Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRCC AGENDA PK 1991/03/11r t I Addendum to ~ Environmental Impact Report EIR-84-4 Otay Landfill Electric Generating Plant ,~ Prepared for: City of Chula Vista Planning Department Chula Vista, California Prepared by: ERC Environmental and Energy Services Co., Inc. (ERCE) 5510 Morehouse Drive San Diego, California 92121 February 1991 i (Revised) ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR-84-4 OTAY LANDFILL ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PROPOSED PROJECT I Pacific Energy is proposing the construction and operation of an additional engine generator unit at the existing electric generating facility at the Otay Landfill in the City of i Chula Vista (Figure 1). The facility consists of mechanical and electrical equipment to draw a vacuum on the gas collection system within the landfill, burn the gas as fuel for i engines, and drive electrical generators. The proposed expansion includes a building to house the new engine unit, generator, compressors, and electrical switchgear. All improvements would be constructed within the existing fenced yard of the electric l generating plant. The fenced yard would accommodate other auxiliary equipment including engine exhaust and intake silencers, water coolers, and an electrical transformer. The City of Chula Vista has prepared this Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Otay Landfill Electric Generating Plant in compliance with the California Environmental i Quality Act (CEQA). 1.2 PROJECT BACKGROUND On June 6, 1983, Pacific Energy submitted an application for a special use permit to the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency to construct and operate a 1.7-megawatt electric generating plant at the County of San Diego's Otay Land£11. The project is designed to utilize the methane gas extracted from the landfill through a collection system of gas wells and pipes. The power generated at the plant is sold to San Diego Gas & Electric ~ Company (SDG&E). In 1984, the City of Chula Vista prepared an environmental impact report (EIR-84-4) to assess the environmental impacts of construction and operation of the electric generating plant. ~ As originally proposed, the project included operation of two to four electric generator units, to be installed in phases. In April 1984, the Resource Conservation Commission concluded that the EIR had been prepared in compliance with CEQA and the City of Chula Vista's environmental review procedure. In June 1985, the Chula Vista 1 ~3• ~' of _ - ~ I \ i • a ~ ;'~ i '.~ _~ i ;lei t ~ ,: r f ~. ~; ~t. E[ l _ ,~, til si !, SOURCE: Ciry of Chula Vista Initial Study Application, 1991. I • ! i --HIV---- , ---j'B. '-~.. L ` I I .. . -- \~r s ~~ ~ ~ I ~ / -- I ~ ~`~\~`` I~=1600 ~~ ~ i ~ . ~_, ~ 0; 800~~600 ~ ERCE Resptect to aay Landiillting Plant With r t t. u rc r, 1 2 ' Redevelopment Agency found the proposed project to be in conformance with the Otay I Valley Road Redevelopment Plan, certified the EIR, and approved a special use permit for the construction and operation of the project, subject to conditions which aze listed in Appendix A of this Addendum. In July 1985, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency entered into an owner participation agreement with Pacific Energy to construct the proposed plant. Following project approval, Pacific Energy installed the fast electric generator unit in 1986. I Pacific Energy is now proposing to install a second engine unit. The environmental impacts of the second unit were analyzed in the original EIR approved by the City of Chula ~ Vista Resource Conservation Commission and Redevelopment Agency. 2.0 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines stipulates that in circumstances where an EIR has previously been prepared and approved for a project, an additional EIR need pQt. be prepared unless: 1. Project changes are proposed with the potential for new significant environmental impacts not considered in the previous EIR; 2. Changes have occurred to the "circumstances under which the project is undertaken" which may result in new significant environmental impacts not considered in the previous EIR; or 3. Important new information has become available which was not known at the time of EIR prepazation and shows: A. The project would have significant impacts not addressed in the EIR; B. Previously identified significant impacts would be substantially more severe; C. Mitigation measures previously determined to be infeasible would be feasible and would substantially reduce the significant impact(s); or 3 D. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously not considered would substantially reduce significant impact(s). Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines stipulates that the lead agency shall only prepare an EIR addendtm if: 1. None of the conditions included in Section 15162 requiring a new EIR have occurred; I 2 Only minor technical revisions or additions to the environmental analysis in the ~ EII2 are necessary for compliance with CEQA; and 3. The changes to the EIR do not raise "important new issues about the significant effects on the environment." 3.0 PROJECT DESIGN CHANGES Pacific Energy has completed additional engineering design of the power plant; made minor changes in the location of specific power plant equipment and made general changes in the project to mitigate specific environmental concerns which were identified during the original environmental review process. These changes, which are incorporated into the site plan in Figure 2, have not resulted in any new significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR. As originally proposed in the Final EIR, the power plant was to include four engine generator units; the current proposal is for two units. The project site was originally proposed to encompass 0.86 acre in the north central part of the Otay Landfill, approximately 0.75 mile north of Otay Valley Road. The project, as currently proposed, would encompass 0.5 acre of the landfill. 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS This section of the EIR addendum summarizes key issues associated with the proposed expansion and additional information which has become available since approval of the Final EIR. 4 O fx w } ~ > I- i ~ ~ _ wa J Q 03 LL 3°a LL ~ ~ w N6 Z Z N O ~ W F a C7 y O J w a ~, _. ~-- z ti z N (7 ~a N _ $ J °~U3 W ~ K ~ LL a a z O w 5~ vi p~ a D O O =O ~ U w m 3 3 i w z ___ W W K -- -r~ ~ 3~ ~ __ _ L.~J ~( 0 1 ~ ag L.~ ; L- ° ..~ I X rI Q 1 W I Q J ^~ Q W Oro i~ ~ ~g Z 8 0 ---~ 1 L--~. ~ ~ 13 O¢O r -1 U - I __--_ I ~-_ J T r.. - I ' °a L J ~.. J i ~ ^ y a `. ~ N I I a ZO r-- ~ ~__J ~ ~ Z~ ° a ~- I Z2 W OW I~I Q ~ ~. r L..J ~__, X ~ ti K O a a 00 3a _ $¢ N C O N C R a x W c m a rn c d c w T W O m a 0 a W W 1~/ 4.1 SOILS At the request of Pacific Energy, Leighton and Associates, Inc. conducted additional geotechnical studies of the site of the proposed expansion. Leighton Associates concluded that the proposed expansion is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint with the incorporation of certain foundation design recommendations in addition to the recommendations in the Final EIR. These recommendations are specified in the geotechnical report by Leighton and Associates (1990). 4.2 VISUAL/AESTHETICS The plant expansion would be located within the fenced yard of the electric generating plant, immediately adjacent and to the east of the existing plant facilities. The proposed project site, including both the existing and proposed plant facilities, would cover 0.5 acre within the Otay Landfill. The height of both the existing and proposed plant buildings would be 25 feet. The buildings would be painted in earth-tone colors. The plant site is located against a knoll which screens views from any residences. There are no residences or roads with a direct view of the plant; therefore, there would be no significant visual impact from the plant expansion. 4.3 AIR QUALITY The proposed expansion would decrease organic gas emissions, hydrogen sulfide emissions, and toxic organic emissions due to the capture of additional landfill gas. Source testing of the first engine unit's performance has indicated that the actual criteria pollutant emissions are lower than the emission estimates presented in the Final EIR. Therefore, the emissions associated with the expansion are also expected to be lower than the projections in the Final EIR. In addition, the second unit will be required by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) to meet lower emission levels than the first unit, due to increases in efficiency of "best available control technology." An Authority to I Construct was granted by the APCD on November 8, 1990, and is included in Appendix B. Since the proposed expansion would decrease landfill gas emissions, the expansion is not considered a significant air quality impact. 6 A report with quantification of the emissions of toxic air contaminants, such as benzene, formaldehyde, trichlorcethylene, perchlorcethylene, and polychlorinated dibenzodioxins, is required by AB2588, "Toxic Hot Spots,' in 1991. These results will be submitted to the APCD and the California Department of Health Services; the results can then be used to verify the emissions of toxic air contaminants in the Final EIR. 4.4 NOISE The existing noise sources in the project vicinity are predominantly the existing electric generating facility as well as earthmoving vehicles and miscellaneous bucks associated with the ongoing landfill operation. The electric generating facility operates on a 24-hour basis. Noise generated from the facility is primarily from the engine/generator, gas