76614 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Notices

Recordkeeping burden. OMB invites would be cost-shared by DOE and JEA specific to the proposals under public comment. (formerly the Jacksonville Electric consideration. Dated: December 1, 2000. Authority) under DOE’s Clean Coal The DOE strategy has three principal elements. The first element involved John Tressler, Technology (CCT) Program. The project would demonstrate circulating fluidized preparation of a comprehensive Leader Regulatory Information Management, Programmatic EIS for the CCT Program Office of the Chief Information Officer. bed (CFB) combustion technology at JEA’s existing Northside Generating (DOE/EIS–0146, November 1989) to Office of Educational Research and Station in Jacksonville, Florida. After address the potential environmental Improvement careful consideration of the potential consequences of widespread commercialization of each of 22 Type of Review: New. environmental impacts, along with successfully demonstrated clean coal Title: Education Longitudinal Study program goals and objectives, DOE has technologies. of 2002 (ELS 2002). decided that it will provide approximately $73 million in federal The second element involved Frequency: Annually. preparation of a pre-selection, project- Affected Public: Not-for-profit funding support (about 24% of the total cost of approximately $309 million) to specific environmental review of institutions; State, Local, or Tribal proposed CCT projects based on project- Gov’t, SEAs or LEAs. design, construct, and demonstrate the CFB technology proposed by JEA. specific environmental data and Reporting and Recordkeeping Hour analyses in accordance with DOE NEPA Burden: Responses: 51,597. Burden FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: To regulations (10 CFR 1021.216). For the Hours: 59,497. obtain additional information about the proposed CFB combustor project, JEA Abstract: Year 2001 field test of 50 CFB combustor project or the EIS, supplied DOE with environmental data schools in five states, students, parents, contact Dr. Jan Wachter, National as part of their proposal. DOE reviewed teachers, and librarians. The main study Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) the potential site-specific in Spring 2002 in all 50 states and Document Manager, U.S. Department of environmental, health, safety, and District of Columbia will constitute the Energy, National Energy Technology socioeconomic issues associated with baseline of a longitudinal study of Laboratory, 626 Cochrans Mill Road, the proposed project before selecting school effectiveness and impact on Pittsburgh, PA 15236, telephone: (412) JEA’s proposal for further consideration. postsecondary and labor market 386–4809, fax: (412) 386–4726, or e- In its review, DOE analyzed the outcomes. mail: [email protected]. For environmental advantages and Requests for copies of the proposed general information on the DOE NEPA disadvantages of the proposal and information collection request may be process, contact Ms. Carol M. alternative sites and processes accessed from http://edicsweb.ed.gov, or Borgstrom, Director, Office of NEPA reasonably available to JEA. should be addressed to Vivian Reese, Policy and Compliance (EH–42), U.S. The third element consists of Department of Education, 400 Maryland Department of Energy, 1000 preparing site-specific NEPA documents Avenue, SW, Room 4050, Regional Independence Avenue, SW., for each selected project. For the JEA Office Building 3, Washington, D.C. Washington, DC 20585, telephone: (202) proposed project, DOE determined that 20202–4651. Requests may also be 586–4600, leave a message at (800) 472– an EIS should be prepared. As part of electronically mailed to the internet 2756, or fax: (202) 586–7031. the overall NEPA strategy for the CCT address [email protected] or Program, the JEA EIS draws upon the faxed to 202–708–9346. Please specify SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: DOE has Programmatic EIS and pre-selection the complete title of the information prepared this Record of Decision environmental reviews. collection when making your request. pursuant to Council on Environmental On November 13, 1997, DOE Comments regarding burden and/or Quality (CEQ) regulations for published in the Federal Register (62 the collection activity requirements implementing the procedural provisions FR 60889) a Notice of Intent to prepare should be directed to Kathy_Axt at her of NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500–1508) and the JEA EIS and hold a public scoping internet address Kathy_Axt@)ed.gov. DOE NEPA regulations (10 CFR Part meeting. The Notice of Intent invited Individuals who use a 1021). This Record of Decision is based comments and suggestions on the telecommunications device for the deaf on DOE’s final EIS for the JEA proposed scope of the EIS, including (TDD) may call the Federal Information Circulating Fluidized Bed Combustor environmental issues and alternatives, Relay Service (FIRS) at 1–800–877– Project (DOE/EIS–0289, June 2000). and encouraged participation in the 8339. NEPA Strategy for the Clean Coal NEPA process. DOE held the scoping [FR Doc. 00–31144 Filed 12–6–00; 8:45 am] Technology Program meeting in Jacksonville, Florida, on December 3, 1997. DOE received 3 oral BILLING CODE 4000±01±P For the CCT Program, DOE developed responses and 20 written responses a strategy that is consistent with CEQ from interested parties. The responses and DOE regulations for compliance helped DOE to establish the issues to be DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY with NEPA and which includes analyzed in the EIS and the level of Record of Decision; JEA Circulating consideration of both programmatic and analysis warranted for each issue. Fluidized Bed Combustor Project, project-specific environmental impacts In August 1999, DOE issued the draft Jacksonville, Duval County, FL during and after the process of selecting EIS for public review and invited a project. This strategy, called tiering comments on the adequacy, accuracy, AGENCY: Department of Energy. (40 CFR 1508.28), refers to the and completeness of the EIS. As part of ACTION: Record of Decision. consideration of general issues in a the review, DOE held a public hearing broader EIS (e.g., for the CCT Program), in Jacksonville, Florida, on September SUMMARY: The Department of Energy followed by more focused 30, 1999. DOE received 1 oral comment (DOE) has prepared an environmental environmental impact statements or and 59 written comments, which helped impact statement (EIS) (DOE/EIS–0289) other environmental analyses that to improve the quality and usefulness of to assess the environmental impacts incorporate by reference the general the EIS. In June 2000, DOE issued the associated with a proposed project that issues and concentrate on those issues final EIS, which considered and, as

