Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA96-029
t AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. County of King ) MARILYN MOSES , being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the 10th day of June ,1996, affiant deposited in the mail of the United States a sealed envelope(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. Signature: 1j C(4, )/n SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this /0 day of 1996. Not Publi 'n and for the State of Washington, residing at 7 , therein. Application, Petition, or Case No.: Appeal of DNS for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility LUA-96-029,AAD The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record HEARING EXAMINER'S REPORT June 10, 1996 OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION APPELLANT: Otto W. Herman, Jr. REBOUND, Inc. File No.: LUA-096-029,AAD LOCATION: 400 S 43rd SUMMARY OF APPEAL: Appeal of Determination of Non-Significance for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Appellant's written request for a hearing and examining the available information on file,the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the May 21, 1996 hearing. The official record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Tuesday, May 21, 1996, at 10:33 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the appeal, Exhibit No.2: Estimated Annual Average Emission proof of posting and publication, and other Table, 5.4-2 documentation pertinent to the appeal. Exhibit No.3: May 6, 1996 letter from Rebound to Exhibit No. 4: May 13, 1996 letter from Valley Ome Almeda at Valley Medical Center Medical Center to Mr. Herman Exhibit No. 5: Puget Sound Regional Council Exhibit No.6: May 21, 1996 letter from Mr. Transportation Pricing Task Force Herman to Fred J. Kaufinan Exhibit No. 7: May 20, 1996 letter from Mr. Thoman Exhibit No. 8: Notice of Construction Permit to Fred J. Kaufman Application for Cogeneration Facility dated February 14, 1996 Exhibit No. 9: March 26, 1996 FAX from Puget Exhibit No. 10: City's project file Sound to Valley Medical Center Otto W. Herman, Jr. Appeal re DNS for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility File No.: LUA-096-029,AAD June 10, 1996 Page 2 Parties are: Representing the appellant,REBOUND,Inc.: OTTO HERMAN, JR.,Executive Director, 2700 1st Ave. #103, Seattle, WA 98121 Representing the City of Renton: MARK PYWELL,Project Manager,200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Representing the applicant,Valley Medical Center: ERIC THOMAN,Attorney, 400 S 43rd Renton, WA 98055 The Examiner explained that the hearing was an administrative appeal held pursuant to Ordinances 3061 and 4065, and was the only administrative review to occur on the matter. The matter can be submitted back to the Examiner for reconsideration if the parties were not satisfied with the decision. The appeal by writ of review is to Superior Court. He stated that the appellant had the burden of demonstrating that the City's action was erroneous, and would have to show clear and convincing evidence that the City's determination was incorrect. At that point the City could respond, if they chose to do so. The applicant to this proceeding would also be given an opportunity to respond. Mr. Herman spoke on behalf of Rebound,whose members are drawn from labor unions throughout Washington. At issue is the adequacy of the environmental review under SEPA and what is required under that. There is a need to differentiate between the responsibilities of the City as a lead agency in that SEPA process during the environmental review and that of other agencies whose authority and jurisdiction and ability to review significant issues from the project are different from that of the lead agency and different from that available under SEPA, and that specifically would refer to the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA). The Environmental Review Committee report states emissions from the facility once construction is completed are regulated by State agencies and no further mitigation is required. That is specifically something appellant is contesting. Appellant believes that the review under SEPA does include air emissions and other factors that are significant environmental impacts from the project, and that in fact is the appropriate point in the permitting process for those to be reviewed. This can be very significant, not only for this project, but for future facilities of this sort. Included in SEPA should be an alternatives analysis and that should look at whether this is as good a way of doing the objective,which in this case would be providing steam, heat and power for the hospital versus other methods of providing those particular resources. Appellant would also like to question in terms of public policy that there be a lot of emphasis on the alternative analysis,that cumulative impacts of a series of projects be studied, and unacceptable standards and impacts for the community not be set. Mr. Thoman testified as counsel for Valley Medical Center. He described the cogeneration facility. The cogeneration aspect is not only will it produce electricity,but it will also throw off heat. The heat will be captured and used by the hospital for steam which will be a double efficiency in terms of operating its hot water heaters and even air conditioners. The purpose of the project for the hospital is to save energy costs. A significant issue is the distinction between this relatively small cogeneration facility and a power plant which is contrasted in the Rebound materials. It is a power plant in terms of producing electricity, but in terms of size and scale and scope, it is by no means comparable to something that Puget Power would build or one of the major utilities would do to sell power. There may at times be an occasion for the hospital to return power to Puget Power, but that is not the initial design of the project. Otto W. Herman, Jr. Appeal re DNS for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility File No.: LUA-096-029,AAD June 10, 1996 Page 3 Applicant believes the City of Renton made the proper decision in terms of deferring to PSAPCA. This project meets PSAPCA's regulations for a project of this size. Valley looked for and sought the most efficient and cleanest technology available. One issue raised addresses expansion and what is labeled as a future generator and that is labeled that way in the PSAPCA submittal. There is no planned expansion,the Board has not considered it and there is no money for it. It is possible there will be a future generator,but it is certainly not planned that way. The space was left for expansion because these engines do require regular overhauls and additional space is handy for the mechanics to work on the engines. It is valuable space and it is planned for that. The Examiner pointed out that although an application or a project meets all permit requirements, it doesn't exempt it from SEPA review or allow summary SEPA review. The fact that this project meets PSAPCA's regulations doesn't entitle the City to rely on that. Those are the issues that obviously should be explored. Testifying for the City, Mr. Pywell stated that staff did review this project,both through pre-application process and through the environmental review process. It was determined that water, sewer and other utilities were available to the site. As far as the review process itself, staff not only discussed this project in-house with various staff members, but also discussed it with members of the PSAPCA to try and determine if the project would have impacts on air quality. Through that review process staff determined and presented to the ERC that this would not have significant air quality impacts,that the facility being constructed would have to run at maximum output 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, in order to be able to produce a significant impact on the air quality. The Examiner asked if impacts would be produced if it did run at maximum for this 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Mr. Pywell responded that it would produce an impact to a level where the PSAPCA would have to review it, but they indicated they would still be able to issue a permit for it. In other words, according to their expertise, it would not cause a significant problem. The Examiner inquired regarding PSAPCA's recommended condition that no other plant boiler be in operation at the same time as the cogeneration engines, and whether there are other projects in the vicinity that might have similar large boilers. Mr. Pywell stated that in the industrial area there are some large buildings that potentially could have boilers or other facilities, but to this date there has been no issue raised regarding the air quality from them in this area that staff would have noted and looked at how this would impact the existing air quality of the area. JOHN RIVERS, Weiland Lindgren, Consulting Engineers, Suite 1400, 600 Stewart Street, Seattle, Washington 98101,testified on behalf of the applicant. He explained the technical aspects of the cogeneration system. He also explained the difference between a power plant and a cogeneration plant and that this cogeneration plant requires a thermal source,that is a use for the hot water and the hot gas that comes out of the engine. It utilizes all the energy in the fuel and it also then makes power that matches what that thermal source need might be. The maximum efficiency of this plant will be like 84%of the energy and fuel being utilized. A power plant utilizes only 30%. This project will not have any waste heat. At this time the plant will not be used for air conditioning. The Examiner asked if the technical type of information Rebound was looking for was available when the appeal was filed,not subsequently added to it-- in other words, did the City have this application that PSAPCA had. The City needed to make a full environmental determination based on the checklist and submissions. If this was part of the submissions by the hospital,then obviously this was available to study. The City has to Otto W. Herman, Jr. Appeal re DNS for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility File No.: LUA-096-029,AAD June 10, 1996 Page 4 make its own independent environmental determination based on the full information that it has and then appellant can also explore and say the City has done it right or wrong. Mr. Rivers responded that the SEPA application was filed with the City in December 1995. The PSAPCA application was filed on February 14, 1996. Mr. Herman received a copy of the application from PSAPCA. Mr. Rivers explained that in terms of federal and PSAPCA regulations,these particular engine units don't even require an air permit. They are smaller than the minimum size required by PSAPCA. Applicant could have opted to go ahead and build the units on the air requirement side, but they made PSAPCA aware that the things were going in. So the permit was prepared and filed basically to inform PSAPCA that a permit was not needed. Closing arguments were then presented by Mr. Thoman and Mr. Herman, and their comments reiterated their previous statements. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this appeal. There was no one else wishing to speak. The hearing closed at 11:45 a.m. FINDINGS,CONCLUSIONS &DECISION Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The appellant,Rebound, filed an appeal of a Determination of Non-Significance(DNS)issued for proposed installation of a cogeneration heat and power plant at Valley Medical Center. The appeal was filed in a timely manner on March 5, 1996. 2. Valley Medical Center,hereinafter the applicant,has proposed constructing a facility on its campus which will generate both heat and power. The current proposal would utilize both products on the applicant's property. The proposed actions were subjected to the City's ordinary SEPA review process. The City, in the course of and as a result of its SEPA review, issued a Determination of Non- Significance for the proposal. The appellant objected to the determination and raised a number of issues concerning the impact on the site and people,particularly with regard to air quality. 3. The appellant is an affiliation of member building trades unions and individuals concerned with social, economic and environmental issues in the community. 4. The appellant claimed there was insufficient information to issue the DNS. They claim there was no analysis of any of the air quality issues and that the ERC did not determine the project's potential impacts as required under SEPA. 5. The Environmental Checklist indicates the proposed complex will be contained within a 6,000 square foot, two story building. The footprint will be 4,500 square feet and the building will be approximately 35 feet tall including its 8 foot mechanical rooftop equipment which will be screened. 6. The building and equipment will be located in a parking lot on the west side of the hospital complex. Otto W. Herman, Jr. Appeal re DNS for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility File No.: LUA-096-029,AAD June 10, 1996 Page 5 8. The Checklist responds to the question: "List any environmental information you know that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal,"with "PSAPCA air permit." The same response is listed for"Other government approvals." 9. The Checklist contains the following under the heading of "AIR": a. "16.5 tons NOx, 40.0 tons CO, 6.3 tons VOC." b. "There are no offsite odors emissions." c. "state of the art control and combustion technology." 10. Under"Energy and Natural Resources"the applicant filled in: "natural gas for generator engines, electricity for power and lighting, hot water for heat." 11. The Checklist notes under environmental risks: "4 engines&waste heat boilers." 12. A geotechnical report was prepared for the site to evaluate site stability. 13. The only mitigation measure imposed was that the applicant pay a fire mitigation fee. 14. The DNS stated: "Air impacts will include the emissions from construction equipment and dust from the grading of project site. During operation of the facility potential impacts would include emissions from the generators. Dust will be controlled by the temporary erosion control measures required by code. Emissions from the facility once construction is completed are regulated by State agencies. No further mitigation is required." 15. Staff and the applicant maintain that the project is sound and will be reviewed by PSAPCA,the agency with air quality expertise. The information submitted for the appeal hearing elaborated on the proposal and the type of pollutants that would be generated,the potential for adding additional generators,the nature of the operation regarding how many generators would operate,would power be sold or distributed off the campus and other information. 16. A review of the original City file submitted for this review does not contain a copy of the PSAPCA application and does not contain any elaboration of the application or Checklist. It does not appear to contain the information that was presented in written and oral submissions at the public hearing. The file demonstrates an absence of any discussion of air quality other than to indicate that it will be reviewed by PSAPCA. