STATE OF FLORIDA
DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
IN RE: FLORIDA MUNICIPAL POWER ) AGENCY TREASURE COAST ENERGY )
CENTER POWER PLANT SITING ) Case No. 05-1492EPP APPLICATION NO. PA05-48. )
)
RECOMMENDED ORDER
Pursuant to notice, a formal hearing was held in this case on February 8, 2006, in Fort Pierce, Florida, before the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its assigned Administrative Law Judge, Donald R. Alexander.
APPEARANCES:
For Florida Douglas S. Roberts, Esquire Municipal Power Hopping Green & Sams, P.A. Agency: Post Office Box 6526
Tallahassee, Florida 32314-6526
For Department Scott A. Goorland, Esquire
of Environmental Department of Environmental Protection Protection: 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard
Mail Station 35
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000
For St. Lucie Heather Young, Esquire County: 2300 Virginia Avenue
Third Floor Annex
Fort Pierce, Florida 34982-5632 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
The issue to be resolved in this portion of the proceeding is whether the Siting Board should issue a final certification to the Florida Municipal Power Agency (FMPA) to construct and
operate the Treasure Coast Energy Center (TCEC) Unit 1 and an ultimate site capacity determination of 1,200 megawatts of steam electric generating capacity to be located at the TCEC, in accordance with the provisions of the Florida Electrical Power Plant Siting Act (PPSA).
PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
This site certification proceeding has been conducted in accordance with the PPSA codified in Part II, Chapter 403, Florida Statutes (2005)1, and Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-17 to consider FMPA's Site Certification Application (Application) for the TCEC Project (the Project). On April 14, 2005, FMPA filed with the Department of Environmental Protection (Department) its Application for site certification for the Project. That Application was also distributed to several reviewing agencies.
On July 27, 2005, the Florida Public Service Commission (FPSC) issued its Final Order determining the need for the Project pursuant to Section 403.519, Florida Statutes.
On December 12, 2005, the Department issued its Staff Analysis Report (Report) concerning the Project, as required by Section 403.507(4), Florida Statutes. That Report contains reports prepared by other reviewing agencies, along with a compiled set of proposed Conditions of Certification for the Project as proposed by the Department and other reviewing
agencies. On February 8, 2006, the Department submitted at the site certification hearing its Revised Staff Analysis Report as Department Exhibit 2 to update and correct various matters in the earlier version of its Report.
After proper public notice by both FMPA and the Department, a consolidated site certification hearing and land use hearing was held in Fort Pierce, Florida, on February 8, 2006, as required by Section 403.508(3), Florida Statutes. The purpose of the certification hearing was to receive oral, written, and documentary evidence concerning whether, through available and reasonable methods, the location and operation of the proposed Project would produce minimal adverse effects on human health, the environment, the ecology of the land and its wildlife, and the ecology of state waters and their aquatic life in an effort to fully balance the increasing demands for electrical power plant location and operation with the broad interests of the public. See § 403.502, Fla. Stat.
Prior to the hearing, FMPA and several reviewing agencies entered into Stipulations, including the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA), the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FFWCC), the South Florida Water Management District (SFWMD), the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council (TCRPC), and the Department, indicating that those agencies did not
object to certification subject to inclusion of those agencies' recommended Conditions of Certification.
Notice of the consolidated land use and site certification hearing was published by FMPA in the Fort Pierce Tribune on December 22, 2005. Notice of the consolidated land use and site certification hearing was also published by the Department on its Official Notices website on December 16, 2005, pursuant to Section 120.551, Florida Statutes.
At the certification hearing, FMPA presented five expert witnesses who testified in the following areas: James Hay, FMPA organization and Project need; Stanley A. Armbruster, design of plant and associated facilities; Timothy M. Hillman, air quality permitting and environmental project management; J. Michael Soltys, managing, coordinating, and completing permitting and regulatory requirements; and Dennis J. Murphy, land use and transportation planning. Also, it offered FMPA Exhibits 1 through 15, which were received in evidence. Finally, by agreement of the parties, the prefiled written testimony and exhibits of those five witnesses, and eight other witnesses, Dr. Ralph E. Brooks, James M. Andersen, Brian J. Klausner, Girma Mergia, Michael J. Tuttle, Kenneth R. Weiss, John M. Wynne, and Roosevelt R. Huggins, were received in evidence as FMPA Exhibit 3.
