Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-04-16; City Council; 11120; ODOR CONDITION - PHASE IV EXPANSION OF ENCINA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITYAB# II,IdO TITLE: DEPT. PLN ODOR CONDITION - PHASE IV EXPANSION OF ENCINA WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITY MTG. 4- b-4 1 D C C a z 0 E 0 - a 6 z 3 0 0 by CIT~F CARLSBAD - AGEN~BILL RECOMMENDED ACTION: The City Council find that the construction of an treatment facility as part of the Phase IV Expansion of Encina Water Pollution Control Facility is in conformance the original Council-imposed condition to reduce the impacl odor at the facility. ITEM EXPLANATION The City Council, on April 18, 1989, approved the Phas Expansion of the Encina Water Pollution Control Facil Construction of the expansion has been underway for some now. One of the conditions of approval imposed by the Council required covering the plant's aeration basins in c to reduce odor from the plant. The condition read as fol! "The site's aeration basins shall be covered and odors from the basins controlled based on the best available technology." Subsequent to the start of construction, the EI Administrative Agency contracted to have a study preparc analyze odor control at the plant. It was determined thai covers alone would not provide the very best technc available to control odors. Now being proposed is an treatment facility. The facility would be located presently vacant area immediately to the west of the aeri basins (refer to attached project location map). The fac would consist of equipment which would take "foul air" under the covers and convey it to several towers (approxim, 10 to 15 feet wide and 35 to 40 feet high) where the air I be scrubbed with chemicals and carbon before being relet The proposed facility would also include storage tanks fo chemicals used in the air scrubbing. Landscaping would be to help screen the facility. The odor treatment facilities now being proposed were not on the approved site plant for the Phase IV Expan However, Encina and City staff believe that the constructi the facilities are necessary in order to comply with the condition originally imposed by the City Council which req using the best available technology. Staff is ther recommending that the City Council find that the constru of the odor treatment facility is in conformance wit1 Council's original condition. This would allow Encina n have to amend the previously-approved site plan. 1. a PAGE 2 OF AGENDA BILL NO. /I! IN FISCAL IMPACT The odor treatment facility will add approximately 3.3 mil: dollars to the cost of Phase IV Expansion project and, 2 member, the City shares in this cost. However, the funding the facility has already been approved and is included in budget for the expansion. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Encina Administrative Agency has prepared a Negai Environmental Declaration for the odor treatment fa&: finding that it will not have any significant, unmitigi impacts on the environment. A copy of the Negative Declara' is attached. EXHIBITS 1. Project Location Map 2. Scrubber Cross Section 3. Negative Declaration .. 0 m EXHll 0 i- %t xz c 22 -4 I k I cy <! I N ,* EXHIE __ e e ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Encina Administrative Agency 6200 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, California 92009-0171 (619) 438-3941 Ref: Name of Proiect: Addition of Secondary Treatment Odor Control Facilities at Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF), Carlsbad, Diego County Location: The EWPCF is on a 25-acre site immediately west of Intersta approximately 0.25 mile south of Palomar Airport Road and 0.25 east of the Pacific Ocean, in the City of Carlsbad. Entitv or Person Undertakins Project: X Encina Administrative Agency - Other Ad Staff Determination: The Agency's staff, having undertaken and completed an Ir Study of this project, in accordance with Section 15063(d) c State Guidelines for the Implementation of the Calif Environmental Quality Act, to determine if the project may t significant effect on the environment, has reached the foll conclusion: - The proposed project could not have a significant effe the er,Tirom.er?t : therefore I s. Negatixre Declaration shoi prepared. - X The proposed project could have a significant effect c environment but there will not be a significant effect ii case because the mitigation measures described in the at1 sheet have been added to the project; therefore, a Nec Declaration should be prepared. - The proposed project may have a significant effect c environment; therefore, an Environmental Impact Report : be prepared. Date: 1) / 281 'I/ - R g2L-y chard W. %> Graff, Encina Administrativ Agency EXHIE 0 0 Date //ZA/ 9.. / / INITIAL STUDY ENCINA ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY 6200 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, California 92009-0171 (619) 438-3941 In accordance with the State Guidelines for Implementation o California Environmental Quality Act and the Guide Implementing the California Environmental Quality Act adopt the Encina Administrative Agency (EAA) in February 1990, document combined with any attachments constitutes the In Study of the project described below. This Initial Study pro the basis for the determination of whether the project may h significant effect on the environment. I. PROJECT DATA A. Title: Addition of Secondary Treatment Odor Control Faciliti the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF) , Carl San Diego County B. Location: (See attached map) The proposed odor control facilities would be sited a EWPCF, which is situated on a 25-acre site in the Ci Carlsbad, immediately west of Interstate-5 approximatel] mile