Technology News - September 15, 2004

Cooling-water rules challenged in court

Thirty-two years after passage of the Clean Water Act, the U.S. EPA has released regulations for cooling-water intake structures at large electric power plants. The regulations went into effect early this September and call for an 85–95% reduction in the number of fish pinned against intake screens and a 60–90% reduction in the number of small aquatic animals sucked into the structures. The EPA says the rule would prevent more than 200 million pounds of aquatic organisms from being killed or injured by the cooling-water structures every year.

As the new rule was released in July, it was challenged in court by six states, a host of environmental groups, and a coalition of electric power companies.

Officials from the states and environmental groups argue that EPA disregarded the Clean Water Act, which calls for power companies to use the best technology available (BTA) to protect fish, shellfish, and other forms of aquatic life. The BTA at this time is closed-cycle cooling—an expensive choice, but one that environmentalists say can reduce fish kills by 95%.

Instead of requiring only BTA, the rule also allows companies to choose from a variety of remedies. Power plant owners can use screens with fish return systems or can mitigate the plant’s impact on the environment by restoring wetlands or watersheds. These alternatives are allowed under the law, EPA and utility officials say, and would go a long way toward improving the ecosystems affected by the cooling-water structures. The rule would cost the industry about $400 million annually for 10 years and provide benefits of up to $83 million each year, mainly for the fishing industry, EPA figures show..

An industry source representing utilities in their lawsuit says that they only dispute minor sections of the rule. “We have a couple of problems, but we think the over-arching framework is quite reasonable,” says the representative.

Yet, the states and environmentalists challenging the rule aren’t satisfied. Tricia Jedele, special assistant attorney general for the state of Rhode Island, says the rule won’t really protect fish. She says that rule essentially tells companies: “Kill as many fish as you want, but improve the watershed or create wetlands and we’ll call it even.”.

Rhode Island officials became especially concerned with this issue after the winter flounder fishery collapsed in Mount Hope Bay in the mid-eighties. Jedele says studies found that the probable cause for the collapse was the Brayton Point Power Plant, located across the bay in Massachusetts, which uses 1 billion gallons of cooling water every day. All legal challenges have been bundled together, and a final court decision should be out late next year. —PAUL D. THACKER