Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP 144B; SDG&E Wastewater Facility; Specific Plan (SP) (3)MEMORANDUM DATE: July 2, 1981 • TO: Ron Beckman Assistant City Manager/Developmental Services FROM: Catherine Nicholas QA* Assistant Planner SUBJECT: REPORT ENCINA POWER PLANT Conditions of approval of Specific Plan, (SP-144B), for construction of Encina Power Plant Unit 5, requires Planning Commission and City Council review of a "Report of Compliance", prepared by staff. I have scheduled this item to be heard at the Planning Commission meeting of August- 26, 1981. I would suggest forwarding the SDG&E Annual Report to the City Council at the time the "Report of Compliance" is considered. CDN:ar MWORANDUM DATE: August 17, 1979 TO: Bill Baldwin, Assistant City Manager ^-••/.V^FROM: Michael Zander, Associate Planner /'^//;$-- SUBJECT: ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT FROM SOG&E On May 4, 1976, the City Council adopted Ordinance No, 9456 approving the construction of the 400 foot stack at Encina. Condition No. 14(J) of that ordinance required an annual, report from SDG&E regarding the improvements in the plant and operating procedures during the pre- ceding year which reduce the emission of air polluntants. On November 22, 1977, SDGSE presented a report, to Council as require'..! (A8 5258), On February 7, 1978, SDG&E requested approval to connect Unit #5 to the stack (AB 3625, supplement $1). A brief report was given and the Council's approval to make :said connection was conditioned upon a report from the City Manager prior to final building permit clearance. On August 15, 1978., SDG&E made a report as required (AB 5547). Since one year has now passed, since the last report, SDG&E must make •another report to Council, I am in contact with SDG&E regarding the need for a-new report. I will have them include a discussion regarding the monitoring equipment. When we receive the report from them, this department will prepare the agenda bill for Council. MIKE ZANDER Associate Planner MZrar cc: James i-lagamans Planning Director AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO WILLIAM SIMMONS 9150 Chesapeake Drive Air Pollution San Diego, Calif. 92123 Control Officer (714) 565-5901 (MS 01 76) March 15, 19?6 Don Agatep ' ; Director of Planning, City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 Dear Mr. Agatepi Enclosed is a copy of the San Diego Air Pollution Control District's study of the "fallout" problem in the vicinity of the San Diego Gas & Electric Company Encina Power Plant. We have included the appendices for your records. I am also enclosing a memo on my trip to San Francisco, Moss Landing Harbor and Los Angeles. As a result of our studies and discussions on the "fallout" problem, we have concluded that the particulates are from the Encina Power Plant. We announced our findings on March h at a meeting with Terramar residents and government officials. Recently San Diego Gas & Electric commissioned Stanford Research Institute (SRI) to study the "fallout" problem. The only report we've seen alleges that the power plant is not responsible. However, we have been told that SRI's latest work confirms our laboratory studies. Since its acknowledgement, San Diego Gas & Electric officials have been in frequent contact with the Air Pollution Control District. San Diego Gas & Electric has agreed to conduct a comprehensive study of the particle formation as a function of boiler operation to determine a best acceptable air pollution control device or process modifi- cation which will eliminate the "fallout" damage. Upon completion of the study, San Diego- Gas & Electric will submit to the Air Pollution Control District a compliance schedule to control, through retrofit if required, Encina units 1 through h and to control Encina 5 prior to its completion. It must be understood that all our facts indicate that Encina complies with all our emissions limits. What we have is essentially a nuisance. If an air pollution control device is required, it will probably not be put'into operation until completion of the UOO' stack. San Diego Gas & Electric has in- formed us that re-design of the exhaust gas entry point into the stack is now underway to allow for the installation of any conceivable air cleaning device which may be required. The purpose of re-design at this time is to minimize possible retrofit costs. The Air Pollution Control District is currently discussing .with County Counsel the legal options open to us to insure abatement of the problem by San Diego Gas & Electric. At this time, we feel that an abatement order will be sought from the Air