annually from all U.S. plants with a total existing or planned organic-fueled or com bustible renewable steam -electric unit that has a generator
nam e plate rating of ten m e gawatts or larger. The data collected in Form EIA-767 is associated with the operation and design of the entire facility. EPA used Form EIA-767 prim arily for inform ation on the type of cooling system including the following data fields:

C Type of system ;
C Type of towers;

C Flow rates; and

C Source water.

One of the lim itations of using data from Form EIA-767 is that the cooling system inf o rm ation is required to be com p leted only by f acilities that have a nam e plate capacity larger than 100 m e gawatts. Therefore, som e of the facilities that report to EIA-767 do not report any inform ation about cooling system s.
EPA will review any additional or updated data from Form EIA-767 during the developm ent of the final 2006 ELG Plan.

3.2 Permit Compliance System

OECA m a intains PCS which is a com puterized m a nagem e nt inform ation system , containing inf o rm ation f r om Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) that f acilities provide to their perm itting authority (e.g., states, regions) in accordance with their perm it requirem e nts. The inf o rm ation stored in PCS consists of the concentration and/or quantity of the param e ter discharged, as well as the flows associated with the various discharge pipes. Using this

3-3inform ation, EPA estim ated the annual pounds released for each of the reported param e ters. PCS provides inform ation only for wastewaters disc harged directly to receiving stream s. The PCS database contains inform ation for both m a jor and m i nor sources. EPA only used inform ation from the m a jor sources because perm itting authorities are not required to provide DMR data to PCS for m i nor sources. Consequently, data available for m i nor sources are lim ited. To com pute a Toxic-W e ighted Pound Equivalent (TW P E) for each param e ter reported, the estim ated m a ss (in pounds) of the chem ical discharged is m u ltiplied by its toxic weighting factor (TW F ). Additional inform ation on the calculation of TW PE and the PCS loading calculations can be found in the 2005 Screening-Level Analysis Report

. Chlorine, used by steam electric f acilities to control the growth of m i croorganism s in cooling water system s (i.e., condenser tubes, cooling towers, etc), is reported to PCS as either free available chlorine or total residual chlorine (TRC). Per 40 CFR 423, neither free available chlorine nor TRC m a y be discharged from on ce-through cooling or cooling tower blowdown for
m o re than two hours in any one day. However, PCS m a y report pollutant concentrations as either a daily m a xim u m or average or as a 2-hour m a xim u m or average. In com puting chlorine releases for the detailed study, EPA assum e d chlorine is discharged only 2 hours per day, and calculated loads using this discharge period rather than the standard 24 hours per day. UW AG stated that the am ount of tim e a facility discharges chlorine varies from plant to plant and could only be determ ined through an industry survey (see DCN 01738 in section 13.2 of the record).

EPA determ ined that eight f acilities discharged 93% of the TW PE f o r the steam electric industry. EPA contacted these facilities to verify their discharges and revised the PCS data to include the newly collected inform ation. Table 3-2 shows the facilities contacted and the explanation of their discharges. Based on these explanations, EPA determ ined it was appropriate to revise the 2002 PCS data for these facilities. After m a king the revisions, the TW PE for steam electric facilities decreased from 22.7 m illion to 1.6 m illion. EPA used the revised loadings for all analyses discussed in this report. For additional inform ation, see the 2005 Screening-Level Analysis Report

.

3-4Table 3-2. Steam Electric Facilities Contacted to Verify PCS 2002 Data.

Facility N PID P ollutant 2002 Estimated Load (lbs/y r) 2002 Revised Load (lbs/y r) Explanation for Re-estimated Dis c h a rge Load s 1 AL Power Co. (EC Gaston Plant) W ilsonville, AL AL0003140 Arsenic 2 ,016,604 2,016 PCS incorrectly reported the units as m g /L rather than μg/L.
Gulf Power Co. Pe nsa c o la , FL FL0002275 Iron 1 ,010,409,425 1,010,409 PCS in correctly reported the units as m g /L rather than μg/L. Duke Energy South Bay Chula Vis t a, CA CA0001368 Chlorine 4,578,499 4,578 PCS incorrectly reported the units as m g /L rather than μg/L.

FPL E n e r gy W y m a n Station Yarmouth, ME ME0000272 Mercury 18,028 0.018 PCS incorrectly reported the units as m g /L rather than ng/L. Progress Energy Asheville Arden, NC NC0000396 Copper 1 ,552,866 1,553 PCS incorrectly reported the units as m g /L rather than μg/L. Duke Energy Ma rsha ll Terrell, NC NC0004987 Arsenic 16,880 244 Two of the four concentrations were reported correctly as m g /L, while the other two were incorrectly reported as m g /L rather than μg/L. Duke Energy Ma rsha ll Terrell, NC NC0004987 Selenium 84,526 115 One of the four concentrations were reported correctly as m g /L, while the other three were incorrectly reported as m g /L rather than μg/L. Gulf Power Co (S cholz P l ant) Chattahoochee, FL FL0002283 Iron 109,028,494 109,028 PCS incorrectly reported the units as m g /L rather than μg/L. Duke Energy (Allen) Belmont, NC NC0004979 Cadmium 19,498 43 One of the two concentrations was reported correctly as m g /L, while the other one was incorrectly reported as m g /L rather than μg/L. Duke Energy (Allen) Belmont, NC NC0004979 Zinc 557,712 1,208 One of the two concentrations was reported correctly as m g /L, while the other one was incorrectly reported as m g /L rather than μg/L. Duke Energy (Allen) Belmont, NC NC0004979 Barium 8,925,808 16,607 One of the two concentrations was reported correctly as m g /L, while the other one was incorrectly reported as m g /L rather than μg/L. 1 Discharge loads were re-estim ated for use in this detailed study.

3-53.3 Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)

Steam electric f acilities are required to com p lete a TRI Form R or A if the f a cility m eets the f o llowing criteria:

C Facility Identification: The facility is in SIC code 4911, 4931, or 4939 and it com busts coal and/or oil for the purpose of generating electric power.

C Num b er of Em ployees: Facilities m u st have 10 or m o re f u ll-tim e em ployees or their equivalent. EPA defines a “full-tim e equivalent” as a person who works 2,000 hours in the reporting year.

C Activity Thresholds: Facilities m u st conduct an activity threshold analysis for every chem ical and chem ical category on the current TRI list to determ ine whether it m a nufactures, processes, or otherwise uses each chem ical at or above the appropriate activity threshold.
Facilities provide an estim ate of toxic chem ical 2 releases in pounds per year. Note that TRI does not collect data f o r natural gas or nuclear powered steam electric f acilities. However, if the f

acility com busts any coal or oil f o r the purpose of distributing electricity in com m e rce, the entire facility (including the non-coal/oil com bustion operations) is subject to TRI reporting requirem e nts. TRI considers kerosene and petroleum coke as “oil” for reporting purposes. EPA used the reported releases to com pute a TW PE for each chem ical reported for reporting year 2002. (U.S. EPA, 2000)
Unlike PCS, chlorine is reported to TRI as chlorine (Cl 2 ), not as TRC. The EPCRA Section 313 Industry Guidance for Electricity Generating Facilities states that no releases to water of chlorine are typically expected. At a pH above four, chlorine reacts alm o st com p letely with water to f o rm HOCl, Cl - , and H + ; therefore, no releases of Cl 2 are expected during norm a l discharge situations. However, 13 steam electric f acilities reported releases of chlorine in TRI. EPA provided inform ation on the 13 facilities to an industry trade group, UW AG. UW AG believes the f acilities reported incorrectly and will be subm itting Form R corrections to TRI (See DCN 01738 in section 13.2 of the record).

2 Over 600 specific chem icals and chem ical cat egories are associated with TRI reporting. 3-63.4 Economic Census

The Econom ic Census provides a detailed portrait of the U.S. econom y once every five years. The 2002 Econom ic Census covers nearly all of the U.S. econom y in its basic collection of establishm ent statistics, and provides the following inform ation by NAICS code:

C Num b er of com p anies;

C Num b er of establishm ents;

C Num b er of establishm ents by size range, based on num ber of em ployees; and

C Num b er of em ployees.

The Econom ic Census provides an upper lim it of the num ber of facilities perform i ng operations that fall under the steam electric category, as the census m a y overstate the num ber by including nonproduction facilities, such as distribution locations. Also, som e of the facilities included in the census m a y not use a steam turbine. For these reasons, EPA used the census data only as a point of reference in this detailed study.

3.5 Section 316(b) Cooling Water Intake Structures
For the section 316(b) Cooling W a ter Intake Structures Rulem a king, EPA conducted a survey of steam electric utilities, steam electric nonutilities, and other m a nufacturing facilities that use cooling water in the f o llowing f our m a jor m a nuf acturing sectors: Paper and Allied Products (SIC 26), Chem ical and Allied Products (SIC 28), Petroleum and Coal Products (SIC 29), and Prim ary Metals (SIC 33). The survey requested the following type of inform ation:

C General plant inform ation, such as plant nam e , location, and SIC codes;

C Cooling water source and uses;

C Design and operational data on cooling water intake structures and cooling water system s;

3-7C Studies of potential im pacts f r om cooling water intake structures that the f acility had perform e d; and

C Financial and econom ic inform ation about the facility.
Although the section 316(b) survey was used to create guidelines for cooling water intake structures, the cooling water system inform ation collected is useful for this review of the steam electric industry. EPA used the inform ation provided by the section 316(b) survey in the following analyses:

C Linking EIA f acility inf o rm ation to the TRI and PCS discharges;

C Identif ying the type of cooling system s used by f acilities; and

C Identifying industrial nonutilities.
EPA will continue to evaluate section 316(b) inform ation as it com p letes the detailed study.

3.6 Utility Water Act Group

UW AG is a trade association that represents the utility electricity producers. On February 22, 2005, EPA staff m e t with representatives of UW AG to discuss the detailed study and certain data inconsistencies and gaps. UW AG indicated that they would try to provide EPA additional inform ation on the steam electric industry such as the following aggregated data:

C Inform ation regarding reported chlorine and boron releases;

C Inform ation on wastewater characteristics; and

C Inform ation regarding current technologies used by the industry.

Inform ation provided by UW AG to EPA as of June 27, 2005 has been included in this report, where appropriate. For m o re inform ation regarding specific inform ation that has been provided to EPA, see Docket ID No. OW -2004-0032.

3-83.7 1996 Preliminary Data Summary for the Steam Electric Point Source Category (PDS)

The 1996 Prelim inary Data Sum m a ry (PDS) was conducted to provide technical support for possible revision of the 1982 steam electric e ffluent lim itations guidelines and standards. The 1996 PDS contained inform ation about the process descriptions and the pollutants released in each of the different types of waste stream s. EPA used the 1996 PDS as a guide for the type of inform ation that would be useful to co llect for the industry profile and wastewater characteristic sections of the detailed study report. Because the 1996 PDS noted changes that were starting to occur in the industry, it can be used as a point of com p arison to the results of this detailed study.

3.8 OECA Sector Notebook
The OECA Sector Notebook, Profile of the Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation Industry , contains the following inform ation:

C Industry profile using 1995 data;

C Industrial process descriptions;

C Chem ical releases and transfers;

C Pollution prevention opportunities; and

C Regulatory sum m a ry.
EPA supplem ented data from EIA, PCS, and TRI with background inform ation from the Sector Notebook (U.S. EPA, 1997).

3-94.0 

### I NDUSTRY 

### P ROFILE

This section describes the steam electric industry in greater detail and is divided into the following sections:

C Section 4.1 discusses the different types of steam electric facilities;

C Section 4.2 presents an overview of the steam cycle for electricity generation and discusses the waste stream s generated; and

C Section 4.3 discusses the dem ographics of the industry using data from EIA.