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The decision of the governmental agency acting as the responsible official is entitled to substantial weight. Therefore,the determination of the Environmental Review Committee(ERC),the determination by the city's responsible official, is entitled to be maintained unless the appellant clearly demonstrates that the determination was in error. 2. The Determination of Non-Significance in this case is entitled to substantial weight and will not be reversed or modified unless it can be found that the decision is "clearly erroneous." (Hayden v.Port Townsend. 93 Wn.2nd 870, 880; 1980). The court in citing Norway Hill Preservation and Protection Association v. King County Council, 87 Wn.2d 267,274(1976), stated: "A finding is'clearly Otto W. Herman, Jr. Appeal re DNS for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility File No.: LUA-096-029,AAD June 10, 1996 Page 6 erroneous'when although there is evidence to support it,the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed." Therefore,the determination of the ERC will not be modified or reversed if it can meet the above test. For reasons enumerated below,the decision of the ERC is reversed and the matter remanded to the ERC. 3. The clearly erroneous test has generally been applied when an action results in a DNS since the test is less demanding on the appellant. The reason is that SEPA requires a thorough examination of the environmental consequences of an action. The courts have,therefore, made it easier to reverse a DNS. A second test,the "arbitrary and capricious"test is generally applied when a determination of significance(DS) is issued. In this second test an appellant would have to show that the decision clearly flies in the face of reason since a DS is more protective of the environment since it results in the preparation of a full disclosure document, an Environmental Impact Statement. 4. An action is determined to have a significant adverse impact on the quality of the environment if more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment is a reasonable probability. (Norway, at 278). Since the Court spoke in Norway, WAC 197-11-794 has been adopted, it defines "significant" as follows: Significant. (1) "Significant" as used in SEPA means a reasonable likelihood of more than a moderate adverse impact on environmental quality. (2) Significance involves context and intensity. . .Intensity depends on the magnitude and duration of an impact.... The severity of the impact should be weighed along with the likelihood of its occurrence. An impact may be significant if its chance of occurrence is not great, but the resulting environmental impact would be severe if it occurred. 5. Also redefined since the Norway decision was the term "probable." Probable. "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur, ... Probable is used to distinguish likely impacts from those that merely have a possibility of occurring, but are remote or speculative. (WAC 197-11-782) 6. The problem in this case appears that the ERC did not have the information that was provided to this office at the hearing, so that while the information now available might support the DNS, it does not appear that the information was available to the ERC. The official file does not contain much other than the Checklist and project narrative. The project narrative is basically a one paragraph statement. more concerned with the physical dimensions of the building than its contents. The appellant correctly points out that the contents will generate certain pollutants and there is no discussion of the consequences of those potential emissions. 7. While the ERC appears to have deferred to the Puget Sound Air Pollution Agency,the ERC had the primary duty to determine if this proposal might have significant impacts on the quality of the environment, even if it met air pollution controls. In addition,when the ERC was reviewing this proposal there was no indication of whether the project met air quality standards.. They did not appear to have that information. 8. Again,this office can only reflect on the record that it was provided and that record is lacking. If that is what the ERC reviewed,then they could not make a full and fair environmental determination. Otto W. Herman, Jr. Appeal re DNS for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility File No.: LUA-096-029,AAD June 10, 1996 Page 7 9. Since a reviewing body should not substitute its judgment for that of the original reviewing body,this office must remand the matter back to the ERC to determine the environmental significance of this proposal. Recalling the general procedures this office issues to appellants that both "good" and "bad" projects can still have more than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment, such as the installation of sewer lines or parks which will meet all regulations, it does not mean that they are without environmental consequences. 10. Finally,this remand does not require any particular outcome. It only requires the ERC to make a determination after a review of all relevant information and without deferring to another agency unless it passes on its lead agency status for this particular matter. Therefore,the determination below must be reversed and the matter remanded for further consideration. DECISION: The determination of the Environmental Review Committee is reversed and the matter remanded for further consideration ORDERED THIS 10th day of June, 1996. FRED J. MAN HEARING E R TRANSMITTED THIS 10th day of June, 1996 to the parties of record: Mark Pywell Otto Herman, Jr. Eric Thoman 200 Mill Avenue S REBOUND,Inc. Valley Medical Center Renton, WA 98055 2700 1st Avenue,#103 400 S 43rd Seattle, WA 98121 Renton, WA 98055 John Rivers Weiland Lindgren 600 Stewart Street,#1400 Seattle, WA 98101 TRANSMITTED THIS 10th day of June, 1996 to the following: Mayor Jesse Tanner Gregg Zimmerman, Plan/Bldg/PW Administrator Members,Renton Planning Commission Jim Hanson,Development Services Director Art Larson,Fire Marshal Mike Kattermann, Technical Services Director Otto W. Herman, Jr. Appeal re DNS for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility File No.: LUA-096-029,AAD June 10, 1996 Page 8 Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney James.Chandler, Building Official Transportation Systems Division Jay Covington,Mayor's Executive Assistant Utilities System Division Councilperson Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Valley Daily News Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 15 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,June 24,1996 Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may, after review of the record,take further action as he deems proper. Appeal of the Examiner's decision is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 11, which requires that such appeal be filed with the Superior Court of Washington for King County within twenty (20) days from the date of the decision. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. • The Seattle/King County Building&Construction Trades Council • May 21, 1996 The Honorable Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Kaufman: REBOUND, is an affiliation of building trades unions and their individual members, which was organized in 1988 to address community concerns in the areas of environmental preservation, project review, health and safety, and social and economic issues for members in their communities. Among REBOUND's roles is to give a voice to its members who would be directly and significantly ry, impacted by local environmental and land use actions in their individual communities. We have raised this appeal of the Determination of Non-significance (DNS) for the Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility, Project No. LUA-96-005, SA, ECF, at the request of our individual members who reside in the City of Renton and its vicinity. These members will be affected by adverse impacts created by this project. REBOUND is not convinced that the procedures followed to date are properly in conformance with the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requirements, as listed below: 1. Under SEPA, "Agencies shall make certain that the proposal that is the subject of environmental review is properly defined. " WAC 197-11-060 (3) (a) . The proposal, as described in the Environmental Checklist, states that this project is a "6,000 sf building on existing Valley Medical Center Campus. Building will house four natural gas fired engines and boilers which will be used to generate both electricity and steam. " The remaining checklist omits impacts which will result from the burning of natural gas, toxic air pollution emissions, particulate, process water treatment, chemical storage, water use, noise, and aesthetics. 1 2700 First Avenue, #103 Seattle, Washington 98121 1-800-244-9178, (206) 441-7364 or 441-0455 749-M 2. WAC 197-11-060 (3) (a) (iii) requires that "Proposals should be described in ways that encourage considering and comparing alternatives. " The consideration of alternatives is the heart of SEPA. Yet, no discussion regarding project alternatives is contained either in the SEPA checklist, or in the City of Renton's planning file. 3. WAC 197-11-060 (3) (b) states "Proposals or parts of proposals that are related to each other closely enough to be, in effect, a single course of action shall be evaluated in the same environmental document. " Nevertheless, the checklist failed to indicate whether or not this project requires the construction of natural gas and/or water pipelines or sewer connections. 4. WAC 197-11-060 (4) (b) requires that "In assessing the significance of an impact, a lead agency shall not limit its consideration of a proposal's impacts only to those aspects within its jurisdiction, including local or state boundaries. . . . ". The City of Renton erred in its failure to evaluate air quality impacts from this proposal. 5. WAC 197-11-060(4) (c) states that "Agencies shall carefully consider the range of probable impacts, including short-term and long-term effects. Impacts shall include those that are likely to arise or exist over the lifetime of a proposal or, depending on the particular proposal, longer. " In the instance of this project proposal, virtually no impacts were identified, quantified, evaluated, conditioned or mitigated. 6. WAC 197-11-330 (a) (i) requires that the responsible official independently evaluate the responses of any applicant and indicate the result of its evaluation in the threshold determination or the environmental checklist. The Environmental Review Committee Staff Report identified only two impacts for the entire project proposal. An impact fee was assessed to mitigate the increase in fire requirements. Air quality impacts were briefly stated, but were not evaluated, and no mitigation measures were required. No independent evaluation was conducted on any other response by the applicant. 7. WAC 197-11-335 states that "The lead agency shall make its threshold determination based upon information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal. . . . " It allows the lead agency to take one or more of four actions ". . . if, after reviewing the checklist, the agency concludes that there is insufficient information to make its threshold determination. " In this subject application, .the checklist contained sufficient information for the City of Renton to reasonably establish that this proposal could create probable significant adverse impacts. The City, however, did not take actions to obtain additional information. 2 8. WAC 197-11-340 (3) (a) states that "The lead agency shall withdraw a DNS if: (ii) "There is significant new information indicating, or on, a proposal's probable significant adverse environmental impacts; or (iii) The DNS was procured by misrepresentation or lack of material disclosure. . . . " The Notice of Construction Permit Application for Cogeneration Facility for the Valley Medical Center, which was submitted to the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency contains significant information which expands the scope of the project description far beyond what is described or evaluated in the environmental checklist. This information should have been made available to the City for evaluation in arriving at a determination of the appropriate level of environmental review, mitigations and conditions. REBOUND believes a determination of significance would be warranted if the environmental checklist covered all the relevant issues and questions including, those listed below: 1. NOR and VOCs, by themselves dangerous air pollutants, in combination create ozone. This _project will be located in the Seattle metropolitan area air shed, which is currently designated in "non-attainment" for CO and ozone because concentrations for these pollutants exceed allowable levels. According to the application for Notice of Construction which was submitted to the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) , this project proposal has the maximum potential to emit 44.9 tons per year (TPY) of NOR. This exceeds PSAPCA's limitation of 40 TPY of NOR for a "major modification" of an industrial air pollution source, thus indicating that the project will cause a more than moderate impact on the human environment. However, information contained in the SEPA checklist (Section 2 . Air (a. ) ) contains conflicting information, only listing NOR emissions "during construction" at 16.5 TPY. This confusing data is inadequate to establish a determination on this project's potential significance. 2. What will the total annual emissions of NOR, VOCs, CO, and particulate matter be, in tons per year, from all Valley Medical Center sources (including the cogeneration facility, incinerator, disposer/sterilizer, parking garage and other mobile sources, heliport, etc. ) once the cogeneration facility is in operation? 3 . If the net change in air emissions is quantified, how will this project proposal affect the ability of this region to attain compliance with the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency's air quality standards? 3 � 11 4. Valley Medical Center's proposed cogeneration facility has the potential of producing approximately eight megawatts of electricity and emit 44.9 tons per year of NO, (equivalent to 5. 6 tons/year/megawatt) . The Tenaska - Washington II generation project, as permitted for construction in Pierce County, was designed to produce 30 times the electrical output and still emit only 98.9 tons per year of NO, (equivalent to 0.4 tons/year/ megawatt) . The environmental review should find this a significant difference and require mitigating steps to reduce NO, emissions. 5. The SEPA checklist indicates that this proposal will emit 6.3 TPY of VOCs. The PSAPCA indicates that 14 TPY of VOCs will be emitted. This discrepant information must be evaluated. 6. This proposal will emit almost 60 TPY of NO, and VOCs, which combine to form ozone precursors in an area that already contains unhealthy amounts of ozone. 