Pollution Control Hearing Board. The only other acceptable alter- native is a court action for injunction. San Diego Gas & Electric has agreed in principle to the abatement order process. Mr. Don Agatep -2- March 15, 1976 The Air Pollution Control District is not technically opposed to the 400' stack, in fact, we feel that some improvement in the air quality will be achieved by installing the tall stack. However, in our opinion, the tall stack by itself will not eliminate or greatly reduce property damage from "fallout" particles in the vicinity of the power plant. We do feel that San Diego Gas & Electric is at last on the way to an acceptable solution to this problem. If you have any questions pertaining to this matter, please feel free to contact me at 565-3909. Sincerely, RICHARD H. BALDWIN Chief, Surveillance & Enforcement Division RHB:mp Enclosures (2) r (2 March 8, 1976 TO: Files FROM: Dick Baldwin SUBJECT: S D G & E ENCINA This report is a summary of my recent findings as a result of several out of town 'i conferences to discuss the fallout problem in the vicinity of gas/oil fired electric generating plants. . February 10, 1976 I met with Tom Brennan, Asst. Director of Enforcement - Bay Area Air Pollution Control District. He informed me of recorded infrequent fall out prob lems in the vicinity of PG §E's plant located in Pittsburg on the Sacramento River. This location is unique in that there are very few structures located near the plant and these structures are up-wind from the plant under prevailing wind conditions. Due to the infrequent occurrence (once or twice) the Bay Area APCD has not pursued this issue. Feb. 11, 1976 I met with John Maloney, APCO - Monterey Bay Unified APCD to discuss the fallout problem at PG §E's Moss Landing Harbor facility. This generating facility originally had 5 units, each under 125 MW. In 1967 and 1968 two 750 MW units began operation. Prior to start up of the 750- MW units there was no known public nuisance. This company has had a good supply of natural gas and on gas the fallout problem was. minimal. The property damage problem became vocal when the Company started using oil on more than a stand-by basis. The problem is so acute at this time that PG §E has developed a short claim form for the boat owners in the harbor. When an episode occurs the boat owners are paid for the cleaning of their boats. If the boats are cleaned within a day or two there is no permanent damage. The spots on the boats are identical to the spots which we have recorded near the Encina power plant. Files . -2- March 8, 1976 I next met with the Moss Landing Plant Superintendent, Robert Puckett, at the power plant. PG §E has recognized the problem for several years. In an effort to abate or minimize the emissions they tried several things. The company feels that the most significant contributor to the problem is soot-blowing the air pre-heater. To rectify this they first tried procelainizing the pre-heater blades, this failed due to high maintenance problems. They are now in the process of installing a scrubber to collect the emissions from soot-blowing the air pre-heaters on one 750 MW unit. If this unit comes out of service on schedule the project will be complete in June 1976. The company has removed the intermediate stage (3 stage) of the air pre- heater to increase the outlet temperature. This reduced the boiler efficiency by 1% and it seems to have created some reduction in the number of air pollution com- plaints. I will follow up on the scrubber project late this summer. Feb. 17, 1976 I met .with Duane Bordwick, Supervising Air,Pollution Engineer with Los Angeles APCD and Bob McClusky of Southern California Edison in L.A. to discuss the fallout problem in the Los Angeles area. The LAAPCD became involved in this problem prior to 1972. In 1972 the LA District filed a public nuisance complaint against Edison for fallout damage to boats and property adjacent to the Redondo Beach facility. Case Number M-130528 went to trial in 1973. The final disposition was not guilty on all counts. The judicial opinion stated that, "Literal compliance of the statute is a scientific impossibility unless and until the defendent is per- mitted to replace its present oil/gas generating facility with a nuclear power generator. On the light of all of the record in -this case, we reject the People's contention that the statute imposes an absolute duty to do the impossible". The facts of the case showing public nuisance were not disproved. This precedent could cause serious problems for us in San Diego. Files -3- March 8, 1976 Since Nov. 16, 1973 the Los Angeles APCD has