compressor, and cooling tower. With the exception of the cooling tower, the noise sources are housed inside a metal building. The nearest landfill property line to the facility is approximately 170 feet north of the facility building. An earthen berm is located between the electric generating facility and the property line. Sound level measurements were conducted on all four sides of the facility, at approximately 50 feet from the building, and at the north property line of the landfill. The measurements were conducted using a calibrated Larson-Davis model 700 sound-level meter which meets the American National Standazds Institute requirements. Sound levels at 50 feet from the building ranged from 74 to 82 dBA. The sound levels at the north property line ranged from 47 to 49 dBA. The facility is located within an Open Space land use (City of Chula Vista 1989). The City of Chula Vista noise ordinance does not specifically define sound level standards for Open Space land uses; however, based on activities consistent with a power plant and a landfill, it can be assumed that the City's 70 dBA land use noise standard for Light Industry would be applicable. The property to the north is designated Industrial land use (City of Chula Vista 1989). The City's sound level standard for Residential land use is 45 dBA during nighttime hours and 55 dBA during daytime hours. The nearest noise-sensitive receptors are residences located over 0.5 mile west of the project site. The electric generating facility is considered a point source and has sound propagation loss characteristics of 6 dBA per doubling of 7 distance. The resultant sound level is expected to be less than 45 dBA at these residences; the sound level is not expected to be audible above the ambient sound level. Sound levels associated with the proposed engine generator unit are expected to be similar to the measured existing sound levels at the facility and are expected to increase the sound level in the vicinity of the facility by approximately 3 dBA. Therefore, the facility is expected to comply with the provisions of the Ciry of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance at all property lines. Noise generated from the proposed expansion is not considered a significant impact. 4.5 UTILITIES No major changes in the utility lines to accommodate the increased power to be generated by the plant expansion are proposed. The proposed increase would reduce the demand for other existing energy sources by SDG&E customers, resulting in a beneficial cumulative impact on energy resources. No new water or sewer lines would be required to service the project. Water usage would be minimal, and all water required for the plant would be kept in a storage tank and periodically pumped out by a commercial service. 4.6 LAND USE The land use designation of the property to the north of the electric generating station has changed since approval of the Final EIR. The land use was previously designated as Residential; the land use designation is now Research and Limited Industrial (City of Chula Vista 1989). The land use category of the Otay Landfill itself remains Open Space. The proposed expansion is a minor addition to and within the boundaries of the existing facility and will have no impacts on surrounding land uses. The proposed expansion of the electric generating station is, therefore, compatible with these land uses. 4.7 TRANSPORTATION Vehicle access to the project is via Otay Valley Road to Maxwell Road to the landfill. The refuse filling activity on the landfill itself requires the periodic alteration of the internal I landfill roadways leading to the plant. 8 I One additional person per day would be necessary to operate the expanded power plant, bringing the total number of plant employees to two. The impact from this employment increase on traffic is not considered significant. 4.H HEALTH The proposed expansion would reduce the emissions of toxic air pollutants from the landfill. As indicated above in Section 4.3, AB2588 requires the quantification of toxic air pollutants in 1991. This quantification can be used to substantiate the emission estimates presented in the Final E1R. In addition, a toxic air emissions health risk assessment for the landfill is required in 1991. The proposed expansion would not result in significant health effects. 4.9 RISK OF UPSET The potential risk of fire or explosion has been reduced at the existing facility by the incorporation of a continuous monitoring system to detect higher than normal levels of oxygen caused by a minor leak or rupture. This system automatically shuts down the facility and stops suction at the wells. Vibrator switches to shut down the facility in case of seismic activity have also been included in the project. The plant is constructed primarily of metal to reduce the impact of a fire should the safety systems fail, and there is little vegetation in the azea surrounding the plant site. The proposed expansion would not have any effect on the risk of upset at the existing facility. 