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