prepared six formal reports on the particulate fallout in the vicinity of the Haynes and Alamitos power plants, the last report being Feb. 10, 1975. I have copies of each of these reports. In summary, Los Angeles APCD feels that they have sufficient evidence to prove that the fallout comes from the power plants and that the worst condition is during soot-blowing or rapid load changes. The Alamitos plant belongs to Edison and Haynes is owned by Los Angeles Department of Water and Power. Edison is currently not soot-blowing their boilers. They shut them down periodically and manually wash the parts which are normally cleaned by steam soot-blowing. Edison has found this practice to be unacceptable and wants to return to their previous practice of soot-blowing. As a result of the LAAPCD study the District has told Edison and LADWP that a bag- house would be considered as an acceptable air pollution control device. Edison and LADWP countered with an offer to perform a detailed scientific study of the problem. The District has accepted this proposal. It is a two part concurrent study, the two parts are; / a) A six month utility industry survey nation-wide to see if this problem is present at other generating facilities and if so, what is being done or has been done to correct the problem. b) An 18 month study to be performed by a consulting company. This part will probably include a detailed analysis of the emissions in the stack and a detailed study of the pollutants in the plume. The purpose is to 'determine how the fallout particles form in an effort to find some control alternative to the baghouse proposal. Files ' -4- March 8, 1976 Based on the above information LAAPCD is considering some form of legal action, probably an abatement order. The only problem at this time, in issuing an abatement order is that nobody knows how long it will take to control the emissions, in fact, at this time there is no direct knowledge as to how the particles form. LA feels that the sulfates emitted from the stack form sulfuric acid droplets, these droplets then agglomerate on the inorganic particles with the particles acting as a nucleus. When sufficient agglomeration takes place gravity causes the particle to fallout from the plume. There is a sound basis for this hypothesis but at this time there is not proof of the fact. The 18 month study will prove or disprove this hypothesis and will suggest alternate control techniques if any are available. DICK BALDWIN DB:j cs cc: Dana Hield, Carlsbad Planning Commission (SO??) SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY ^ ' P.O. BOX 1831 SAN DIEGO. CALIFORNIA 92112 (714)232-4252 F.LENO. CNB 100JACK E. THOMAS VICE PRESIDENT—POWER PLANT ENGINEERING » CONSTRUCTION MaiTCh 12 1976 Mr. Paul Bussey City Manager City of Carlsbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Dear Mr. Bussey: During the January 28 Planning Commission hearing on San Diego Gas & Electric Company's requested amendment to the Specific Plan for the Encina Power Plant, we said that SDG&E had retained Stanford Research Insti- tute (SRI) to conduct some studies related to the alleged fallout problem in the Terramar area. • The test program, while not concluded, has thus far indicated that some of the reported corrosion damage in the Terramar area is probably started or caused by particles from the Encina Plant. Therefore, we plan to meet with the individual Terramar residents to resolve the damage claims which are our responsibility. Both the San Diego County APCD and this Company have determined that further studies will be required to isolate the specific plant operating conditions which are causing the fallout and identify the steps required for corrective action. We want you to know that we are working with the San Diego County APCD staff to (a) scope a study, and (b) design an agreement or affidavit that will assure the City and County that necessary corrective action will be taken by the Company. AN INVESTOH-OWNED CORPORATION SAN DIEGO GAS & ELECTRIC COMPANY Mr. Paul Bussey March 12, 1976 Page Two However, we respectfully request everyone to keep clearly In focus that establishing a plan to correct this problem should in no way involve further delay in the City's re-confirmation of its amendment to the "Encina Specific Plan" to permit construction of the 400 foot stack. -2* Tack E. Thomas Vice President-Power Plant Engineering and Construction JET:dm cc: Bob Prazee Mary Casler Bud Lewis Ron C. Packard Tony Skotnicki Stephen M. L'Heureux E. W. Dominguez J. C. Pikes E. L. Jose Eric Larson R. L. Watson ^Fon Agatep Vincent Biondo A. A. Sugg, District Manager Local Papers