south of Palomar Airport Road and approximately 0.2! east of the Pacific Ocean. C. Description: The proposed odor control facilities include low pi fiberglass covers that would be placed over existing and constructed secondary treatment aeration basins and assoc open conveyance channels. During normal secondary wastc treztmmt, air is introduced near the bcttzx: sf these and channels and rises to the surface. As it rises tl the wastewater, it picks up odors typical of seci treatment. Once the covers are installed, "foul airtV would be col from under the covers and conveyed using blowers and duc to a new air treatment facility. The facility WOC designed to provide chemical and carbon air scrubbing a series of towers approximately 10 to 15 feet wide and 40 feet tall). Treated air would be released t atmosphere approximately 35 to 40 feet above the ex ground surface. The proposed facility would also i storage tanks for the chemicals (e.g., caustic) used scrubbing. Landscaping (e.g., Italian cypress) would b as feasible to help screen the facility. 4 OCEAN WATER POLLUTI 0 N * CONTROL FACILITY LOCATION MAP FIG ENClMA WPCF 0 m Prior to construction of the proposed facilities, EAA obtain approval from the City of Carlsbad and from California Coastal Commission. D. Purpose: Addition of the permanent aeration basin covers and the fc odor control facility would complete the EAA's roughly million effort to curtail odors emanating from the EWPCl E. Entitv or Person Undertakina Project: Encina Administrative Agency (EAA) 11. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Yes Maybe 1. Earth. Wiii the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geological substructures? - - b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or uncovering of the soil? - - c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? - - d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? - - e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? - - f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? - - g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mudslides, ground failure, or similar hazards? - - 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? - - b. The creation of objectionable odors? - - c, Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? - - Yes Maybe 0 0 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh water? - - b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? - - c. Alteration to the course or flow of flood waters? - - d. Change in the amount of surface water in any body of water? - - e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? - - flow of groundwaters? - - f. Alteration of the direction or rate of g. Change in the quantity of groundwaters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? - - h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? - - i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? - - 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, c. Introduction of new species of plants into shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? - - rare or endangered species of plants? - - replenishment of existing species? - - an area, or in a barrier to the normal d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? - - 0 Yes Maybe * 5. Animal Life, Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? - - rare or endangered species of animals? - - b. Reduction of the numbers or any unique, c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? - - d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? - - 6. Noise, Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? - - b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? - - 70 Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or light or glare? - - planned land use of an area? - - 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? - - 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset condition? - - b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? - - 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? - - 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? - - a Yes Maybe e 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the a. Generation of substantial additional b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or c. Substantial impact upon existing transpor- proposal result in: vehicular movement? - - demand for new parking? - - tation systems? - - d. Alterations to present patterns of circu- lation or movement of people and/or goods? - - e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? - - f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? - - 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? - - b. Police protection? - - c. Schools? - - d. Parks or other recreational facilities? - - e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? - - f. Other governmental services? - - 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? - existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? - - - b. Substantial increase in demand upon 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? - - b. Communications systems? - - e Yes Maybe c. Water? - - d. Sewer or septic tanks? - - e. Storm water drainage? - - f. Solid waste and disposal? - - 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? - - b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? - - 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstraction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? - - 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? - - 20. Cultural Resources. a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? - - b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a pre- historic or historic building, structure, or ob] ect? - - c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? - - d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses with the potential impact area? - - 21. Mandatory Findings of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wild- life population to drop below self sus- taining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or important examples of California history or prehistory? "endangered plant or animal or eliminate a 0 Yes Maybe b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short- term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while ling-term impacts will endure well into the future.) - - c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is d. Does the project have envirsmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? - - significant. ) - - 111. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (Narrative description of environmental impacts) The proposed facilities would be located on a site thal previously graded and developed. Thus, no new grading wou required. Already located on the site is a 22.5 million g -per day (MGD) wastewater treatment plant, which is currently expanded (the so-called Phase IV expansion) to provide z capacity for 36 MGD of wastewater and the solids from 38 b wastewater. The proposed odor control facilities would not c EWPCF's rated capacity. The EWPCF already includes two similar odor control facilitie to treat foul air from other areas of the treatment plant. A odor control facility is being constructed and the existir odor control facilities are being upgraded as part of the Phi expansion. The proposed odor control facility being evaluated in this I1 Study (the fourth odor control facility) would be simil appearance and character to the existing and Phase IV odor CI facilities. The use of resources (water, energy and chem would be similar to the Phase IV odor control facility construction. Thus, potable water would be obtained frc Carlsbad Municipal Water District. Like the Phase IV odor c facility, the proposed facility would include provisions for reclaimed water whenever possible. Wastewater from the fa would be (a) treated at the EWPCF or (b) discharged directly Encina ocean outfall as appropriate. Electric power fc facility would be (a) generated onsite using natural gas pur from the San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E) or (b) pr directly by SDG&E. Chemicals used in scrubbing would be ha stored and controlled by contingency plans similar to che already used on site. e a As with any odor control facility, the intent is to reduce concentration of foul smelling odors. In the process, some od are removed and others are changed in character. The result treated air may contain by-products of treatment: these by-prodL would be similar in nature to those released at the existing Phase IV odor control facilities. In summary, the proposed project as mitigated (i.e.., provisions for reclaimed water use and with landscaping screening) would not significantly alter the nature or charac of the EWPCF, other than to improve odor control, and therej could not have a significant effect on the environment. IV. DISCUSSION OF COMPATIBILITY OF PROJECT WITH EXISTING ZOI AND GENERAL AND SPECIFIC AREA PLANS The proposed project is consistent with the existing zoning (Pu Utility) and all appropriate City of Carlsbad plans. F V. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: - I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a signifi effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION WII PREPARED. - X I find that although the proposed project could hay significant effect on the environment, there will not significant effect in this case because the mitigz measures described on an attached sheet have been add€ the project. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effec the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPOR required. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. - -- e a MITIGATION MEASURES Encina Administrative Agency 6200 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, California 92009-0171 Name of Project: Addition of Secondary Treatment Odor Control Facilities at Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF), Carlsbad, Diego County Progosed Mitisation Measures: 1. The facilities will be designed to use reclaimed water in of potable water whenever feasible. 2. The odor scrubbing facilities will be landscaped as fear (e.g., with Italian cypress) for visual screening. m m February 25, 1991 NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENCINA ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY 6200 Avenida Encinas Carlsbad, CA 92009-0171 Name of Project: Addition of Secondary Treatment Odor Cc Facilities at the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (E Location of Project: City of Carlsbad, San Diego County Description of Project: The Encina Administrative Agency prop0ses to place permanent COVETS on existing and new aer basins at the EWPCF to further control odors. EAA also prc to convey the ttfoul air1# collected under the covers to new chc and carbon scrubbing towers for treatment prior to dischargc Entitv or Person Undertakins Proiect: Encina Administrative I EAA Board Determination: The Board of Directors of the I Administrative Agency, having reviewed the foregoing proje accordance with Section 10.6 of the Encina Administrative Agc Procedures Implementing the California Environmental Qualit1 has found that there is no substantial evidence that the pi will have a significant effect on the environment. A cow of the Initial Studv for the project is attached. Mitisation Measures: None required. ......................... DATE : Richard W. Graff, General Mi ENCINA ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCY