[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 219 (Thursday, November 13, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60889-60892]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-29890]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
Notice of Intent To Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement and
Notice of Floodplain and Wetlands Involvement for the Proposed
Jacksonville Electric Authority Circulating Fluidized Bed Combustor
Project
AGENCY: Department of Energy.
ACTION: Notice of intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS), and notice of floodplain and wetlands involvement.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Department of Energy (DOE) announces its intent to prepare
an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) pursuant to the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969, as amended (42 U.S.C. 4321 et
seq.), the Council on Environmental Quality NEPA regulations (40 CFR
Parts 1500-1508), and the DOE NEPA regulations (10 CFR Part 1021), to
assess the potential environmental and human health impacts of the
construction and operation of a project proposed by the Jacksonville
Electric Authority (JEA) that has been selected by DOE to demonstrate
circulating fluidized bed (CFB) technology under the Clean Coal
Technology (CCT) Program. The proposed project would involve
construction and operation of a CFB combustor fueled by coal and
petroleum coke to repower an existing steam turbine at JEA's Northside
Generating Station in Jacksonville, Florida, to generate nearly 300
megawatts of electricity (MWe). This EIS will support a DOE decision
regarding whether DOE will provide approximately $75 million in cost-
shared funding (about 24% of the total cost of approximately $309
million) for the proposed project.
The purpose of this Notice of Intent is to inform the public about
the proposed action; present the schedule for the action; announce the
plans for a public scoping meeting; invite public participation in the
scoping process; and solicit public comments for consideration in
establishing the scope and content of the EIS. The EIS will evaluate
the potential impacts of the proposed action and reasonable
alternatives. Because the proposed project may involve an action in
floodplains and wetlands, the EIS will include a floodplain and
wetlands assessment and a statement of findings in accordance with DOE
regulations for compliance with floodplain and wetlands environmental
review requirements (10 CFR Part 1022).
DATES: To ensure that the full range of issues related to this proposal
is addressed, DOE invites comments on the scope and content of the EIS
from all interested parties. All comments must be received by December
31, 1997, to ensure consideration. Late comments will be considered to
the extent practicable. In addition to receiving comments in writing
and by telephone, DOE will conduct a public scoping meeting in which
agencies, organizations, and the general public are invited to present
oral comments or suggestions with regard to the range of actions,
alternatives, and impacts to be considered in the EIS. The scoping
meeting will be held at the Northside Generating Station, In-Plant
Conference Room, 4377 Heckscher Drive, Jacksonville, Florida, on
Wednesday, December 3, 1997, at 7 p.m.
ADDRESSES: Written comments and requests to participate in the public
scoping process should be addressed to: Dr. Jan Wachter, NEPA Document
Manager for the JEA Project, Federal Energy Technology Center, U.S.
Department of Energy, 3610 Collins Ferry Road, Morgantown, WV 26507-
0880. Individuals who would like to verbally or electronically provide
comments should contact Dr. Wachter at direct telephone 304-285-4607;
toll free number 1-800-432-8330 (ext. 4607); fax 304-285-4469; or E-
mail [email protected]
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To obtain additional information about
this project or to receive a copy of the draft EIS when it is issued,
contact Dr. Jan Wachter at the address provided above. For general
information on the DOE NEPA process, contact Ms. Carol M. Borgstrom,
Director, Office of NEPA Policy and Assistance (EH-42), U.S. Department
of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20585-0119;
telephone 202-586-4600; or leave a message at 1-800-472-2756.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Need for the Proposed Action
Under Public Law 99-190, Congress provided authorization and funds
to DOE to support the construction and operation of demonstration
facilities selected for cost-shared financial assistance as part of
DOE's CCT Program. In December 1985, Congress made funds available to
DOE for conducting the first round of the CCT Program. Congress
directed that this first solicitation for federal cost-sharing (1) be
open to all market applications of clean coal technologies, (2) apply
to any segment of the U.S. coal resource base, and (3) encompass both
new and retrofit applications. In response to the solicitation,
proposals were received and projects were selected by DOE for
negotiation. In addition, a list of alternate candidates was
established from which replacement selection could be made should any
of the original selections not proceed. JEA's proposed CFB combustor
project has evolved through a series of site changes from a project
that was selected from the alternate list for demonstration.