7. In addition to NO, and VOCs, natural gas fired power plants typically emit measurable amounts of Class A and other toxic air pollutants, including several known carcinogens. These include formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, benzene, furans, benzo (a) pyrene, polycyclic organic matter (POM) , and poly aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) . The burning of natural gas in power plants often produce emissions of Class B Toxic Air Pollutants, including butane and xylene. Xylene is . toxic to the human reproductive process and also contributes to chronic health affects. The DNS fails to identify, list, evaluate or mitigate any of these probable toxic air pollutant emissions for this project. It is reasonable to expect that air releases of these materials could occur. It is important to consider these impacts on sensitive receptors, particularly in the nearby neighborhoods and on Valley Medical Center's own patients. 8. Potential sources of toxic air pollution are required by the State of Washington to analyze and compare their potential toxic air pollution impacts with the state's "Acceptable Source Impact Levels (ASILS) " for the different pollutants. The DNS failed to compare the potential concentrations of toxic air pollutants (TAPS) from this project to the applicable ASILs. The DNS failed to established that the emissions were below levels of significance. 9. The DNS failed to establish that this project will have a less than significant impact in its failure to present the project's emissions capacity or to compare the emissions to agency thresholds, or to evaluate the project's impacts on existing air quality. The permitting of an emission source which will emit large amounts of pollutants may conflict with state and federal law, and is prohibited under SEPA. 4 i � I 10. The term "Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) " includes a grouping of many toxic air pollutants. Since this project proposal has the capability to emit about 28,000 lbs/year of total VOCs, it is possible that a significant amount of this tonnage is composed of toxic air pollutants. The DNS failed to study this issue and establish whether the toxic air pollutant impacts from this project are non-significant. 11. This project proposal will emit fine particulate matter (PM- 10) , a substance which is capable of being drawn deep into the lungs and is highly damaging to human health. Studies recently published (some conducted in the Seattle area) , have demonstrated that PM-10 and Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) are more harmful than had been previously considered. The sources of PM-10 include the four exhaust stacks and construction equipment, and truck and automobile traffic generated by this project proposal. The DNS fails to establish levels of PM- 10 and their significant impacts from this project. 12. What chemicals and in what proportions will be used in the glycol cooling circuit? What form of glycol, and what quantity, will be utilized in the cooling circuit? Are' there alternative coolants that may have a lesser environmental impact? 13 . Power plants frequently use and store chemicals such as lubrication oil, biocides, chlorine caustic and acids on site. The potential storage and transport of these hazardous, flammable and toxic materials is a potential significant risk that the DNS. failed to discuss, analyze and mitigate. A comprehensive listing of these materials should be prepared and the full range of potential dangers should be described and safety procedures should be implemented. A discussion of alternative material use should also be included. 14. The construction and operation of the large internal combustion engines, which are the capacity of about 40. truck engines, will generate considerable noise and may constitute a significant adverse impact. This should be fully evaluated, but was not considered in the DNS. 15. The SEPA checklist stated that no future expansion was planned. However, diagram A2 . 1 indicated that listed a fifth generator and boiler which were labeled "future generator" and "future boiler" . These additions will create further environmental impacts which should be evaluated. 5 • 16. Best Management Practices for stormwater and fugitive emissions during construction should be conditioned for this project and compliance with the Department of Ecology's Puget Sound Stormwater Manual should be required. 17. Will Continuous Emission Monitors be installed in each discharge stack? How will actual emissions be monitored? 18. Why were scrubbers not incorporated into the project design? 19. What chemicals, and what quantity, will be utilized in pre- ; treatment of feed water? What chemicals, and what quantity, will be utilized in the exhaust waste heat recovery silencer, including during maintenance? 20. What is the quantity of blowdown? Where will this be discharged? Will blowdown be treated prior to discharge? 21. Has Valley Medical Center submitted applications for the water, sewer and natural gas pipelines/connections necessary for this project proposal? REBOUND appreciates the opportunity to raise these significant issues on behalf of our members and have them considered in light of their potential significant adverse impacts on our members, their families and their communities. REBOUND requests that the DNS be withdrawn, that further evaluation take place and either a full Environmental Impact Statement be required, or if the City has sufficient expertise to internally evaluate and establish appropriate conditions, a Mitigated Determination of Non-significance could be issued that includes all the appropriate measures to limit and mitigate adverse impacts. Since e yours, o Herman,/976—/ Executive Dir opeiu8 afl-cio 6 400 South 43rd Street < '> 1 Renton, WA 98055 7' 206022803450 '� 0:' FAX 206057502593 � -'>��"� ,Valley Medical Center May 20, 1996 The Honorable Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Valley Medical Cogeneration Facility Project No. LUA-96-005,SA,ECF Dear Mr. Kaufman: An organization named"Rebound" submitted a letter dated March 5, 1996 listing objections to the proposed cogeneration project at Valley Medical Center (VMC) and requesting that the Determination ofNon-Significance(DNS)issued February 13, 1996 be revoked. VMC concurs with the DNS finding and, after reviewing Rebound's letter, concludes that the points raised in the letter have no merit. This letter is VMC's response to, or clarification of, the points raised in Rebound's letter. Rebound makes numerous references to the Notice of Construction permit application which was submitted to the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency(PSAPCA). For your convenience, a copy of the application is attached. To facilitate comparison, this letter's headings, organization and paragraph numbering are identical to that of Rebound's letter. Responses and issues will be easiest to compare if this letter and Rebound's letter are reviewed side by side. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA)REQUIREMENTS VMC is confident that the City of Renton, with its extensive experience, completely conforms with the requirements of SEPA. The following comments are noted as further evidence that compliance with SEPA is complete and Rebound's comments have no merit. 1. In this paragraph Rebound suggests that the filed Environmental Check List is not complete. The suggestion is in error. Only environmental areas that ARE impacted by the project are listed on the Check List. Environmental areas that are NOT impacted by the project are NOT listed in the Check List. It was assumed that the purpose of the Check List is to focus on specific environmental affected areas affected by the project and not a long list of environmental affects that have nothing to do with the project. The only significant environmental impact from this project will be air emissions which are jurisdiction of the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency(PSAPCA). As noted in the Check List items A.8 and A.9, a PSAPCA permit is being obtained. Since existing VMC water, chemical storage and other systems will be diverted from present uses to this project, there is no new impact from this project. VMC is very aware that it is a hospital and noise and aesthetic considerations are very important. The cogeneration project will contain noise within a building matching the rest of the VMC campus. The project will not adversely affect VMC Page 1 of 7 noise or aesthetics. 2. The cogeneration plant will supply steam, hot water and electricity to VMC. All three of these utilities are mandatory for VMC operation. The installation of the cogeneration plant will provide VMC with the most efficient means of providing the required utilities. When the cogeneration plant becomes operational, existing VMC boilers currently supplying steam and hot water will be shut down. The cogeneration plant will also be a very high efficiency producer of electricity. The amount of electricity purchased from Puget Power will be reduced, allowing Puget Power to reduce low efficiency power production at fossil fueled power plants. The only alternatives for the cogeneration project are to build or not to build. If the cogeneration project was not an asset to VMC in performing its mission of serving the citizens of the area, VMC would not be interested in building a cogeneration plant. Rebound's assertion that alternatives have not been considered is in error. VMC has considered the alternatives and so has the Federal government. Cogeneration technology is encouraged by the Federal government as a means of improving the nation's energy efficiency. The national energy efficiency, balance of payments, and air quality would all be improved if more organizations followed VMC's example and installed cogeneration. 3. As noted under Item 1 above,the Check List lists only those areas that will be affected by the project. New gas and/or water pipelines or sewer connections will not be required. The cogeneration project will connect to existing connections on the VMC campus. Since the cogeneration project is more efficient than the existing systems, water and sewer use is expected to be reduced somewhat from the current levels. 4. The City of Renton did not err in its failure to evaluate air quality impacts. PSAPCA is the agency that regulates air pollution in this region which includes areas beyond the jurisdiction of.the City of Renton. The cogeneration project has filed an air permit application with PSAPCA. 5. VMC is a long term facility. Natural gas is the most benign fuel currently available. The cogeneration plant allows VMC to utilize the gas in the most efficient manner. Fuel burned in a much less efficient utility power plant to produce electricity for VMC will be reduced. The net long term benefit to the nation and the state is a slightly more efficient electric power system resulting in lower fuel use and reduced air emissions. The benefits of this highly efficient energy system will accrue to VMC, the citizens of the region, the state and the nation for many years. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST: OMISSION OF INFORMATION 1. PSAPCA is the agency responsible for air emissions in Renton. All air pollutants are controlled by PSAPCA to standards equal to or stricter than those required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency. Since PSAPCA made and enforces the declaration, it is very aware that this area is non attainment. PSAPCA regulations and requirements Page 2 of 7 reflect the non attainment condition. VMC has prepared and submitted an air permit application to PSAPCA. PSAPCA's granting of a permit provides a ruling about the emissions from the proposed cogeneration plant. In this and other paragraphs Rebound uses selected data from the PSAPCA application. Some of the data is misused. The following discussion of project design and PSAPCA requirements is necessary to put the quoted data and Rebound's objections in perspective. VMC is a hospital. The safety and comfort of VMC patients is the reason for VMC's existence, and therefore of prime importance. The cogeneration project will provide an additional level of security to the VMC facility. Currently electricity to VMC is supplied by Puget Power. As required by State law and hospital practice, three engine driven emergency generators are installed as standbys to provide electricity whenever there is an outage of the Puget Power system. Three boilers are installed to provide steam and hot water. Two boilers supply the steam demands of VMC. The third boiler is a standby in case one of the operating boilers fail. The existing boilers, emergency generators and Puget Power connections will remain in place and be operable at all times after the cogeneration plant is installed. The cogeneration plant will be the new primary source of electricity and heat for VMC. If the cogeneration plant fails completely, VMC will revert to the current system of electricity from Puget Power and heat from the boiler. The existing systems become the first level of standby. The current standby boilers and emergency engine generators become the second level of standby. The cogeneration system will allow VMC to exceed all State and hospital requirements for standby electricity and heat. The planned cogeneration system consists of four engine generator/waste heat boiler modules. Only three engine modules are required to meet all the energy needs of VMC. As per VMC practice, the fourth engine is standby to be used only when one of the other engines fails or is out of service. Normal operation will range from one to three engines in service depending on time of year, outside temperature, number of patients and other factors. The PSAPCA application requires each project to provide two values, (1)Maximum Potential to Emit and(2)Expected Emissions . The Maximum Potential to Emit is calculated assuming maximum operation of all equipment for the maximum amount of time. Expected Emissions are the actual emissions resulting from normal operation. Maximum Potential to Emit is calculated by multiplying maximum emissions per hour by maximum hours of operation per year. Each engine will operate an average of 8010 hours per year. If each engine operated at full load during that time the engines would emit the 44.9 tons per year noted in Rebound's letter. The calculations showing the derivation of that value are shown on Table 6-3 of the attached PSAPCA application. Rebound's quoted number neglects the rest of the story. If the cogeneration system is in operation, the boilers are not. Shutting down the boilers reduces their Maximum Potential to Emit NOx by 29.04 tons per year. The VMC site Maximum Potential to Emit with cogeneration and the resulting shut Page 3 of 7 down of the boilers is 15.86 tons of NOx per year. Several other emission scenarios are possible and are described in the PSAPCA application. The Maximum Potential of Emit is a numerical value used in various ways by PSAPCA. It is not related to the real world situation at VMC. As noted above, the fourth engine is a standby while the Maximum Potential to Emit calculation assumes it will be running. Instead of operating continuously at full load as the calculation assumes, the cogeneration plant will actually follow the electricity and heat requirements of VMC. The Expected Emissions of NOx will be vary with the operating conditions and are described in detail in the PSAPCA application. Contrary to Rebound's contention, the data submitted to PSAPCA most certainly is NOT "inadequate to establish a determination on this project's potential significance". PSAPCA has the data and the tools for using it and is doing so at this time. 2. The lower value of 6.3 tons of VOC's (based on sales literature) on the Check List, was the best available at the time. The Maximum Potential to Emit value for VOC on Table 6-3 of the PSAPCA application is 13.92 tons per year less .58 tons per year reduction from boiler shutdown resulting a net of 13.34 tons per year. VMC assumes that Rebound derived the quoted 14 tons per year by rounding the initial, not the net, value up. The PSAPCA limit for VOC is 40 tons per year. 3. This paragraph provides misleading information. It is correct in stating that NOx and VOC are ozone precursors. Because of that the PSAPCA emission limits for each of these is set at 40 tons per year. The paragraph implies that NOx and VOC are additive, they are not. And even if they were the 44.9 of No.1 plus 13.34 of No.2 do not add up to 60. 