The Department presented the testimony of Hamilton S. Oven, Jr., who is the Administrator for the Siting Coordination Office and was accepted as an expert. Also, it offered Department Exhibits 1 and 2, which were received in evidence.
A single set of exhibits was tendered and used by the parties for both the land use and site certification phases of the hearing; however, separate Recommended Orders are being rendered for each portion of the hearing.
St. Lucie County (County) presented no witnesses and no exhibits. No other party participated in this hearing.
Opportunity was afforded for members of the general public to appear. One member of the public, Elie J. Broudreaux, III, who is director of the Fort Pierce Utilities Authority (FPUA), offered sworn oral comments in support of the Project. No party or member of the public offered testimony or evidence contrary to the conclusion that the Project should be granted certification under the PPSA, subject to the Department's recommended conditions of certification.
The Transcript of the hearing was filed on March 8, 2006.
A Joint Proposed Recommended Order was filed by FMPA and the Department on March 20, 2006, and has been substantially used in the preparation of this Recommended Order.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Based upon all of the evidence, the following findings of fact are determined:
FMPA is a joint action agency created under the Florida Interlocal Cooperation Act of 1969 (Section 163.01, Florida Statutes) and the Joint Power Act (Part II, Chapter 361, Florida Statutes). FMPA comprises twenty-nine municipal electric utilities across Florida and was created to allow its member utilities to cooperate with each other on the financing, construction, ownership, and operation of electrical generating resources. FMPA is governed by a Board of Directors consisting of one representative from each of the twenty-nine member cities. Within FMPA, the All-Requirements Project (ARP) was formed in 1986 and currently has fifteen municipal members serving approximately 280,000 customers. Under the ARP, both generating and non-generating members purchase all of their capacity and electrical energy needs from the ARP. Additionally, ARP members with generating plants commit their capacity to FMPA. FMPA will own the TCEC and act as the project manager for construction. The FPUA will operate Unit 1 for FMPA.
FMPA's proposed TCEC will be located in the County, approximately five miles west of the City of Fort Pierce and eight miles north of the City of Port St. Lucie.
Much of the site's northwestern boundary is determined by a Florida East Coast Railroad line that parallels Glades Cut- Off Road. To the south, the site is bordered by the North St. Lucie River Water Control District's Canal 102 with a Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) electrical transmission line right-of-way across the southern part of property and adjacent to Canal 102. The parcel north of the proposed site is owned by the FPUA and is proposed for a mainland wastewater treatment plant. The land directly east of the site is largely undeveloped industrial park. The proposed plant site itself is located within the Midway Industrial Park. The site is approximately one-half mile east of the Florida Turnpike and one-half mile north of Midway Road.
The site contains approximately 68.1 acres. Land use and vegetation at the site consist primarily of pasture used for cattle and horses. Within the pasture land are areas of wet prairie, freshwater marsh, and Brazilian Pepper. The site was historically and most likely pine flatwoods or savannah, based on the characteristics of the surrounding vicinity. However, due to past clearing and agricultural activities, the site has been significantly altered from its natural state and has little native vegetation. Current vegetation reflects the disturbed condition of the site. There were no observations or indications of protected plant or wildlife species on the site.
The site is located in an area outside the 500-year flood plain as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The future land use map in the County's Comprehensive Plan indicates no expected changes in the land use patterns for the site or the adjacent land area in the future, indicating that the site will continue to be compatible with the predominant land use in the immediate Project vicinity. As part of its land development approvals for the site, the St. Lucie Board of County Commissioners determined that the Project was compatible with surrounding land uses.
FMPA proposes to construct a nominal 300-megawatt combined cycle electrical generating unit at the site known as Unit 1. FMPA is also requesting an ultimate site capacity determination for a total of 1,200 megawatts of generating capacity to be located at the Project site. Any future electrical generating units after the first two units up to the proposed ultimate site capacity of 1,200 megawatts will require additional zoning review and approval and any other applicable County development authorization at the time those units are proposed for approval.
Unit 1 will be dual fuel, with natural gas as the primary fuel and ultra low sulfur diesel fuel oil as a backup fuel. The Project will be a "one-on-one" combined cycle unit.
Unit 1 will be comprised of a combustion turbine, a heat recovery steam generator (HRSG), and a single steam turbine generator.
In the combustion turbine, fuel is combusted in the form of hot gases which expand through the turbine. The combustion turbine spins the electrical generator that is directly connected, producing power. About half of the energy of the hot gases is extracted when expanded through the combustion turbine. The remainder of the heat is exhausted into a HRSG. These hot gases flow through the HRSG which turns water into steam. The steam flows into a steam turbine, spinning a second electrical generator. The steam is then exhausted into a condenser, where it is condensed back into water and pumped back to the HRSG.
The HRSG will also be equipped with duct firing to provide peak power by increasing the steam production in the HRSG, which increases the output from the steam turbine generator.
The Unit will also be able to operate in a steam turbine bypass operation where the combustion turbine and HRSG will operate normally but the steam will bypass the steam turbine. This mode of operation will be employed during startups and will also allow unit operation when the steam turbine/generator is not available.
Combined cycle generation technology is very efficient because it generates electrical energy from the fuel input, both directly through the combustion turbine and indirectly through capture of the energy in the combustion turbine exhaust gas in the HRSG. This captured energy is used to produce steam to drive the separate steam turbine electrical generator. By reheating the steam between sections of the steam turbine, additional improvements and cycle efficiency can be achieved. Combined cycle technology makes the most of the input fuel, achieving increased efficiency in the generation of electrical energy. It achieves efficiencies of 55 percent in converting fuel into electricity. For these reasons, the modern combined cycle power plant is one of the most efficient power cycles available. If properly maintained and operated, the life expectancy of a combined cycle unit is indefinite.
Combined cycle units operating on natural gas, such as Unit 1, are one of the cleanest sources of fossil generation. These units also use considerably less water than traditional steam turbine units, requiring approximately one-half the amount of water used by a steam cycle only unit with similar electrical output.
The ultimate site arrangement for the Project allows for the installation of three future similar-sized combined cycle units for an ultimate site certification capacity of
approximately 1,200 megawatts. FMPA will clear and develop the entire Project site during the construction for Unit 1.
A cooling tower used to cool the steam turbine condenser will be located to the north of Unit 1. The cooling tower will consume approximately 95 percent of all the water used by the Project. For this Project, reclaimed water will be supplied from FPUA's soon-to-be constructed water reclamation facility, which will be located just north of the site. The reclaimed water will be used as cooling tower makeup. Until the water reclamation plant comes online, the new Unit 1 will utilize water withdrawn from the Upper Floridan Aquifer for cooling. The cooling tower design will be a multiple cell, mechanical draft, counter flow cooling tower.
Access to the site will be over Energy Drive, which is an access road in the adjacent industrial park.
Unit 1 will be interconnected to the FPL electrical transmission system. A new electrical switchyard will be constructed on the site. Two new transmission lines will connect the site to an existing nearby FPL electrical substation and electrical transmission system. The new transmission lines will be installed on new structures for the entire length of each transmission line. Each of the two new lines will be approximately three miles long. One line will parallel Glades Cut-Off Road to the southwest and connect to the existing FPL
Midway/Turnpike transmission line. The second line will go west from the Project site, cross Glades Cut-Off Road parallel to an existing road and FPL transmission line, cross over the Florida Turnpike and Interstate 95, and then turn south into the FPL Midway electrical substation. Each corridor is one-fourth mile wide for most of its length. It is expected that a final right- of-way will be acquired parallel to Glades Cut Off Road for one transmission line and a final right-of-way will be acquired for the second transmission line parallel to the existing FPL right- of-way.
The new transmission line structures will be self- supporting concrete tubular steel or hybrid concrete-tubular steel poles or a combination of these options. The typical aboveground height of the transmission structures will be approximately one hundred feet. The structures will be placed approximately four hundred to eight hundred feet apart along the route. The lines will be designed to meet the clearance requirements of the National Electrical Safety Code for the minimum ground clearance of twenty-six feet. The two lines will also comply with the Department's electric and magnetic fields limits in Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-814.
These two transmission line corridors were selected as the most direct means with the least impact for connecting into the FPL transmission network. The transmission lines are
located in areas zoned for commercial, industrial, and agricultural uses. No housing units will be moved as part of the Project and no residential areas will be impacted. The transmission lines will be constructed completely within or adjacent to existing rights-of-way which provide minimal ecological value.