4.1 Facility Types
Electric power plants m a y use various prim e m overs to generate electricity. DOE’s EIA defines prim e m over as the engine, turbine, water wheel, or sim ilar m achine that drives an electric generator; or, a device that converts energy to electricity directly (e.g., photovoltaic solar and fuel cell(s)) (U.S. DOE EIA W e b site). The prim ary types of prim e m overs are steam turbines, gas turbines, internal com bustion engines, com b ined-cycle turbines, hydraulic turbines, and others.

Steam electric facilities use a steam /water system as the therm odynam i c m e dium to drive a turbine. An energy source is required to produce heat for the boiler which generates the steam

. The current applicability of Part 423 covers facilities that use fossil-type fuel (coal, oil, or gas) or nuclear fuel to produce the steam

. However, other fuel sources such as m unicipal solid wastes or wood wastes (biom a ss) m a y also be used to produce the steam

. For this prelim inary report, EPA focused on facilities that m eet the definition of steam electric under Part 423. A brief discussion of steam facilities using alternate fuel sources is included in Section 4.3.5. EPA will investigate these facilities further during the developm ent of the 2006 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan.

Som e electricity generators use com b ined-cycle units to produce electricity. These units use steam turbine technology to increase the efficiency of the prim ary gas turbine. Hot gases

4-1from the turbines are transported to a waste heat recovery boiler to generate steam for a second turbine.
For the purposes of this detailed study, EPA divided the steam electric industry into the three f acility types:

1. Utility: A corporation, person, agency, authority, or other legal entity or instrum e ntality that owns and/or operates f acilities f o r the generation, transm ission, distribution, or sale of electric energy for use prim arily by the public. Utilities provide electricity within a designated f r anchised service area and file form s listed in 18 CFR Part 141. Per EIA, facilities that qualify as cogenerators or sm all power producers under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act are not considered electric utilities. 2. Nonindustrial nonutility: A corporation, person, agency, authority, or other legal entity or instrum e ntality that owns electric generating capacity and is not an electric utility. Nonutility power producers include qualifying cogenerators, qualifying sm all power producers, and other nonutility generators (including independent power producers) without a de signated franchised service area, and which do not file form s listed in 18 CFR Part 141. 3. Industrial nonutility: Industrial nonutilities are sim ilar to nonindustrial nonutilities except their prim ary purpose is not the distribution and sale of electricity. This category includes electric generators that are co-located with other m a nufacturing activities such as chem ical m a nuf acturing or pulp m a king.
In general, utilities and nonindustrial nonutilities are categorized by three SIC codes:

C 4911: Electric Services - Establishm ents engaged in the generation, transm ission, and/or distribution of energy for sale.

C 4931: Electric and other services com b ined - Establishm ents prim arily engaged in providing electric services in com b ination with other services when the electric services are the m a jor part of the services, but are less than 95% of the total services.

C 4939: Com b ination utilities, not elsewhere classified - Establishm ents prim arily engaged in providing com b inations of electric, gas, and other services, not elsewhere classified.

4-2NAICS codes have replaced SIC codes. The U.S. Census Bureau provides tables showing the correspondence between NAICS and SIC codes. SIC codes 4911, 4931, and 4939 all fall under NAICS code 22, Utilities. The NAICS definition of utilities includes establishm ents providing the following utility services: electric power, natural gas, steam supply, water supply, and sewage rem oval. W ithin this sector, the specif i c activities associated with the utility services provided vary by establishm ent. Services that electric power establishm ents m a y provide include generation, transm ission, and distribution. NAICS code 22 is further subdivided into the f

o llowing codes that apply to steam electric f acilities:

C 221112 - Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation;

C 221113 - Nuclear Electric Power Generation; and

C 221119 - Other Electric Power Generation.
Utilities and nonindustrial nonutilities typically report to EIA under NAICS code 22. The 2002 Econom ic Census data uses the m o re detailed six-digit NAICS code.
Industrial nonutilities are not categorized in the above SIC and NAICS codes since their prim ary purpose is not the distribution and sale of electricity. EPA used the reported SIC and NAICS codes to identify industrial nonutilities. S ection 4.3 discusses the identification of steam electric f acilities in greater detail.

4.2 Process Description and Wastew a ter Sources

Steam electric f acilities consist of a steam generator (boiler), a steam turbine, and a condenser. The following description of the steam process reflects facilities using fossil fuel. Fossil fuels are conveyed into a boiler where they are com busted to generate steam

. Boilers m a y have superheaters, reheaters, econom izers, and air heaters to im prove efficiency. The high tem p erature, high pressure steam leaves the boiler and enters the turbine generator. As it m oves from the high pressure boiler to the low pressure condenser the steam drives the turbine blades. During the process, the steam expands, and the now low pressure steam enters the condenser, where it is condensed by the cooling water flowing through condenser tubes. The condensate travels back to the boiler where it is reheated for use in the turbine. Figure 4-1 shows a diagram
4-3of the steam electric cycle. Table 4-1 lists the wastewater stream s produced by the steam electric cycle.
A constant flow of cooling water is required to keep the condenser shell at the proper pressure. The cooling water is warm ed during the condensation process. Facilities use either a once-through or recirculating cooling water system

. In once-through cooling water system s, the cooling water is withdrawn from the source water, flows through the condenser, and is discharged back to the source water. In a recirculating system , the warm ed cooling water is cooled in cooling towers or cooling ponds and then recirculated to the condenser. Recirculating system s require only about 5% of the water that once-through system s use. In recirculating system s, a sm all am ount of water m u st be discharged periodically to control the build-up of solids; then m a ke-up water is added to the system

. In both once-through and recirculating system s, chem icals m a y be added to prevent scaling and biofouling. Chlorination is the m o st widely used m e thod of biofouling control, although som e facilities use brom ine. EPA does not have inform ation on the types and am ounts of

chem icals used at steam electric f acilities. According to inf o rm ation f r om UW AG, if f

a cilities report discharges of total residual oxidants, rather than total residual chlorine, the f acility is likely using brom ine. Facilities using brom ine m u st still use som e chlorine to activate the brom ine. UW AG also stated that the steam el ectric industry is trying to optim ize the am ount of chem icals added and the tim ing of the addition to reduce costs (see DCN 01738 in section 13.2 of the record).

4-44-5FluegasFuelA irB ottomAshHandling SystemB oilerW aste(SolidorLiquid)G astoA tmosphereFlyAshW asteW aste(TreatmentResiduals)Figure 4-1.Steam Electric Process FlowDiagram(SolidorLiquid)C ollectionSystemC ondenserTurbineG eneratorM ake-upW aterC oolingTowerB lowdownElectricalG eneratorC ondensateChemicalA dditionC hemicalAdd itionWaterTreatmentC oolingWaterHighPressureSteamOnce-th roughCoolingWaterOnce-th roughDischarge– OR–RecirculatingSystemSource: U.S. EPA 1996 and 1997Two types of ash are produced during the com bustion of fossil fuels, bottom ash and fly ash. Bottom ash collects at the bottom of the boiler. Fly ash, which is finer than bottom ash, is transferred by the flue gas to the end of the boiler where it is collected in the econom izer, air heater, or particulate control equipm ent. Fly ash and bottom ash m a y be m a naged separately or together in landfills or in wet surface im poundm ents. W h ile natural gas plants generally do not require ash handling f acilities, coal-f ired f acilities generate the largest quantities of ash and usually require ash handling f acilities. The ash content will depend on the type of coal burned, how it was prepared before burning, and the operating conditions of the boiler. According to the OECA Sector Notebook (U.S. EPA, 1997), m o re than 95% of the ash consists of silicon, alum inum , iron, calcium , m a gnesium , potassium , sodium , and titanium

. Trace constituents include antim ony, arsenic, barium , cadm i um , chrom i um , lead, m e rcury, selenium , strontium , zinc, and other m e tals.

Another source of wastewater from steam electri c facilities is coal pile runoff. Rainwater can dissolve inorganic salts in coal and carry the pollutants into the runoff. Other sources of wastewater include water treatm e nt discharges, boiler blowdown, m a intenance cleaning, and wet air pollution control devices (flue gas desulfurization) (U.S. EPA, 1997).

Table 4-1. Wastewater Streams from Steam Electric Facilities

Process Wastewater Cooling W a ter C hlorine, iron, copper, nickel , chlorinated organic com pounds, tem p erature, suspended solids Ash Handling Generally: SiO 2 , Al 2 O 3 , Fe 3 O 3 , CaO, MgO, TiO 2 , SO 3 , P 2 O 3 , and carbon residuals Possibly: TDS, TSS, sulfate, calcium , chloride, m a gnesium , nitrate, antim ony, arsenic, cadm i um , chrom i um , copper, cy anide, iron, lead, m e rcury, nickel, selenium , silver, thallium , vanadium , and zinc (m ay cause turbidity) Coal Pile Runoff Generally: Acidity, COD, calcium , m a gnesium , iron, alum inum , m a nganese, silica, chloride, sulfate, TD, TSS, arse nic, chrom i um , copper, nickel, vanadium , and zinc Possibly: antim ony, cadm i um , beryllium , lead, selenium , thallium , m e rcury, and silver

4-6Table 4-1 (Continued)
Process Wastewater W a ter Treatm e nt Clarification: alum inum sulfate, sodium alum inate, ferrous sulfate, ferrous chloride, and calcium carbonate Filtration: suspended solids Ion Exchange: calcium and m a gnesium salts, iron, copper, zinc, alum inum , m a nganese, potassium , soluble sodium , chlori des, sulfates, organics, sulfuric acid, and sodium hydroxide Evaporation: salts (type depends on intake water characteristics) Softening: calcium carbonate, m a gnesium hydroxide, and sodium salts Boiler Blowdown C hlorides, sulfates, m e tals, preci pitated solids containing calcium and m a gnesium salts, soluble and insoluble corrosion products, and chem ical additives Flue Gas Desulfurization W a ste from W e t Scrubbers A slurry of ash, unreacted lim e, cal cium sulfate, and calcium sulfite. Maintenance Cleaning O il, grease, phosphates, nitrites, suspended solids, dissolved solids, iron, nickel, chrom i um , vanadium , zinc, m a gnesium salts, polynuclear hydrocarbons, acidity, alkalinity, and oil Miscellaneous W a stestream s Suspended solids, dissolved solids, oil and grease, phosphates, surfactants, acidity, m e thylene chloride, phthalates, BOD 5 , COD, fecal coliform , and nitrates Source: Prelim inary Study of the Steam Electric Poin t Source Category, 1996 and OECA Sector Notebook, 1997.

4.3 Industry Demographics
EPA perform e d a prelim inary analysis of the dem ographic inform ation for the year 2002 collected by EIA.
This section is divided into the following subsections:

C Section 4.3.1 discusses the overall industry;

C Section 4.3.2 discusses utilities;

C Section 4.3.3 discusses nonindustrial nonutilities;

C Section 4.3.4 discusses industrial nonutilities; and

C Section 4.3.5 discusses additional fuel types.

4-74.3.1 Overall Steam Electric Industry
As stated previously, the steam electric industry com p rises facilities that generate electricity using a steam cycle. Part 423 regulates steam facilities that use fossil fuel or nuclear f u el as their energy source. For the purpose of this prelim inary report, EPA ref e rs to f acilities using fossil or nuclear fuel to produce electricity through a steam -cycle as ‘steam electric’ facilities. Facilities m a y be using other sources of energy to generate steam

. Section 4.3.5 provides a brief discussion of these f acilities. EPA will investigate these f acilities f u rther during the developm ent of the 2006 Effluent Guidelines Program Plan.