4. The Check List stated in items A.8 and A.9 that a PSAPCA permit will be prepared. For this project to proceed the DNS and the PSAPCA permit is required. The project can not proceed if either one is denied. It is VMC's understanding that the two agencies work is complimentary, not redundant. Rebound's comments are not valid because PSAPCA is establishing the air quality impacts. 5. Rebound reviewed the PSAPCA application but apparently misunderstood the descriptions. VMC is proposing to build a COGENERATION plant for its own use. Rebound talks about a POWER plant. There are differences of purposes, scale, and technology between the two. A power plant is designed and built for the sole purpose of generating electricity. Energy discharged for the power plant is considered waste heat and disposed off as efficiently as possible in large bodies of water or to the air by use of cooling towers. A conventional thermal power plant will convert approximately 30% of the energy in the fuel into useful energy. A state of the art combined cycle gas turbine plant will convert approximately 40% of the energy in the fuel to useful energy. Power plants have economies of scale, the larger the plant the lower the cost of producing electricity. The power plant development industry Page 4 of 7 will not, in general, consider developing a power plant smaller than 50 megawatts (MW). Power plants burn gas in boilers or gas turbines. Some of Rebound's observations about power plants are correct. Rebound is not correct in equating VMC's cogeneration plant to a power plant. The purpose of a cogeneration plant is to maximize energy efficiency by using as much of the energy in the fuel as possible. The power plant extracts electrical energy from the fuel and throws the rest of it away as waste heat. The cogeneration plant extracts electrical energy and as much of the heat energy as possible from the fuel. Instead of economies of scale, cogeneration plants have economies of efficiency, the better the use of the fuel the more economical the cogeneration plant. The VMC cogeneration plant can potentially convert up to 84% of the energy in the fuel to useful energy. The VMC cogeneration plant will have engines instead of gas turbines or boilers. Each of the 4 engines is rated at 900 kilowatts(or.9 MW) each for a total installed capacity of 3.6 MW and actual operating capacity(with 3 engines used) of 2.7 MW. As noted by Rebound, power plants emit various quantities of various materials. Emissions are partially a function of the constituents of the gas, the combustion technology, combustion temperature, excess air and many other factors. The EPA and the industry has been studying power plant emissions for decades. These studies have resulted in the numerous environmental regulations applicable to power plants. Many pages of detailed regulations for power plants, their boilers and their gas turbines are in effect. VMC is considering a cogeneration plant, not a power plant. The engines proposed for the VMC cogeneration plant are very different from the boilers and gas turbines of power plants. They are different enough that the EPA has never published regulations applicable to engines. There are no Federal regulations applicable to the engines proposed for VMC. PSAPCA, recognizing its responsibility to the area, has exceeded Federal EPA standards and imposed engine emission standards for this region. VMC is a resident of the region and is interested in local air quality. VMC has selected engines that have the lowest emissions in their class. The Bay Area Air Quality Management District(San Francisco, CA. area) has ruled that the engines and their control systems are Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for emission control. The manufacturer guaranteed engine emissions will be 18 times lower than PSAPCA requirements for engines. 6. PSAPCA enforces all the air pollution requirements and regulations of the State. 7. It appears that this item is the same as Item 4 above. 14 tons per year equal 28,000 lbs/year. Federal and State regulations as amended by PSAPCA cover the entire spectrum of pollutants. 8. This project will burn natural gas in an internal combustion engine. Particulate matter is considered to be absent from natural gas. Particulate emissions by engines burning natural gas is considered to be insignificant. Consequently there are no particulate standards. Particulate emitted by the trucks and cars required during the construction period of less than Page 5 of 7 a year will be minuscule. 9. This project will discharge neither cooling water or steam. Engine cooling will be provided by a closed loop radiator system to be mounted on the roof and discharge excess heat to the air in a manner identical to the radiator in a car. Only the required amount of steam will be produced. 10. The various discharges are not discussed in the Check List because they do not exist! VMC takes exception to implications of this and the previous Item 9. Throughout their letter, Rebound quotes extensively from the application submitted by VMC to PSAPCA. The application includes a complete detailed discussion of the existing and proposed energy systems and provides flow diagrams and site drawings. Having examined the information Rebound should be very much aware that this is NOT a power plant and there are NO cooling towers or demineralizers. Utility demands currently satisfied by Puget Power and the boiler plant will instead be satisfied by the cogeneration plant. A large portion of VMC heat currently supplied by steam will instead be supplied as hot water from the cogeneration plant. The amount of steam generated will be reduced to 5,447 lb/hr from the current 11,000 lb/hr. Operation of the existing boiler water treatment system will be reduced by 50%. The high efficiency of the cogeneration plant results in increased use of resources and decrease in waste. 11. Rebound continues to compare the cogeneration project with a power plant. Their generic comments are true for the generic power plant. They are not true for the specific cogeneration plant. The amount of lubricating oil on VMC campus will increase by the approximately 750 gallons,the amount required for the engine crankcases (100 gallons each) and the active day tank(350 gallons). Lubricating oil will not be stored on the VMC site. The cogeneration plant does not require any other chemicals so the change in inventory of chemicals stored on the VMC site will not significantly change with the installation of the cogeneration plant. 12. Noise is addressed in Check List items 7b.1 through 3. Each of the four cogeneration engines is rated at 1274 horse power, equal to perhaps 4, (not 10 as noted by Rebound), truck engines. The major difference between these engines and trucks is that they will be installed inside a concrete building designed to contain noise. Engine exhaust will pass through a steam boiler and a muffler. It will be muffled to a much greater degree than a truck engine. Project design of noise abatement will ensure that the noise levels will not be increased on the VMC campus. VMC is very sensitive to noise. It's noise requirements for past projects have been very stringent. The requirements will not be relaxed for this project. 13. As noted on the Check List, no future expansion is planned. Diagram A2.1 was originally prepared as part of a scope document for bidders desiring to design and construct the project. It was desirable to allow bidders maximum flexibility in details of equipment location and building size. It was reasonably certain that the building size and shape would change as Page 6 of 7 detailed design of the cogeneration plant progressed. Engines and generators must be undergo major maintenance approximately every five years (based on operating hours). Major maintenance requires that the equipment be completely disassembled and all parts examined. In order to restrict maintenance work to the cogeneration building, adequate part lay down space in the building must be available. The definition of"adequate lay down space"is vague and was perceived as an area open to argument and discussion by the various bidders. Requiring room for the future fifth cogeneration system requirement allow VMC to ensure adequate excess building space in a very clear manner understood by all bidders. 14. All local, county and state regulations will be complied with during construction of the cogeneration plant. Based on the above VMC concludes that Rebound misunderstood the information in the PSAPCA application. Issues raised by Rebound are not valid. Rebound's request to revoke the DNS should be denied. Very truly yours, - ,ItfrriPt10 ' AtitedAidet Romulo M. Almeda P.E. Administrator, Support Services Page 7 of 7 ,cr ?13 -33 0 LOH D • The Seattle/King County Building&Construction Trades Council • May 6, 1996 Mr. Ome Almeda Facilities Administrator Valley Medical Center 400 South 43rd Street Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Almeda: During my meeting with Eric Thoman on Friday, May 3 , 1996, I indicated that REBOUND had a number of questions regarding the potential environmental impacts of Valley Medical Center's proposed cogeneration facility. Mr. Thoman advised me to direct these inquiries to you. Responses to the following questions will be helpful to us in our continued review of this project proposal: 1. Figure A2 . 1 indicates that an additional fifth engine and boiler are planned. When will this equipment be installed? 2 . What will the total annual emissions of NOR, VOCs, CO, and particulate matter be, in tons per year, from all Valley Medical Center sources (including the cogeneration facility, incinerator, disposer/sterilizer, parking garage and other mobile sources, heliport, etc. ) once the cogeneration facility is in operation? 3 . Please quantify the net change in air emissions and describe how this project proposal contributes to the ability of this region to attain compliance with the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency's air quality standards? 4 . This project proposal did not address emissions of fine particulate matter. How many tons per year of PM10 will be expelled? 5. What are the predicted maximum air toxic impacts from Type A and Type B pollutants? 2700 First Avenue, #103 Seattle, Washington 98121 1-800-244-9178, (206) 441-7364 or 441-0455 749 M . page two Mr. Ome Almeda May 6, 1996 6. Valley Medical Center's proposed cogeneration facility has the potential of producing approximately eight megawatts of electricity and emit 44 . 9 tons per year of NOR. The Tenaska - Washington II generation project was designed to produce 30 times the electrical output and still emit less than 40 tons per year of NOR! Please explain the comparatively high rate of NOR emissions for Valley Medical Center's project. 7 . Will Continuous Emission Monitors be installed in each discharge stack? How will actual emissions be monitored? 8. Why were scrubbers not incorporated into the project design? 9 . What chemicals, and what quantity, will be utilized in pre-treatment of feed water? What chemicals, and what quantity, will be utilized in the exhaust waste heat recovery silencer, including during maintenance? 10. What is the quantity of blowdown? Where will this be discharged? Will blowdown be treated prior to discharge? 11. What chemicals and in what proportions will be used in the glycol cooling circuit? What form of glycol, and what quantity, will be utilized in the cooling circuit? 12 . Has Valley Medical Center submitted applications for the water, sewer and natural gas pipelines/connections necessary for this project proposal? I look forward to hearing from you at your earliest possible convenience. Si1ely, O . : ./__.77 tto `"Herman r. Executive Dir 'ctor cc: Eric Thoman OWH:gal opeiu8 afl-cio 2 400 South 43rd Street l/ Renton, WA 98055 , 206.228.3450 • ,r',,1, FAX 206.575.2593 -�' Valley `t<. Medical Center May 13, 1996 Via U.S. Mail and Fax: (206) 441-7334 Mr. Otto W. Herman, Jr. Executive Director REBOUND 2700 First Avenue, #103 Seattle, WA 98121 Re: Cogeneration Facility at Valley Medical Center Dear Mr. Herman: This letter is to follow up your letter to Ome Almeda dated May 6, 1996, which was a response to the meeting between you and I on Friday, May 3, 1996. I am very surprised by the questions directed to Ome and I have requested that he not respond. I invited you to submit questions to Ome primarily because you excluded Ome from our meeting and he is the most knowledgeable person to respond to questions about the project. However, the questions that we discussed at our meeting were in the nature of the scope of the project, i.e., the number of engines, the surplus energy that may be generated. I also indicated that Ome would know who the subcontractors would be to the general contractor, Diamond B Constructors, Inc. I anticipated other general questions regarding the due diligence by the hospital in deciding to build this project and selecting the particular equipment (which is the most efficient available today). The questions you have directed to Ome are the very questions that are at issue in the environmental appeal of this matter to the City of Renton. It would be redundant to respond to these questions now. Honestly, I fail to see how the answers to these questions are relevant to the particular goals of your members. If you were to dismiss your appeal I am confident that we could satisfy your environmental concerns. As I stated to you, I am very surprised that you or someone from your organization did not call us or come to a public meeting about this project prior to your filing an appeal. For your information, most of the questions that you have asked in your letter to Ome can be answered in the submittal to Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency dated February 14, 1996. As you know, PSAPCA has approved this project. I am sure that you are aware that PSAPCA is one of the most stringent air pollution control agencies in the United States. Thus, it is a great mystery to Valley Medical Center and the City of Renton why REBOUND would challenge a project that has been given PSAPCA's blessing. If you wu Id like to discuss these matters further, please do not hesitate to call. Ve• rUlyyo .r , Eric J.