A new natural gas pipeline up to sixteen inches in diameter is proposed to connect the site with the Florida Gas Transmission gas pipeline. This existing gas main is located approximately 3,700 feet southwest of the site, near the Florida Turnpike. A 1,320-foot wide corridor centered on Glades Cut Off Road from the Florida Turnpike to the site is proposed for certification. A seventy-five-foot wide temporary easement for pipeline installation and a permanent forty-foot right-of-way are anticipated. It is expected that the natural gas pipeline will be constructed within or adjacent to the existing Florida East Coast Railroad corridor or adjacent to Glades Cut Off Road. The pipeline will be manufactured according to American Petroleum Institute standards and will be built in accordance with United States Department of Transportation and FPSC safety requirements.
The proposed gas pipeline corridor is located in areas zoned for commercial and utility uses. No residential areas will be impacted during construction of the underground
pipeline. The existing railroad right-of-way is expected to be maintained as a transportation corridor and provides minimal ecological value. There will be minimal impacts to vegetation in the gas pipeline right-of-way as there will be only minor clearing required for construction. Disturbed lands will be returned to maintained right-of-way condition following construction.
Fuel oil for use in the unit will be delivered by truck. A complete fuel unloading, storage, and supply system will be installed at the site. The unloading station will be designed for containment of a fuel spill. Double-walled piping will be used for underground piping running through the unloading station to the storage tank and from the tank to the combustion turbine. A one-million gallon aboveground storage tank will be installed to provide approximately three days of fuel oil at full load operation for Unit 1. This will be a single wall tank fabricated from carbon steel and will be installed inside a dike containment area. The containment area will be provided with a synthetic liner sufficiently impermeable to ensure no oil can escape by infiltrating through the liner into the soil or into surface or groundwaters.
The major water use during operation of Unit 1 will involve cooling tower operation. This is the highest volume water consumer for the Project. The cooling system will use
approximately 2.52 million gallons per day of treated wastewater, most of which is evaporated to the atmosphere in the cooling process. Other plant non-cooling water uses will include the plant service water system. This system supplies fire water, miscellaneous process uses, and makeup water to the demineralizer system. The demineralizer system provides boiler makeup water and provides water for control of nitrogen oxides when firing oil in the unit.
Treated sewage effluent or reclaimed water will be used for cooling tower makeup water. This reclaimed water will be provided by the FPUA wastewater treatment plant proposed to be located north and adjacent to the site. This treatment plant is expected to be online in late 2009. The reclaimed water will be supplied via pipeline across the site. It will be necessary to utilize groundwater for cooling purposes until the wastewater treatment plant is online. Groundwater will also be used when the wastewater treatment is offline and unable to supply treated effluent in the future.
Three new onsite wells pumping from the Upper Floridan Aquifer will supply fire water and service water. The wells will supply water to the steam cycle and makeup treatment system and the evaporative cooling makeup. They will also provide a temporary water supply for cooling tower makeup. The wells will be sized so that two of the wells will be able to provide the
required water flow at full load with a third well as a backup. An average of 2.95 million gallons per day of groundwater will be used prior to the availability of reclaimed water. An average of approximately 129,000 gallons per day of groundwater will be needed under average annual conditions for non-cooling water needs of the plant.
Cooling tower blowdown from Unit 1 will be conveyed to the FPUA wastewater treatment plant for treatment and disposal. Approximately 586,000 gallons per day of cooling tower blowdown wastewater will be returned to the FPUA system for disposal. The cooling tower system will operate at three cycles of concentration when using groundwater, which is considered the maximum practical limit to prevent scaling of heat transfer systems within the cooling system. When reuse water is available, the cooling towers will operate at four cycles of concentration, which further minimizes the amount of water needed for cooling. The cooling system is also designed to minimize the amount of cooling tower blowdown and makeup that is required.
Potable water for the site will be provided through an extension from the FPUA municipal water system. This connection will also supply the evaporative cooler needs on the Unit and backup water supply to the plant service water system.
Water treatment and other water uses in Unit 1 will generate various process wastewaters. Wastewaters from the onsite demineralizer system, including filter backwash and reverse osmosis reject wastewater, will be routed to an onsite wastewater sump for disposal to the FPUA wastewater treatment plant. The HRSG and boiler piping will be chemically cleaned during commissioning of the new unit and the steam generators will be cleaned infrequently over the life of the unit. Chemical cleaning solutions will be neutralized onsite if required and transported offsite by a licensed waste disposal contractor. Sanitary wastewater will be routed to the FPUA municipal sanitary treatment system for treatment and disposal.