The demonstration of JEA's CFB combustor project under the CCT
Program would fulfill an existing DOE programmatic need. Coal has the
potential to address critical energy supply issues because of its
abundant reserves; however, barriers to increased use of coal include
concerns about environmental issues, such as acid deposition, global
climate change, polyaromatic hydrocarbon emissions, and solid waste.
Since the early 1970's, DOE and its predecessor agencies have sponsored
long-term programs to develop innovative coal technologies through the
proof-of-concept stage to overcome these environmental barriers while
improving combustion efficiency and reducing costs.
However, the availability of a technology at the proof-of-concept
stage is not sufficient to ensure its continued development and
subsequent commercialization. Before any technology can seriously be
considered for commercialization, it must be demonstrated at a large
enough scale to prove its reliability and to show economically
competitive performance. The financial risk associated with such large-
scale demonstration is, in general, too high for the private sector to
assume in the absence of strong incentives. The congressionally-
directed CCT Program provides a mechanism to accelerate the
commercialization of innovative technologies to meet the nation's near-
term energy and environmental goals, to
[[Page 60890]]
reduce technological risk to industry to an acceptable level, and to
provide private sector incentives required for continued research and
development aimed at finding solutions to long-range energy supply
problems.
Proposed Action
The proposed action is for DOE to provide, through a cooperative
agreement with JEA, cost-shared financial assistance to JEA for the
design, construction, and operation of the proposed project, as
described below. JEA plans to form an alliance with Foster Wheeler
Corporation through its subsidiary, Foster Wheeler Power Systems, Inc.,
to jointly own and operate the project. Together with other Foster
Wheeler affiliates, Foster Wheeler Power Systems, Inc. will provide the
CFB combustor and perform the project engineering, procurement, and
construction. The demonstration project would last 24 months and cost
approximately $309 million, with DOE's share being nearly $75 million
(24%). The proposed project would be located at JEA's existing
Northside Generating Station in Jacksonville, Florida, which currently
consists of 3 heavy oil- and natural gas-fired steam generation units
and 4 diesel oil-fired combustion turbine units.
The Northside Generating Station is approximately 10 miles north of
downtown Jacksonville, Florida. The Northside Generating Station is an
industrial site encompassing approximately 400 acres, with 200 acres
devoted to existing steam generation units, combustion turbine units,
and associated infrastructure. New construction associated with JEA's
proposed CFB combustor project would occupy approximately 60 acres of
previously disturbed land. The Northside Generating Station contains a
number of wetland areas, especially in the perimeter areas. Preliminary
analysis indicates that the site may be in a hurricane storm surge
area, in addition to the 100-year floodplain of the St. Johns River.
The most significant environmental feature associated with the
Northside Generating Station is the nearby presence of estuarine salt
marsh backwaters of the St. Johns River. St. Johns River Power Park, an
industrial site which consists of two 624 MWe coal- and petroleum coke-
burning power plants on 1,656 acres, is adjacent to the Northside
Generating Station.
The overall objective of the project is to demonstrate the
feasibility of CFB technology at a size that will be attractive for
large-scale utility operation. The new CFB combustor would use coal and
petroleum coke to generate nearly 300 MWe by repowering the existing
Unit 2 steam turbine, a 297.5-MWe unit that has been out of service
since 1983. The project is expected to provide JEA with a low-cost,
efficient, and environmentally-sound generating resource. In addition,
JEA plans to repower the currently operating Unit 1 steam turbine
without cost-shared funding from DOE. The Unit 1 steam turbine will be
essentially identical to the turbine for Unit 2, and is scheduled to be
repowered about 6 to 12 months after the Unit 2 repowering. While the
proposed project only consists of the Unit 2 repowering (because DOE
would provide no funding for the Unit 1 repowering), the EIS will
evaluate the Unit 1 repowering as a related action.