`f om. Gener.' oun - EJT/cm cc: Ome ,I eda c96/e96/corp t,1 049-596.Itr TABLE 5.4-2 ESTIMATED ANNUAL AVERAGE EMISSION FROM TENASKA WASHINGTON II PROJECT Pollutant Annual Avg. Emission Rates metric tons/year (tons/year) NOx 89.7 (98.9) SO, 49.3 (54.3) CO 82.7 (91.2) VOC 33.5 (36.9) Particulates 46.8 (51.6) j PM,o 44.4 (49.0) Note: The estimated annual average emissions are based on 120 hours operation on No. 2 fuel oil at -6 C° (20°F) ambient temperature and 8,400 hours operation on natural gas at 10 C° (50°F) ambient temperature. Both cases include 300 MMBtu/hr duct firing on natural gas, which is the maximum annual average duct firing rate. The 120 hours operation on No. 2 fuel at -6 C° (20°F) ambient temperature represents the worst-case emission condition; the 8,400 hours operation on natural gas at 10 C° (50°F) ambient temperature represents average case emission conditions near average annual ambient temperature. Total gas turbine use is limited to 8,520 hours per year, or a 97.3% annual utilization factor. The estimated annual average emission rate is equivalent to the maximum potential emissions, because the power plant will be limited by permit to 8,520 hours per year. • ff j' i �{j . .... . :, . •. . 1 . , • ,_,_ . • Draft Environmentai impact Statement , Proposed Tenaska - Washington H , Generation Project . • d : . . . ,, ,_... .. :,...:...„,„:„._. • ..... • ...,: _._ ,,,..)„,„,..,„..._,..i_. ,,...„. ...,,,. • ., ....._••:,....,.......: •.,„...„•-• . :. ......„.„,....,.:.,,,,,,y,,,,? .,, , :•• - •,. . „.,.,•„.,....,.,.!.. .„• .":••...,.. „ „•,.....,„-.„..: . .-, •-„,._....„--...,•:, ...... . ...2..,„...c..•r.'cit 11-7•11' OP•,c,e 1 • ' • . • •- 't•.•*f.. .-f':-I- '' -..-."' ' -':' '''...'---t-..i.i.i.,-- - .0„..,..,‘;:,•i-. '.-••••-.:.:•,:...•,,•••-"-••. •-•••i.i:•,i-i,..-l.1fi.,-p.-.••.-1..-i...f...-.. --••••.•,•••^n•••••:-•^-.7-7•....:.:••••,• —•.,.,......•--. -•-,..4-`.,,•....:t_r=-•..•-'.-.;:'i±::-4 J"t!'',*..''111".--•1"-';;'.. -+•- '''iiii,if.ii iiiT ii..-i•-i,,.,r;,-:.c:.:...—1..'.--.1 • . i -• - ---14-P%-.,'...4..,:.rz4'R;.4.'f-..-,•,,•.•I.1?'i 3•.1r.`r•••:K,-'4A'-.i4%...-1.r•,7,,4'•t-4.•-47 ,. .________--- ..ijc.r...,•••1,4 fr. 7 r r„....i:•:: 1,i t7-1.,- -- ---• --• •3:0 • • . .• . • . ,'• ,••-••• e' : : : , . . ... ' . - -•-"" • -•:14;.•...—. •t ti ill* --. . ... ..• ...- '-'--''' ' ... •1*„;.>Ilk- 0.----,,—,-:..'74,..... .•--or-,°_,..:-:...; •: ..,1,.,.!,..427,131,0, .,, ' "'-',,,OVIr.plovsm„.7;• -z...,•!.....-7,;__. --- . di IMO; i I la, • ' • J--- •t. • _ ,..„:;..„,.. - • • -- '11. ' - 41 - - .•.: , -.1- . •,••:'t! '. • - •. es - ':'..4. ... Alt, .-- --.:-,_ 1.:, . --A ...., .. [.. 1,...- ,•-..,7:- ., • -- .41k, - •`:,•,....•,......_• . . ,7gi 104 ' '. 'i, .. r r:,,-,,:4,1:411-1 ;.If '-, • j____..---.-4111P,th._ '''''''...-__- ,„..'• .11 k r...;:::rg,.7.1-7:i.& •::. ..--.--. rffigeti V.IINtlim.!;• . ----,:.- ''''iPixT..,,,_. I .....,-_______----ores ago<iiii0„, .::.,,rt ..,...-".111 -'' :;11,,:..7:'•::.t''' .4.. 44 \ ..• ", . •.te, -• J- Ilsr2.11....11.1,?.%8:0••'1,41 -, T•--..-, .. ,,..-%' ---.?. -7->• ...1; ... ---- ,- •it''..'4,:::-'.•• ' ''' 441 •. vi_..,.7....o.,....70,0a...t:.ircoap,• - „._ ..it••!.,..? P*....1 ...ipti;11.11 li 1' • ....., ..)IIS .4 roP-411,. , ------• , ..-7-,.. ..• -.:.!7,. .V. k ••-foi.V.P.-coli.-'--111- - ,,,a apb....-00..4.. . . '.„AO • . ____..k•- . . .°..'' --- 4 -- .*....ceig,1•01,,.„;,,o, _ ...0§- 4,00.-- . .-_ . .,• e-....•/- ..s. _.•. . • .71: ,.t. , ....,) . ,. .. .,.L .... . .. ... _._ __ 1., - , 3 , , . DOE/EIS-0194 . , o , ll' t onnevilire . , Auoust 1993 POWER ADMINISTRATION ' b • • . � mn: - ,--i-: ,4 "-FJ•.f" r1.,7•14 fs.. r%,c:v.4i. L:^.,••�u ,-,,,,+�,RFt.,,spy.a•r"0"sz7,1,`,iC;.z,;t p.- _ Y,.,:- �) _ r:-^: `_i.; ' o e f w ti✓, S � ty ; qi. ,,. ^;.' r°•. is;aS`�fi��Y:r.fl .< y.r s'Sd..t-"• ;I .irN:. }./... '.S{'.; rf.._ P'�+ : `,�1 r.ay-f i. F=ia �t :��y> " . :.�• � 1�• [+ n y. Jw•,4r::z < ,p. ri ; >c -uG . : . CI� Y FRENTO �:_ t ifi-/ . s'l, - 'leafing- ed:JKauanJesse Tanner Mayor:- • •• • •.APril4 1996. :Mr. Otto W. Herman, Jr: - : :Mr. Eric Tlioman - - Executive Director - Valley Medical Center - -'` ' : REBOUND -400 South 43rd - ' • - . . • .2.700 First Avenue, #103 . Renton, WA 98055 • • • Seattle, WA 98121 • - - Re: Appeal of Determination of Non-Significance for. . . .. - . Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility _ LUA-96-029,AAD . Gentlemen: - • The appeal hearing in the above matter previously set for.Tuesday,.April 2, 1996, has been continued. We would like.to reschedule the hearing of this appeal for May 7 or May 21. Would you please confer and let this office know which of these dates you agree upon. . Your cooperation is appreciated. - . Sincerely, - "'"U i14...,_____ Fred J. Kagan Hearing Examiner FJK:mm . cc: Mark Pywell, Project Manager Karen Codiga, Development Services • 200 Mill Avenue South-Renton,Washington 98055 - (206)235-2593 - - abThis pacer contains 50%recycled material.25%nest a nsumwr .. FROM REBOUND 04. 18. 1996 10:36 P. 2 • • rg3 CO) INLED3 ' 118 " 1] • The Seattle/King County Building&Construction Trades Council • APR I 8 1996 • kr- r 3 Ph. April 18, 1996 The Honorable Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Kaufman: This letter is to confirm my telephone conversation with Mary Moses this morning, in which 1 indicated that REBOUND will be available on May 21, 1996 for you to hear the Appeal of Determination of Non- Significance for valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility, LUA- 96-029,AAD. REBOUND has communicated with Eric Thoman, counsel for valley Medical Center, who stated that he will also be available on that day. We appreciate your offering of options for rescheduling the hearing for the above appeal, and your accommodation of our attempts to resolve issues. 1417 y, Otto W. Herman, - Executive Direc or cc: Eric Thoman opeiu8 afl-cio 2700 First Avenue,#103 Seattle, Washington 98121 1.800.244-9178, (2013)441-7384 or 441-0455 •® 74.M ***END*** 5). r i=3; o I D 1111 APR 2 21996 I The Seattle/King County Building&Construction Trades Council • g iN REA' 1G EXA 'ER • April 1, 1996 The Honorable Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Appeal of Deternimatiopn of Non-Significance for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility LUA-96-029,AAD • Dear Mr. Kaufman: • The hearing for the above referenced appeal has been set for 9: 00 a.m. .._on Tuesday, April 2, 1996`. REBOUND received a telephone call from Eric Thoman, legal counsel for Valley Medical Center (respondent) , inquiring as to whether or not REBOUND would agree to a rescheduling of the hearing date. Since both parties still have 'outstanding issues, REBOUND hereby requests that the hearing be rescheduled. Thank you for your consideration. Sinc y, a Otto W. Herman, . - Executive Director • cc: Eric Thoman • afl-cio • • 2700 First Avenue,#103 Seattle, Washington 98121 1-800-244-9178, (206) 441-7364 or 441-0455 749,M AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION s Jessica Folkerts , being first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of the VALLEY DAILY NEWS 600 S. Washington Kent, WA. 98032 a daily newspaper published six (6) times week. Said newspaper is a legal newspaper of general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, printed and published in the English language continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Wash- NVUIIliC sir ,,, , ",� ington. The Valley Daily News has been approved as a legal newspaper by order RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for King County. An Appeal Hearing will be held by the The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the Valley Daily News Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular (and not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to the subscribers -neeting in the Council Chambers on the during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a ngton floor City Hall, Renton, wash- ngton, on April 2, 1996 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the following petitions: Notice of Appeal Hearing APPEAL OF ISSUANCE OF DNS-M IN RE: VALLEY COGENERATION FACILITY AAD-96-029 The appellant, REBOUND, appeals t`,e Environmental Review Committee's Cete-- was published on 3—?7-96 mination of Non-significance-Mitigat c (DNS-M)for the Valley Cogeneration Facility project (File No. LUA-96-005,SA,ECF). Val- The full amount of the fee charged for said-foregoing publica ion is the sum of ley Cogeneration proposes to construct a 3,000 sq. ft., two story building to house a 'as-fired cogeneration power plant. The $ 4 11 appellant alleges that the DNS-M was issued in violation of SEPA. Site Location: 400 South 43rd Street. Legal descriptions of the files noted Le le k, alley Daily News above are on file in the Development Ser- vices Division, Third Floor, Municipal Build- ing, Renton. ASubscribed and sworn before me this Zday of �/A A,. , 19 are linvited to bel interested present to said petitions present at the Appeal Hearing to express their opinions. _ Published in the Valley Daily News Wi eL �/l� ` larch 22, 1996. 1334 a �tiN•..•F �`/ . . , se ��..•S............ ►ON F •.(4A Notary Public or the State of Washington �` o`Y p T A R ��•.(p residing at Auburn / a_#. Z_ -•c� \ _-_ k t. * 1 King County, Washington k * • p U B t\(1 �o;•= • `4 vim+., Revised 7,9 O)• O { V97**1'. 31 \.*cl;•o. ``'�.(F WAS;� ® . :. .. CITE _JF RENTON ..LL Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor . • . . Fred J.Kaufman. March 7, 1996 Mr. Otto W. Herman, Jr. Executive Director REBOUND 2700 First Avenue, #103 Seattle, WA 98121 Re: Appeal of Determination of Non-Significance for Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility LUA-96-029,AAD . . . Dear Mr. Herman: 1 The appeal hearing in the above matter has now been set for Tuesday, April 2, 1996, at 9:00 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton,Washington. Should you be unable to attend, would you please appoint a representative to act on your behalf. If this office can be of further assistance, please feel free to write. Sincerely, Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:mm Enclosure . • cc: - Mayor Jesse Tanner Jay Covington, Mayor's Executive Assistant Mark Pywell, Project Manager Karen Codiga, Development Services 200 Mill Avenue South -Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2593 •A -T=-2I ,=))3 n Mm n • The Seattle/King County Building&Construction Trades Council • I , 1 , ::;;:;n J. Kaufman er City of Renton COS — I% 200 Mill Avenue South N Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Kaufman: REBOUND is requesting the appeal of the Determination of Non- significance (DNS) for the Valley Medical Center Cogeneration Facility, Project No. LUA-96-005, SA, ECF, at the request of its individual members who reside in the City of Renton and its vicinity. These members will be affected by adverse impacts created by this project. This appeal is being filed following REBOUND's review of planning documents contained in the City of Renton's Department of Development Services files. REBOUND contends that this material did not contain sufficient information pertaining to various aspects of the project; information regarding project components and environmental impacts was omitted; the City of Renton did not adequately evaluate alternatives, impacts or require mitigation measures; and the City, as the lead agency, erred in making the determination that the proposed project would have no probable significant adverse environmental impacts. • STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT (SEPA) REQUIREMENTS 1. Under SEPA, "Agencies shall make certain that the proposal that is the subject of environmental review is properly defined. " WAC 197-11-060 (3) (a) . The proposal, as described in the Environmental Checklist, states that this project is a "6, 000 sf building on existing Valley Medical Center Campus. Building will house four natural gas fired engines and boilers which will be used to generate both electricity and steam. " The remaining checklist omits impacts which will result from the burning of natural gas, toxic air pollution emissions, particulate, process water treatment, chemical storage, water use, noise, or 2700 First Avenue,#103 Seattle, Washington 98121 1-800-244-9178, (206) 441-7364 or 441-0455 749-M aesthetics. 2. WAC 197-11-060 (3) (a) (iii) requires that "Proposals should be described in ways that encourage considering and comparing alternatives. " The consideration of alternatives is the heart of SEPA. Yet, no discussion regarding project alternatives is contained either in the SEPA checklist, or the planning file. 3 . WAC 197-11-060 (3) (b) states "Proposals or parts of proposals that are related to each other closely enough to be, in effect, a single course of action shall be evaluated in the same environmental document. " Nevertheless, the checklist failed to indicate whether or not this project requires the construction of natural gas and/or water pipelines or sewer connections. 4. WAC 197-11-060 (4) (b) requires that "In assessing the significance of an impact, a lead agency shall not limit its consideration of a proposal's impacts only to those aspects within its jurisdiction,, including local or state boundaries. . . . " The City of Renton erred in its failure to evaluate air quality impacts from this proposal. 5. WAC 197-11-060 (4) (c) states that "Agencies shall carefully consider the range of probable impacts, including short-term and long-term effects. Impacts shall include those that are likely to arise or exist over the lifetime of a proposal or, depending on the particular proposal, longer. " In the instance of this project proposal, virtually no impacts were identified, quantified, evaluated, conditioned or mitigated. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST: OMISSION OF INFORMATION Typically, gas fired power plants emit quantities of oxides of nitrogen (NOR) , carbon monoxide (CO) , volatile organic compounds (VOC) and particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter (PM- 10) . 1. NOR and VOCs, while by themselves dangerous air pollutants, combine to create ozone. This project will be located in the Seattle metropolitan area air shed, which is currently designated in "non-attainment" for CO and ozone because concentrations for these pollutants exceed legal levels. According to the application for Notice of Construction which was submitted to the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) , this project proposal has the maximum potential to emit 44 . 