The TCEC design contains several features to minimize impacts of project wastewaters to surface and groundwaters. The cooling system design will minimize the amount of cooling tower blowdown and makeup required. There will be no process wastewater discharge to groundwater or surface waters at the plant site. All process and sanitary wastewaters will be returned to FPUA for final disposal. Further, the use of reclaimed and treated wastewater in the cooling system will reduce the quantity of wastewater that would otherwise have to be disposed of to surface and groundwaters. Groundwater consumption will also be reduced through the use of treated wastewater for cooling and by recovering and pumping blowdown
water from the HRSG to the cooling towers as makeup rather than sending the blowdown to the wastewater collection and disposal system.
Groundwater withdrawals during initial operation of Unit 1 are proposed from the Upper Floridan Aquifer for cooling tower makeup until future sources of treated wastewater become available for the Project to displace groundwater withdrawals. Analyses were performed to determine the impact of these groundwater withdrawals from the non-potable Upper Floridan Aquifer. A three-dimensional aquifer analysis computer model was developed to model these impacts. The computer model was one developed by the United States Geological Survey and approved by the SFWMD. The drawdown in the Floridan Aquifer was simulated for the condition of groundwater withdrawals for Unit
1 of 3.2 million gallons per day. This assessment indicates that the onsite pumping from the Upper Floridan Aquifer would have a small impact on existing legal groundwater users in the area. This modeling predicts that the additional two- and one- foot drawdowns in the Upper Floridan Aquifer due to the plant withdrawals at maximum withdrawal rates would occur at 1.8 and
5.8 miles, respectively, from the Project. This limited impact in drawdown of the Floridan Aquifer and the magnitude of the drawdown increase are not considered significant. The proposed groundwater pumping is not expected to cause salt water
intrusion into the Floridan Aquifer. Due to the presence of a 600-foot thick Hawthorne formation and the upward gradient from the Upper Floridan Aquifer to the land surface, no adverse effects to surface wetlands are expected. The SFWMD agreed with these conclusions as indicated in its report submitted to the Department. Impacts on the Upper Floridan Aquifer after the Project begins operation using reclaimed water will be significantly reduced and also cause no adverse impacts.
Project construction may require dewatering for placement of subsurface facilities, such as piping, electrical trenches, sumps, and foundations. Dewatering impacts for construction were estimated using site specific geotechnical information. Due to the short duration of the onsite dewatering, it will not affect existing users and will have a minimal and temporary impact on the surficial water table aquifer. No impact is expected to extend beyond the project site boundaries.
Of the 68.1-acre Project site, 11.96 acres constitute wetlands. Three onsite wetlands will be lost due to the site development, comprising 11.25 acres of wetlands. The onsite wetlands were delineated in accordance with state and federal guidelines for such delineations. These onsite wetlands are low quality herbaceous wetlands, mainly disturbed wet prairie and freshwater marshes. Cattle have access to the entire site
including these wetlands. Natural vegetation and wildlife have been largely eliminated from the Project site and much of the surrounding vicinity due to onsite grazing and past development activities, including residential, industrial, and commercial development. Based on these considerations, the loss of vegetation and associated wildlife habitat at the Project site will be insignificant.
FMPA must mitigate for the unavoidable wetlands impacts due to site development. FMPA has entered into a mitigation credit purchase and sale agreement with the Bluefield Ranch Mitigation Bank (located in the County) to compensate for those wetlands impacts subject to state jurisdiction.
There will be no impacts to surface waters from operation of the facility. The Project will not withdraw or discharge wastewaters to surface waters. The onsite stormwater management system will be designed to comply with all applicable state and local regulations regarding discharge into offsite surface waters. The stormwater management system will meet the water quality treatment requirements of the Department and SFWMD, as well as the standards of the County. Runoff originating from potentially contaminated areas, such as miscellaneous plant drains and drainage from oil containment areas, will be routed through an oil/water separator. Oil and grease will be removed from the contaminated stormwater, and the
treated effluent will be collected and discharged to the FPUA wastewater treatment plant. Captured oil and grease will be properly disposed offsite. Runoff from other potentially contaminated areas, such as storage tank containment areas, will be contained locally.