In a CFB combustor, coal and coal/fuel blends, air, and limestone
are introduced into the lower portion of the combustor, where initial
combustion occurs. As the fuel is reduced in size through combustion
and breakage, it is transported higher in the combustor where
additional air is introduced. Ash and unburned fuel and limestone pass
out of the combustor, collect in a particle separator, and recirculate
to the lower portion of the combustor. Sulfur reacts with limestone
added in the furnace to form ash that can be marketed as a useful
byproduct such as roadbed material.
For the proposed project, the combined installation of the CFB
combustor and a flue gas scrubber is expected to remove over 97% of the
sulfur dioxide emitted from burning coal that contains up to 4.5%
sulfur. The relatively low furnace operating temperature of about
1650 deg.F would result in appreciably lower nitrogen oxide emissions
compared to conventional coal-fired power plants.
The project would also include a new selective non-catalytic
reduction system to further reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides. Over
99.8% of particulate emissions would be removed by a new baghouse or a
new electrostatic precipitator.
In addition to the CFB combustor itself and the air pollution
control systems, new equipment for the project would include a new
stack and new fuel, limestone, and ash handling systems. The height of
the proposed new stack is expected to be approximately 450 feet
compared to 300 feet for the existing stack at Unit 2. The project
would also require overhaul and/or modifications to existing systems
such as the steam turbine, condensate and feedwater systems,
circulating water systems, water treatment systems, plant electrical
distribution systems, the switchyard, and the control systems.
Options being considered for transport of coal include (1) an
extension of conveyors from the nearby St. Johns River Power Park, and
(2) construction of new receiving, handling, and storage facilities for
solid fuel. Limestone and ash storage and handling facilities also
would be required. Wherever possible, existing facilities and
infrastructure located at the Northside Generating Station would be
used for the proposed project. These include the discharge system for
cooling water to the St. Johns River, the wastewater treatment system,
and the electric transmission lines and towers.
Because Unit 2 has not operated since 1983, the baseline emissions
from that unit are zero. Units 1 and 3 have been operating at annual
capacity factors of less than 40%, firing either heavy oil or natural
gas. Unit 3 would continue as a 563.7-MWe oil/gas-fired unit. With the
exception of low-NOX (nitrogen oxide) burners on Unit 3,
Units 1 and 3 are not currently equipped with emission control systems.
The area is in attainment of the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. However, as part of JEA's commitment to the local community
in the implementation of this project, JEA has committed to a 10%
reduction in the annual stack emissions for criteria pollutants (i.e.,
sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, and particulate matter) from the
Northside Generating Station (as compared to recent annual emissions).
In achieving this objective, the combined emissions from the repowered
Units 1 and 2 operating at annual capacity factors of 100% are
projected to be less than recent typical annual emissions from Unit 1
alone.
Another part of JEA's community commitment is that groundwater
consumption will be reduced by at least 10% from recent levels. This
would be accomplished by increased recycling of the treated wastewater
produced at the station. Plant wastewater is presently treated with
lime, followed by clarification in settling basins. While some recycled
water is currently utilized, most of the treated wastewater is
discharged to percolation ponds. Should the proposed project be
implemented, the discharge of treated wastewater to the ponds would be
reduced.
Project activities would include engineering and design,
permitting, equipment procurement, construction, startup, and a 24-
month demonstration of the commercial feasibility of the technology.
DOE plans to complete the EIS and issue a Record of Decision
[[Page 60891]]
within 15 months of publication of this Notice of Intent, assuming
timely delivery of environmental information from JEA for use in
developing the EIS. Upon completing its NEPA review, if DOE decides to
implement the proposed action, construction would commence in early
1999 and finish in late 2001, startup would occur in early 2002, and
demonstration of the technology would begin in April 2002. During the
demonstration, Unit 2 would be operated on several different types of
coal and coal/fuel blends to demonstrate the flexibility of the
technology. Upon completion of the demonstration phase, the facility
would continue its commercial operation.