9 tons per year (TPY) of NOR. This exceeds PSAPCA's limitation of 40 TPY of NOR for a "major modification" of an industrial air pollution source, thus indicating that the project will cause a more than moderate impact on the human environment. 2 f However, information contained in the SEPA checklist (Section 2 . Air (a. ) ) contains conflicting information, listing NOX emissions "during construction" at 16.5 TPY. This confusing data is inadequate to establish a determination on this project's potential significance. 2. The SEPA checklist indicates that this proposal will emit 6. 3 TPY of VOCs. The PSAPCA indicates that 14 TPY of VOCs will be emitted. This discrepant information must be evaluated. 3. This proposal will emit almost 60 TPY of NOX and VOCs, which combine to form ozone precursors in an area that already contains unhealthy amounts of ozone. 4. The DNS failed to establish that this project will have a less than significant impact in its failure to present the project's emissions capacity or to compare the emissions to agency thresholds, or to evaluate the project's impacts on existing air quality. The permitting of an emission source which will emit large amounts of pollutants may conflict with state and federal law, and is prohibited under SEPA. 5. In addition to NOX and VOCs, natural gas fired power plants typically emit measurable amounts of Class A and other toxic air pollutants, including several known carcinogens. These include formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, benzene, furans, benzo (a) pyrene, polycyclic organic matter (POM) , and poly aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) . The burning of natural gas in power plants often produce emissions of Class B Toxic Air Pollutants, including butane and xylene. Xylene is toxic to the human reproductive process and also contributes to chronic health affects. The DNS fails to identify, list evaluate or mitigate any of these probable toxic air pollutant emissions for this project. It is reasonable to expect that air releases of these materials could occur. This is important to consider these impacts on sensitive receptors, particularly in the nearby neighborhoods and on Valley Medical Center's own patients. 6. The Sate of Washington requires that potential sources of toxic air pollution analyze and compare their potential toxic air pollution impacts to the state's "Acceptable Soure Impact Levels (Asils) " for the different pollutants. The DNS failed to compare the potential concentrations of toxic air pollutants (TAPS) from this project to the applicable ASILs. The DNS failed to established that the emissions were below levels of significance. 7. The term "Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) " includes a grouping of many toxic air pollutants. Since this project proposal has the capability to emit about 28, 000 lbs/year of total VOCs, it 3 is possible that a significant amount of this tonnage is composed of toxic air pollutants. The DNS failed to study this issue and establish whether the toxic air pollutant impacts from this project are non-significant. 8. This project proposal will emit fine particulate matter (PM- 10) , a substance which is capable of being drawn deep into the lungs and is highly damaging to human health. Studies recently published (some conducted in the Seattle area) , have demonstrated that PM-10 and Total Suspended Particulates (TSP) are more harmful than had been previously considered. The sources of PM-10 include the four exhaust stacks and construction equipment, and truck and automobile traffic generated by this project proposal. The DNS fails to establish levels of PM- 10 and their significant impacts from this project. 9. Most steam and electrical generating facilities have cooling towers or radiators which expel steam and waste heat. This project has the capacity to generate excess steam, especially during the "Power Demand Following" operating procedures as indicated in the PSAPCA permit application. During this operational status, the power plant may be a source of PM-10 and total suspended particulates (TSP) , to the degree that steam and cooling water which contains solids are emitted. 10. Power and steam generating plants, like the proposed project, typically use and discharge large amounts of water, and potentially expel cooling tower blowdown water. If cooling tower will be used, the plant's water heating processes may concentrate by a factor of 10 the amounts of pollutants and solids that are already present in the intake water, and will be discharged into the sewer system. A variety of toxic chemicals, including fungicides, biocides, chlorine and zinc may be added to the effluent as part of the plant's water treatment processes. Demineralized water wastes and wastes generated by pre-treatment of boiler feed water, may also be discharged. These water wastes have the potential to contain large amounts of pollutants, including but not limited to chlorides (salts) , which may have a significant impact on the environment. In addition many municipal sewer systems ban discharges of cooling water. The DNS does not evaluate any of these water use and discharge issues potentially associated with this project. 11. Power plants frequently use and store chemicals such as lubrication oil, biocides, chlorine caustic and acids on site. The 4 potential storage and transport of these hazardous flammable and toxic materials is a potential significant risk that the DNS failed to discuss, analyze and mitigate. A comprehensive listing of these materials should be prepared and the full range of potential dangers should be described and safety procedures should be implemented. A discussion of alternative material use should also be discussed. 12 . The construction and operation of the large internal combustion engines, which are the capacity of about 40 truck engines, will generate considerable noise and may constitute a significant adverse impact. This should be fully evaluated, but was not considered in the DNS. 13. The SEPA checklist stated that no future expansion was planned. However, diagram A2. 1 indicated that listed a fifth generator and boiler which were labeled "future generator" and "future boiler" . These additions will create further environmental impacts which should be evaluated. 14. Best Management Practices for stormwater and fugitive emissions during construction should be conditioned for this project and compliance with the Department of Ecology's Puget Sound Stormwater Manual should be required. For the reasons stated above, REBOUND requests that the DNS for this project proposal be revoked and that the full scope and significance of impacts be analyzed in an environmental impact statement. Sincerely, e) Otto W. Herman, Jr. Executive Director opeiu8 afl-cio 5 CITY OF RENTON CITY TREASURER REG/RCPT : 02-32476 C:03-05-1996 CASHIER ID : H 04:40 pry A:03-05-1996 8000 MISCELLANEOUS REV $75.00 HE APPEAL/LUA-95-005 000.500.00.338.58.00.000000 TOTAL DUE $75.00 RECEIVED FROM: REDOUND CHECK $75.00 TOTAL TENDERED $75.00 CHANGE DUE $0.00 MAR 26 '96 02:37PM PUGET 50UND R1Fz • r. I/4 - ?•4 ()4 1.4\. o y 16.14. Tel..,11k • Puget Sound Air Pollution Control rency 110 Union Street, Suite 500, Seattle, WA 98101-2038 • FAX Date: March 26, 1996 To: Valley General Hospital From: Fred Austin Attn: Romulo Almeda, Administrator-Support Phone: 206-689-4055 Services FAX Number: 440.61575-2593 FAX: 206-343-7522 NOC#6409 Here.is a copy of the DRAFT permit language for NOC 6409. Number of pages including cover page: 4 MAR 26 '96 02:37PM PUGET SOUND AIR P.2/4 r v , • Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Notice of Construction Worksheet NOC Number: 6409 Reg.No. 16155 Source Name: Valley Medical Center Date Received: 2/15/96 Due Date: 3/8/96 Source Location: 400 S 43rd St,Renton 98055 Engineer: F Austin Inspector: D Gribbon Compliance Issues: Yes❑ No 0 A. Project Description Cogeneration Plant consisting of(4) 898 kW Jenbacher JMS 320-GS-NLC engines (1274 hp, 20 cylinders, 2970 cu.-in. total),NG fired 8,767,824 BtuTi,with(4) 1.79 MMBtu/hr Waste Heat Boilers. B. Fees Invoiced for$1,200 ($300/boiler) • C. SEPA Review City of Renton D. Emission Estimate 1. ACTUAL EMISSIONS (WORSE CASE) Estimated Actual Emissions Page 6-9 NOx=29.83; CO=59.67; VOC=9.25 tpy 2. POTENTIAL TO EMIT Max Potential Page 6-13 (Table 6-3)with Jenbacher guarantee: 1274 hp; Form S-A=> 8,767,824 Btu/hr 8010 hr/yr;454 gm/lb; 2000 lb/t) • guaranteed values g/hp-hr; NOx=1.00; CO=2.00;VOC(NMHC)=0.31 4*(1.00 g/hp-hr)*(1274 hp)*(8,010 hr/yr)-(454 gm/lb)*(2000 lb/t)} = NOx=44,9 tpy; CO=89.8 tpy; VOC=13.9 tpy Max annual values based on guarantee values with 4 engines operating full time without existing boilers operating. • a) PRODUCTION RESTRICTIONS Limit hours to 8010 hr/yr per engine to be synthetic minor. MAR 26 '96 02:37PM PUGET SOUND AIR P.3/4 Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency NOC Worksheet • Page 2 of 3 E. .Applicable Regulations • 1. PSAPCA REGULATION 1 ARTICLE 6 2. STATE WAC 143-4 • 3. FEDERAL SIMILAR TO PROPOSED 40 CFR 60, SUBPART FF F. Technology Review BACT, RACT, LAER • 1. GENERIC BACT NO 2. SIMILAR TO 3. CASE-BY-CASE BACT YES G. AMBIENT Impact Analysis 1. GENERIC MANUFACTURE'S GUARANTEE VALUES 2. SCREEN RESULTS H. Public Notice Requirement Possibly Recommend • 1. Operating Permit or`PSD No J. Recommended Approval Conditions • 1. VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER (VMC) SHALL NOT EXCEED 8010 HOURS DURING ANY 365 DAY PERIOD FOR EACH COGENERATION ENGINE AND MAINTAIN AN OPERATIONS LOG THAT IS RETAINED FOR AT LEAST 2 YEARS. 2. THIS COGENERATION SYSTEM AND ANY OTHER PLANT BOILER SHALL NOT BE IN NORMAL OPERATION AT THE SAME TIME. 3. VMC SHALL NOT EXCEED THE FOLLOWING LIMITS FROM EACH ENGINE: NOX=1.00 GRAM/HP-HR; C0=2.00 GRAM/HP-HR; VOC(NMHC)- -0.31 GRAM/HP-HR. 4. SOURCE TEST METHODS ARE 40 CFR 60, APPENDIX A, METHODS 7E, 10A AND 25B. 5, VMC SHALL SUBMIT A COMPLIANCE TEST PLAN TO PSAPCA WITHIN 120 DAYS OF THIS APPROVAL, FOLLOWING REGULATION I, SECTION 3.07 TO VERIFY CONDITION NO. 3. • 6. OPACITY SHALL NOT EXCEED 5% FOR A PERIOD OR PERIODS AGGREGATING MORE THAN 3 MINUTES IN ANY 1 HOUR. • K. Other Comments • NOC Number MAR 26 '96 02:38PM PUGET SOUND AIR P.4/4 , Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency NOC Worksheet Page 3of3. • Has the source seen Date: this: Done By: • Date: Inspector Review: Date: • Reviewed by: Date! Manager Review: Date: G:IENGRINOCINOCWKS.DOC • • • NOC Number Puget Sound Regional Council PSRC • TRANSPORTATION PRICING TASK FORCE Thursday, May 23, 1996 8:30 - 10:00 a.m. -- , Puget Sound Regional Council - 6th Floor Board Room " Agenda. ` 1. Transportation Financing Reform White Paper* Progress to Date/ Preliminary Findings ', Ralph Cipriani / Nick Hockens Discussion All Note: At the May 9, 1996 meeting of the Task Force we had intended to begin reviewing the preliminary findings pertaining to annual transportation costs in the central Puget Sound region, but we ran out of time. In preparation for the May 23, 1996 meeting, the Chair requested that we mail out materials in advance to give members time to review the materials in advance. Enclosed are handouts of several charts and graphs noting the costs we have identified to date and also some related information regarding fuel prices and efficiency. 2. Next Meeting Date/Workscope Revision Discussion All • Current Composition of Transportation Pricing Task Force Councilmember Maggi Fimia, King County, Chair(TPB) Councilmember Bob Edwards, King County Suburban Cities(TPB) Dan Finn, TMA Alliance(TP8) . Councilmember Nona Ganz, King County Suburban Cities(TPB) Virgina Gunby, 1000 Friends of Washington (GMPB) • Linda Hoult, Snohomish County Tomorrow(TPB) Councilmember John Manning, City of Seattle(TPB) Renee Montgelas, WSDOT(TPB) Councilmember Dave Russell, King County Suburban Cities(GMPB) Preston Schiller, The Sierra Club(TPB) Commissioner Alice Tawresey, Washington State Transportation Commission (TPB) *Supporting material attached • loll Western Avenue.Suite 500•Seattle.Washington 98104-1035•(206)464-7090• FAX 587-4825 0 Preliminary Findings :. Understanding Transportation Costs Transportation Pricing Task Force May 23 , 1996 Prepared by Puget Sound Regional Council Transportation Costs ► Public ► Personal ► Social Public Costs ► Maintenance & Operations ► Preservation & .Improvements ► Debt Service ► Roadway Land Use*1 ► Municipal Services* *Not considered in traditional cost-benefit analysis Traditional Annual Public Expenditures Central Puget Sound Region $1,400,000,000 ;x:y..r'%z,p✓; ..�„,"P¢r$:�:•`al ,,Imilcd.rie.4%_:.,'a wx• n.t;«a, -+y., 1 air e7.'.. t.r4ANT 2 1. $1 200 000 000 $1,000,000,000r ti y $800,000,000 °z �� � xis '� � $600,000,000 $400,000,000 — $200,000,000 $0 , Debt Service El Preservation&Improvements Maintenance&Operations Source:MTP Financial Element Lost Property Tax & Development Opportunities from Roadways Central Puget Sound Region ► Total Centerline Miles 16,700 State 1,100 r> City and County 12,900 v' Other 2,700 ► Annual Opportunity Cost $555 million Source:WSDOT HPMS Files:Cost estimate based on Litman(1995) Municipal Services Annual Cost, Central Puget Sound Region ► Police ► Fire ► EMS ► Planning ► Total Cost $208 million Source:Total estimate based on Litman(1995) • Adjusted Annual Public Costs rw+sistapwlMNla.+tsa4n`e._.ki.fa.. w.!n'YeN.N/Prk]iC,W�.tYv.'f6M1' afskYesA-RW w Includes Municipal Services & Roadway Land Value • $2,000,000,000 • >s ,N% „‘NNN\ • $1,500,000,000 $1,000,000,000 km ;. $500,000,000 • so 4 ' Roadway Land Value 9 Municipal Services Debt Service Preservation&Improvements Maintenance&Operations • • Personal Costs • • ► Operating Costs 1> Gas / Oil i> Maintenance r Tires ► Ownership Costs t> Tax, License, Registration Depreciation 1> Insurance • 1> Finance Charge • Annual Personal Expenditures :.: tnsr wws�.� ..• �; atrw� �: w as w s :,r.,OW,463tOrV,W1104.1i'A 414414411V4 Central Puget Sound Region ► Automobile $9,708 million • Vehicle Ownership Costs Vehicle Operating Costs ► Transit / Ferry Fares . $ 114 million ► Total $9,822 million Source:American Automobile Association(1996),MTP Financial Element Consumer Expenditures •iNVAMII.4464MOS .aighur00ur1/4 »#4,41. : 00wy: Seattle Metropolitan Area, 1993-1994 Food/Beverage 14% err. Transportation 18% • Housing 33% 1.4 _,rE y y. G'• r. "F :if Health Care 4% 4. kK ••'� ' • t Other 6% , w Entertainment 7% 5%Apparel �', � Personal Insurance,Pension 13% • Source:Bureau of Labor Statistics Public & Personal Annual Expenditures Central Puget Sound Region wvvvvz $10,000,000,000 $8,000,000,000 C $6,000,000,000 $4,000,000,000 22.2.2.22 $2,000,000,000 _� SO Public Only Public &Personal 2 Personal Expenditures Roadway Land Value Municipal Services >;;5: Debt Service • Preservation&Improvements Maintenance&Operations Source:MTP Financial Element,AAA • II Social Costs ► Environmental D Air, Water, Noise Pollution D Solid Waste I . D Land Use D Energy ► Systemic D Parking D Congestion I> Accidents I> Equity / Barrier Effects . . Air P011ution Annual Cost, Central Puget Sound Region ► Health ► Environmental ► Aesthetic / Recreational ► Total costs $1,110 million Source:Litman j Stormwater Runoff / Flood Control Annual Cost, Central Puget Sound Region ► Low estimate: $46 million ► High estimate: $115 million Source:WSDOT In Litman(1995) 1 I II i II II I I I 11 Solid Waste ,,, „...