EPA reviewed data from PCS, TRI, and EI A to characterize the steam electric industry. This section describes the facilities included in each data source. EIA provided inform ation on f

acility type, capacity, and f u el type while PCS and TRI provided inf o rm ation on wastewater characteristics.

EPA extracted all PCS data from m a jor sources in SIC 4911, SIC 4931, and SIC 4939 for the prelim inary detailed study. In the PCS database, 882 facilities report one of these SIC codes. Of the 882 facilities, 554 are m a jor dischargers and 328 are m i nor dischargers. The analyses in this report use PCS data from the 554 m a jor facilities. Table 4-2 shows the distribution of the PCS f acilities by SIC code.

Table 4-2. Distribution of PCS Facilities by SIC Code

SIC Code Major Dischargers Minor Dischargers Total 4911 545 266 811 4931 9 4 2 5 1 4939 0 2 0 2 0 Total 554 328 882

EPA also extracted TRI data from all facilities in SIC 4911, 4931, and 4939. Of the 692 facilities that report one of these SIC codes in the TRI database, only 376 report wastewater

4-8discharges of reportable toxic chem icals, and one f acility reports wastewater discharge in SIC Code 4939. Because this facility has only one discharge of 1.7 pounds of barium , resulting in a TW PE of 0.003, EPA did not use this facility’s data in this analysis. Table 4-3 shows the distribution of the TRI f acilities by SIC code. EPA linked the PCS and TRI data to inf o rm ation from EIA to classify each facility type. Section 5.0 discusses the use of the PCS and TRI data in greater detail.

Table 4-3. Distribution of TRI Facilities by SIC Code

SIC T otal No Reported Water Discharge D irect Discharge Indirect Discharge Both Direct and Indirect Discharge 4911 639 289 320 12 18 4931 45 20 19 3 3 4939 8 7 1 0 0 Total 692 316 340 15 21

Since Form EIA-860 contained the m o st detailed inform ation on facility type, energy source, and capacity, EPA used data from EIA to develop a prelim inary dem ographic profile of the industry. Form EIA-860 contains records for 16,413 generators from 5,137 facilities for calendar year 2002. However, these records include data from all facilities that produce electricity, not specif i cally steam electric f acilities. EPA included just the f acilities that used a steam turbine as the prim e m over in the steam electric detailed study. For this prelim inary report, EPA included the following prim e m overs from Form EIA-860:

C ST - Steam Turbine;

C CA - Com b ined Cycle Steam Part; and

C CS - Com b ined Cycle Single Shaft (com bustion turbine and steam turbine share a single generator).

As m e ntioned in Section 2.1, Region IV determ ined that the steam electric effluent guidelines in 40 CFR 423 are applicable to the steam electric unit of a com b ined cycle generating plant because the steam electric portion of the com b ined cycle uses fossil-type fuel in conjunction with

4-9a therm a l cycle. Therefore, EPA included data for the prim e m overs reported as “com b ined cycle steam part” in this study.
Based on the current applicability of 40 CFR 423, EPA included facilities using only f

o ssil or nuclear f u el in this initial analysis:

C BIT - Anthracite Coal, Bitum i nous Coal;

C LIG - Lignite Coal;

C SUB - Subbitum i nous Coal;

C WC - Wa s t e / O t h e r C o a l ;

C DFO - Distillate Fuel Oil;

C JF - Jet Fuel;

C KER - Kerosene;

C RFO - Residual Fuel Oil;

C W O - Oil-Other and W a ste Oil, Crude Oil, Liquid Byproducts, Oil W aste, Propane (Liquid), Re-Refined Motor Oil, Sludge Oil, Tar Oil);

C NG - Natural Gas; and

C NUC - Nuclear (Uranium , Plutonium , Thorium )

. Figure 4-2 shows the distribution of the energy sources used in the steam electric industry. The figure shows that m o st of the electricity produced by the steam electric facilities is provided by coal and natural gas. For 2002, Form EIA-860 reporting shows 1,450 steam electric facilities with a total electric capacity of 631,635 Megawatts.

4-10

### Co al 53 % Oil 6% Nucl ear 17 %

Na t u ra l G a s 24 % Total Steam El ect ri c Capacit y : 63 1,6 35 M e ga wa tts



### Co al 53 % Oil 6% Nucl ear 17 %

Na t u ra l G a s 24 % Total Steam El ect ri c Capacit y : 63 1,6 35 M e ga wa tts

Source: EIA, 2002 Figure 4-2. Distribution of Electricity Pr oduction in the Steam Electric Industry, 2002

EIA uses the term s “regulated” and “unregulated” entities to correspond to utilities and nonutilities. Regulated entities sell electricity to the public while unregulated entities do not have a designated franchised service area. A ccording to inform ation obtained from EIA, the “type” field reported on Form EIA-860 can be used to separate utilities (regulated) from nonutilities (unregulated). However, som e unregulated facilities m a y be run by regulated utilities, and vice-versa.
EIA reports facilities by NAICS code rather than SIC code. Utilities and nonindustrial nonutilities are reported under NAICS code 22, while industrial nonutilities are reported under the NAICS code for their prim ary industry. EPA used the NAICS code along with the regulated status to determ ine the num ber of f

acilities, num ber of generating units, and total capacity f o r each type of facility, shown in Table 4-4.

4-11Table 4-4. Number of Steam Electric Facilities, Generating Units, and Capacity, by Facility Type Reported to EIA
Facility Type Number of Facilities N umber of Generating Units T otal Capacity (MW) Utilities 662 1,721 416,361 Nonindustrial nonutilities 480 857 204,614 Industrial nonutilities 308 676 10,660 Total 1 ,450 3,254 631,635

4.3.2 Utilities
Utilities provide approxim a tely 66 percent (416,361 Megawatts) of the electricity produced by steam electric f acilities. Table 4-5 presents the capacity, num ber of steam electric facilities, and num ber of steam electric generating units according to plant capacity. Note that f

acilities m a y have m u ltiple generating units.

Table 4-5. Distribution of Steam Electric Utilities by Size

Plant Capacity 0-50 MW 50-100 MW 100-200 MW 200-300 MW 300-400 MW 400-500 MW >500 MW Total Total Utility Capacity (MW ) 2,887 5,249 12,511 12,826 14,527 18,855 349,506 416,361 Percent of Utility Capacity 1% 1% 3% 3% 3% 5% 84% 100%
Num b er of Utility Facilities 109 70 85 52 41 42 263 662 Percent of Utility Facilities 16% 11% 13% 8% 6% 6% 40% 100%
Num b er of Utility Generating Units 203 153 203 129 124 112 797 1,721

Percent of Utility Generating Units 12% 9% 12% 7% 7% 7% 46% 100%

The data in Table 4-5 show that the m a jority of the utilities, generating units, and capacity is from the largest size group (>500 m e gawatts). EPA also divided the utility group by prim ary energy source as shown in Figure 4-3. The m a jority of utility capacity is provided by coal.
4-12

### 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

C oal N a t u r a l G a s N uc l ear O i lCapacity(Thousand MW) 

### 63%

17% 16% 4% Total Existing C a pa cit y : 416,361 Megawatts

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

C oal N a t u r a l G a s N uc l ear O i lCapacity(Thousand MW) 

### 63%

17% 16% 4% Total Existing C a pa cit y : 416,361 Megawatts

Figure 4-3. Distribution of Utility Capacity by Energy Source

Figure 4-4 presents a tim eline of cum u lative capacity for the utilities reported on the 2002 EIA f

o rm s. The graph shows the cum u lative steam electric capacity based on initial year of operation. W h ile the coal-fired capacity increased rapidly in the 1970s, the utility capacity has leveled off in recent years.

4-13

### 0 50 100 150 200 250 300

T h r ough 1950 Th r o u g h 1960 Th r o u g h 1970 T h r ough 1980 Th r o u g h 1990 Th r o u g h 2002 Ti m e P e r i odCumulative Capacity(Thousand MW) 

### Co a l Na t u ra l G a s Nu c l e a r Oi l

Figure 4-4. Capacity of Utilities by Fuel Type

4.3.3 Nonindustrial Nonutilities
Nonindustrial nonutilities provide 32% of the total steam electric capacity. Table 4-6 and Figures 4-5 and 4-6 present the nonindustrial nonutility distributions in the sam e m a nner as the utilities. Like utilities, m o st of the capacity is from large (>500 MW ) facilities; however, nonindustrial nonutilities have a greater percentage of facilities and generating units in the
sm aller size ranges than utilities.

4-14Table 4-6. Distribution of Steam Electric Nonindustrial Nonutilities by Size

Plant Capacity 0-50 MW 50-100 MW 100-200 MW 200-300 MW 300-400 MW 400-500 MW >500 MW Total Total Nonindustrial Nonutility Capacity (MW ) 2,835 4,210 9,868 12,655 12,532 8,332 154,181 204,613

Percent of Nonindustrial Nonutility Capacity 1% 2% 5% 6% 6% 4% 75% 100%

Num b er of Nonindustrial Nonutility Facilities 118 57 68 52 36 19 130 480

Percent of Nonindustrial Nonutility Facilities 25% 12% 14% 11% 8% 4% 27% 100%

Num b er of Nonindustrial Nonutility Generating Units 144 64 98 76 67 45 363 857

Percent of Nonindustrial Nonutility Generating Units 17% 7% 11% 9% 8% 5% 42% 100%

Nonindustrial nonutilities also have a larger percentage of capacity than natural gas-fired generating units. The overall capacity from natural gas for utilities and nonutilities is sim ilar (70,800 m e gawatts for utilities and 75,700 m e gawatts for nonindustrial nonutilities).

4-150 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Co a l Na t u ra l G a s N u c l e a r O i lCapacity(Thousand MW) 

### 36% 37%

18%

9% Total Existing Capacit y : 204, 613 Megawatts

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Co a l Na t u ra l G a s N u c l e a r O i lCapacity(Thousand MW) 

### 36% 37%

18%

9% Total Existing Capacit y : 204, 613 Megawatts

Figure 4-5. Distribution of Nonindustria l Nonutility Capacity by Energy Source

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Th r o u g h 19 50 Th r o u g h 19 60 T h r o ugh 19 70 Th r o u g h 1 980 Th r o u g h 19 90 Th r o u g h 20 02 Ti m e P e r i o dCumulativeCapacity(ThousandMW) Co a l Na t u r a l G a s Nu c l e a r Oi l

Figure 4-6. Capacity of Nonindustrial Nonutilities by Fuel Type

4-16Figure 4-5 shows that coal-fired nonindustrial nonutility capacity increased through the 1960s and 1970s. Nonindustrial nonutilities also saw a large increase in natural gas capacity during the 1990s.

4.3.4 Industrial Nonutilities
The industrial nonutility group contains facilities reporting NAICS codes other than 22, Utilities. These facilities are not currently regulated under 40 CFR 423. According to inform ation provided in the 1996 Preliminary Data Summary for the Steam Electric Point Source Category , perm its for the effluent wastestream s of an electric power generating unit which exists as an ancillary unit of a plant falling under an effluent guideline other than Part 423
are norm a lly written by best professional judgem e nt (BPJ) using Part 423 regulations for sim ilar wastestream s. Table 4-7 lists the industries, the num ber of facilities represented, and the total capacity for steam electric industrial nonutilities using fossil or nuclear fuel as reported to EIA.

Table 4-7. Distribution of Industrial Nonutilities by NAICS Code

NAICS Code NAICS Title N umber of Facilities T otal Capacity (MW) 322 Paper Manufacturing 8 2 2 ,968 325 Chem ical Manufacturing 5 8 3 ,147 311 Food Manufacturing 4 4 1 ,001 611 Educational Services 33 456 324 Petroleum and Coal Products Manufacturing 20 743

331 Prim ary Metal Manufacturing 1 2 1 ,158 211 Oil and Gas Extraction 1 0 3 4 622 Hospitals 9 6 0 92 Public Adm i nistration 5 57 314 Textile Product Mills 5 8 4 327 Nonm etallic Mineral Product Manufacturing 2 7 7
336 Transportation Equipm ent Manufacturing 3 9 3

3122 Tobacco Manufacturing 3 101

4-17Table 4-7 (Continued)
NAICS Code NAICS Title N umber of Facilities T otal Capacity (MW) 321 W ood Product Manufacturing 2 9 333 Machinery Manufacturing 2 24 22132 Sewage Treatm e nt Facilities 2 112 326 Plastics and Rubber Products Manufacturing 1 4 0

332 Fabricated Metal Product Manufacturing 1 1 0

481 Air Transportation 1 8 482 Rail Transportation 1 4 514 Inform ation Services and Data Processing 1 0

. 7
521 Monetary Authorities 1 12 561 Adm i nistrative and Support Services 1 2

624 Social Assistance 1 2 814 Private Households 1 6 212 Mining 2 6 6 2212 Natural Gas Distribution 1 3 3345 Navigational, Measuring, Electrom e dical, and Control Instrum e nts Manufacturing 1 205

4911 Postal Service 1 178 562212 Solid W a ste Landfill 1 1 Total 308 10,660 Table 4-8 and Figures 4-7 and 4-8 present the distribution inform ation for industrial nonutilities. Table 4-8 shows that industrial nonutilities are m u ch sm aller in size than utilities and nonindustrial nonutilities, which is expected since the steam electric generator is ancillary to other m a nufacturing activities. Industrial nonutilities have a fairly sm all overall capacity (10,660 MW ). The capacity is fairly equally distributed between coal and natural gas fired generating units.

4-180 1 2 3 4 5 6

C oal N a t u r a l G a s N uc l ear O i lCapacity(ThousandMW) 45% 52%

0% 3% Total Existing C a pacit y : 10,660 Mega w a tt s Table 4-8. Distribution of Steam Electric Industrial Nonutilities by Size

Plant Capacity 0-50 MW 50-100 MW 100-200 MW 200-300 MW 300-400 MW 400-500 MW >500 MW Total Total Industrial Nonutility Capacity (MW ) 3,257 2,950 2,145 1,195 688 425 0 10,660

Percent of Industrial Nonutility Capacity 31% 28% 20% 11% 6% 4% 0% 100%
Num b er of Industrial Nonutility Facilities 2 4 2 4 2 1 6 5 2 1 0 3 0 8
Percent of Industrial Nonutility Facilities 79% 14% 5% 2% 1% 0% 0% 100%
Num b er of Industrial Nonutility Generating Units 4 5 3 1 2 4 5 9 2 9 4 7 0 6 7 6

Percent of Industrial Nonutility Generating Units 67% 18% 9% 4% 1% 1% 0% 100%

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

C oal N a t u r a l G a s N uc l ear O i lCapacity(ThousandMW) 45% 52%

0% 3% Total Existing C a pacit y : 10,660 Mega w a tt s

Figure 4-7. Distribution of Industrial Nonutility Capacity by Energy Source

4-190 1 2 3 4 5 6

Th r o u g h 19 50 Th r o u g h 19 60 Th r o u g h 19 70 T h r oug h 198 0 Th r o u g h 19 90 Th r o u g h 20 02 Ti m e P e r i o dCumulativeCapacity(ThousandMW) Co a l Na t u r a l G a s Oi l

Figure 4-8. Capacity of Industrial Nonutilities by Fuel Source

4.3.5 Other Fuel Sources

Som e facilities that produce electricity using a steam cycle m a y be using a renewable fuel rather than fossil or nuclear fuel. EPA has not reviewed wastewater characteristics for these f

acilities, to date. This section provides dem ographic inf o rm ation f o r these f acilities.
Facilities reported using the f o llowing f u el types with steam cycles in EIA:

C AB - Agricultural Crop;

C MSW - Municipal Solid W a ste;

C OBS - Other Biom ass Solid;

C TDF - Tire-derived Fuels;

C W D S - W ood/W ood W a ste Solids;

C BLQ - Black Liquor;

C W D L - W ood W a ste Liquids;

C LFG - Landf ill Gas;

C GEO - Geotherm al;
4-20C PC - Petroleum Coke;

C OG - Other Gas;

C BFG - Blast Furnace Gas;

C PUR - Purchased Steam ;
C OBG - Other Biom ass Gas;

C SUN - Solar; and

C OTH - Other.

Table 4-9 lists the num ber of f

acilities, num ber of generating units, and total capacity f o r the renewable fuels.

Table 4-9. Summary of EIA Data for Other Fuel Sources for All Steam Electric Facilities Reporting to EIA 2002
Facility Type Number of Facilities N umber of Generating Units Total Capacity (MW) Steam Cycle - BLQ 6 6 157 3,688 Steam Cycle - GEO 4 5 200 2,987 Steam Cycle - MSW 8 1 105 2,900 Steam Cycle - W D S 117 161 2,701 Steam Cycle - PC 16 19 1,043 Steam Cycle - OG 24 54 837 Steam Cycle - BFG 9 29 826 Steam Cycle - OTH 2 0 2 9 673 Steam Cycle - SUN 9 9 410 Steam Cycle - AB 13 27 345 Steam Cycle - LFG 1 1 1 2 212 Steam Cycle - PUR 4 9 5 8 Steam Cycle - TDF 2 2 5 7 Steam Cycle - W D L 2 3 3 5 Steam Cycle - OBS 2 2 2 5 Steam Cycle - OBG 1 1 1 8

4-215.0 

### W ASTEWATER 

### C HARACTERIZ ATION
EPA analyzed the wastewater discharges by the type of f

a cility reporting (utility, nonindustrial nonutility, or industrial nonutility). In order to classify the PCS and TRI data by f

acility type, EPA linked the PCS and TRI databases to the EIA database. Each of these prim ary data sources uses unique identif ication num bers f o r f acilities. EPA linked the PCS and TRI data for each facility using EPA’s Facility Registration System (FRS). FRS provides a unique identification num ber for facilities and contains relevant inform ation about the facility such as
nam e , address, owners, and perm its held. Both PCS and TRI identification num bers are included in the FRS system

. EPA linked the PCS and TRI inform ation to the EIA data using inform ation from EPA’s section 316(b) cooling water intake structure regulation developm ent, and also by
m a tching zip codes and other facility identification inform ation. EPA created a m a ster table that lists the FRS ID, TRI ID, NDPES num ber, and EIA ID. This m a ster table allowed inform ation from each data source to be consolidated by facility. See Docket ID No. OW -2004-0032 for additional inf o rm ation.

Table 5-1 shows the num ber of f

acilities that are in the TRI and PCS databases that report to the SIC codes applicable to the steam electric industry, the num ber of facilities linked to the EIA database, and the percent of the TW PE that is represented by the linked f acilities. EPA was not able to categorize all the facilities listed in the table below as utilities or nonutilities due to incom p lete inf o rm ation in EIA. For exam ple, EIA does not contain inf o rm ation f o r f acilities in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands and som e f acility inf o rm ation was incom p lete. However, the analysis of wastewater characteristics presented in this section represents 96% of the PCS TW PE and 95% of the TRI TW PE.

5-1Table 5-1. Number of Facilities in the PCS and TRI Databases Matched to the EIA Database

Database Number of Facilities Reporting Number of Matched Utilities Number of Matched Nonindustrial

Nonutilities Total Number of Matched

Facilities Percent of TWPE Represented PCS 554 (m ajor dischargers) 327 163 490 96

TRI 375 235 103 338 95

The rem a inder of this section presents the wastewater characteristics for the following types of steam electric f acilities:

C Section 5.1 discusses utilities;

C Section 5.2 discusses non-industrial nonutilities; and

C Section 5.3 discusses industrial nonutilities.

5.1 Utilities

This section sum m a rizes the wastewater characteristics for utilities. Section 5.1.1 discusses the PCS data and 5.1.2 discusses the TRI data.

5.1.1 PCS
EPA analyzed data from PCS to identify pollutants discharged from steam electric utilities. Of the 554 m a jor facilities reporting to PCS, 327 are utilities. Table 5-2 presents the top pollutants discharged based on TW PE, along with the num ber of facilities reporting the pollutant. The top five pollutants reported are:

1. Copper: Copper m a y be present in cooling water biocides or coal pile runoff. 2. Arsenic: Coal pile runoff and ash hand ling wastes are the m o st likely source of arsenic since arsenic is naturally occurring in coal. All but 1 of the 44 f a cilities that report arsenic discharges are coal f acilities. Arsenic discharges are reported by f acilities in only 14 states, and 29 of the 44 f acilities reporting arsenic

5-2discharges are in Region IV. Facilities in North Carolina account for 12% of the arsenic TW PE. 3. Chlorine: Chlorine is used as a biocide and is m o st likely discharged from cooling water stream s. Chlorine is a constituent of coal and theref ore m a y also be present in other wastestream s such as coal pile runoff, ash handling stream s, and scrubber wastes. Chlorine reported in PCS refers to TRC and not Cl 2 . 4. Boron: Boron is not regulated by 40 CFR 423 so few facilities report boron discharges. Of the 11 f acilities that reported boron discharges, 6 use coal as an energy source and 5 use nuclear as an energy source. One facility accounts for 67% of the boron discharged, and the top five boron dischargers account for 98%. EPA does not currently have inform ation on potential sources of boron in the wastewater; however, UW AG has perf orm e d an initial investigation regarding the release of boron and will be subm itting a sum m a ry m e m o randum to EPA on the sources of this pollutant (see DCN 01739 in section 13.2 of the record). 5. Alum inum : Alum inum is typically used as a treatm e nt chem ical in chem ical precipitation/clarification system s although the potential source in steam electric discharges is not apparent from the PCS data.

Table 5-2. The Top Pollutants Released From 327 Utilities in the PCS Database

Pollutant Number of Facilities Reporting Pollutant Total Pounds Estimated to be Discharged Total TWPE Percent of Total TWPE Copper 121 318,312 202,071 19% Arsenic 4 4 47,443 191,732 18% Chlorine (based on discharging 2 hrs/day) 136 364,978 185,833 17% Boron 1 1 920,836 163,186 15% Alum inum 21 1,609,747 104,136 10% Silver 6 5 ,090 83,836 7.9% Selenium 50 28,229 31,655 3.0% Iron 8 8 4 ,442,293 24,877 2.3% Cadm ium 2 2 744 17,209 1.6% Fluoride 7 412,707 14,445 1.4% Lead 26 6,216 13,923 1.3% Mercury 2 5 9 7 11,360 1.1% Zinc 69 159,696 7,488 0.7% Nitrogen, Nitrate Total (as N) 5 807,041 4,519 0.42% Nickel 25 23,422 2,551 0.24% Nitrite plus Nitrate Total 1 Det. (as N) 11 342,762 1,919 0.18%
5-3Table 5-2 (Continued)

Pollutant Number of Facilities Reporting Pollutant Total Pounds Estimated to be Discharged Total TWPE Percent of Total TWPE Manganese 15 76,926 1,110 0.10% Chrom i um , Hexavalent 6 2 ,051 1,060 0.10% Total 327 9,568,590 1,067,569 99.6% Note: Includes only pollutants that have a TW F. Does not include conventional pollutants like BOD 5 and TSS.
In addition to the pollutants listed in Table 5-2, steam electric plants discharge other pollutants, such as the conventional pollutants, that do not have a toxic weighting factor (TW F ). EPA could not calculate TW PE f o r these pollutants. As shown in Table 5-3, utilities discharge large m a sses of these pollutants.

Table 5-3. Pollutants Without TWFs Discharged From 327 Utilities in the PCS Database

Pollutant Number of Facilities Reporting Pollutant Total Pounds Estima Discharged ted to be
Total Suspended Solids 294 375,870,357 BOD 5 94 7,611,588 Oil & Grease 280 4,886,983 Total Residual Oxidants* 4 9 729,338 *According to UW AG, total residual oxidants indicates us e of brom ine biocides (see DCN 01738 in section 13.2 of the record). Analysis of Pollutants Discharged by Energy Source
EPA further investigated the pollutant discharges reported in PCS by the energy source reported in the EIA database. Table 5-4 shows the num ber of f

acilities, the com b ined capacity, and the TW PE associated with the reported discharges by energy source. Table 5-4 was created using inform ation from the 327 PCS steam electric utilities. Since facilities m a y report two or
m o re energy sources, the total num ber of facilities reported in Table 5-4 is greater than 327.

5-4Table 5-4. PCS Discharges From 327 Utilities Distributed by Energy Source

Category Nu mb er of Facilities En ergy S o u rce Capacity (MW) MW/Facility TWPE (tox-lb/yr) TWPE/Facility TWPE/MW Coal 231 200,650 869 853,828 3,696 4.26 Natural Gas 7 1 45,324 638 72,864 1,026 1.61 Nuclear 38 56,993 1,500 120,125 3,161 2.11 Oil 3 0 13,262 442 20,753 692 1.56

For f acilities that reported using two or m o re energy sources, EPA distributed the TW PE to each energy source based on the percentage of capacity from each energy source. For
exam ple, if 25% of a f acility’s capacity is f r om coal and 75% is f r om natural gas, and the f acility reported releasing 4,000 pounds of chlorine, then EPA assum e d 1,000 pounds are associated with coal and 3,000 pounds are associated with natural gas operations. Although som e pollutants, especially m e tals, are m o re likely to result from the use of certain fuels (e.g., coal), this approxim a tion allowed EPA to evaluate whether certain energy sources contributed the bulk of

the pollutant loads. Table 5-4 shows that the m a jority of the utility TW PE is discharged by coal facilities. Coal facilities account for 65% of the steam electric utility capacity, but 80% of the TW PE discharged. Com p ared to the other f u el types, coal f acilities have additional waste stream s from coal pile runoff and ash handling that add to the loadings for this energy source.

Table 5-4 also shows TW PE per m e gawatt, TW PE per f acility, and m e gawatt per f a cility calculated by EPA. The table shows that coal f acilities have the highest TW PE per m e gawatt, discharging m o re than 2.5 tim es as m u ch as natural gas and oil facilities, and twice as m u ch as nuclear f acilities per m e gawatt.
Table 5-5 shows the top five pollutants and their TW PE released from each energy source and the total TW PE. Sim ilar pollutants are ranked in the top five for each energy source. Coal has the highest levels of arsenic com pounds, likely due to coal pile runoff or ash handling since arsenic is naturally occurring in coal. As m e ntioned previously, cooling water is a potential source of chlorine. Copper m a y be found in cooling water, ash handling, coal pile runoff, or the low volum e wastestream s. 5-5Table 5-5. Top Five Pollutants From 327 Utilities by Fuel Source

Rank Coal Natural Gas N uclear Oil Pollu tan t TWPE Pollu tan t TWPE Pollu tan t TWPE Pollu tan t TWPE 1 A rsenic 177,205 Copper 30,439 Copper 37,824 Chlorine 11,649 2 C hlorine 137,480 Chlorine 24,204 Boron 34,492 Copper 3 ,451 3 C opper 130,357 Arsenic 11,866 Al uminum 19,507 Arsenic 2 ,661 4 B oron 128,690 Lead 1,610 Iron 13,202 Nitrite Plus Nitrate Total (as N) 1,028

5 A luminum 84,630 Mercury 1 ,529 Chlorine 12,499 Iron 640 Total 853,828 Total 72,864 Total 120,125 Total 20,753

According to Tables 5-4 and 5-5, nuclear facilities have a TW PE of 120,125 lb-eq, which accounts for 11% of the total utility TW PE. However, 60% of this discharge is released from one f acility, RE Ginna Nuclear Power Plant in Ontario, NY. The top f i ve pollutant discharges from this facility based on TW PE are copper, boron, iron, chlorine, and zinc. The facility accounts for 80% of the copper TW PE, 66% of the boron TW PE, and 99.9% of the iron TW PE released f r om utility f acilities using nuclear as an energy source. Table 5-6 com p ares the releases f r om the RE Ginna f acility to the releases f o r all nuclear f acilities. The high TW PE per f

acility and TW PE per MW f o r nuclear f acilities are driven by the results f r om this f a cility.

Table 5-6. Pollutant Releases From RE Ginna Nuclear Plant in Ontario, NY

Pollutant RE Ginna Nuclear Plant A ll Nuclear Facilities Copper 30,071 37,824 Boron 22,721 34,492 Iron 13,198 13,202 All Releases 71,690 120,125

5-6Analysis of Pollutants Discharged by Flow Rate
PCS does not provide adequate inform ation to determ ine the process stream (e.g., fly ash handling) for each reported discharge. Ther efore, EPA divided waste stream s into four categories based on flow, shown in Table 5-7, to help determ ine the type of stream s driving loads. Although the flows for these stream s varies largely by plant size, EPA is using these categories only as a screening-level tool to determ ine the source of the m a jority of the TW PE.

Table 5-7. Flow Categories
Flow Rate (MGD) P otential Streams > 50 Once-Through Cooling W a ter 10 - 50 Recirculating Cooling W a ter

1-10 Ash Handling < 1 Miscellaneous, Metal Cleaning W a ste

EPA separated the discharges for each of the top pollutants released by flow category. EPA did not have concentration and flow inform ation for all 327 facilities in the utility segm ent. Som e f acilities report releases by a m a ss quantity (rather than concentration and f l ow), and theref ore, the TW PE f r om these f acilities could not be distributed to one of the f l ow categories. However, these facilities account for only 1% of the total TW PE reported by utilities. Table 5-8 lists the total TW PE for each of the four flow categories. The table shows that the m a jority (52%) of the TW PE released is from stream s that are greater than 50 MGD.

5-7Table 5-8. TWPE From Utilities by Flow Range Flow Range (MGD) Total Flow (MGD) T WPE Percent of Total TWPE >50 167,375 549,009 52% 10-50 7,111 224,908 21% 1-10 2,703 246,801 23% <1 301 36,618 4% TOTALS 177,490 1,057,336 Note: Approxim a tely 1 percent of the total TW PE is not included in the flow analysis since som e facilities do not report a flow rate, but do report a discharge by quantity.

Table 5-9 shows the distribution am ong the four flow categories for the top five pollutants. Arsenic is the only pollutant that does not have the m a jority of its TW PE associated with flows that are greater than 50 MGD. The m a jority of the arsenic TW PE falls in the flow range of 10 - 50 MGD. Arsenic is a constituent of coal, and is likely to be released f r om ash ponds. Although ash handling stream s are likely to have a lower flowrate, coalpile runoff m a y also be contributing to the arsenic loads and m a y be a higher flow stream

.
Table 5-9. Flow Distribution for the Top Five Pollutants Released by Utilities Flow Range (MGD) Copper TWPE Arsenic TWPE Chlorine TWPE Boron TWPE Aluminum TWPE >50 123,630 14,518 181,061 117,858 51,932 10-50 35,832 115,885 3,715 6,150 29,945 1-10 38,316 56,805 382 37,507 10,176 <1 4,293 4,354 211 1,670 2,703 Total 202,071 191,562 185,369 163,186 94,755 Note: Approxim a tely 1% of the total TW PE is not included in the flow analysis since som e facilities do not report a flow rate, but do report a discharge by quantity.
Analysis of Pollutants Discharged by Type of Cooling System

Steam electric power plants use two types of cooling system s: once-through and recirculating. EPA used inform ation from EI A and the section 316(b) cooling water intake structure regulation developm ent to categorize c ooling system type. Form EIA-767 and section 316(b) contain inform ation about the type of cooling system in use at 305 of the 327 steam
5-8electric utilities in PCS. Table 5-10 shows the num ber of utilities that use each type of cooling system
. Table 5-11 shows the total TW PE released for all utilities, once-through facilities, recirculating facilities, and facilities using a com b ination of once-through and recirculating cooling system s. Forty facilities reported both a once-through and a recirculating cooling system
. Table 5-11 shows that, for each of the pollutants, once-through facilities release a greater am ount of pollutant than recirculating facilities.

Table 5-10. Distribution of Cooling Systems Used by Utilities
Type of Cooling System Number of Facilities Once Through 195 Recirculating 7 0 Com b ination 4 0 Total 305

Analysis of Effluent Pollutant Concentrations

EPA used concentration data available in PCS to com pute the m i nim u m , average, and
m a xim u m concentration of detected concentrations reported for each of the top pollutants. EPA also determ ined the num ber of non-detects reported. Table 5-12 shows the distribution of concentrations for each of the top pollutants along with the m e thod detection lim it. Concentration data were available for 309 of the 327 PCS utilities, which accounts for 97% of the total PCS TW PE.

5-9Table 5-11.Distribution of PCS TWPE From 305 Utilities by Type of Cooling System1

5-10PollutantNumber ofFacilitiesReportingPollutantTotalTWPE forthe 327SteamElectricUtilitiesOnce ThroughRecirculatingCombinationNumber ofFacilitiesReportingTWPETWPE/FacilityNumber ofFacilitiesReportingTWPETWPE/FacilityNumber ofFacilitiesReportingTWPETWPE/FacilityCopper121202,07168164,0062,4123134,1811,103183,460192Arsenic44191,73227141,6435,2461113,5851,235636,5056,084Chlorine136185,83372151,6762,1074210,7272551623,3031,456Oxidants, TotalResidual-13--7--6--Boron11163,186851,2286,40413,1193,1192108,83954,420Aluminum21104,1361477,7495,554726,3873,77000-Silver683,836583,83516,76711.5100-Selenium5031,6552917,474603173,611212410,5702,642Iron8824,8775316,471311212,676127125,728477Cadmium2217,209159,93166251,08821826,1903,095Fluoride714,445613,8222,304162362300-Lead2613,9231611,532721460515161,785298Mercury2511,360152,6081744481268,7041,4511EPA used information fromEIA and section 316(b) to identify cooling systemtype.Table 5-12.PCS Concentration Information From 309 Utilities for Top Pollutants in PCS

5-11PollutantNumberofFacilitiesNumberofRecordsNumber ofNon-DetectsNumberof DetectsSummary of Detected ConcentrationsUnitsAvg Conc.Min Conc.Max Conc.MethodDetectionLimitCopper, Total (As Cu)49347722752720.12358206ug/LArsenic, Total (As As)12761462270.012431ug/LChlorine, Total Residual100113122690517130.05790000ug/LBoron, Total (As B)916491555.210.0024260.005mg/LAluminum, Total (As Al)8910.970.003150.045mg/LSilver, Total (As Ag)8191360.050.00050.190.007mg/LSelenium, Total (As Se)189924756.10.00104560.002mg/LIron, Total (As Fe)43310122987770.10301007ug/LCadmium,Total (As Cd)115914451.90.009514ug/LFluoride, Total (As F)6790.670.104.10.1mg/LLead, Total (As Pb)13552035200.084051ug/LMercury, Total (As Hg)17641153280.003000.2ug/LNote: This table presents only total metals and not dissolved metals or total recoverable metals.All three types of metals analyses contribute to the total TWPE.5.1.2 TRI
EPA developed analyses sim ilar to the PCS data analyses using inform ation from TRI. However, the two data sets have differences, such as:

C Not all pollutants are reported to both databases - for exam ple, TRO is reported to PCS but not TRI;

C Chlorine is reported to TRI as Cl 2 rather than residual chlorine;

C TRI data contains only facilities using coal or oil as energy, as other fuel sources aren’t required to report unless the f acility also uses coal or oil; and

C TRI contains data for both direct and indi rect discharges, while PCS contains only direct discharges.

The num bers presented in this section of the report for pounds released and TW PE represents the quantity discharged to receiving stream s a nd accounts for POTW treatm e nt (for indirect discharges).
As in the PCS analysis, EPA was not able to link all TRI f acilities to inf o rm ation in EIA to obtain facility inform ation. Of the 375 facilitie s reporting to TRI, 235 are utilities. Table 5-13 shows the pollutant discharges reported from the 235 utilities in TRI. Arsenic is the top pollutant discharged, followed by copper, m e rcury, lead, and selenium

. Arsenic is reported by 84 out of 235 facilities and accounts for 49% of the total TW PE reported by steam electric utilities in TRI. All 84 f acilities that reported arsenic discharges are coal f acilities. Arsenic discharges are reported by only 17 states, of wh ich 45 of the 84 releases are from Region IV.

5-12Table 5-13. Pollutants Released From 235 Utilities in the TRI Database

Chemical Name Number of Facilities Reporting Chemical Total Pounds Released Accounting for POTW Removals Total TWPE Percent of Total TWPE Arsenic and Arsenic Com pounds 84 73,224 295,923 49% Copper and Copper Com pounds 143 258,030 163,803 27% Mercury and Mercury Com pounds 96 313 36,654 6% Lead and Lead Com pounds 148 16,272 36,449 6% Selenium and Selenium Com pounds 21 26,858 30,117 5% Chlorine 9 22,929 11,675 2% Zinc and Zinc Com pounds 148 212,630 9,969 1.6% Nickel and Nickel Com pounds 119 60,598 6,600 1.1% Manganese and Manganese Com pounds 126 379,967 5,484 0.9% Chrom i um and Chrom i um Com pounds 111 31,561 2,389 0.4% Polycyclic Arom atic Com pounds 3 2 4 2 ,382 0.4% Vanadium and Vanadium Com pounds 66 62,811 2,198 0.4% Thallium and Thallium Com pounds 11 1,832 1,882 0.3% Beryllium and Beryllium Com pounds 15 1,279 1,351 0.2% Cobalt and Cobalt Com pounds 38 10,389 1,187 0.2% Barium and Barium Com pounds 167 543,754 1,082 0.18% Am m onia 1 8 48,006 72 0.01% Antim ony and Antim ony Com pounds 7 4 ,111 50 0.01% Nitrate Com pounds 3 516,350 32 0.01% Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 4 1 8 5 <0.01% Methanol 1 6 ,604 0.10 <0.01% Sulfuric Acid (1994 and after "Acid Aerosols" Only) 1 5 0.007 <0.01% Hydrochloric Acid (1995 and after "Acid Aerosols" Only) 1 5 0.00012 <0.01% Hydrogen Fluoride 1 10 0.00006 <0.01% Total 235 609,307 100%

5-13Analysis of Pollutants Discharged by Energy Source
EPA segm ented the TRI discharges by the energy source as in the PCS analysis. Table 5­ 14 shows a sum m a ry of the total TW PE for each energy source. Since facilities m a y report using two or m o re energy sources, the total num ber of f

acilities reported in Table 5-14 is greater than 235. For facilities that reported using two or m o re energy sources in the EIA database, EPA distributed the TW PE to each energy source based on the percentage of capacity from each energy source as in the PCS data analysis. As with the PCS data, the m a jority of the utility TW PE is released by coal f acilities. EPA also com puted the TW PE per m e gawatt (MW ) , TW PE per f acility, and m e gawatt per f acility. Table 5-14 shows that coal f acilities again have the highest TW PE per MW

. Coal facilities account for m o st of the capacity, but they also account f

o r m o st of the TW PE, and on a TW PE per MW basis, coal f acilities are discharging just slightly
m o re than natural gas f acilities, f our tim es as m u ch as oil f acilities, and m o re than eight tim es as
m u ch as nuclear f acilities. As m e ntioned previously, natural gas and nuclear f acilities are not required to report under TRI. Facilities report to TR I if any portion of their capacity is generated from coal or oil. Not enough inform ation is available to determ ine why the natural gas and nuclear f acilities m a y be reporting to TRI.

Table 5-14. TRI Discharges From 235 Utilities Distributed by Energy Source

Category Number of Facilities Energy Source Capacity

(MW) MW/Facility TWPE (Tox-lb/yr) TWPE/Facility TWPE/ M W Coal 220 192,560 875 567,360 2,579 2.95 Natural Gas 2 5 12,296 492 32,849 1,314 2.67 Nuclear 4 7 ,974 1,994 2,792 698 0.35 Oil 1 8 8 ,578 477 6,305 350 0.74

Table 5-15 shows the top five pollutants, based on TW PE, released from each energy source and the total TW PE f o r the energy source. The top pollutants are m a inly m e tals which are a constituent of coal and m a y be released to water in the fly ash handling system or through coal pile runoff.
5-14Table 5-15. Top Five Pollutants From 235 Utilities for Each Fuel Source in the TRI Database

Rank Coal Natural Gas N uclear Oil Pollu tan t TWPE Pollu tan t TWPE Pollu tan t TWPE Pollu tan t TWPE 1 A rsenic 282,479 Arsenic 13, 168 Copper 1,696 Mercury 1,734 2 C opper 155,335 Chlorine 8,381 Zinc 952 Copper 1 ,552 3 L ead 35,351 Copper 5,220 Lead 110 Poly cy clic Arom atic Compounds 1,468

4 M ercury 30,560 Mercury 4,359 Nickel 35 Chlorine 458 5 S elenium 29,998 Lead 674 Lead 314 Total 567,360 Total 32,849 Total 2 ,792 Total 6 ,305 Summary
The PCS and TRI analysis shows that copper, arsenic, chlorine, boron, alum inum , m e rcury, lead, and selenium rank highest in term s of TW PE released to wastewater f o r utilities. The m a jority of the pollutant loads are f r om coal f acilities. This result is expected since coal facilities have additional wastestream s due to coal-pile runoff and ash handling system s. The initial evaluation of cooling system inform ation shows that utilities using a once-through cooling water system discharge higher levels of pollutants.

5.2 Nonindustrial Nonutilities

This section sum m a rizes the wastewater characteristics for nonindustrial nonutilities. Section 5.2.1 discusses the PCS data and 5.2.2 discusses the TRI data.

5.2.1 PCS
EPA analyzed data from PCS to identify pollutants discharged from steam electric nonindustrial nonutilities. Of the 554 facilities reporting to PCS, 163 are nonindustrial nonutilities. Table 5-16 presents the top pollutants discharged based on TW PE, along with the
num ber of f

acilities reporting the pollutant.

5-15Table 5-16. The Top Pollutants Released From 163 Steam Electric Nonindustrial Nonutilities in the PCS Database

Pollutant Number of Facilities Reporting Pollutant Total Pounds Estimated to be

Discharged Total TWPE Percent of Total TWPE Boron 1 4 703,404 124,654 26% Alum inum 24 1,858,482 120,227 25% Chlorine 79 184,974 94,182 20% Copper 5 5 71,321 45,276 10% Iron 6 2 4 ,578,911 25,642 5% Lead 19 8,809 19,733 4% Silver 5 1 ,016 16,733 4% Zinc 49 267,254 12,530 3% Selenium 11 5,723 6,417 1.4% Chrom i um , Hexavalent 5 6 ,009 3,104 0.7% Cadm ium 9 99 2,295 0.5% Mercury 6 4 521 0.11% Hydrazine 7 7 ,409 465 0.10% Nickel 27 3,636 396 0.08% Manganese 20 23,405 338 0.07% Nitrogen, Am m onia 2 0 223,024 336 0.07% Boric Acid 1 519,734 312 0.07% Arsenic 8 74 298 0.06% Sulfate 1 3 48,887,354 274 0.06% Nitrogen, Nitrate Total (As N) 6 35,868 201 0.04% Chloride 5 6 ,511,436 159 0.03% Chrom i um 12 1,918 145 0.03% Pcb-1260 (Arochlor 1260) 2 0 81 0.02% Nitrogen, Nitrite Total (As N) 4 209 78 0.02% Magnesium 2 75,839 66 0.01% Vanadium 7 1 ,349 47 0.01% Cobalt 1 235 27 0.01% Molybdenum 2 121 24 0.01% Sodium 1 2 ,318,659 13 <0.01% Fluoride 4 339 12 <0.01% Titanium 2 109 3 < 0.01% Beryllium 4 1 1 <0.01% Barium 2 408 1 < 0.01% Total 474,591

5-16As in the analyses of utilities, boron, alum inum , chlorine, and copper ranked in the top five pollutants discharged based on TW PE. Ir on also ranked in the top five for nonindustrial nonutilities. Arsenic is the only pollutant that was in the top five for utilities, but not for nonindustrial nonutilities. The capacity of coal-fired plants is over three tim es higher for utilities than nonindustrial nonutilities which m a y also account for the higher arsenic loads.

Table 5-17 shows the com p arison of capacity between the utility and the nonindustrial nonutility facilities.

Table 5-17. Comparison of Capacity Between Utilities and Nonindustrial Nonutilities Reporting in the PCS Database

Energy Source Utility Capacity (MW) Percent of Total Utility Capacity Nonindustrial Nonutility C a pa c i ty (MW) Percent of Total Non-industrial Nonutility Capacity Coal 200,650 64 59,426 40 Natural Gas 45,324 14 37,609 25 Nuclear 56,993 18 35,245 24 Oil 13,262 4 16,428 11 Total 316,229 100 148,708 100

As with the utilities, som e of the pollutants discharged, such as conventional pollutants, do not have TW Fs. Som e of these pollutants can have significant discharges, as shown in Table 5-18.

Table 5-18. Pollutants Without TWFs Released From 163 Nonindustrial Nonutilities in the PCS Database

Pollutant Number of Facilities Reporting Pollutant Total Pounds Estimated to be Discharged Total Suspended Solids 139 88,278,176 Oil & Grease 131 11,621,147 Total Residual Oxidants 26 669,239 BOD 5 65 21,359

5-17Analysis of Pollutants Discharged by Energy Source
EPA further investigated the pollutant discharges reported in PCS by the energy source reported in the EIA database. Table 5-19 shows the num ber of f

acilities, the com b ined capacity, and the TW PE associated with the reported discharges by energy source. Table 5-19 was created using inform ation from the 163 PCS steam electric nonindustrial nonutilities. Since facilities
m a y report two or m o re energy sources, the total num ber of f

acilities reported in Table 5-19 is greater than 163.

