### Office of the Governor Robert F. McDonncll Governor June 14,2011

The Honorable Lisa 

### P. Jackson United States Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building -Mail Code: 1101A, Room 3000 1200 PennsylvaniaAvenue, N.W. Washington,

### DC 20460

Dear Administrator Jackson:



### I am writing in response to your agency's draft 316B rules, regarding cooling water intakes at power plants. 

### I write onbehalf of the Commonwealthof Virginia to urge you to take another look at these regulations with an eye towards better balancing the costs of implementing the regulations against available environmental benefits.
The issues raised in the rules are important from an environmental standpoint. However,
our 

### DEQ does not believe they rise to the level of affecting human health. Accordingly, it is important to protect citizens and businesses from the economic impactof excessive energy costs, that do not result in corresponding benefits.

I know the regulated community is raising a host of issues with you in this regard. 

### I write to highlight several that have particular saliencefor the Commonwealth. Briefly put, these are: 

### * The need for a better-balanced provision with regard to nuclear stations, in recognition of the importanceof these units in producing carbon free,baseload energy, and the immense,unnecessary cost of adding coolingtowers at nuclearunits (estimated in the billions per station); 

### * The need for an appropriate cost-benefit analysis test for all power stations; the social impactmodel proposed in the rule is a novel applicationof a very unbalanced test that will likely result in the impositionof unnecessary costs unsupported by corresponding benefits; The need to provide a more flexible and achievableimpingement standard for all power stations; 

### * The need to clarify that man-made lakes built to cool power stations (nuclear and fossil fuel) do not constitutewaters of the United States forpurposes of implementationof this rule, as the aquatic life in these lakes only exists as a direct result of the constructionof the power station and the associatedman-made lake;

Patrick Hcn~ Bu~lilin~ 11 11 Easr Broad Street * Richmond, Virginia 23219 (304) 736,221 1 * TTY (800)828-1120r The need to clarify that closed cycle cooling, when appropriate,or meeting the regulatory flow standard at either a nuclear or a fossil-fuel station, each constitutes compliance with the standard without the need for further controls or expensive and burdensome monitoring; The urgent need for flexibility in phasing in the entrainment studies at nuclear and fossil fuel stations and resulting retrofits to allow the regulated communityto complete needed capital investments in an orderly and cost effective way, that does not undermine economic recovery and business growth that creates jobs. Safety to citizens and the environment remains our top priority in Virginia. However, we strive to make sure that goal is accomplished with the least intrusivemeans in order that services our citizens expect and deserve can be provided at a reasonable cost. 

### I have asked my director of the Departmentof Environmental Quality, Mr. David Paylor, to keep me apprised of the progress of this rule. Thank you for consideringmy comments, and please feel free to contactMr. Paylor with any questions.

Sincerely.

Robert 

### F. McDonnell