„:„..,,,.....„.....T.,.. I ,I ' Moderate Risk Waste: Composition and Collection Costs ► Auto-related wastes Antifreeeze 7% compose over 70% of ' , , y° -, 1 4. Batteries 15% regional moderate risk fi g ou so°i° waste �F � I z� y Other 5% ► 1994 regional cost of j ,, �4 a collectingauto-related II ; `� '.' ' = Paints 15% wastes: $4.4 milhon 1i ° ICleaners 5% Adhesives 1/° I I Pesticides 2% j ' I i I I Source:Washington Department of Ecology L I I dI I,1 I II Traffic Accidents .I , , , , ,, , , Central Puget Sound Region, 1994 i ► Deaths I ► Injuries , I ► Property. Damage . ► 'Estimated Economic Cost $1,110 million I Source:Washington Traffic Safety Commission,National Safety Council 1 Annual Parking Costs Central Puget Sound Region ► Residential $971 million ► Commercial / Retail $ 1 , 111 million ► Total $2,082 million Equity / Barrier Effects • ► 8% of the region's households (84,000). lack vehicle access ► 7% of the region's residents (200,000) are 70 or over ► 4% of residents (66,000). have disabilities limiting mobility Source:1990 US Census " Total Annual Costs Central Puget Sound Region Public $2,084,264,000 Maintenance/Operations $597,874,000 Preservation/Improvements $699,688,000 Debt Service $57;702,000 Municipal Services j $208,269,000 € Land Value $555;384,000 x :,; fsn • Personal $9;822,395,000 ',.: �M Vehicle Operating $1;851;2,80,000 ?®reoria,g publtol3% Vehicle Ownership $7;857,000,000 Transit/Ferry Fares , $1.14,1'15,000 A a z Social $4;353,858,000 °w k ; Air Pollution $110,768,000 Water Impacts $46,000,000 -` Solid Waste* $4,460,000 Accidents* $1,110,000,000 Parking $2,082,690,000 Total $16,399,489,000 *These estimates may include some double counting;they indicate the magnitude of externalities and do not reflect official estimates. i i I � I Related Factors !I. ► Declining Real Gas Prices ► Declining Motor Fuel Tax Revenues ► Inefficient Energy Use I � Washington Gas Prices Less in 1993 than in 1970: 2.5 2 1.5 6R _ 1 - 0.5 0 I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 i 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1993 Source:US Department of Energy. Price includes federal and state motor fuel taxes. Washington Motor Fuel Tax Adjusted for Fuel Efficiency 0.5 - r ErS I I I I I 1975 1977 1981 1983 1984 1990 1991 Source:MTP Financial Element • Combined State and Local Gasoline Tax Rates Vat � f 5 �� iz� Y -."'+•'".^x•ik. Y 1- ,:�i.k^%i3' ..,5s�' 4 �g s. [a 4 v!- {{:. _ � # •+ ak E,� $ ; h% �"t �,"„'at,�`"`�. "Sa n,:•K u,�;M"i 4.x '�„rd'}, .CY c o-y. g i ,� s��ah• bids 3 'Yb-` ,{ '-i:;='�`";•;s'i: t ,s-'r k:'} p . 3 ilttr • .., ,�� .,j.,•Y.��Y. .�:i:l`^Y�Yy,p=�A.k�'_�'.y'; ,; ,h'?^^� _ f -i J.�°',"`t°,•�� Z a•O Higher Combined Rate • o v ®Same Combined Rate Lower Combined Rate • Source:WSDOT Financial Planning Office Comparing US Transportation •. Efficiency • • • Autos(Per Capita) :-. ' PMT(Per capita) Energy Use* US 0:6 •13500' .. 54 • France • '041 7800 16 Italy •.:. %..:; ..: • 7400 • 14 Sweden 0:42 '7800 21 UK 0:35 7000 19 • West Germany: :•.. :;; • : ` :;U.5 . 6900 21 Source:Saving Energy in US Transportation,Office of Technology Assessment. *Energy use=Millions of BTU's per capita. • Methods for Calculating Annual Transportation Costs Cost Source/Formula Amount Public $2,084,264,000 Maintenance/Operations MTP Financial Element $597,874,000 Preservation/Improvements MTP Financial Element $699,688,000 Debt Service MTP Financial Element $57,702,000 Municipal Services Litman: $0.009 x Annual VMT1 $208,269,000 Land Value Litman: $0.024 x Annual VMT1 $555,384,000 Personal $9,822,395,000 Vehicle Operating AAA: $0.08 x Annual VMT1 $1,851,280,000 Vehicle Ownership AAA: $4,3652 x Registered Vehicles' $7,857,000,000 Transit/Ferry Fares MTP Financial Element • $114,115,000 Social4 $2,271,168,000 Air Pollution Litman: $0.048 x Annual VMT1 $1,110,768,000 Water Impacts Litman citing WSDOT: low estimate$46 million, $46,000,000 high estimate$115 million Solid Waste Disposal Washington Department of Ecology $4,400,000 Accidents Washington Traffic Safety Commission using $1,110,000,000 National Safety Council estimates Parking Litman: Internal (residential)=$0.042 x Annual $2,082,690,000 VMT1; +External(commercial/retail)=$0.048 x Annual VMT1 Travel Time Costs' Not included Noise' Not included Equity/Barrier Impacts' Not Included Land Use Impacts' Not Included Total4 $16,399,489,000 1Annual VMT=23,141,000,000 (central Puget Sound region). 2Vehicle ownership costs based on a 4-year/60,000 mile retention cycle. 3Total registered vehicles= 1,800,000(central Puget Sound region). Estimate does not include commercial vehicles. 4Social costs can be prone to include doubling of some public and private costs. They are provided here to show the magnitude of"externalities", not as strict estimates. 5Methods to ascertain these costs vary considerably and depend on data that is not currently available (e.g., regional land use data),therefore they are not included. O:ITRANS\NICK\FU LLCOST.TBL ss i. ,,. ::. -. f.'.y,,: f'« \ ..": . u� . ..,.� a1Y1 1n a , ._• .it,fr l�i. , }yl Fi`; ? .r«`. 1\ ,i. r• .f. NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION ; t PERMIT APPLICATION �l„ t.. FOR ,l1i x: COGENERATION FACILITY l FOR THE ' ' 4i VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER ,, 1B '�' Renton, Washington k 9 t 'di rk ty. Valley ,. \ ' � . Medical rl� M + 1 Center yktil rt, SUBMITTED TO ,f. 1 PUGET 11. SOUND "u AIR POLUTION CONTROL AGENCY FEBRUARY 14, 1996 , , 4.: 1 NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION COGENERATION FACILITY TABLE OF CONTENTS COVER LETTER PSAPCA FORMS SECTION 1 Form P Form S Form S-A Environmental Checklist EXISTING FACILITIES SECTION 2 Figure 2-1 Facilities Location and Site Map Figure 2-2 Average Monthly Steam Flow Drawing P1 Existing Process Diagram, Wmter Flows Figure 2-3 Average Monthly Electrical Demand EXISTING EMISSION SOURCES SECTION 3 Attachment 3-1 PSAPCA Registration Certificate Figure 3-1 Existing System Emission Flow Diagram Table 3-1 1994 Boiler Emissions SELECTED COGENERATION SYSTEM SECTION 4 Drawing P2 Cogeneration Process Diagram, Winter Flows Drawing Al-1 Site Plan Drawing A2.1 Floor and Roof Plans PSAPCA REGULATIONS SECTION 5 Exhibit 5-1 PSAPCA Letter Exhibit 5-2 Selected PSAPCA Regulations Table 5-1 engine Nox Standard COGENERATION PROJECT EMISSIONS SECTION 6 Figure 6-1 Cogeneration System Operating Limits Figure 6-2 Cogeneration Emissions Flow Diagram Table 6-1 Cogeneration System Expected Operation- Thermal Demand Following Table 6-2 Cogeneration System Expected Operation-Power Demand Following Table 6-3 Cogeneration System-Maximum Potential Emissions Exhibit 6-1 Bay Area Quality Management District (BACT) Drawing E 11516-3 Technical Diagram Exhibit 6-2 LEANOX Combustion Control System Exhibit 6-3 Hydrocarbon Emissions • TOC-1 I NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION PERMIT APPLICATION COGENERATION FACILITY TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) JENBACHER ENGINE DESCRIPTION APPENDIX A JENBACHER ENGINE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION APPENDIX B VAPORPHASE HEAT RECOVERY BOILER APPENDIX C TOC-2 460 South 13rd street Renton, WA y9055 206.225•34504-'`;`FAX 206.575•2593 - Valley :,.;-; Valley it _tit '' Medical Center February 14, 1996 Mr. Fred Austin Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency. 110 Union Street, Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98101-2038 Re: Valley Medical Center Air Permit Application Dear Mr. Austin: Enclosed is a Notice of Construction Permit Application dated February 14, 1996, for the cogeneration facility to be located at Valley Medical Center(VMC) in Renton, WA. We discussed the Preliminary version of this Application dated January 10, 1996 during our meeting on January 10. This application incorporates the suggestions of that meeting and replaces the Preliminary Application. Please destroy the Preliminary Application. Your letter of January 18, 1996 notes that, after review of the Preliminary Application, Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA), has determined that the requirements of Regulation I, Article 6,New Source Review apply to this installation. We do not agree with the determination for the following reason: 1. Article 6 applies to all sources except those sources excluded in Exhibit A of Section 5.03. 2. Exhibit A(4) excludes all internal combustion engines less than the size thresholds of 44 FR 43152 7/23/79. 3. The engine sizes selected for this project are less than the size thresholds of 44 FR 43152 7/23/79. 4. Therefore the engines for this project are excluded under 44 FR 43152 7/23/79 and Exhibit A of Section 5.03. Article 6 does not apply to this project. The regulations and selected engine parameters are examined in detail in Section 5 of this Application. VMC has been, and intends to remain, a good citizen of the Puget Sound area. The selected technology is the best available. We have therefore decided to go through the formal process of obtaining a PSAPCA permit for this project. The Jenbacher engines selected by VMC for this project are state of the art. They are designed for the lowest emissions while at the same time providing highest thermal efficiencies. This is achieved through use of a patented LEANOX combustion control system that allows the engines to meet all emission standards without the use of catalysts or other"end of pipe" control devices. The selected engines, though extensively used throughout Europe, are the first application in the Northwest. We I TI Mr. Fred Austin Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency February 14, 1996 Page 2 of 2 assume that the application of engines that meet emission criteria without the need of the "end of pipe" devices required by other engines will be viewed by PSAPCA as advancing the state of engine technology in the Northwest. The engine control technology and its qualification as BACT is discussed in Section 6 of the application. Very truly yours, VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER Romulo M. Almeda, P.E. Administrator, Support Services l SECTION 1 1 • PUGET SOUND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY ENGINEERING DIVISION • HO Union Street,Suite 500 . Seattle,WA 98101-203S -1 Telephone: (_06)689-4052 L, Notice of Construction. and Application for Approval FORM M P Be sure to complete items 39,40,41,& 43 before submitting Form P. W��Ncr use ONLY) r VV'1 DATE N/C NUMBER SIOE I REG.NO. VAR.NO SIC.NO COS.NO. GRIO NO. UTM ' I. TYPE OF BUILDING (Chace,' I. STATUS OF EQUIPMENT(Chace) ~PLICANT , rXNe+ D Esistinp OXMA , D Existing Cl Altered D Relocation VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER 3. COMPANr (OR OWNER) NAME B. APPLICANT ADDRESS • 'VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER 400 SOUTH 43RD ST. , RENTON, WA 98055 4. COMPANY (OR OWNERI MAILING ADDRESS 9. INSTALLATION ADDRESS ' 400 SOUTH 43RD ST. , RENTON, WA 98055 1400 SOUTH 43RD ST., RENTON, WA 98055_. ' 5. NATURE OF BUSINESS 10. TYPE OF PROCESS HOSPITAL I COGENERATION EQUIPMENT (ENTER ONLY NEW EQUIPMENT OR CHANGES.ENTER NUMBER OF UNITS OF 1 ' EQUIPMENT IN COLUMN 'N0.OF UNITS.'COMPLETE FORM 'S'FOR EACH ENTRY.) . 1 ; I 11. NO. SPACE HEATERS OR 14. NC. 16. NO. 16. NO. BOILERS OVENS I I MECHANICAL EQUIP. I MELTING FURNACES OF UNITS (Complete Form S.A.) OF uNRS OF UNITS OF UNITS `i I ENGINES/WASTE HEAT BOILERS OVEN IaI AREAS la1 .►OT • 12. NO. 1 INCINERATORS IIb1 PAINT&AXING 11)1 BULK CONVEYOR 101 REVERSE=ATORT OF UNITS (Complete Form 5-81 (Cl PLASTIC CURING ICI CLASSIFIER lc: ELECTRIC INDUC/RESIST Ial $10) LITHO COATING OVEN IaI STORAGE BIN (01 CRUCIBLE ' NO. I OTHER SYSTEMS llel DRYER lel SAGGING lei CUPOLA )NITS II) ROASTER III OUTSIOE BULK STORAGE III ELECTRIC ARC (a1, DEGREASING.SOLVENT I0l KILN ICU LOADING OR UNLOADING la) SWEAT 1 (DI ABRASIVE BLASTING Int MEAT-TREATING MI• BATCMING (n) OTHER METALLIC 1 (CI OTHER—SYSTEM III OTHER 01 MIXER (SOLIDS) I') GLASS IdI III II 1 OTHER It I OTHER NON METALLIC of UNITS !GENERAL OPER.EQUIP,) of UNITS IGENERALOPER.EQUIP.I or UNITS(GENERAL OPER.EQUIP.)17. NO. CF.UNITS' OTHER EQUIPMENT ill CHEMICAL MILLING (I) GALVANIZING (k) ASPHALT BLOWING (al SPRAY PAINTING GUN (DI. PLATING (g: IMPREGNATING (I) CHEMICAL COATING IDl SPRAT ICOTM OR ROOM r 1 1C1 DIGESTER (I+ MIXING OR FORMULATIN (m COFFEE ROASTER lc: FLOW CC ATING (al Dar CLEANING (I) REACTOR• I(n) SAWS t PLANERS tel FIBERGLAS'a)NG ' , ies. FORMING OR MOLDING (1I STILL (o) STORAGE TANK MI OTHER ' CONTROL DEVICES (ENTER NUMBER OF UNITS OF EQUIPMENT IN SPACES IN COLUMNS. COMPLETE A FORM R FOR EACH ENTRY.) • • NO. I CONTROL DEVICE CONTROL DEVICE I 21. NO. I CONTROL DEVICE I OF F NO. I CONTROL DEVICE ' OFF UNITS OF UNITS OF UNITS UNITS ' Us-- SPRAY CURTAIN lal AIR WASHER lal, ABSORBER lal IDEMISTER (Dt CYCLONE (DI wET COLLECTOR Ibl, AOSORBER ro1 BAGHOLSi Iel MULTIPLE CYCLONE lel VENTURI SCRUBBER lel FILTER PADS ICI ELEC.PRECIPITATOR to) INERTIAL COLL.—OTHER Idl IaI AFTERBURNER Iles OTHER ,23. BASIC ECUIPMEN7 COST 24.. CONTROL EQUIPMENT COS. 2s. OMIT HOURS 26. GAYS OF OPERATION (C..c'e1 tlmiel $4,750,000 (Esa ( IIN BASIC COST FROM?4HRS. au to •M M T w s I bOQgn6)6 INCL� -7. ESTIMATED STARTING OATS OF CONSTRUCTION: I28. ESTIMATED COMPLETION DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: - MARCH 1995 MARCH 1996 29.RAW MATERIALS (Litt Itartln9 Rtat.rlai u,.a In process)!IRMsY4.. ANNUAL AMT. J0. PRODUCTS (Lim Eno Prooucial ANNUAL PROD. NO FUELS (Type and amount) NIT UNITS FUEL-N 11177.677—. ,866,505" rit + ---79,000 0 )xwM/ )K I I•-• STEAM & HOT WATER i0057J,351 )THERMS/YR _. I I.-. I I I._. 1 I I._. I 1. i Construction Application FORM P ill Nonce of PP STACKS OR VENTS (LIST NUMBER.TYPE.AND SIZE OF VENT) `1 I OIMENS!ONS(INCHESI 34. LENGTH Maul OF OPENING 32. HEIGHT ABOVE f• 11. VOLUMES `I 31. NO. I GRADE IFT.) EXHAUED GTH IOR AMI I 35. WIDTH OF UNITS IaCFMI 40 3889 max 1 Circular Pipe 14inc1hes nal 4 I F U When 0,eratin in diamater 1 .• �Ipl I FLUEESS i 1Ic! I PROCESS OR GENERAL EXHAUST I I I IQI I PROCESS OR GENERAL VENTS I I I ial I SKYLIGHT OR WINDOW i I �'If) I EXHAUST WOOD iIl 101 I OTHER _ FLOW DIAGRAM .136. FLOW DIAGRAM INSTRUCTIONS: • • (a) FLOW DIAGRAM MAY BE SCHEMATIC.ALL EQUIPMENT SHOULD BE SHOWN WITH EXISTING EQUIPMENT SO INDICATED. ' (b)SHOW FLOW DIAGRAM OF PROCESS STARTING WITH RAW MATERIALS USED AND ENDING WITH FINISHED PRODUCT. ' (c) IF MORE THAN ONE PROCESS IS.INVOLVED TO MAKE FINISHED PRODUCT.SHOW EACH PROCESS AND WHERE THEY MERGE. (a) INDICATE ALL POINTS IN PROCESS WHERE GASEOUS OR PARTICULATE POLLUTANTS ARE EMITTED. (.) FLOW CHART CAN BE ATTACHED SEPARATELY IF NECESSARY.(DRAWINGS MAYBE SUBMITTED INSTEAD IF DESIRED). i (T) SHOW PICKUP AND DISCHARGE POINTS FOR HANDLING OR CONVEYING EQUIPMENT. I • - SEE ATTACHED FIGURE 6-2 ° ' ---- — • - - — -- • i I I i - - — • - I + I I j i , ...... _ - • • i i i .---- •- •• - . —- ••- • • • • 37. LIST OF ATTACHMENTS AND ACCOMPANYING DATA OR COM+AENTS: Forms SA,S Project Description • Project Drawings - ' 38. CEIITIFiCATION: I.THE UNDERSIGNED. DO HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS APPLICATION AND THE ACCOMPANYING FOu1S.' PLANS. AND SUPPLEMENTAL DATA DESCRIBED HEREIN IS.TO THE BEST OF MY BNOWLEDGE.ACCURATE AND COMPLETE_ I ao. DATE J5. SIGNATURE � Jate. P..ONE I 31. TYPE QR ►41NT NAME �4i. TITL- 5(206)251-514i Administrator-Support Service • PUGET SOUND AIR. POLLUTION CONTROL•AGENCY • Engineering Division . 