VerDate 112000 18:28 Dec 06, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM pfrm08 PsN: 07DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Notices 76615 appropriate, incorporated public recently been dismantled and removed. The heated combustor converts water comments on the draft EIS. Among the Units 1 and 3 can burn both natural gas in tubes lining the combustor’s walls to issues raised in the comments were and oil [No. 6 fuel oil or No. 2 fuel oil high-pressure steam. The steam is then concerns about (1) reliability of CFB (diesel)]. Units 1 and 3 have no air superheated in tube bundles placed in combustion technology in meeting pollution control with the exception of the solids circulating stream and the expected air emissions rates for low-NOX burners on Unit 3. Once- flue gas stream. The superheated steam particulate matter, sulfur dioxide (SO2), through cooling water is withdrawn drives a steam turbine-generator to and oxides of nitrogen (NOX), in view of from and discharged into the St. Johns produce electricity in a conventional limited large-scale operating experience; River. Existing facilities currently steam cycle. (2) air emissions of heavy metals, occupy about 200 acres of the 400-acre The injected limestone could capture radionuclides, carcinogenic chemicals, property. The property contains a up to 98% of the sulfur impurities and carbon dioxide (CO2); (3) potential number of wetland areas, especially in released from the fuel. When heated in effects of cooling water discharge on the the perimeter areas. the CFB combustor, the limestone, St. Johns River; (4) potential The proposed project would repower consisting primarily of calcium entrainment of juvenile sea turtles, such the idle Unit 2 steam turbine to generate carbonate (CaCO3), converts to calcium as endangered green sea turtles, in the nearly 300 MW of electricity using a oxide (CaO) and CO2. The CaO reacts cooling water intake; (5) potential new coal- and petroleum coke-fired with SO2 from the burning fuel to form effects on manatees and other combustor to demonstrate CFB calcium sulfate (CaSO4), an inert endangered species; (6) potential effects combustion technology. The new material that is removed with the on Essential Fish Habitat, such as combustor would be located adjacent to combustion ash. The combustion estuarine emergent wetlands; (7) the existing Unit 3. Piping and related efficiency of the CFB combustor allows potential effects on cultural resources; infrastructure would be constructed to the fuel to be burned at a relatively low (8) disposal of ash, including whether link the combustor with the Unit 2 temperature of about 1,650EF, thus the planned ash marketing would be steam turbine. The proposed project and reducing NOX formation by successful; (9) noise levels from related infrastructure would occupy approximately 60% compared with construction, operation, and rail about 75 acres of the Northside conventional coal-fired technologies. transportation; (10) electromagnetic Generating Station property. Greater than 99% of particulate fields; and (11) traffic congestion. emissions in the flue gas are removed CFB combustion technology is an downstream of the combustor by either Project Location and Description advanced method for burning coal and an electrostatic precipitator or a fabric The site for the proposed project is other fuels efficiently while removing filter (baghouse). located in Jacksonville, Florida, about 9 pollutants from air emissions inside the In addition to the CFB technology, the miles northeast of the downtown area, sophisticated combustor system. CFB proposed project would use a polishing at JEA’s existing Northside Generating technology provides flexibility in utility scrubber in combination with the CFB operations because a wide variety of Station. This 400-acre industrial site is combustor to attain a 98% SO2 removal situated along the north shore of the St. solid fuels can be used, including high- rate. The polishing scrubber is a Johns River, approximately 10 miles sulfur, high-ash coal and petroleum conventional scrubbing system that west of the Atlantic Ocean. The local coke. In a CFB combustor, coal or other would use lime in a dry flue gas terrain is flat and there is a mix of fuels, air, and crushed limestone or desulfurization process downstream of industrial, commercial, residential, and other sorbents are injected into the the combustor to convert SO2 agricultural land use in the vicinity. The lower portion of the combustor for chemically to calcium sulfite and industrial 1,650-acre St. Johns River initial burning of the fuel. The calcium sulfate. It is called a polishing Power Park borders Northside combustion actually occurs in a bed of scrubber because the CFB combustor Generating Station to the northeast, and fuel, sorbent, and ash particles that are would remove 85–90% of the SO2 and the 46,000-acre Timucuan Ecological fluidized by air from nozzles in the the polishing scrubber would remove or and Historic Preserve borders the site to bottom of the combustor. The air ‘‘polish off’’ the remainder. This design the east. Blount Island, located expands the bed, creates turbulence for is driven by economic rather than immediately to the southeast in the St. enhanced mixing, and provides most of technical considerations (i.e., the CFB Johns River, is a major port with the oxygen necessary for combustion of combustor alone could achieve a 98% facilities for docking, loading, and the fuel. As the fuel particles decrease SO2 removal rate but the operating cost unloading large ocean-going vessels. in size through combustion and would be greater). The most striking environmental feature breakage, they are transported higher in Another addition to the CFB associated with the area is the nearby the combustor where additional air is combustion technology is that the presence of estuarine salt marsh injected. As the particles continue to proposed project would use a selective backwaters of the St. Johns River. decrease in size, unreacted fuel, ash, non-catalytic reduction system to Northside Generating Station, which and fine limestone particles are swept further reduce NOX emissions. Aqueous currently employs 265 people, has out of the combustor, collected in a ammonia, the reagent for this system, operated since November 1966 when particle separator (also called a would be injected into the CFB the 297.5-megawatt (MW) Unit 1 came cyclone), and recycled to the lower combustor exhaust gas to convert NOX on-line. The 297.5-MW Unit 2 and the portion of the combustor. This is the emissions to nitrogen gas and water via 564-MW Unit 3 started operation in ‘‘circulating’’ nature of the combustor. a chemical reduction reaction. March 1972 and June 1977, respectively. Drains in the bottom of the combustor Atmospheric emissions of ammonia can Unit 2 has been out of service since remove a fraction of the bed composed occur if the amount supplied to reduce 1983 because of major boiler problems primarily of ash while new fuel and NOX in the flue gas is not used up associated with the volume of its sorbent are added. The combustion ash (ammonia slip). However, excess furnace being inadequate to is suitable for beneficial uses such as ammonia in the stack gas can typically accommodate the heat generated. The road construction material, agricultural be reduced by optimizing the amount of Unit 2 steam turbine is currently idle fertilizer, and reclaiming surface mining ammonia that is injected. For the and the Unit 2 furnace and stack have areas. proposed project, stack emissions of