All runoff from the fenced site will be directed to the onsite stormwater detention basin for treatment and discharge in accordance with applicable stormwater rules. Peak stormwater discharges from the Project area are less than the peak stormwater discharges from the pre-Project site for the same storm event. Therefore, the potential for local flooding will not be affected by the Project.
During construction, a combination of silt fencing, straw bale sediment barriers, and a stormwater detention pond will be used to control erosion on the site and to reduce the potential for transport of loaded sediment offsite. Grading will be accomplished in phases and each graded area will be seeded and mulched after construction is completed. During operation, stormwater ditches will route stormwater to the onsite stormwater detention area. This basin will meet the stormwater treatment quality and quantity requirements of the Department, SFWMD, and County. Thus, there will be minimal adverse impact from the management and storage of surface waters on the site.
Air emissions from the Project are subject to review under federal and state regulations, primarily the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting program. The Department regulates major air pollution facilities, such as Unit 1, in accordance with the PSD program under Florida Administrative Code Rule 62-212.400. The PSD pre-construction review is required in areas currently in attainment with the state and federal ambient air quality standards. The County is an attainment area for those air quality standards. The state PSD regulations are designed to assure that the air quality in existing attainment areas like the County does not significantly deteriorate or exceed the ambient air quality standards while providing a margin for future industrial and commercial growth.
The PSD regulations apply to major stationary sources and major modifications at major existing sources undergoing construction. A major stationary source is defined for PSD permitting purposes as any one of twenty-eight listed major source categories which emits or has the potential to emit one hundred tons per year or more of any regulated pollutant. The Unit 1 Project is one of the twenty-eight major listed category types, a fossil fuel-fired steam electric plant, and has the potential to emit greater than one hundred tons per year of at least one of the PSD regulated pollutants. Unit 1 also exceeds the PSD significant emission levels for several pollutants and
is thus subject to PSD review as a major stationary source. The emissions from Unit 1 subject to PSD review include nitrogen oxides (NOx), sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), particulate matter less than ten microns in aerodynamic diameter (PM10), and sulfuric acid mist.
The PSD review requires an analysis of best available control technology (BACT), an air quality impact analysis, and an assessment of the Project's impacts on general commercial residential and commercial growth, soils and vegetation, and visibility, as well as impacts to air quality in Class I areas.
BACT is defined as an air emission limitation based on the maximum degree of pollutant reduction for emissions, determined on a case-by-case basis, considering technical, economic, energy, and environmental factors, as well as other costs for the control of each pollutant. The facilities at the Project subject to BACT review include the combustion turbine, the fuel oil storage tank, a diesel driven fire pump and oil storage tank, a safe shutdown generator and storage tank, and the mechanical-draft cooling tower. A BACT analysis was performed for each of these emission sources. The analysis was conducted using the "top down" methodology described by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Based upon this analysis, best available control technologies for controlling NOx emissions from Unit 1 were
determined by the Department during its PSD review to be the use of dry low NOx burners within the combustion turbine and selective catalytic reduction (SCR) installed in the HRSG to achieve an emission limit of 2.0 parts per million of NOx when burning natural gas. The Department also determined during its PSD review that when burning fuel oil, BACT to control NOx emissions was the use of water injection with a SCR to achieve an emission limit of 8.0 parts per million. The Department agreed with FMPA's proposed NOx emission limit for this Project.
For carbon monoxide emissions, BACT control was determined by the Department during its PSD review to be good combustion controls and practices. Carbon monoxide is a product of incomplete combustion of carbon-containing fuels such as natural gas and fuel oil. Most combustion turbines incorporate good combustion practices based on high temperature and other techniques to minimize emissions of CO. The Department further determined during its PSD review that the BACT for CO was 4.1 parts per million for natural gas firing and 8.0 parts per million for fuel oil firing. A continuous limit of 8.0 parts per million CO on a twenty-four hours basis will also be implemented for both gas and oil firing with or without the duct burner in operation. In addition, an annualized limit of 6.0 parts per million of CO will also be included to recognize that Unit 1 will be operated in the normal natural gas-fired mode.
BACT for particulate emissions, both PM and PM10, was determined by the Department during its PSD review to be a fuel selection of natural gas and ultra low sulfur fuel oil and good combustion controls.
Sulfur dioxide and sulfuric acid mist control was determined by the Department in its PSD review to be the use of low sulfur fuels, including the limited use of ultra low sulfur diesel fuel.
