### Memorandum 

### TO: 

### 316b Existing Facility Rule Docket 

# ..---, FROM: Mary T
. Smith. Directk :-- 

# r I 

### r

# I ,/ Engineering and

# An1l¥f**Di ~**  7/1/1/ SUBJECT: Meeting on June 28, 2011 with Clean Energy Group Regarding BTA 

### Impingement Framework Attendees at Meeting: • Melissa Lavinson, PG&E • Michael Bradley, Clean Energy Group • Mark Strickland, PSEG 

# • Ray Butts, NextEra Energy 

# • Carla Logan, Constellation Energy 

# • John Quinn, Constellation Energy 

# • Carrie J enks, Clean Energy Group 

# • Amy Trojecki, Exelon 

# • Steve Newbold, EPA OP 

# • Paul Balserak, EPA OP 

# • Alex Barron, EPA OP 

# • Nancy Stoner, EPA OW 

# • Michael Goo, EPA OP 

# • Bob Sussman, EPA OA 

# • Mary Smith, EPA OW 

### Representatives ofthe Clean Energy Group discussed with EPA their draft proposal "BTA Framework to Replace EPA's Proposed Impingement Mortal ity Standard under Sec. 316(b)" (attached). EPA asked a number of clarifying questions such as 1. 

### Preapproved BTA

- is the minimal intake flow 

## o.s feet/sec? Likely something higher

. 2. Mitigation measures - what about the 2nd 

### Circuit opinion that prohibits restoration? These would mitigate amount ofI and E that would need to be minimized by technology. 3. Deminimus

- what's covered? Facilities used part of the year; facilities that impinge few fish. 4. When would guidance be issued? Probabl y not enough time to do this before final rule so probabl y after Jul y 2012
. 

### Feedback from EPA: Good start but needs more specificity. What is minimal intake flow? What is "comparable BTA?" Parties agreed to get together again when there is more specificity, and perhaps a discussion with EPA's technical staffbefore the next meeting would be helpful.BTA Framework to Replace EPA's Proposed Impingement Mortality Standard under Sec. 316(b)1 The following provisions set forth a framework for complying with the impingement mortality standards under 316{b) of the Clean Water Act. The framework was deve loped based on concerns that a one-size-fits-all approach for impingement mortality, as proposed by EPA, could not be developed and applied appropriately to recognize the site specific factors that affect impingement mortality. Thi s framework was refined based on meetings with EPA staff. Companies will also be providing individual specific comments to the Agency on the EPA's proposed rule under 316{b), but the framework for impingement mortality outlined below is designed so that all affected facilities are required to comply with impingement standards through the installation of best technology available (BTA). This BTA framework, including each element listed below, will ensure that the rule results in a significant national reduction in impingement with important environmental and ecological benefits throughout the U.S. This framework is consiste nt with approaches previously used by the Agency and upheld by courts. 1) EPA should require facilities to insta ll BTA technology, which should include one of the following : a. Preapproved BTA: i. advanced screens with fish return systems; or ii. a specific minimal intake flow (measured fps). b. Comparable BTA measures to minimize adverse environmental impacts (AEI) associated with impingement as appropriate based on site specific considerations and as determined by the permitting director, including: i. The use of offshore velocity caps; ii. Sound and light d iversion technology; iii. Wedgewire screens; or iv

. Other appropriate BTA technology(ies) or mitigation measure(s) based on site specific factors, as determined by the permitting director, including cost benefit analyses, taking into account measures already implemented to reduce AEI, including mitigation (e.g., restoration) measures, and consistent with any EPA guidance to ensure similar or greater benefits. 2) Verification and Monitoring. Each facility should be required to demonstrate the installed BTA technology is operating consistent with best management practices

. Each permit review will also requ i re the permitting director to confirm the technology ins talled is BTA and operated appropriately to ensure maximum benefit. 3) Shellfish Impingement Mortality Protection. If the permitting director determines that a plant located on ocean or tidal waters is not minimizing AEI to shellfish, then the permitting director sho uld require additional measures, as necessary, to reduce impingement mortality of shellfish based on cost benefit analysis. Facil ities could be obligated to install barrier nets, or their equivalent, as proposed by EPA 

### unless the facility demonstrates to the permitting director that site specific considerations prevent a barrier net or

t Each company will provide individ ual comments on the complete 316(b) proposal by EPA, but th isframework is proposed by Constellation Energy, Exelon Corporation, NextEra Ene rgy, PG&E Co rporation , and Public Service Enterprise Group, Inc. as a framework for discussion with EPA for the impingem ent mortality requirements

. The companies are offering this framework as a complete proposal and would not necessarily support a proposal includ ing only some of the elements of this framework

.its equiva lent from being installed effectively, in which case the permitting director can require alternative measures, or make a determination that additional measures are not required to protect shellfish. a. For example, an intake structure located in a harbor may not be able to install a barrier net or equivalent technology due to ship traffic. In such cases, the permitting director must have the aut hority to approve alternative technologies o r operational practices that are technically feasible at such a location to minimize environmental impact

. A case example is NextEra's Riviera Plant in Riviera Beach , Florida

. A barrier net would interfere with port traffic in the Port of Palm Beach

. 4) Closed Cycle Cooling. Systems t hat have already ins talled closed cycle cooling (includ ing cooling towers and cooling ponds that are not dete rmined to be waters of the U

.S.), would be deemed to be in compliance with BTA for impingement and entrainment and should not be required to install any further requirements under 

### 316(b). S) EPA Guidance for Comparable BTA. EPA should develop guidance for states based on a few (5 to 10) example facilities to illustrate t he expected performance for specific BTA and comparable BTA technologies at specific sites

. These examples should be based on a robust data set and reflect different situations that will affect impin gement such as different wate r bodies , fragi le species, facility sizes, and seasonal dynam ics. The expected performan ce should be based on both fish mortality and biomass and account for actions that prevent fish impingement. Thi s guidance wou ld facilitate permitting authorities' assessment of alternatives to the preapproved BTA technologies. It wou ld not establish a national stan' dard that would be applicable to all facilities. The guidance should also note that states should use a cost benefit ana lysis when evaluating BTA for a fa ci lity if the facility is installing a comparab le techno logy. 6) Oe Minimis. EPA shou ld provide permitting autho riti es the criteria to develop de m in imis exemptions for plants with extremely low impingement levels and/or mortal ity rates based on site specific factors (e .g., flow or biomass impingement) and cost benefit analyses

. De minimis exemptions could be based on the following elements, and faci lities meeting one of these exceptions would satisfy a faci lity's obl igat ions for the impingement mortality standard: a. actual intake flow versus design intake flow; b. a numeric impingement level (annual lbs or Ibs per million gallons withdrawn) ; or 

### c. operating characteristics

. 7) Species of Concern. As proposed by EPA, in determining BTA or comparable BTA, including any mitigation measures, the permitting director should have the authority to analyze species of concern at the particular facility's water body rather than require BTA based on the impingement mortality of all species.



### 2