To: A2 File ^ Southern Vermont Gas
From: Brian Fitzgerald, Engineering Services
Date: March 3, 1999
Subject: Southern Vermont Gas ^ Combined Cycle
Power Plants
I spoke with Doug Fulle and two other
representatives of Foster Wheeler Environmental,
permitting consultants for the two natural gas
combined cycle plants proposed for Rutland and
Bennington, Vermont. The purpose of the call was
to discuss the process which would be used to
review the applications.
I explained the general requirements of the review
process and discussed the following points.
1. Pre-application modeling protocol submittal:
2. Modeling guidance;
3. Pre-construction monitoring for criteria
pollutants and meteorological parameters;
4. Involvement of federal land manager in permit
process;
5. MSER "top-down" process;
6. Ozone Transport Region requirements;
7. Status of NOx waiver submittal; and
8. Hazardous air pollutant applicability.
I informed the consultants that a pre-application
modeling protocol should be submitted for our
review and comment. We discussed the need to
submit this protocol to the Federal Land Manager
and affected states. We all agreed it would be a
good idea to obtain feed back from these parties
early in the process. The modeling protocol
should contain the models which will be used to
evaluate criteria pollutant impacts and air
quality related values in Class I areas. There
was general discussion on how discrete receptors
would be identified and on how "sensitive areas"
would be assessed.
We then discussed the potential need for
pre-construction monitoring of criteria pollutants
and/or meteorological parameters. I indicated
there would not likely be a need for monitoring of
criteria pollutants but was not certain about
meteorological data. Pre-construction monitoring
is one area which the consultants would like feed
back about as soon as possible. I committed to
getting back to them on the monitoring issue.
The next general area of discussion involved MSER
analysis. I informed them that for NOx and VOC,
if emissions were significant then a LAER type of
analysis is required. For other significant
emissions, a BACT-like top-down approach should be
used. I discussed the desire to look at all
significant emissions in conjunction with one
another to develop the best strategy to keep all
emissions as low as possible. I also indicated a
desire to look at overall plant efficiency when
setting emission standards (lb/MMBTU vs. lb/kw).
Finally, we discussed the evaluation of hazardous
air impacts. While our rules exempt HAC review
for fuel burning equipment combusting gaseous
fuels, it would be a good idea to perform an
assessment of air toxic impacts should the issue
come up during public review or other permit
boards (such as PSB).
Cld
Cc: Paul
Dick
Pete LaFlamme, Water Quality
|