The cooling tower can produce PM emissions in the small amounts of water entrained in the air passing through the cooling tower that can be carried out of the tower, known as "drift" droplets. These droplets contain impurities from the cooling water which can be classified as an emission. FMPA proposed, and the Department accepted during its PSD review, that use of high-efficiency mist eliminators with a maximum guaranteed drift rate of 0.0005 percent constitutes BACT for these drift emissions. Modeling of the impacts of the emissions and plume from the cooling tower indicates that there would be no environmental impact.
Finally, the Department concluded during its PSD review that the use of ultra low sulfur fuel oil and limited hours of operations (five hundred hours or less) insures that emissions from both the onsite safe shutdown generator and the diesel engine fire pump will be minimal. An air quality impact
analysis was also conducted for the Project-related air emissions, in accordance with the Department's and EPA's air dispersion modeling guidelines. The ambient air quality impact analysis conducted for Unit 1 demonstrates that this Project will not have a significant impact on air quality near the Project site or in the nearest Class I air quality areas, including the Everglades National Park. There are no predicted air quality impacts greater than the PSD significant impact levels. Therefore, under the PSD program, no further air quality impact analysis was required for the Project.
The Project is not expected to cause any adverse impacts on vegetation, soils, or visibility in the Project area or at the nearest Class I areas.
The Project construction activities may produce air emissions during onsite construction of buildings and from construction equipment exhaust. Particulate matter would be the major source of air pollution during construction. These emissions are expected to be intermittent, short term, and composed of relatively-large particles. These particles tend to settle out quickly and will not generally leave the Project site. Particulate matter emissions will be controlled by watering and application of dust suppressants or ground covers as necessary in active work areas.
Construction and operation of the Project will result in significant economic benefits to the County, the region, and the State of Florida. No significant permanent adverse socioeconomic impacts are expected. The anticipated benefits of the Project include primarily the direct and indirect employment and earnings impacts that will be realized in the area from construction and operation. The Unit 1 construction will create approximately 286 temporary jobs, with an estimated payroll of
$23.6 million over a twenty-two-month period. It is expected that most of these jobs will be filled by workers already residing in or near the County. The in-migration of construction employees will be small and should not increase the demand for services from local governments and nearby service providers. Information gathered for the Project indicates that more than enough service capacity is available to accommodate the construction work force. Individuals temporarily relocating to the area during construction should not have a problem securing affordable housing. The indirect socioeconomic impacts from construction of the Project include the creation of service jobs in the area to accommodate construction workers. Using an accepted economic multiplier, it is expected that 762 additional jobs may be created as a result of the construction.
Expenditure of the construction payroll in the local economy will be passed along to local businesses through spending by
construction workers and the governments in the form of taxes. Benefits from operation of the Project will occur from the sixteen operational personnel needed to operate the combined cycle units. The annual payroll for these employees is estimated to be $1.38 million. It is expected that these employees will come from the existing FPUA work force. Since operational personnel tend to live near the facility they operate, the majority of the annual payroll will remain within the local economy. Indirect socioeconomic impacts will include the creation of up to sixteen additional fulltime indirect jobs as a result of the operation of the combined cycle project.
By its Order dated July 27, 2005, the FPSC found that there is a need for the proposed Unit 1, taking into account the need for electric system reliability and integrity. The FPSC found that Unit 1 was required to maintain FMPA's winter and summer reserve margins. The FPSC also found that Unit 1 will enhance the reliability and integrity of FMPA's electric system through the use of the highly efficient combined cycle technology with the ability to burn two different types of fuel. The two interconnections to FPL's transmission system would also be a benefit to Unit 1 and allow FMPA to better serve its members in the FPL transmission grid. FMPA's analysis of five proposals from other potential bidders indicated that Unit 1 is the most cost-effective option available. There were no
conservation measures taken by or reasonably available to FMPA which would mitigate the need for the proposed Unit 1. Unit 1 was further found by the FPSC to provide the most cost-effective solution to satisfy FMPA's forecast capacity requirements beginning in 2008.
The Department, DCA, FPSC, SFWMD, FDOT, FFWCC, TCRPC, and the Cities of Fort Pierce and Port St. Lucie each prepared written reports on the Project.
The Department has proposed Conditions of Certification for the Project, which FMPA has agreed to accept and comply with in construction and operation of the Project.