Alternatives
NEPA requires that agencies discuss the reasonable alternatives to
the proposed action in an EIS. The purpose for agency action determines
the range of reasonable alternatives. Congress established the CCT
Program with a specific purpose: to demonstrate the commercial
viability of technologies that use coal in more environmentally benign
ways than conventional coal technologies. Congress also directed DOE to
pursue the goals of the CCT Program by means of partial funding (cost-
sharing) of projects owned and controlled by non-federal government
sponsors. This statutory requirement places DOE in a much more limited
role than if the federal government were the owner and operator of the
project. In the latter situation, DOE would be responsible for a
comprehensive review of reasonable alternatives. However, in dealing
with an applicant, the scope of alternatives is necessarily more
restricted. It is appropriate in such cases for DOE to give substantial
weight to the applicant's needs in establishing a project's reasonable
alternatives.
An overall strategy for compliance with NEPA was developed for the
CCT Program that includes consideration of both programmatic and
project-specific environmental impacts during and after the process of
selecting a project. As part of the NEPA strategy, the EIS for JEA's
proposed CFB combustor project will tier off the program's final
Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) that was issued by
DOE in November 1989 (DOE/EIS-0146). Two alternatives were evaluated in
the PEIS: (1) the no action alternative, which assumed that the CCT
Program was not continued and that conventional coal-fired
technologies, with flue gas desulfurization and nitrogen oxide controls
to meet New Source Performance Standards, would continue to be used;
and (2) the proposed action, which assumed that the clean coal projects
would be selected and funded, and that successfully demonstrated
technologies would undergo widespread commercialization by the year
2010.
For JEA's proposed CFB combustor project, the range of reasonable
alternatives to be considered in the EIS is also narrowed in accordance
with the overall NEPA strategy. The no action alternative will be
analyzed in the EIS as a reasonable alternative to the proposed action
of providing cost-shared funding support for the proposed project. DOE
will consider any other reasonable alternatives that may be suggested
during the public scoping period.
Under no action, DOE would not provide partial funding for the
design, construction, and operation of the project. In the absence of
DOE funding, there are three options that JEA could reasonably pursue.
These options will be analyzed under the no action alternative. JEA
could construct the proposed project without DOE cost-shared funding.
Under this scenario, the potential environmental impacts or benefits at
Northside Generating Station are expected to be identical to those of
the proposed project. A second option is that JEA could construct a new
gas-fired combined cycle facility at Northside Generating Station or at
another location. Under this scenario, potential environmental impacts
or benefits at Northside Generating Station would vary from those of
the proposed project. A third option is that JEA could purchase
electricity from other utilities to meet JEA's projected demand. Under
this scenario, potential environmental impacts or benefits at Northside
Generating Station related to demonstration of the proposed project
would not be realized. In addition, the second and third options would
not contribute to the objective of the CCT Program, which is to make
available to the U.S. energy marketplace advanced, more efficient,
economically feasible, and environmentally acceptable coal
technologies.
Because of DOE's limited role of providing cost-shared funding for
JEA's proposed project and because of the advantages associated with
the proposed location, DOE does not plan to evaluate alternative sites
for the proposed project. JEA considered additional sites during its
site selection process. Site selection was governed primarily by
benefits that could be realized by JEA. An existing plant site was
preferred because the cost associated with construction of the project
at a ``greenfield'' site in an undisturbed area would be much higher,
and the environmental impact likely would be much greater than at an
existing facility. The existing Northside Generating Station has
several advantages because it is an operating plant with land available
for installation of new facilities. Much of the required
infrastructure, including the electric transmission lines and towers,
is already in place, thereby reducing the level of capital investment
and construction impacts. The station has the flexibility to
accommodate possible fuel delivery needs with its existing rail and
water facilities. Furthermore, most of the operational staffing for the
new facility would be accommodated by the existing Northside Generating
Station staff.
Preliminary Identification of Environmental Issues
The following issues have been tentatively identified for analysis
in the EIS. This list, which was developed partly on the basis of
concerns provided by the public in response to JEA's stakeholder
outreach program, is not intended to be all inclusive, but is presented
to facilitate public comment on the scope of the EIS. Additions to or
deletions from this list may occur as a result of the scoping process.
