1 Site Description Report Yates Power Plant 708 Dyer Road Newnan, GA 30263 February 11, 2009 1.0 Background and Objectives The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is in the process of developing 316(b) cooling water intake structure requirements that refl ect the best technology available (BTA) for minimizing adverse environmental impact for all existing power plants and manufacturing facilities. As part of this process, EPA staff is visiting electric generators and manufacturers to better understand the co oling water intake structure (CWI S) technologies in use at facilities, including the site
specific characteristics of each facility and how these affect the selection and performance of CWI S technologies. EPA is also visiting facilities to better understand cooling water use and specific issues or technologies that can affect 316(b) compliance
. As part of its site visit to the McDonough Power Plant (McDonough), EPA also collected information on Georgia Power’s retrofitted recirculating cooling water s ys te m at its Yates Power Plant. 2.0 Facility Description Yates is located on a 2400 acre site in a rural setting along the Chattahoochee River southwest of Atlanta, Georgia. The facility opened five generating units with once
- through cooling in the 1950s and ad ded two generating units with closed
- cycle cooling in the 1970s . Yates is owned by Georgia Power and operates under NPDES permit GA 0001473 which expire s August 31, 20 11. 3.0 Electricity Generation and Transmission Yates is a baseload facility that consists of seven coal
- fired generating units with a total generating capacity of 1250 MW . These units burn eastern bituminous coal from Appalachia. 4.0 Cooling Water System and Intake Structure The cooling water intake structure s (CWI S s ) for Yates are located on the shoreline of the Chattahoochee River. One structure serves Units 1
- 5 and a second structure a few hundred feet downstream supplies Units 6&7. After Units 1 - 5 converted to closed
- cycle cooling, that intake structure w as outfitted with fine mesh (3mm) J ohnson wedgewire screens. Facility representatives noted that the wedgewire screens have operated well so far and that no maintenance has yet been required. The new design through
- screen velocity is 0.5 feet per second (fps).2 As discussed below in Secti on 6.0, Yates Units 1
- 5 converted from once
- through cooling to closed
- cycle cooling. Prior to the conversion, the facility ’s design intake flow (D IF) was 691 million gallons per day (mgd) or 480,000gal/min
. Currently , the facility ’s D IF is 57.6 mg d, a 91 .6 % reduction in design capacity
. Yates Unit 1
- 5 intake structure has a total of three intake pumps totaling 15,000 gpm. The combined withdrawal for the two intake structures averages about 48 mgd. 5.0 Impingement and Entrainment Information Yates has not conducted any source water characterization or impingement or entrainment studies. 6.0 Cooling Tower Feasibility Due to problems with thermal discharges (including fish kills), the facility was forced to curtail electricity generation during extended heat waves coinciding with drought
- induced low river flows
. 1 In2004, the facility installed a 4 0 cell mechanical draft cooling tower (in a 1000 foot long back
- to - back arrangement) at a cost of $83 million
. Facility representatives believe it is currentl y the l argest fiberglass cooling tower in the United States. The cooling towers have drift eliminators, but are not outfitted with plume abatement or noise control. Facilit y representatives stated that, at first glance, Yates may appear to be an eas y site to retrofit closed
- cycle cooling, due to the rural location and the relatively close proximity

of the proposed tower site to the intake and discharge tunnels. However, a significant amount of work was involved in converting the facility :
 Condenser strengthe ning: additional materials were added to strengthen the water box.  Tunnel strengthening: as with McDonough, the condenser piping was not designed to function as a high
- pressure s ys tem. Yates’ circulating pumps were inside the power block (as opposed to in the screen house); with a closed
- cycle sy stem, the entire circulating s ys tem would be pressurized. As a result, Yates installed steel piping inside the older concrete pipes; a labor
- intensive process at a significant cost.  Tower basin upgrades: the tower s were built in the floodplain of the river, which required building up the earthen base of the towers an additional 20 - 30 feet to protect against flooding damage. An additional permit was required for construction in a floodplain, but facility representatives noted that this permit was not difficult to obtain.

1 Like McDonough , Yates was placed on a four year compliance schedule for installing the cooling towers.3  Additional station service lines: the energy required by

the new cooling towers could not be supplied by the existing facility

infrastructure. New electric lines were added from the transmission yar d to a control building for the towers. 7.0 Debris Handling Yates does not have significant problems with debris loading. The airburst sy stem for the wedgewire screens appears to be adequate in addressing any debris concerns. 8.0 Repowering/Future Uses There are currently

no plans to expand generating capacity or make other significant operational changes at Yates. 9.0 Cooling Ponds There are no cooling ponds onsite. 10.0 Ownership Yates is owned b y an investor
- owned compan y, Georgia Power. Georgia Power provides approximately

95% of the electricit y in the state, making them the single largest entity

for promoting economic development in the state. Their rates are set by the Public Service Commission and any large expenditures would require approval before being passed along to consumers. 11.0 316(a) The Yates permit does not contain a thermal variance. It specifie s temperature limits at the end of a mixing zone consistent with state water quality standards of 90 degrees F maximum and 5 degrees above the intake temp erature. 12.0 Ash Handling EPA did not collect any

information about ash handling at this site. 13.0 Air Emissions Controls EPA did not collect any

information about air controls at this site.4

14.0 Additional Information Facilit y representatives also stated that Yates will be adding a flue gas desulfurization (FGD) unit in the future, but that this did not affect the placement of the cooling towers. Attachment A Yates Fact Sheet5

Attachment A

—Yates Fact Sheet Please see the attached materials.