VerDate 112000 13:08 Dec 06, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07DEN1 76616 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Notices ammonia slip would not exceed 40 agency must focus on alternative ways period (1994–95) of the station (Units 1 ppm. to accomplish its purpose that reflect and 3). Also targeted for a 10% A CFB combustor has several both the application before it and the reduction is the total annual advantageous operating characteristics function the agency plays in the groundwater consumption of Northside that differentiate it from more decisional process. It is appropriate in Generating Station, as compared to 1996 conventional technologies. Because the such cases for DOE to give substantial levels. These reductions are to be fuel and sorbent being added represent weight to the applicant’s needs in accomplished while increasing the total only a small fraction of the total fuel establishing a project’s reasonable annual energy output of the station. and sorbent available in the bed, the alternatives. JEA, the project participant, is combustor reacts more slowly to Based on the foregoing principles, the responsible for obtaining all applicable variations in fuel or sorbent quality. only reasonable alternative to the permits for the proposed project and Steam characteristics and furnace proposed action is the no-action would comply with all applicable laws, temperatures are more uniform, which alternative, including three scenarios regulations, and ordinances. JEA plans usually results in easier operation, fewer that could reasonably be expected to to enter into a contract with Foster upset conditions and emission spikes, result as a consequence of the no-action Wheeler Corporation, which would and more consistency in the quality of alternative. Other alternatives that did perform the design, engineering, combustion ash. As a consequence of not meet the goals and objectives of the procurement, and construction of the bed fluidization and recycling of CCT Program or of the applicant were CFB combustor and air emissions particles back to the lower portion of the dismissed from further consideration. control equipment. JEA and Foster combustor, enhanced mixing is Wheeler conceived and proposed the Proposed Action achieved at more uniform temperatures, technology in response to the DOE which allows more complete The Department’s proposed action is solicitation under the CCT Program; combustion and sorbent reaction. to provide approximately $73 million DOE’s role is limited to providing the Another advantage of the combustor is (about 24% of the total cost of cost-shared funding for the proposed the efficient transfer of heat due to the approximately $309 million) for the project. In addition, DOE and JEA have physical contact between the particles design, construction, and operation of different objectives to be attained in the bed and the heat exchanger tubes facilities to demonstrate CFB through the proposed project: DOE’s in the walls. The technology also has combustion technology at JEA’s objective is to demonstrate CFB lower operating and maintenance costs Northside Generating Station in technology, while JEA’s intent is to meet and a shorter ‘‘down time’’ for Jacksonville, Florida. The new CFB its future demand for electricity. maintenance than conventional coal- combustor would use coal and No Action fired technologies. petroleum coke to generate nearly 300 During the demonstration, Unit 2 MW of electricity by repowering the Under the no-action alternative, DOE would be operated on several different existing Unit 2 steam turbine (the would not provide cost-shared funding types and blends of coal and petroleum 297.5–MW unit that has been out of for the proposed CFB combustor project. coke to explore the flexibility of the CFB service since 1983). In doing so, the The Programmatic EIS for the CCT technology. The coal would be proposed project is expected to Program (DOE/EIS–0146) evaluated the transported by ship (from areas such as demonstrate emission levels of SO2, programmatic consequences of no Columbia and Venezuela), by train NOX, and particulate matter that would action. Under the no-action alternative (primarily from the central Appalachian be lower than Clean Air Act limits while for the proposed project, three region such as West Virginia and eastern at the same time producing power more reasonably foreseeable scenarios could Kentucky), and by a combination of efficiently and at less cost than result. train and ship (train from West Virginia conventional technologies using coal. First, JEA could repower the existing and eastern Kentucky to Newport News, The proposed project would Unit 2 steam turbine without DOE Virginia, and ship from Newport News demonstrate CFB technology for electric funding, thereby accepting more of the to Jacksonville). The petroleum coke power generation at a size sufficient to financial risk associated with would be transported by ship from oil allow utilities to make decisions demonstrating the CFB combustor (at its refineries in Venezuela and the regarding commercialization of the own risk, JEA has in fact begun initial Caribbean region. Limestone for the CFB technology. construction activities without DOE combustor probably would be In addition, JEA plans to repower the funding). JEA would also proceed with transported by ship from the Caribbean currently operating Unit 1 steam turbine the related action of repowering Unit 1. region and the Yucatan Peninsula of without cost-shared funding from DOE. Under this scenario, construction Mexico. The Unit 1 steam turbine would be materials and activities and project essentially identical to the turbine for operations would be the same as for the Alternatives Unit 2 and would be repowered about proposed project. The same amount of Congress directed DOE to pursue the 6 to 12 months after the Unit 2 electricity would be generated. Fuel goals of the CCT Program by means of repowering. Although the proposed requirements would be similar except partial funding of projects owned and project consists of only the Unit 2 that the blend of coal to petroleum coke controlled by nonfederal-government repowering (because DOE would might be slightly different, particularly sponsors. This statutory requirement provide no funding for the Unit 1 during the first 2 years of operation. places DOE in a much more limited role repowering), the JEA EIS evaluates the Under this scenario, more of the solid than if the federal government were the Unit 1 repowering as a related action. fuel used could be petroleum coke. owner and operator of the project. In the JEA’s management has established a Second, rather than repowering Unit latter situation, DOE would be target of a 10% reduction in annual 2, JEA could construct and operate a responsible for a comprehensive review stack emissions of each of 3 pollutants new gas-fired combined cycle facility at of reasonable alternatives for siting the (SO2, NOX, and particulate matter) from Northside Generating Station or at one project. However, in dealing with an Northside Generating Station (Units 1, of its other existing power plants. The applicant, the scope of alternatives is 2, and 3), as compared to emissions natural gas would drive a gas necessarily more restricted because the during a recent typical 2-year operating combustion turbine and the heat from

VerDate 112000 13:08 Dec 06, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Notices 76617 combustion would be used to produce Third, rather than repowering Unit 2, very close to, the site boundary, often steam that would drive a steam turbine. JEA could purchase electricity from within 0.6 mile of the proposed CFB Based on modeling projections by JEA, other utilities to meet JEA’s projected combustor stack. Dispersion of the facility would be expected to demand. Under this scenario, no pollutants would reduce atmospheric generate approximately 230 MW of construction activities or changes in concentrations at the nearest PSD Class electricity. current operations would occur within I areas (more than 30 miles from the Under this scenario, Northside Unit 1 the JEA system of power plants, proposed facility) to only a small would remain in its current oil-and gas- including Northside Generating Station. fraction of the maximum modeled fired configuration, and JEA would not JEA would not proceed with the related increases near the site. The increases in proceed with the related action of action of repowering Unit 1. There pollutant concentrations at the nearest repowering Unit 1. Based upon the could be construction activities or PSD Class I areas would be expected to projected cost of natural gas and the changes in operations at the other be only small fractions of the combined cycle unit efficiency, the cost utilities providing electricity to JEA if corresponding Class I increments. of generating electricity at the new the needed electricity capacity were not The combination of the proposed combined cycle facility was projected to already available. project and related action would result be in the same range as the existing oil- This scenario would not contribute to in emissions from the new 495-ft twin- fired units. This resulted in the new the CCT Program goal, would not flued stack that would be twice those combined cycle unit being projected to provide employment for construction considered in the analysis of the operate at about a 60% capacity factor workers in the Jacksonville area, and proposed project alone. However, as (the percentage of electricity actually would not result in reductions of part of the related action, the generated by a unit during a year atmospheric emissions or groundwater elimination of emissions from the compared with the unit’s maximum use at Northside Generating Station. existing 250-ft stack serving Unit 1 capacity). The difference in generating Moreover, existing Units 1 and 3 might would more than compensate for the output between the proposed combined be required to operate at capacity factors added emissions. Compared to existing cycle unit operating at a 60% capacity greater than historical levels if JEA were emissions at Northside Generating factor and the two proposed CFB unable to purchase sufficient electricity Station, a net decrease in maximum combustors operating at a 90% capacity from other utilities. Under those hourly emissions of SO2, NOX, and factor would be supplied by operating circumstances, annual air emissions and particulate matter would result from the the existing units at higher capacity groundwater consumption would addition of the repowered Unit 2 and factors, by purchasing electricity from increase. the limestone dryers and the other utilities, or most likely by a replacement of the existing Unit 1 with Major Environmental Impacts and combination of these two options. If the the repowered Unit 1. Therefore, a Mitigation Measures existing Northside units were to remain decrease in ground-level concentrations operating at their historical levels, then Potential impacts that could result of these pollutants would be expected the addition of a combined cycle unit from construction and operation of the most of the time at most locations in the would result in an increase in JEA proposed project are evaluated in the surrounding area (the overall effect emissions. The more likely scenario is JEA EIS for resource areas including air would be beneficial). However, that the existing units would operate at quality, surface water, groundwater, pollutant concentrations would not higher capacity factors than in recent floodplains and wetlands, ecological decrease for all averaging times at all years, resulting in a larger increase in resources, noise, transportation, solid locations; maximum ground-level emissions compared with historical waste, and cultural and socioeconomic concentrations at some locations could levels and an even larger increase of resources. The following summary increase because the characteristics and most pollutants compared with JEA provides key findings for areas of location of the proposed new stack emissions expected following the potential concern. would be different from those of the repowering of Units 1 and 2 with CFB Air Quality stack currently serving Unit 1. The net combustors. Therefore, even though air impacts could be positive or negative on emissions of most pollutants from the A computer-based air dispersion any particular day at any particular combined cycle facility alone would be model was used to estimate maximum location. less than corresponding emissions from increases in ground-level concentrations Air dispersion modeling also was a CFB combustor alone, the emissions of SO2, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and used to evaluate maximum adverse from the existing oil-fired units would particulate matter that would occur at impacts possible from the proposed result in greater overall emissions under any location as a result of emissions project in conjunction with the related the combined cycle facility scenario. from the CFB combustor and limestone action. Maximum modeled increases in Construction activities and operations dryers for the proposed project (the Unit ground-level concentrations are very would be similar for the gas-fired 2 repowering). Results indicate that similar to those for the proposed project combined cycle facility and the CFB maximum modeled increases are always alone. Maximum increases are always combustors but with notable differences less than 15% of their corresponding less than 15% of their corresponding related to fuel, sorbent, and ash Prevention of Significant Deterioration Class II increments. Because the nearest handling and storage facilities. Under (PSD) Class II increments (standards in PSD Class I areas are more than 30 miles the combined cycle facility scenario, the ambient air for increases in away, pollutants from Northside natural gas would be delivered by pollutant concentrations). One set of Generating Station would be well mixed pipeline; no coal, petroleum coke, allowable increments exists for Class II in the atmosphere, and stack limestone, or lime would be used. No areas, which cover most of the United characteristics would have little effect combustion ash would be generated. States, and a much more stringent set of on ground-level pollutant This scenario would not contribute to allowable increments exists for Class I concentrations in these areas. Therefore, the CCT Program goal of demonstrating areas, which include many national a net decrease in pollutant emissions advanced, more efficient, economically parks, monuments, and wilderness resulting from the proposed project in feasible, and environmentally areas. Maximum concentrations conjunction with the related action acceptable coal technologies. generally occur at locations along, or would be expected to improve air

VerDate 112000 13:08 Dec 06, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00012 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07DEN1 76618 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Notices quality, albeit by a very small amount, and the proposed project without the influx of brackish or saline groundwater at the nearest PSD Class I areas. related action. from deeper aquifers. Ozone (O ) concentrations during Regarding potential cumulative air 3 Floodplains and Wetlands quality impacts, results of modeling 1993–97 at the nearest monitor located regional sources and the proposed about 5 miles north-northwest of No impacts from flooding would be project indicate that no exceedances of Northside Generating Station were expected to occur, and proposed national or state ambient air quality always less than 90% of the 1-hour activities would have a negligible effect standards would be expected if the NAAQS. Because changes in NOX and on floodplain encroachment. A category proposed project were implemented. volatile organic compound (VOC) 3, 4, or 5 hurricane in Jacksonville is a Florida standards are the same as the emissions from the proposed project low-probability event that, if it National Ambient Air Quality Standards alone or in conjunction with the related occurred, would have serious (NAAQS) except for annual and 24-hour action would be less than 1% of consequences for Northside Generating Station. Although the effects of storm standards for SO2, for which the Florida emissions in Duval County, they would standards are more stringent. During the not be expected to lead to any surge and waves that would occur along 6-to 12-month transition period before exceedances of the 1-hour NAAQS for the beaches would partially be mitigated the Unit 1 repowering, the 24-hour O3 at that monitoring location. at Northside Generating Station by (1) Regarding toxic air pollutants, its inland location, (2) the presence of average SO2 concentration is estimated to be as high as 97% of the findings indicate that the proposed the beach ridge along the dune line, and corresponding Florida standard. This project alone or in conjunction with the (3) Blount Island, the first floor of the large concentration results from related action would not lead to any station could be inundated by this aerodynamic downwash effects caused exceedances of, or close approaches to, unlikely event. Ecological impacts to wetlands from by the proposed 200-ft tall combustor guideline values for noncarcinogenic the proposed project would be minor structure that would induce downward effects from toxic materials. Further, including both the inhalation and because no more than 1.8 acres of motion on the exhaust gas emitted from isolated hardwood wetland habitat the 250-ft stack serving the existing Unit ingestion pathways, the maximum annual cancer risk to a member of the would be lost during construction of the 1 and the 350-ft stack serving the public resulting from dioxins, furans, ash storage area, and disturbance of salt existing Unit 3 (exhaust gas from the and other carcinogenic substances marsh habitats during construction of proposed 495-ft CFB combustor stack emitted during operations was the solid fuel delivery system would be would not be subjected to appreciable estimated to be less than 1 in 1 million negligible. Wetlands associated with the downwash because the stack is taller). (risk from lifetime of exposure estimated upper salt marsh communities would During the 6- to 12-month transition to be less than 3 in 100,000); given the not be measurably affected because period before the Unit 1 repowering, upper-bound assumptions in the nearly all of the conveyor system for JEA has committed to reduce maximum estimate, the risk would probably be solid fuel delivery would span these hourly SO 2 emissions from the existing less. habitats using existing structures and Unit 1 by nearly 93% when operations would involve no clearing or Water Resources commence for the proposed project. earthmoving activities. Although some This reduction, which would be Because Unit 2 has not operated since pilings might need to be installed at the accomplished by using natural gas and 1983, the proposed project would upper fringes of the salt marsh and in fuel oil with an SO2 emission rate increase the demand for cooling water. San Carlos Creek, any impacts resulting averaging no more than 0.143 lb/MBtu After Unit 2 is repowered, the demand from piling installation would be very (effectively, a blend with a sulfur by the entire 3-unit plant would be localized and temporary and should not content averaging no more than 0.13%), approximately the same as when the measurably affect the normal structural would assure that the maximum 24- three units operated together from and functional dynamics of the salt hour average SO2 concentration would approximately 1978 until 1980. The marsh and nearby estuarine ecosystems. not exceed the Florida standard. sustained flow of the back channel of As a mitigation measure to offset the Estimated SO2 concentrations for the St. Johns River would not be loss of 1.8 acres of wetlands, JEA would other averaging periods are less than depleted by this diversion because purchase slightly greater than 3 acres of 60% of their respective standards. The nearly all of the withdrawn cooling wetlands from an offsite mitigation bank annual average NO2 concentration is water would be returned to the river and would restore 1 acre of salt marsh, less than 40% of its NAAQS. The 24- after passing through the condensers. which together would result in a net hour and annual averages of particulate The amount of heat discharged to the St. gain in the amount of wetlands. In matter are less than 65% of the NAAQS, Johns River would also increase as a addition, JEA plans to set aside and even though ambient background consequence of the proposed project. preserve 15 acres of undisturbed, particulate concentrations for both However, the size of the thermal plume uplands maritime oak hammock along averaging periods are over 40% of the would not increase because the west bank of San Carlos Creek. By NAAQS. simultaneous operation of all three units preserving the land, JEA would Results of modeling regional sources would increase the discharge velocity maintain habitat for wildlife, help and the proposed project in conjunction and enhance mixing. protect the water quality of the creek, with the related action of repowering Operation of the proposed project and leave a high-quality forested buffer the existing Unit 1 indicate that would reduce by 10% the groundwater area in a developing industrial area. maximum concentrations are always consumption from the upper Floridan less than corresponding concentrations aquifer by Northside Generating Station, Ecological Resources without the related action. For example, which would decrease the rate of With regard to threatened and the 24-hour average SO2 concentration decline of the potentiometric surface of endangered species, manatees are of the for regional sources and the proposed that aquifer. As a result, more most concern. Impacts on this species project in conjunction with the related groundwater would be available to local from construction of a new fuel and action is 91% of the Florida standard, users, and water quality of the aquifer limestone unloading dock are unlikely compared to 97% for regional sources would be stabilized because of reduced because manatees probably would not