5.0 DETERMINATION The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the requirements in the CEQA Guidelines (Sections 15162 and 15164) for additional environmental documentation relative to the previous decisions, new information which has been developed, and activities which have occurred subsequent to the preparation of the Draft and Final EIRs for this project. The City has concluded that: 1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion of the Final EIR as a result of detailed engineering design changes have not 9 created any new significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR; 2. Addidonal or refined environmental data available since completion of the Final EIR does not indicate any new significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Final EIR; and 3. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR regarding the potential environmental impact of the project, or regarding the measures or alternatives available to mitigate potential environmental effects of the project, does not show that the project will have one or more significant impacts which were not previously addressed in the Final EIR. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared this addendum to the Final EIR to document the information and analysis which , lead to these conclusions. No public review of this addendum is required. REFERENCES City of Chula Vista. 1989. General Plan Land Use Map. July 1989. Leighton and Associates, Inc. 1990. Additional Geotechnical Studies, Proposed Cogeneration Plant Expansion, Chula Vista, California. Prepared for Pacific Energy. December 1990. l0 APPENDIX A CONDITIONS OF SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT i . The applicant shall adhere to the mitigation measures outlined in EIR-84-4. 2. Prior to the issuance of any building pemrits, the applicant shall satisfy the fire protection requirements as established by the Fire Department of the City of Chula Vista. 3. The applicant shall notify the City of Chula Vista and landfill owner of their intention to terminate the facility at least one year in advance of termination. The disposition of all equipment, structures, and gas collection systems shall be deternrined prior to the termination date. 4. The applicant will conduct periodic testing to determine whether engine vibrations are causing lateral leaching of hazardous materials or otherwise adversely affecting the integrity of the Class I disposal site. 5. The applicant shall coordinate with the County of San Diego regazding the landfill phasing plan. 6. Supplemental vertical planting shall be provided around the perimeter of the building subject to approval of the City's landscape architect. 7. The applicant's landscape architect shall coordinate with the City's landscape architect to provide an acceptable erosion control planting plan. 8. The applicant shall file a request for deferral or waiver of utility undergrounding requirements. If the waiver or deferral is granted, the new utility poles shall be positioned outside of the perimeter of the active landfill and be coordinated with the staged development plans for the landfill operations. Approval of the County Department of Public Works shall be required. A-1 9. A 5,000-gallon water tank shall be installed at the plant site. The location of the water tank will be subject to approval of the City's Fire Marshal and Zoning Administrator. 10. The wood trim proposed at the comers of the building shall be removed. A-2 APPENDIX B AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT ''' /. -•` C "~ K. 1, Sommerville County of S:+n A1ego Air Pollution Control Officer 1 L*ovembcr R, I990 Mr. Jan Bush Pacific Energy 6055 E. Washington Blvd. Commeire, CA 90040 Dear 1~4r. Bush: After examination of your Application No. 591039 for an Air Pollution Control District _ Au;hotiry to Construct and Permit to Operate a second Ic;an bum rcciprocatutg engine and support equipment to be lo;.atcd at the Otay landfill, Chula Vista, CA, the District has decided on the following actions: aj•fhority to Construct is tented pursuant to Rule 20 and 2U.Z of the Air Pollution Control District Rules and Regulations fot a resource recovery projett consisting of: One (1) Superior 2650 bra}:e•horsepowcr engine, Model 16SGTA, and egytipped with a pr>r-igmnon chamber and automatic air-to-fuel ratio control system, and shall use exclusively I.•trtdfill t;as fuel./ This Authority to Constntct is grnted with the following conditions: l . Emissions of nitroectt dioxide froth the engine exhaust shall not exceed d.67 Hounds per hour as dctcmtincd b test methods a ~rovell b the Disrict. The volumetric ,/ concentration of oxides of nitrogen NOx in the engsnc ea tausl shall not exceed 177 assns Her million, measured as nitroben dioxide and corrected to 30'0 oxygen, on trdry basis. 