Concurrent Sessions C: Fish Screening at Water Diversions II - A Comparison of the NMFS and Section 316(B) of the Clean Water Act of Fish Screen Criteria
Location
Agriculture Leaders Theater, Oregon State University
Start Date
25-6-2013 1:30 PM
End Date
25-6-2013 1:50 PM
Description
Both EPA and NMFS have authority to provide regulations and design criteria to protect fish at water withdrawals. The NMFS criteria were created to protect anadromous salmonids and apply to hydropower, irrigation, and other water withdrawals. The NMFS criteria is intended to expedite the permit renewal process for fish screens and bypass designs that are required by various state or federal regulations. EPA is authorized under the Clean Water Act to require compliance with its fish screening regulations. EPA’s 316(b) Rule, which is expected to be finalized on June 27, 2013, will be applied on a national level and impact all existing facilities that withdraw 2 MGD or more water from Waters of the US and use at least 25% or more of that water exclusively for cooling, regardless of the species present. This presentation will highlight the differences and similarities between the NMFS and EPA fish protection strategies with an emphasis on the impact of 316(b) regulations in the northwest.
Concurrent Sessions C: Fish Screening at Water Diversions II - A Comparison of the NMFS and Section 316(B) of the Clean Water Act of Fish Screen Criteria
Agriculture Leaders Theater, Oregon State University
Both EPA and NMFS have authority to provide regulations and design criteria to protect fish at water withdrawals. The NMFS criteria were created to protect anadromous salmonids and apply to hydropower, irrigation, and other water withdrawals. The NMFS criteria is intended to expedite the permit renewal process for fish screens and bypass designs that are required by various state or federal regulations. EPA is authorized under the Clean Water Act to require compliance with its fish screening regulations. EPA’s 316(b) Rule, which is expected to be finalized on June 27, 2013, will be applied on a national level and impact all existing facilities that withdraw 2 MGD or more water from Waters of the US and use at least 25% or more of that water exclusively for cooling, regardless of the species present. This presentation will highlight the differences and similarities between the NMFS and EPA fish protection strategies with an emphasis on the impact of 316(b) regulations in the northwest.
Comments
Mr. Olken is a Project Engineer at Alden Research Laboratory, Inc. where he has been involved a wide array of projects to reduce the human impacts on aquatic organisms. His work has focused primarily with Section 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. Mr. Olken has been the lead engineer on over one-hundred 316(b) evaluations for power companies across the country and is an expert in fish protection technologies for use at large water withdrawals. Mr. Olken currently works from Alden’s branch office in Portland Oregon.