Table 5-19. PCS Discharges From 163 Nonindustrial Nonutilities Distributed by Energy Source

Category Nu mb er of Facilities En ergy S o u rce Capacity (MW) MW/Facility TWPE (tox-lb/yr) TWPE/Facility TWPE/MW Coal 80 59,426 743 184,089 2,301 3.10 Natural Gas 5 3 37,609 710 190,001 3,585 5.05 Nuclear 22 35,245 1,602 64,868 2,949 1.84 Oil 3 3 16,428 498 35,633 1,080 2.17

For f acilities that reported using two or m o re energy sources, EPA distributed the TW PE to each energy source based on the percentage of capacity from each energy source. For
exam ple, if 25% of a f acility’s capacity is f r om coal and 75% is f r om natural gas, and the f acility reported releasing 4,000 pounds of chlorine, then EPA assum e d 1,000 pounds are associated with coal and 3,000 pounds are associated with natural gas operations. Although som e pollutants, especially m e tals, are m o re likely to result from the use of certain fuels (e.g., coal), this approxim a tion allowed EPA to evaluate whether certain energy sources contributed the bulk of

the pollutant loads. Table 5-19 shows that the natural gas f acilities report the highest TW PE.

Table 5-19 also shows TW PE per m e gawatt, TW PE per f acility, and m e gawatt per f

acility calculated by EPA. The table shows that natural gas f acilities have the highest TW PE per m e gawatt, discharging m o re than twice as m u ch as nuclear and oil f acilities, and m o re than 1.5 tim es as m u ch as coal facilities per m e gawatt.

5-18Table 5-20 shows the com p arison of TW PE per f acility between the utilities and nonutilities. Table 5-20 shows that the natural gas TW PE for nonindustrial nonutilities is 2.5 tim es larger than f o r utilities while the num ber of f

acilities is lower. The overall TW PE per facility for nonindustrial nonutilities is m o re than three tim es larger than for utilities. The dif f

e rence is driven by one f acility, W e st Texas Utilities Com p any in Abilene, TX. This f a cility reports a discharge of 1,226,638 pounds of alum inum which is equal to 79,353 lb-eq. EPA will contact this f acility to verif y the reported discharge.

Table 5-20. Comparison of TWPE/Facility Between Utilities and Nonindustrial Nonutilities Reporting in the PCS Database

Category Nu mb er of Utility Facilities Utility TWPE Utility TWPE/Facility Nu mb er of Nonindustr ial

Nonutility Facilities Nonindustr ial Nonutility

TWPE Nonindustr ial Nonutility TWPE/Facility Coal 231 853,828 3,696 80 184,089 2,301 Natural Gas 7 1 72,864 1,026 53 190,001 3,585 Nuclear 38 120,125 3,161 22 64,868 2,949 Oil 3 0 20,753 692 33 35,633 1,080

Due to the greater TW PE and the lower capacity for nonindustrial nonutility natural gas f

acilities com p ared to utility natural gas f acilities, the TW PE per m e gawatt is greater. Part of this dif f

e rence m a y be attributable to W e st Texas Utilities; however, even if the TW PE f r om that facility was set to zero, the TW PE would still be larger for nonindustrial nonutilities than for natural gas utilities. Table 5-21 shows the TW PE per m e gawatt f o r each of the energy sources for utility facilities and nonindustrial nonutility facilities.

5-19Table 5-21. Comparison of TWPE/MW Between Utilities and Nonindustrial Nonutilities Reporting in the PCS Database

Energy Source Utility TWPE/MW Non-industrial Nonutility TWPE/MW Coal 4.26 3.10 Natural Gas 1 .61 5 .05 Nuclear 2.11 1.84 Oil 1 .56 2 .17

Analysis of Pollutants Discharged by Cooling System
Using the section 316(b) and Form EIA-767 inform ation, EPA determ ined the cooling system used by 144 of the 163 nonindustrial nonutilities. As with the utilities, the m a jority of the TW PE is released by facilities using once-through cooling system s. However, for the nonindustrial nonutilities, greater quantities of som e pollutants (boron, selenium , and cadm i um ) are released from recirculating system s rather than once-through system s. Table 5-22 shows the distribution of the 144 facilities by cooling system type. Table 5-22 shows that the m a jority of the nonindustrial nonutilities use once-through cooling system s.

Table 5-22. Distribution of Cooling Systems Used by Nonindustrial Nonutilities
Type of Cooling System Number of Facilities Once-Through 102 Recirculating 3 1 Com b ination 1 1

5.2.2 TRI
EPA analyzed data from TRI to identify pollutants discharged from steam electric nonindustrial nonutilities. Of the 375 facilities reporting to TRI, 103 are nonindustrial nonutilities. Table 5-23 presents the top pollutants discharged based on TW PE, along with the
num ber of f

acilities reporting the pollutant.

5-20Table 5-23. The Top Pollutants Released From 103 Steam Electric Nonindustrial Nonutilities in the TRI Database

Chemical Name Number of Facilities Reporting Chemical Total Pounds Released Total TWPE Percent of Total TWPE Arsenic and Arsenic Com pounds 29 15,395 62,216 41% Lead and Lead Com pounds 76 20,742 46,462 30% Copper and Copper Com pounds 43 30,978 19,665 13% Mercury and Mercury Com pounds 41 44 5,099 3% Nickel and Nickel Com pounds 41 44,984 4,899 3% Chrom i um and Chrom i um Com pounds 40 54,413 4,119 3% Zinc and Zinc Com pounds 52 46,593 2,185 1.4% Vanadium and Vanadium Com pounds 28 59,998 2,100 1.4% Selenium and Selenium Com pounds 7 1 ,862 2,088 1.4% Manganese and Manganese Com pounds 55 107,621 1,553 1.0% Chlorine 2 1 ,945 990 0.6% Barium and Barium Com pounds 63 286,663 571 0.4% Thallium and Thallium Com pounds 4 530 544 0.4% Am m onia 2 2 46,871 71 0.05% Polychlorinated Biphenyls 1 0.0012 41 0.03% Hexachlorobenzene 1 0.02 39 0.03% Toluene 2 4,200 24 0.02% Cobalt and Cobalt Com pounds 6 132 15 0.01% Antim ony and Antim ony Com pounds 4 763 9 0 .01% Beryllium and Beryllium Com pounds 1 4 4 < 0.01% Polycyclic Arom atic Com pounds 2 0 .03 3 <0.01% Molybdenum Trioxide 2 253 0.2 < 0.01% Form ic Acid 1 1 3 0 .005 <0.01% Benzo(g,h,i)perylene 1 0 .0005 0.00014 <0.01% Hydrogen Fluoride 1 10 0.00006 <0.01% Total 152,697

5-21Four of the top five pollutants (arsenic, lead, copper, and m e rcury) released from nonindustrial nonutilities were am ong the top five pollutant released from utility facilities. Nickel replaced selenium in the top five pollutants list for nonindustrial nonutilities.
Analysis of Pollutants Discharged by Energy Source
EPA segm ented the TRI discharges by the energy source as in the PCS analysis. Table 5­ 24 shows a sum m a ry of the total TW PE for each energy source. Since facilities m a y report two
or m o re energy sources, the total num ber of facilities reported in Table 5-24 is greater than 103. For f acilities that reported using two or m o re energy sources in the EIA database, EPA distributed the TW PE to each energy source based on the percentage of capacity from each energy source as discussed in the PCS data analysis. Unlike the PCS data, the m a jority of the nonindustrial nonutility TW PE is released by coal facilities, 91%, not natural gas. EPA also
com puted the TW PE per m e gawatt, TW PE per f acility, and m e gawatt per f acility. Table 5-24 shows that coal facilities have the highest TW PE per m e gawatt. Coal facilities account for m o st of the capacity, but they also account for m o st of the TW PE, and on a TW PE per m e gawatt basis, coal f acilities are discharging alm o st twice as m u ch as natural gas f acilities and f our tim es
as m u ch as oil f acilities. Four utility f acilities reported a nuclear f u el source, but no nonindustrial nonutilities reported a nuclear fuel source. This discrepancy is not surprising, since nuclear f acilities are not required to report to TRI.

Table 5-24. TRI Discharges From 103 Nonindustrial Nonutilities Distributed by Energy Source

Category Number of Facilities Energy Source Capacity MW/Facility Energy Source TWPE TWPE/Facility T WPE/MW Coal 90 56,939 633 139,615 1,551 2.45 Natural Gas 1 4 5 ,484 392 6,939 496 1.27 Oil 1 6 10,004 625 6,143 384 0.61

5-22Table 5-25 shows the com p arison of TW PE between the two types of f

a cilities. The TW PE percentage by fuel source is fairly consistent between the utilities and the nonindustrial nonutilities.

Table 5-25. Comparison of TWPE Between Utility and Nonindustrial Nonutility Facilities Reporting in the TRI Database

Category U tility TWPE Percent of Utility TWPE Nonindustrial Nonutility TWPE Percent of Nonindustrial Nonutility TWPE Coal 567,360 93.1 139,615 91.4 Natural Gas 32,849 5.4 6 ,939 4.6 Nuclear 2,792 0.5

- - Oil 6 ,305 1.0 6 ,143 4.0

W h ile the TW PE percentages were consistent, the TW PE per m e gawatt for each of the fuel sources was lower for utility facilities as com p ared to nonindustrial nonutility facilities. For
exam ple, the TW PE per m e gawatt was 52% lower for utilities than nonindustrial nonutilities using natural gas as the fuel source. Table 5-26 shows the com p arison of TW PE per m e gawatt f

o r the two types of f

acilities.

Table 5-26. Comparison of TWPE/MW Between Utility and Nonindustrial Nonutility Facilities Reporting in the TRI Database

Category Utility TWPE/MW Nonindustrial Nonutility TWPE/MW Coal 2.95 2.45 Natural Gas 2 .67 1 .27 Nuclear 0.35

- Oil 0 .74 0 .61

5-23Summary
The PCS and TRI analysis shows that boron, alum inum , chlorine, copper, iron, arsenic,
m e rcury, lead, and nickel rank highest in te rm s of TW PE released to wastewater for nonindustrial nonutilities. Arsenic loadings reported to PCS are significantly lower for nonindustrial nonutilities than for utilities, because the m e gawatts generated by coal (the m a jor source of arsenic) is over three tim es higher f o r utilities. The PCS data show that the TW PE per f

acility is highest f o r natural gas f acilities, while the TRI data show coal f acilities have the highest TW PE per f acility. As discussed previously, the high TW PE reported f o r natural gas f

acilities m a y be due to a single anom alous f acility. EPA will discuss the reported discharge with the facility, and, if necessary, investig ate the source of their high discharge. The prelim inary results show that utilities and nonutilities have sim ilar wastewater characteristics.

5.3 Industrial Nonutilities

EPA was able to m a tch 60 of the 308 steam electric industrial nonutilities listed in EIA to data included in the PCS database. The industries that these facilities represent are presented in Table 5-27.

5-24Table 5-27. Industries Represented in the Analysis of 60 Industrial Nonutilities Industry N umber of Facilities Pulp, Paper, and Paperboard 17 Sugar Processing 8 Petroleum Refining 8 Organic Chem icals, Plastics, and Synthetic Fibers 5 Iron and Steel Manufacturing 5 Vinyl Chloride and Chlor-Alkali 4 Grain Mills Manufacturing 2 Nonferrous Metals Manufacturing 2 Pharm aceutical Manufacturing 2 Pesticide Chem icals Manufacturing 2 Fruits and Vegetable Processing 1 Cem e nt Manufacturing 1 Inorganic Chem icals 1 Metal Finishing 1 Ore Mining and Dressing 1 Explosives 1 Sewerage System s 1

Since the industrial nonutilities’ prim ary purpose of operation is som e thing other than electricity production, m a ny of the chem icals released m a y not be associated with electricity production. Table 5-28 shows the top pollutants, based on TW PE, released from the steam electric industrial nonutilities. Of the 60 industrial nonutilities, 21 reported releasing chlorine, which is one of the m o st f r equently reported chem icals f r om steam electric f acilities in the PCS database.