No state, regional, or local agency has recommended denial of certification of the Project.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction of the parties and the subject matter of this proceeding pursuant to Sections 120.569, 120.57, and 403.508(3), Florida Statutes.
In accordance with Part II of Chapter 403, Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62-17, proper notice was accorded all persons, entities, and parties entitled to such notice. All necessary and required governmental agencies, as well as members of the public, either participated in or had the opportunity to participate in the certification
hearing. Reports and studies were issued by the Department, DCA, FFWCC, SFWMD, FDOT, TCRPC, City of Fort Pierce, and City of Port St. Lucie.
The FPSC has issued its affirmative determination that a need exists for the electrical generating facility and the electricity it will produce in accordance with Section 403.519, Florida Statutes.
Competent substantial evidence produced at the certification hearing demonstrates that FMPA has met its burden of proof to demonstrate that the TSEC meets the criteria for certification under the PPSA. Unrebutted evidence produced at the hearing demonstrates that the safeguards for construction and operation of the TCEC are technically sufficient to protect the public welfare of the citizens of Florida and are otherwise reasonable and available methods to achieve that protection of the public. The Project will result in minimal adverse effects on human health, the environment, the ecology of the land and its wildlife, and the ecology of state waters and their aquatic life. In addition, and as noted in a separate Recommended Order, the Project will not conflict with the State Comprehensive Plan or the County Comprehensive Plan. If operated and maintained in accordance with this Recommended Order and the Department's proposed Conditions of Certification, the TCEC will comply with the applicable non-procedural
requirements of all agencies. Further, certification of the Project will fully balance the increasing demand for electrical power plant location and operation in this State with the broad interests of the public that are protected by the PPSA.
Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is
RECOMMENDED that the Siting Board grant final certification to the Treasure Coast Energy Center Project under Part II, Chapter 403, Florida Statutes, for the location, construction, and operation of the Project, representing a 1,200 megawatts combined cycle unit site with Unit 1 being a nominal 300- megawatt combined cycle unit, as described in the Site Certification Application and the evidence presented at the certification hearing, and subject to the Conditions of Certification contained in Department Exhibit 2.
DONE AND ENTERED this 30th day of March, 2006, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
S
DONALD R. ALEXANDER
Administrative Law Judge
Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building
1230 Apalachee Parkway
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060
(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675
Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us
Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 30th day of March, 2006.
ENDNOTE
1/ All future references are to the 2005 version of Florida Statutes.
COPIES FURNISHED:
Lea Crandall, Agency Clerk
Department of Environmental Protection 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard
Mail Station 35
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000
Douglas S. Roberts, Esquire Hopping Green & Sams, P.A. Post Office Box 6526
Tallahassee, Florida 32314-6526
Scott A. Goorland, Esquire
Department of Environmental Protection 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard
Mail Station 35
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000
Heather Young, Esquire 2300 Virginia Avenue Third Floor Annex
Fort Pierce, Florida 34952-5632
Kelly A. Martinson, Esquire Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
James V. Antista, General Counsel
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission 620 South Meridian Street
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600
Peter Cocotos, Esquire
South Florida Water Management District Post Office Box 24680
West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-4690
Sheauching Yu, Esquire Department of Transportation 605 Suwannee Street
Mail Station 58
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0458
Martha Carter Brown, Esquire Florida Public Service Commission 2450 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0850
Roger Saberson, Esquire
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
70 Southeast Fourth Avenue
Delray Beach, Florida 33483-4514
Roger G. Orr, Esquire City of Port St. Lucie
121 Southwest Port St. Lucie Boulevard Port St. Lucie, Florida 34984-5099
Frank H. Fee, III, Esquire Fee, Koblegard & DeRoss
401 South Indian River Drive Fort Pierce, Florida 34950-1530
Gregory M. Munson, General Counsel Department of Environmental Protection 3900 Commonwealth Boulevard
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000
Heidi M. Hughes, General Counsel Department of Community Affairs 2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO FILE EXCEPTIONS
All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within
15 days of the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will render a final order in this matter.
| Issue Date | Document | Summary |
|---|---|---|
| May 16, 2006 | Agency Final Order | |
| Mar. 30, 2006 | Recommended Order | The proposed power plant site was consistent with St. Lucie County`s land use and zoning requirements. |
| Mar. 30, 2006 | Recommended Order | Application for certification to place site a new power plant in St. Lucie County met all siting requirements. |