The issues include:
(1) Atmospheric Resources: potential air quality impacts resulting
from air emissions during current and future operation of Northside
Generating Station (e.g., effects of ground-level concentrations of
criteria pollutants, and trace metals including mercury, on surrounding
residential areas and the Timucuan Preserve (a National Park Service
Class II ecological and historic preserve adjacent to the western edge
of the Northside Generating Station); potential effects of greenhouse
gas emissions on global climate change;
(2) Water Resources and Aquatic Ecology: potential effects on
surface water and groundwater resources consumed and discharged;
potential effects on estuarine salt marsh ecosystems and aquatic biota
resulting from withdrawing and discharging cooling water from the St.
Johns River (e.g., thermal discharge, entrainment or impingement of
fish and invertebrate species);
(3) Infrastructure and Land Use: potential effects resulting from
the transport of coal, petroleum coke, and limestone required for the
proposed project, including the development of land for infrastructure,
storage, or waste disposal; affected resource areas including land
(e.g., existing shoreline and wetlands), utilities, and
[[Page 60892]]
transportation routes (e.g., train traffic to supply coal);
(4) Solid Waste: pollution prevention and waste management
practices, including solid waste impacts, caused by the generation,
treatment, transport, storage, and disposal of solid wastes;
(5) Construction: impacts associated with noise, traffic patterns,
and construction-related emissions;
(6) Visual: impacts associated with a new stack that is taller than
existing structures at Northside Generating Station;
(7) Floodplains: potential impacts (e.g., impeding floodwaters, re-
directing floodwaters, on-site and off-site property damage) of siting
new buildings and infrastructure within floodplain and hurricane storm
surge areas;
(8) Wetlands: potential reduction of wetlands due to new
construction (e.g., construction associated with feedstock transport
infrastructure);
(9) Community Impacts: impacts on public safety related to fire and
emergency vehicle access to the Northside community of Jacksonville;
impacts to local traffic patterns resulting from rail traffic;
socioeconomic impacts on public services and infrastructure (e.g.,
police protection, schools, and utilities); noise associated with
project operation; environmental justice with respect to the
surrounding community; and
(10) Cumulative effects that result from the incremental impacts of
the proposed project when added to other past, present, and reasonably
foreseeable future actions (e.g., incremental discharge of cooling
water affecting aquatic biota).
Public Scoping Process
To ensure that the full range of issues related to this proposal
are addressed, DOE will conduct an open process to define the scope of
the EIS. The public scoping period will run until December 31, 1997.
Interested agencies, organizations, and the general public are
encouraged to submit comments or suggestions concerning the content of
the EIS, issues and impacts to be addressed in the EIS, and the
alternatives that should be analyzed.
Scoping comments should clearly describe specific issues or topics
that the EIS should address in order to assist DOE in identifying
significant issues. Written, e-mailed, faxed, or telephoned comments
should be communicated by December 31, 1997 (see ADDRESSES).
In addition, a public scoping meeting to be conducted by DOE will
be held in the In-Plant Conference Room at the Northside Generating
Station on December 3, 1997, at 7 p.m. The address of the Northside
Generating Station is 4377 Heckscher Drive, Jacksonville, Florida. DOE
requests that anyone who wishes to speak at this public scoping meeting
contact Dr. Jan Wachter, either by phone, fax, computer, or in writing
(see ADDRESSES in this Notice). Individuals who do not make advance
arrangements to speak may register at the meeting and will be given the
opportunity to speak after all previously scheduled speakers have made
their presentations. Speakers who wish to make presentations longer
than five minutes should indicate the length of time desired in their
request. Depending on the number of speakers, it may be necessary to
limit speakers to five minute presentations initially, with the
opportunity for additional presentation as time permits. Speakers can
also provide additional written information to supplement their
presentations. Oral and written comments will be given equal weight.
DOE will begin the meeting with an overview of the proposed CFB
combustor project. A presiding officer will be designated by DOE to
chair the meeting. The meeting will not be conducted as an evidentiary
hearing, and speakers will not be cross-examined. However, speakers may
be asked to clarify their statements to ensure that DOE fully
understands the comments or suggestions. The presiding officer will
establish the order of speakers and provide, any additional procedures
necessary to conduct the meeting.
Issued in Washington, D.C., this 6th day of November, 1997.
Peter N. Brush,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Environment, Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. 97-29890 Filed 11-12-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6450-01-P