VerDate 112000 13:08 Dec 06, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00013 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Notices 76619 regularly frequent the dock area due to project site [Rule 62–330.200(2)(c), unit trains. If all coal were transported the paucity of submerged vegetation Florida Administrative Code]. by train, the 6 new one-way train trips such as seagrasses and emergent per week would exacerbate impacts Socioeconomic Resources and cordgrasses in the immediate vicinity of associated with noise, vibration, and Environmental Justice the dock. Potential impacts resulting blocked roads at on-grade rail crossings from operational activities such as Construction and operation of the resulting from existing train traffic. docking of vessels would also be proposed project would not result in These impacts are a source of concern unlikely. The potential for manatees to major impacts to population, for residents of Panama Park, North be trapped and pinned between the employment, income, housing, local Shore, and San Mateo. Project-induced dock and a vessel are minimal because government revenues, or public services train traffic would increase total the dock would be supported by widely in Duval County. The percentage of movement on the CSX line paralleling spaced support pilings rather than Blacks and Asians in Duval County is U.S. 17 by about 5% and would increase consisting of one long continuous greater than for Florida as a whole. traffic on the spur line from U.S. 17 to structure. Because manatees generally Because there are relatively few people the St. John River Power Park and avoid swift currents and prefer slow- in poverty or Blacks and Asians living Blount Island by approximately 8%. moving or stagnant water, they would in the census tracts surrounding the Additional train traffic could be not frequent the main discharge area in proposed site, no disproportionately minimized by relying more heavily on the back channel of the St. Johns River high and adverse impacts to low income barges and ships for coal transport. As where currents are relatively swift. In or minority populations would occur. In mentioned earlier, economic projections addition, it is very unlikely that all units particular, because of the relatively low indicate that the marine fuel delivery for both the St. Johns River Power Park number of minority and low-income mode is more likely. residents in the vicinity of the proposed and Northside Generating Station would Noise be shut down simultaneously, thereby project, very few members of these minimizing the probability that groups would experience the adverse During construction of the proposed manatees would be harmed by a cold effects associated with increased road project, noise levels would increase shock event. and rail traffic and related noise. from the present operational levels. Construction would primarily occur Transportation Four or five juvenile loggerhead, adjacent to the existing turbine building. Kemps Ridley, and/or green sea turtles Construction-induced traffic during The noisiest periods of construction (a listed endangered species) became the peak traffic hour would not exceed would be during steam blowouts and trapped in the Northside Generating available capacity except for the section during the operation of a pile driver and Station intake basin on one occasion of Heckscher Drive from State Route 9A other construction equipment. Except during summer 1997 (the turtles were to Drummond Point (just west of possibly during steam blowouts and released unharmed). In order to prevent Eastport Road). Without mitigation the possibly during operation of equipment any further occurrences of juvenile congestion experienced on this segment used to construct a nearby segment of a turtles entering the intake structure, would be significant. Accordingly, JEA conveyor, construction noise should not where they might become trapped, JEA has committed to encourage carpooling appreciably change the background installed on the intake trash rakes a and suggest alternate routes to and from noise of nearby residences, interfere finer grid of mesh bars (welded wire the site. The increased traffic would also with outside voice communications, or screen on 6-in. centers contrasted to the result in noticeable congestion on New exceed the limitations of Rule 4, Noise old 12-in. centers). The denser grid has Berlin Road, especially at the Pollution Control, promulgated by the excluded turtles of sizes similar to those intersection of Ostner and New Berlin Jacksonville Environmental Protection observed from entering the intake basin Roads. To avoid a significant impact, Board (1995). This rule limits daytime and becoming trapped. JEA has committed to monitor traffic at construction noise levels to 65 dB(A) at Cultural Resources the above-mentioned intersection and to residential property. place a police officer at the intersection JEA likely would perform continuous, Because the area in the vicinity of the to direct traffic during peak times, if low-pressure, high-velocity steam proposed project is rich in needed. Should the presence of a police blowouts. Although this activity would archaeological resources and the officer prove inadequate to control be conducted around the clock, noise excavation of undisturbed land could project-induced traffic, JEA has further levels at the nearest residences should affect important archaeological artifacts, committed to pursue authorization of a be below levels of concern, because this both a cultural resources assessment temporary traffic signal at that type of blowout, uses low-pressure survey of the proposed project site and intersection. steam rather than high-pressure steam. a follow-up Phase II investigation were Based on current projections, marine However, because JEA’s steam blowout conducted. These studies found that transportation would be the most plan has not been finalized, JEA has there are no potentially significant economic means of delivering solid fuel committed to installing mufflers if high- historic or archaeological sites located and limestone for the proposed project. pressure steam blowouts are conducted, in the area that would be disturbed by Consequently, no more than one 90-car or, if mufflers are not installed, JEA has the proposed project. Under the terms of train per week would be required to committed to measuring the noise levels the Submerged Lands & Environmental transport coal for the proposed project, at the nearest residences and ensuring Resource Permit that would be issued and this could be offset by decreased that the levels would conform to the by the Florida Department of rail deliveries and corresponding Noise Pollution Control ordinance Environmental Protection (FDEP), JEA increased waterborne deliveries for limits. would be required to notify the operations at the St. Johns River Power The project-induced increased appropriate agencies [the St. Johns River Park. However, in the less likely event movement of trains through the local Water Management District, the FDEP, that all necessary coal would be area would be accompanied by high- and the State Historic Preservation transported by rail, up to 3 additional decibel train whistles and rattling rail Officer] immediately upon discovery of trains per week would be required for a cars. Train noise is a source of concern any archaeological artifacts on the total of 6 new one-way trips by 90-car for residents of Panama Park, North

VerDate 112000 13:08 Dec 06, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00014 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07DEN1 76620 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Notices