2. The volumetric concentrtion of carbon monoxide (CO) in the engine exhaust shall ~ not exceed 700 priers per million conrcted to 390 ox • en, on a dry basis. 3, Emissions of non-me:haae hydraarbons (;~A1HC) from the engine shrill not excucd J 4. PertrJttet shall provide access facilities, utilities and any ncress,•uy safay equipment for source testing and inspection upt»i request of the Air Pollution Control Dtstnct. 5 A fitei flow meter eh~ ~i~ 1 be installed in the sep~t t: fuel line that is dedicated to the 6 ~t'ithin ninety days of wmDletion of cansvuction, testing shall be done at the Applicants expense, !o venfy enmpli~.nce unth the cmission'.imia of conditions 1, 2. . and 3 above. This initial Compliance tau proprvn shall include a dcrvonstration to verify that the limits prescribed above arc optimum condi:icats for the Permit to AIR 1'C)LI.ITI~ION L()~TF.(?L DISTRICT - 91511 Cticsapeakc At 1~•r, tian Dir~i!: Catitoinia 92123-1095 _ . ~ (G19) G9-0•i?t)7 FAX (GI9) G34 2Tt0 ..~ _... •.., ,,1 ~ ~, -2- l 7 The °pplicant chill instill tea Pow and pl+tfoms in accordanea with District M~' ' reouirements. 8. A written test Dlan shall be submitted and zpprovcd by the District prior to the District's approval of a Startu Authorization for shaktdown and testing. Test protocol format and the r>:qurrements for ondtuan Ao. can be obtained from Dedl Ridenour, Senior Chemist, at G19( )~t69~-3.3_59. A final test report shall be submitted fur approval to ilte District no later art A5 avs followine completion of testin Exhaust stack concentration of i~Oz, CO and Nh4I-1C, and than assoetat • stack I emission mass rates, ,~xrcent of oxygen and carbon dioxide in il1e exhaust, and engine ~ perfomtatlce )+aratneters (including load, fuel rates, inlet manifold assure and ~/ two raturr,lttnition tinyng ..nd exhaust temtxratutr) shall e o tarn to engine ,ornlartee parameters shall be optimized prior to the initial compliance test and - verified dtuing the test to establish Permit to Operate conditions that shall maintain continuous complistlce with Conditions 1\'os. 1, 2 and 3. . 9. if compliance with Conditions Nos. 1, 2 and 3 cannot be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the District, the applicant shall take corrective sction to meet these litnits. Any proposed corrective acuon that would result in a mcxiification to the equipment, shall ;equine an application and a District Authority to Construct letter for such a modification. I 10. In the event the District detcnnines that additional monitoring or safety equipment is appropriate for this installation the applicant shall obtain and prompily install such equipment. 11. The applicant shall implement the necessary support for limiting the operation of Engine i\To. 1 andEnSine A'o. 2 to a total of 16,500 hours per year (an avenge of ~ ~? 8550 hours per engine). A totalizing clock shad be provided for each engine. The ? clock hours of each en the shall be recorded ort a dail basis and made availablo to 1e Dtstnct upon request... -- 12. Except as otherwise ttquired by the c^r.•t:~~^..^.s h_nein rho equipment for this Au4ta-ity to Construct (A/C) is granted seal! be as described above and shall be maintained and operated in accordance with the data, spet.'ification, drawings, sod operating procedures submined with Application ATo. 591039 for an A/C to install Engine No. 2 and Permit to Operate No. 40217 for Engine No. 1. This Air Pollution Control District Authority to:Construct does not relieve the holder from obtaining permits or authorizations which maybe required by other governmental agencies. Z]tie is nor a Permit to Oneratc. Please notify the Air Pollution Control District as soon as t11e tquiptnent is installed ut acconlsnce with this Authority to Construct s0 that it tray be ec-rluatrd ftu a Pentvt io Operstc. Qpera:ion of this equipment without written _... ~._~__.:__ ._ .r.. :.w ...:11 Mw ~ vinta,;nn of Qlttr ltlfhl 1n W11~lCCt t~0 (]Nl and ~,rau,w Ucumuca. _ J r•.. . - - ~.:: .._ r_ __ ~. -... - __.~b: ._ _. _ . _ .. _ ~..... _ r ~=. -~--._ .. .. r - _.... _ _ Application No. 591039 I I -3- A copy of this Authority to Construct will be posted or kept readily available at the site of construction. \Vithin ten days after receipt of [ltis Au[horry to Construct; the applicant [nay petition the He.~[rirtg Board for a hearing on any conditions unposed herein in accor[iance wtth Rule 25. Ibis Au[hori[y to Conswct will expire one year from, the date of this letter. If you have any questions reganiirtg tl[is action, please contact me at (619) 694-3316. Sincerely, ~ ROBERT L. BATTEIJ Associate Air Pollurion Control Enb~nter RLB:ap • ~ / ;. - .. - :~ '- ,. ~.