5-25Table 5-28. Top Pollutants Released From 60 Industrial Nonutility Facilities Reporting in the PCS Database

Pollutant Number of Facilities Pounds Released TWPE Silver 3 9 ,990 164,548 Chlorine 21 295,368 150,390 Molybdenum 1 717,011 144,434 Sulfide 7 42,674 119,550 Nitrogen, Am m onia 3 8 32,564,941 49,022 Lead 15 13,085 29,310 Copper 1 9 44,006 27,936 Nitrogen, Nitrite Total (As N) 2 74,432 27,788 Cyanide 1 1 18,422 20,576 Fluoride 3 358,547 12,549 Selenium 4 11,136 12,487 Alum inum 5 168,466 10,898 Arsenic 4 2,467 9,970 Nickel 13 72,970 7,947 Zinc 19 134,045 6,285 Phenol & Phenolics 1 2 187,285 5,245 Mercury 5 45 5,238 Cadm ium 4 216 4,986 Chloride 6 126,159,200 3,072 Tributyltin 1 2 5 2 ,242 Nitrogen, Nitrate Total (As N) 3 143,050 801 Boron 1 3,837 680 Chrom i um , Hexavalent 5 1 ,307 675

Using the section 316(b) and Form EIA-767 inform ation, EPA determ ined the type of cooling system used by 22 of the 60 industrial nonutilities. Table 5-29 shows the distribution of the 22 facilities by cooling system type. The m a jority of the industrial nonutilities use recirculating cooling system s; however, with such a sm all data set, it is dif f i cult to determ ine if these results are representative of all industrial nonutilities.

5-26Table 5-29. Distribution of Cooling Systems Used by 60 Industrial Nonutility Facilities
Type of Cooling System Number of Facilities Once-Through 6 Recirculating 1 5 Com b ination 1 Total 2 2

Table 5-30 shows the distribution of the 60 f acilities by energy source using EIA inform ation. Five of the facilities reported using two or m o re energy sources; therefore, the total
num ber of facilities reported in Table 5-30 is greater than 60.

Table 5-30. Distribution of Energy Sources Used by Industrial Nonutility Facilities
Energy Source Number of Facilities Coal 32 Natural Gas 3 5 Nuclear 0 Oil 5

Due to the lim ited inform ation on industrial nonutilities, EPA will continue to investigate this type of facility as it com p letes the detailed study.

5-276.0 

### A DDITIONAL 

### I NFORMATION 

### N EEDS AND 

### N EXT 

### S TEPS

EPA will continue to evaluate steam electric facilities for the developm ent of the 2006 Plan. EPA will respond to com m e nts on this prelim inary report and continue to evaluate the topics discussed in this report. Topics requiring further study include:

C Arsenic - Arsenic discharges are reported by f acilities in 14 states, and 29 of the 44 f acilities reporting are in Region IV. EPA will investigate the reason f o r the increased discharge in this area;

C Boron - Boron ranks in the top five pollutants discharged from steam electric utilities and nonindustrial nonutilities. EPA will investigate possible sources of boron;

C Mercury - Mercury ranks in the top five pollutants discharged fromnatural gasfired utilities and coal- and natural gas-fired nonindustrial nonutilities. EPA will investigate the wastestream s that contribute to the m e rcury load; and

C Total Suspended Solids - Steam electric f acilities discharge high quantities of TSS. EPA will investigate the sources of TSS. In addition, EPA will conduct a focused review of topics that were not evaluated as part of the prelim inary study. The additional areas to be investigated are discussed in the following sections:

C Section 6.1 discusses the evaluation of pollution prevention and wastewater treatm e nt technologies;

C Section 6.2 discusses the review of inform ation provided by UW AG;

C Section 6.3 discusses the additional questions on industrial nonutilities;

C Section 6.4 discusses the additional questions on generators using renewable or recycled fuel; and

C Section 6.5 discusses em erging issues.
EPA will review any additional inf o rm ation provided on these topics f o r the developm ent of the 2006 Plan.

6-16.1 Pollution Prevention and Wastew a ter Treatment Technologies
EPA will review pollution prevention and wastewater treatm ent technologies available to reduce pollutant loadings. W h en evaluating potential treatm e nt options, EPA will take into account the prelim inary concentration analysis (Table 5-12), which shows that, on average, the pollutants are present in steam electric wastewaters. EPA will consider the reported concentration levels when evaluating treatm e nt options.
In the OECA Sector Notebook (U.S. EPA, 1997), EPA suggested several m e thods for reducing pollution f r om steam electric f acilities (sum m a rized in Table 6-1). EPA will investigate these and other options further during the developm ent of the final detailed study.

Table 6-1. Potential Pollution Prevention Options for Steam Electric Facilities
Pollution Prevention Option Description/Notes Cooling Water Optim ize chem ical use F acilities should m i nim i ze the am ount of chem icals added to the system
. Chem ical substitution B rom i ne is m o re toxic than chlorine. Ozone treatm e nt could be considered to replace both brom ine and chlorine. Use inert construction m a terials N onreactive constr uction m a terials will reduce scale and corrosion. Reduce water use R ecirculating system s should be used instead of once-through system s. Installing autom a tic bleed/feed controllers and bypass feeders m a y also reduce volum es of chem icals and water required. Boiler Cleaning (Fire side) Use cleaner fuels N atural gas is the cleanes t burning fuel. Cleaner coals and oils will reduce am ount of cleaning required. Use alternate cleaning m e thods Soot blowers, sonic horns, brushing, sweeping, or vacuum ing used to replace or augm ent waster washing will reduce wastewater generated. Boiler Cleaning (Water side) Optim ize cleaning frequency M aintain operating records including norm a l cycle chem istry to help determ ine when cleaning is needed Control boiler chem istry C ontrolling chem istry will help reduce scaling Source: OECA Sector Notebook (U.S. EPA, 1997)

Steam electric f acilities are currently recycling f l y ash and bottom ash to m i nim i ze the
am ount of ash requiring treatm e nt. UW AG provided inform ation on the use of coal com bustion 6-2product wastes (see DCN 01728 in section 13.2 of the record). Inform ation for 2003 shows that fly ash and bottom ash are used in the following applications:

C Concrete/Concrete Products/Grout;

C Cem e nt/Raw Feed for Clinker;

C Flowable Fill;

C Structural Fills/Em b ankm ents;

C Road Base/Sub-base/Pavem ent;

C Soil Modif i cation/Stabilization;

C Mineral Filler in Asphalt;

C Snow and Ice Control;

C Blasting Grit/Roof ing Granules;

C Mining Applications;

C W a ste Stabilization/Agriculture; and

C Agriculture.

EPA will continue to collect inf o rm ation on potential pollution prevention and wastewater treatm e nt options for this industry.

6.2 UWAG Information

As m e ntioned in Section 3.6, UW AG is currently collecting data from their m e m b ers for use in EPA’s evaluation of this industry. EPA will review the inform ation as it is received from UW AG and incorporate it into analyses wher e appropriate. Since UW AG represents only utilities, the inform ation collected will only be applicable to this facility type (see DCN 01738 in section 13.2 of the record).

6.3 Industrial Nonutilities
Industrial nonutilities are not currently regulated under Part 423 since their prim ary purpose is not the generation or distribution of electricity. EPA will investigate these f acilities

6-3further to estim ate the potential hazard posed by discharges from the steam electric portion of these f acilities. Additional questions to address include:

C W h at are the current perm it lim its f o r these generating units? Are perm it writers applying Part 423 lim its to the steam electric portion of these plants?

C Is wastewater f r om the steam electric plant com m i ngled with other f acility wastewater before treatm e nt and discharge? Does it af f

ect the pollutant loads and potential treatm e nt?

C W h at type of cooling system s are used by these f acilities? W h at chem icals are they using to control biofouling?

C Does the f act that these f acilities are co-located with other m a nuf acturing operations affect pollution prevention and treatm e nt options?

EPA m a y answer these questions through a targeted perm it review and/or through facility site visits.

6.4 Renew a ble/Recycled Fuel Sources
Part 423 currently only applies to facilities using fossil-based or nuclear fuel. As
m e ntioned in Section 4.3.5 steam electric facilities m a y use fuels such as agricultural waste and biom ass to produce steam

. EPA will investigate these facilities to determ ine if they should be included in the applicability of Part 423. Additional questions to address include:

C How are these facilities sim ilar to facilities currently covered by Part 423 in term s of pollutant discharge, water use, wastewater flow rates, and plant capacity?

C Do these f acilities have any additional sources of wastewater? How are these f acilities currently perm itted? W h at pollutants are regulated and what lim its apply?

EPA m a y answer these questions through a targeted perm it review and/or through facility site visits.

6-4 C6.5 Emerging Issues

EPA will also review inform ation on em erging technologies that m a y im pact pollutant loadings, such as Integrated Gasification Co m b ined-Cycle (IGCC). This technology, which m a y becom e used m o re frequently, involves converting co al into a gaseous fuel which is then purified and com busted in a gas turbine generator to produce electricity. Heat from the exhaust gas is recovered and used to generate steam to produce additional electricity. IGCC plants are m o re efficient than traditional steam electric plants. Most of the environm ental benefits for this technology will be related to reducing air em issions. (U.S. EPA, 1997)

EPA will collect additional inf o rm ation on the prevalence of these types of f

acilities. Currently, EPA only has inform ation on one IGCC plant located at the Polk Power Station in Florida. The 260 MW IGCC plant is considered a zero-discharge facility. A brine concentration unit handles all of the liquid wastes and the effluent is reused in the process. EPA will investigate topics related to IGCC plants during the developm ent of the 2006 Plan. ( www.tam p aelectric.com / TEEVPowerPlants IGCC.cfm ) ]

6-57.0 

### R EFERENCES

1. Kaplan, Charles H., Letter to Regional Perm it Branch Chiefs and State Directors. “Com bined Cycle Electric Generation Plants , Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category”, U.S. EPA Region IV, Decem ber 19, 1989. 2. Tam p a Electric Environm ental W e b site, http://www.tam p aelectric.com / TEEVPowerPlantsIGCC.cfm 3. U.S. Departm e nt of Energy, Energy Inform ation Adm i nistration. www.eia.doe.gov

. 4. U.S. EPA. Cooling W a ter Intake Structures Section 316(b) W e b site, http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/316b/index.htm l

. 5. U.S. EPA, EPCRA Section 313 Industry Guidance Electricity Generating Facilities , EPA 745-B-00-004, Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, February 2000. 6. U.S. EPA. 2005. PCSLoads2002_v01 Database. 7. U.S. EPA. Prelim inary Data Sum m a ry for the Steam Electric Point Source Category , EPA-821-Z-96-010, W a shington, DC, 1996. 8. U.S. EPA, Profile of the Fossil Fuel Electric Power Generation Industry , EPA Office of Com p liance Sector Notebook Project, EPA/310-R097-007, Septem ber 1997. 9. U.S. EPA, Screening-Level Analysis Report . W a shington, DC, 2005. 10. U.S. EPA. 2005. TRIReleases2002_v02 Database.

7-1