Shore, and San Mateo. One local noise, vibration, and blocked roads at scenario under the no-action alternative. resident has reported the level of train on-grade rail crossings. This scenario is nearly identical to the whistles as being 108 dB(A) and the Under the second scenario, in which proposed project [e.g., in both cases level of rattling rail cars as being up to JEA would construct and operate a new there would be a 10% reduction in 85 dB(A). As mentioned in the gas-fired combined cycle facility at annual stack emissions of each of 3 transportation section above, additional Northside Generating Station or at one pollutants (SO2, NOX, and particulate train noise could be minimized by of their other existing power plants, matter) from Northside Generating relying more heavily on barges and there would be no train, marine, or Station and a 10% reduction in the total ships for coal transport. truck traffic associated with fuel and annual groundwater consumption of the sorbent delivery. No combustion ash station]. Consequently, under the first Waste Management would be generated and there would be scenario, environmental impacts would The preferred alternative for no truck traffic to remove ash from the be very similar to those of the proposed management of the combustion ash site. Consequently, impacts related to project except that there could be less would be to sell it as a by-product to traffic noise and disruptions would be train traffic and more ship and barge offsite customers. An aggressive minimized. Air emissions would be traffic to deliver the fuel because more marketing program would be expected to increase compared with of the solid fuel used could be implemented to maximize the quantity historical levels because of the petroleum coke. Assuming that there sold. If more than approximately 70% of operation of the combined cycle facility would be fewer train trips, the potential the ash could be sold over the 30-year in addition to the existing Northside impacts associated with train noise, lifetime of Northside Generating Station, units operating at the same or higher vibration, and blocked crossings would the 40-acre storage site would be capacity factors. Therefore, air be reduced under the first scenario. sufficient for complete containment, emissions under this scenario would Under the second scenario of the no- and disposal of the material would not generally be greater than those for the action alternative, even though air be an issue. Additional permanent proposed project. Changes in emissions of most pollutants from the disposal space would be required if JEA concentrations of pollutants in the combined cycle facility alone would be cannot sell more than 70% of the ash. ambient air would depend on the less than corresponding emissions from In the unlikely event that none can be location and project-specific nature of a CFB combustor alone, the emissions sold, an additional 80 to 100 acres of the facility (e.g., stack height and exit from the existing oil-fired units would disposal space would be required over temperature and velocity). Impacts to result in greater overall emissions the 30-year operating life of the facility. cultural resources could be less if there compared to those of the proposed If additional space were required, were less disruption to construct project. This environmental drawback potential locations for disposal include conveyors and other facilities on would tend to outweigh the scenario’s the property directly north of the previously undisturbed land; environmental benefits (e.g., no train-, Northside property, available land at the conversely, impacts could be greater if ship and barge-, or truck-related noise St. Johns River Power Park, and existing more onsite and/or offsite land were from traffic associated with fuel and offsite landfills. Four large landfill sites disturbed because of a need to construct sorbent delivery or ash removal). that are permitted to dispose of or upgrade a pipeline supplying natural The third scenario of the no-action nonhazardous industrial wastes have gas to the facility. alternative would not result in been identified in northeastern Florida Under the third scenario, in which reductions of atmospheric emissions or and southeastern Georgia. JEA would purchase electricity from groundwater use at Northside other utilities to meet JEA’s projected No-Action Alternative Generating Station. Moreover, there demand, there would be no change in could be potential impacts from Under the no-action alternative, DOE current environmental conditions at the construction activities or changes in would not provide cost-shared funding site, and the impacts would remain operations at the other utilities for the proposed project; three unchanged from the baseline providing electricity to JEA if the reasonably foreseeable scenarios could conditions. It is possible that existing electricity were not already available. result (see Alternatives above). Under Units 1 and 3 would operate at capacity Therefore, this scenario is not the first scenario, in which JEA would factors greater than historical levels if considered the environmentally repower the existing Unit 2 steam JEA were unable to purchase sufficient preferred alternative. turbine without DOE funding, electricity from other utilities. environmental impacts would generally Consequently, annual air emissions and Comments on the Final EIS be very similar to those of the proposed groundwater consumption would DOE received comments from the project. However, more of the solid fuel increase. In addition, some impacts to Marine Mammal Commission; the used could be petroleum coke, which resources could result in the Florida Department of Transportation; would be brought to the site by geographical area of the other utilities, the Florida Department of State, waterborne transport. If current particularly if a new facility were built Division of Historical Resources; the projections about the economic to meet the JEA demand or if additional United States Environmental Protection advantages of marine transportation fuel were transported to the other site or Agency (EPA), Region 4; and a member change and rail transport is the primary sites to generate additional electricity. of the local community. means of moving coal to the project site, The level of any such impacts would The Marine Mammal Commission the increased use of petroleum coke depend on the project-specific expressed concern about potential harm under this scenario would result in less characteristics of any facility to northern right whales from collisions train traffic and more marine traffic to construction, the fuel required by the with ocean-going vessels, and deliver the fuel as compared with the facility, and the affected resources in the recommended that DOE consult with proposed project. As a result, there area. the National Marine Fisheries Service to would be fewer train trips through the assess what mitigation measures might neighborhoods in the vicinity of Environmentally Preferred Alternative be needed to protect northern right Northside Generating Station, which The environmentally preferred whales from injuries due to project- would reduce potential problems with alternative would likely be the first related vessel traffic. The Commission

VerDate 112000 13:08 Dec 06, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07DEN1 Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 236 / Thursday, December 7, 2000 / Notices 76621 also expressed concern about potential plans to the Jacksonville permit ensure that worker safety is not harm to manatees during routine engineer. JEA has contacted the compromised. The analysis concluded delivery of fuel to the plant, and Jacksonville permit engineer cited in the that wind speeds during the incident recommended that DOE consult with comment and both parties agree that, exceeded the design threshold of the the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to because project-related construction dome anchoring system during determine whether the use of propeller would not occur along Heckscher Drive construction. Consequently, the guards should be required to protect and because the only access for construction process has been manatees. construction personnel would be redesigned to use additional anchors In regard to the protection of northern located at the New Berlin Road entrance and to delay installation of most of the right whales from collisions with to the facility, JEA is not required to dome covering until after the entire project-related vessels, approximately submit site plans and access plans for structural frame is permanently 50 to 60 ocean-going vessels are the proposed project to the Florida anchored. expected to deliver solid fuel, fuel oil, Department of Transportation. and limestone to Northside Generating The Florida Department of State, Decision Station annually after both units are Division of Historical Resources stated DOE will implement the proposed repowered. In comparison, about 65 that the JEA EIS addresses their action of providing approximately $73 vessels delivered fuel oil to the station concerns in regard to the potential million in cost-shared federal funding in 1998. However, some of these vessels impact on historic properties listed, or support to design, construct, and were smaller river barges that did not eligible for listing, in the National demonstrate the CFB technology enter into the Atlantic Ocean, which Register of Historic Places. The Division proposed by JEA. The project is contains critical habitat for northern of Historical Resources also stated their intended to demonstrate the combined right whales from the shoreline out to as opinion that no historic resources removal of SO2, NOX, and particulate far as 15 nautical miles. As an upper- would be affected by the proposed matter in a promising technology that is bound estimate, the annual increase in action. ready to be commercialized within the traffic in the Atlantic Ocean after both The U.S. EPA, Region 4, stated that range that is most desired by utilities units are repowered would be about 50 their initial comments/concerns on the (250 to 400 MW). The project is vessels, which is less than 2.5% of the draft EIS have been satisfactorily expected to generate sufficient data from 2,047 round-trips made by vessels addressed and that they appreciate the design, construction, and operation to traveling between the St. Johns River mitigation measures that JEA has agreed allow private industry to assess the and the Atlantic Ocean in 1999. The to employ in order to address potential potential for commercial application of ocean-going vessels are not expected to impacts. EPA further stated that they the CFB technology. This decision to continue to have environmental travel at speeds greater than about 12 provide cost-shared funding for the concerns about potential process knots. Because (1) the trips (about 1 per proposed project was made after careful releases and project impacts. DOE week) would be relatively infrequent, review of the potential environmental believes that by implementing the (2) the number of trips would be a small impacts, as analyzed in the EIS. percentage of current traffic, and (3) the mitigation measures described in this vessels would travel slower than the Record of Decision it will address EPA’s Mitigation Action Plan concerns. threshold speed of 14 knots above In accordance with § 1021.331(a) of which most serious injuries to whales A member of the local community expressed concerns regarding the DOE NEPA regulations, DOE will occur, no mitigation measures would be prepare a Mitigation Action Plan that necessary to protect northern right groundwater use, particulate emissions, addresses mitigation commitments whales from collisions with project- and construction worker safety. expressed in this ROD. Copies of the related vessels. Staff with the National Regarding groundwater use, as Mitigation Action Plan may be obtained Marine Fisheries Service have discussed above under Water Resources, from Dr. Jan Wachter, NEPA Document concurred with this assessment. JEA has committed to a 10% reduction In regard to the use of propeller in total annual groundwater Manager, U.S. Department of Energy, guards to protect manatees from vessels consumption at Northside Generating National Energy Technology Laboratory, delivering fuel to Northside Generating Station after Units 1 and 2 are 626 Cochrans Mill Road, Pittsburgh, PA Station, currently propeller guards are repowered (as compared to 1996 levels). 15236, telephone: (412) 386–4809. not used on vessels in the St. Johns Similarly for particulate emissions (see Issued in Washington, D.C., on this 29th River. However, with the Air Quality above), JEA has established day of November, 2000. implementation of the mitigation a target of a 10% reduction in annual Robert S. Kripowicz, measures discussed in the EIS (e.g., the stack emissions of particulate matter Acting Assistant Secretary for Fossil Energy. dock design would allow sufficient from Northside Generating Station [FR Doc. 00–31160 Filed 12–6–00; 8:45 am] space between vessels and the dock (Units 1, 2, and 3), as compared to BILLING CODE 6450±01±P structure such that manatees could emissions during a recent typical 2-year easily avoid being trapped), it is operating period (1994–95) of the unlikely that the proposed project station (Units 1 and 3). These reductions DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY would cause harm to a significant are to be accomplished while increasing number of manatees, even without the total annual energy output of the Golden Field Office; Fiscal Year 2001 propeller guards on project-related station. In regard to the concerns Broad Based Solicitation for vessels. Staff with the U.S. Fish and expressed about construction worker Submission of Financial Assistance Wildlife Service have concurred with safety, DOE believes that this concern Applications Involving Research, this assessment. reflects an accident that occurred in July Development and Demonstration The Florida Department of 2000, while JEA was constructing (at its Transportation stated that the project own risk) the solid fuel storage dome AGENCY: Department of Energy. may have a direct impact on the State associated with the proposed project. In ACTION: Issuance of the Fiscal Year 2001 Transportation System and requested the response to the accident, JEA Broad Based Solicitation for Submission that JEA submit all site plans and access completed a root cause analysis to of Financial Assistance Applications

VerDate 112000 13:08 Dec 06, 2000 Jkt 194001 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 4703 Sfmt 4703 E:\FR\FM\07DEN1.SGM pfrm01 PsN: 07DEN1