110 Union Street,Suite 500 • SeattIe,Washington .98101-2038 • (206) 689-4052 .... NOTICE of CONSTRUCTION & APPLICATION.::for APPROVAL: :-;:FO RM S For ea use • FOR BaSIC'PROCESS EQUIP1fE�IT Agency. Date N/C# *Note: Information required by Section la must b7 completed for this form to be accepted for review. 1 a.Complete the [x] 1 [A 2 [ ]3 [ ]4 [x] 5 [ 1 6 b.Company(or owner)Installation Address Sections Indicated• [ 17 [ A [ 19 [ 110 [ 111 [ 112 400 South 43rd St. Renton, WA 98055 c.Company(or owner)Name d.Applicant Valley Medical Center Valley Medical Center e.Prepared by(name and title) John Rivers, f. epared (signagiret' g.Phone Principal Engineer-Wieland Lindgren e" (206)441-5172 2 a-PROCESS EQUIPMENT b.Title c.Make&Model d.Dimensions(LxWxH) Engine Generator Jenbacher JMS 320-GS-NLC 24'x6'x8' e.#of Units; Rated Capacity f. g.Auxiliary Equipment h.Connected to: 4, Units, 898KW Each Waste Heat Boiler Engine Exhaust 3 a. b. I c. d. i e. f. I g.Equipment I h.Connected to: 4 a- BURNERS b.Type of Burner,Fuel c.Make&Model d.Rated Capacity , e.#of Units;Ignition Method f. g.CFM Exhausted (Temperature) h.Connected to: °F) 5 a.STACKS, VENTS. AND b Typeof Vent c.Dime 'ons d. EXHAUST OPENINGS wate Heat Boiler Exhausct rei nch Diameter x 15' above Roof e. 00f Vents; aterial of f. g. CFM Exhausted (Temperature) h.Connected to: 4,ructtonMSteel 3RR9 ( �Rq °F) Waste Heat Boiler 6 a-TANKS AND KETTLES b.Type of Tank,Material c.Dimensions(LxWxH)in inches d. [Surfacej Clo [ Area sq]Open e.tof Tanks:Material of f. g.Auxiliary Equipment h.Connected to: onstruction 7 a. FANS b.Type of Fan(designate blade) c.Make&Model d.Motor Data RPM HP e. of Fans;Material of f. g.CFM Exhausted (Temperature) h.Connected to: nstructton C °F) 8 a- OVENS & FURNACES b.Type of Oven or Furnace c.Make&Model d.Rated Capacity e. Materialf.of Construction ( °� 9 a. OPERATIONAL DATA b.Type of Operation c. Operating Schedule(normal) d.Mode of Operations [ ]Batch [ ]Continuous Shifts/Day: [ ]1 [ ]2 [ ]3 [ 1 Manual [ ]Auto [ I Semi-Auto e.Duration of Batch(hrs/batch) f. g.Daily*of Batches h. avg max "--10 a- CONVEYORS b.Type of Conveyor(pneumatic,bolt) c.Make&Model ( d.Capacity e.Dimensions(LxWxH) f. g.#of Pickups #of Discharge Points h.Connected to: I . 1 1 a. GAS FLOW b.Actual CFM c.SCFM(Reg I Standard) d. Temperature(°F) • In Out i e.Pressure Drop f.Efficiency g.IC leoncent andtratio Outletns Pollutant h. 1' f l2 a- ADDITIONAL DATA b.[ ] Attach Brochure c.[ ] Attach Plans/Specs d.[ ] Attach Emission Estimate • (show calculation) e.[ ] Submit Narrative f.[ ] Submit Source Test Data g.[ I Submit Modeling Data h.[ ] Attach Schedule of Equipment Description of Process with Make,Model,Capacity i• [ 1 I•[ 1 Ik-[ 1 I-[ I orm 50-1.15S(6/92) PUGET SOUND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY FORMS A ENGINEERING DIVISION NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION AND APPLICATION FOR APPRC'/AL Continuation Form for FUEL BURNING EQUIPMENT 1. PLANT: (A) MFR. Jenharher IB) MODEL JMS 320-GS 44LC 2. TYPE OF PLANT: (CHECK APO_ICABLE ITEMS) (A) 0 STEAM HEATING lal a GAS BURNER Engines 0 PNEUMATIC FEED AND PULVERIZER EWATER HEATING ❑ OIL BURNER 0 CYCLONE FURNACE ❑ PROCESS STEAM 0 CONVERT. BURNER 0 AUTOMATIC WOOD WASTE FEED El OTHER PURPOSE 0 SPREADER STOKER 0 OTHER STOKER 3. DESIGN HEAT INPUT RATING 8,767,824 BTU/HOUR EACH . NUMBER OF UNITS 4 4. TYPE FUEL - USE RECORDED DATA OR BEST ESTIMATES . - GRADE I ANNUAL RATED HOURLY APPROXIMATE SCC4E:OLE OF OPERATION TYPE OR (CHECx AP°.:CABLE MONTHS) , SPEC. SULFUR CONSUMPTION CONSUMPTION _11 v M I A M I T I A I S p l w l I I I I OIL I I GAS I Pipeline I _ 1,866,0001 R7_R6 X X X X XI )I XI X X XIx I X WOOD I I Therms Therms Ili III I OTHER I I WWII 5. STEAM OUTPUT CONDITIONS As Steam & Hot 6. STACK GASES (ESTIMATE) (AI LB/HR: NORMAL F7ln U/1Ier9700 (AI FLOW RATE 2382 SCFM (B) PRESSURE 90 PSI G (Bl TEMP.°F 389 ICI TEMP. °F 331 (C) EXIT PARTICULATE CONCENTRATION GR/SCF (D) : SATURATION 100% (D) X MOISTURE 7.5% IV °SUPERHEAT 0% 7. EMISSION CONTROLS: (CHECK ONE): (AI 9 NONE Engine control system (B) ❑ PRIMARY CONTROLS ONLY (C) ❑ PRIMARY AND SECONDARY CONTROLS IF APPLICABLE, COMPLETE IDI OR BOTH (DI AND (El. (DI PRIMARY CONTROL: IE) SECONDARY CONTROL: TYPE OF CONTROL: TYPE OF CONTROL: . MAKE • MAKE MODEL MODEL CFM CFM • GPM (IF APPLIC.) GPM (IF APPLIC.) EFF. + EFF. S. ESTIMATE OF MATERIALS CAPTURED: ' LB/HR OF(B) (Al (TYPEIS) OF MATERIAL) (C) MATERIAL IS 0 WASTED 0 REINJECTED ❑ SOLD (CHECK ONE) 9. STACK OR CHIMNEY (A) I:ZiSTEEL 0 MASONRY ❑CONCRETE (CHECK ONE) • (Bl HEIGHT ABOVE GRADE 40 (FT.) (E) DIAMETER AT SAMPLING PORTS (IN.) (C) EXIT DIMENSIONS 14 (IN.) (REQUIRED IF DIAMETER EXCEEDS 36") {6� - (DI NOTE: INDICATE LOCATION AND WEIGHT OF NEARBY BUILDINGS ON PLAT PLAN. ADDITIONAL REMARKS: I _ Equipment is Gas Fuel Engine with electric generator and waste heat boiler to supply electricity, hot water and steam to the hospital . ( �! PUGEr SOUND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY 110 Union Street, Suite 500 Seattle, Washington 98101 • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAIT - You may not need to fill out the attached checklist. .•: Please read and check the following: Because of the State Environmental Policy Act,the action for which you are filing a Notice of Construction and Application for Approval to this Agency requires the completion of an environmental checklist. BUT: If you can answer`yes"to either of the following questions with respect to the action being proposed, the attached checklist need not be completed: 1. I have obtained a State, City or County Permit and filled out an environmental checklist. FX1 Yes n No If you answered yes", give State, City or County Department and date, and attach a copy of the checklist. Environmental review being prepared for the City of Renton 2. An environmental checklist or assessment has previously been filled out for another agency. Yes No If"yes", give agency and date, and attach a copy of the checklist. If your answer to both of the above questions was"no", you must fill out the attached environmental checklist. Prepared by: 1 (Signature) (Print Name) • (Title) 1 Form No. 66-150 5/29/92 • IVISIO ><»< >'><><>s' `mii miiii <{ { : :< »>»<>'>> ::::::::::.::.::.::::.:::::.::::.:::::.::::::.:::::.:::.::::,:.:::....:...:QEUE...MENT S.ERVIC.ES.:D..:....:.... .. ::.....�......... ....................:..............................,<. • • :::: L CH•E... ..KLIST.. PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the . quality of the environment. The purpose of this.checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or"does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS:. Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. 1. 1 - Environmental Checklist A. BACKGROUND I I 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Valle Mc S Ica/ Ccife2" C�e�e✓a.i-/v� r c,l� 2. Name of applicant: 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: .XJS r ' A -i���G 3-''•— wc^.S Imo- 4, 9-9/% LO '/ ��/- /6/ 4. Date checklist prepared: Deb 2q /qq 5. Agency requesting checklist: Cif Ra.;740de) 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):1/cvc-it /- 1 1 (_mi l Sfr J� 47(}fI :ma's t//.71G 's•C� 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. P I l� o l"✓V 2 / (ice Icy:— "� Z779.4‹:/V0.1 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. 1 `f U 'y7,=i c? r 7Q✓S. ./ /., 4� flw/-se -rouv oa i,ecS ,t�eS a� orleers c i4,c6 c.u// $e Us.ecl -�ve�,ef .fc e.lcLi✓tU5 3vId Sfca�i. 2 Environmental Checklist • 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. �/ eoaa./ C�c'�.///Mail 5 / / e y/ar.� / 2tird vt 't' z�� J // / B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other SI s( d b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) S/ Whatgeneral types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, c. YP P muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. d sr/f ove:%,�J 5 / &/ ii lU d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. e /V/O e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. l I/' .1J :` SIZG9e f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? II) Citazje, — 1d�� }G e-e-)�� ,.ec! 3 Environmental Checklist h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: ���e�f bv��c�•� ✓Z,h leSCIet'S 772 I(sfIC) SkrrIfn �sfew, 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. /VUy.iv1 eeiirweh driv/n� GOhS�rvCi iUh /‘""S hstyea, MGx , 4,7‘11s/ ar W 3 lv.3 S,ezG VOG b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No.7e., c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Z �tocE - ! Arf ae9'7 7tYd l CcvN h lJ S•f i 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year- round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate,state what stream or river it flows into. !J00 e 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. - 0 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Pope 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. //0soe r 5) - Does the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. Po • •' Environmental Checklist • 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. / b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. 4./6he 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of • such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. A/one c. Water Runoff(including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters,/ If so, describe. gam wafer Ge-41.,1/ .6 :.fir/cc-.-c_. C'( ei\l/.S71-/y S4..2✓Y/ (,v&+ b SJ51LGLv1 2) Could��waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. JVan-nel rev C/ham, D 7 • d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: 4. PLANTS • a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ✓ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ✓ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other ✓ shrubs • V grass pasture crop or grain • wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants:water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kindand amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? S Ii op, G /r9 r fi.-�� Vic;' �/•:�! zr� // � F i'�.<�,�;;." —v "co mac. /�J�.c _ V 5 Environmental Checklist c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. 1 ) d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Mah,fCvi vic-e r.ea,- eel-, s:L%.e.At /9,912 C!✓4-e04 f d C` \%Ya+G 7("6-i4a P'e.i-'OVt��• 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: (see next page) Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other G.1/s/ C.--cis, �p�,.�.�GJ s ,ter=, Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other Fish: bass, salmon,trout, herring, shellfish, other ,Uo�., b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Notre c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain NG d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: • 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. �+ // ,kkni.' -/ Gles- l!!k/ ` �i'l�/d/�7yi:� c� .'nc'- I G=f(.---<. vt-1 e ��G+LI T/.'rn , 161: CtJc %�" 1�✓� J^L�^• �J b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally� / describe. /VU c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: ` (oti,,n,4v..G ce_.)/fti ‘5,7111a74t //iC�'�+� l 2.4 DCGv�iec� sC��s p �{� CIi� pU/QJSG /s- 7� r-ed ce vGtC/ ee-1-7 u`Lyaoak-7 ay/ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH 6 il- Environmental Checklist • (--- I a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, -, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. F -2 is l/ (?5a 1z114ti) bhr./ea f/,,-.7_) o,/ s7 ' 7 7/e,Ls .zieuvl2S Goad-c ��4 6v1/6,- - k..:r -c11.72&i-d ov14., 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. /JU/ ci/ O—e ai/eJ `/-:J? /,{ l .-`-'1'l/i,ri- ,e_-...-,. -_Se�t,/'CPS 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: `.✓r'✓t:e/4/r,J J,/ rz k5 .ate'// C C 1-1...4/:L4/h C4,--46c I' N'71a,/., c•"K 74' c;vGa. �/ b. Noise 1 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic,• equipment, operation, other)? -ac(ic, hose 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. 1 ,r � , NUvrY,Z L9✓ �?,PN ....1,,,,-_,-,.. C>lii/. :%sYl< r is G✓1 -e4jjlre cr�,c ,(a cl,a/W ,'_ern )1.,/..re, ✓Jly C';i', ;<•f� �'jJ/, ,::,7 i 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: J C.�Jr'1 rGIH/?rl4.1` Oa` €a,,e /':J/SC �", Kck,v(-1"_,7 1✓C-/7 C /a:C"c T://^ t a,S . ' d ram{'C f fr'/%/(, ' 47, 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE i a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Sr/!1a./ 11 b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. /to . c. Describe any structures on the site. . ,11����z/, ��E��G i o �� ham/ ,.e/rry C�, j c T d. Will any structures be demolished? If so,what? /V'U e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? • f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? /k s II1i✓/7 k7 1 • Environmental Checklist g. If applicable,what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. A/0 i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? i( ,- k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: //Om2 I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, - middle, or low-income housing. /one b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. /VOki 6 c. Proposed� measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: • /Ion 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. (h f-) Vp' e)4 Qs-1 Sf ae.ks - 7/l - U/ CO44CvG'1e G?�lnS *v✓G"`'CJvl b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered,or obstructed? • c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: • .;a bf � �} w/4-h &Y/574�� -7vS/0.7-el acs is f,v • 8 ,1. • Environmental Checklist L 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? poile b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? /Vail e d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: //oh 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? NGhe b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. 1./o c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: A/Gh e 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. ///674 b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. NGh c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: 4/6 krc 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. • Dace 7h 7'� Az..dcj llv 7 .47c/ /s Served' . 7/b74 9 • ' Environmental Checklist • • b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? ' /fc iS Svved y / u4' 4G ��,5/71- c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate?pi c.�,If 4&../e• he) ole GI)c//z-�ed fay S,PacL Z3 /0�E/h Spaces w/�� O-e G-/min ed T"►,e Pro Jtec/ d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads�or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? 0l ✓e e ms/•e .�. e r�sds o e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. .)(./o f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. L /I Lt./ 9-G &SS-�-j ti�d TO pSe4 �J g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: NGn e 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. /fCVL2S-e rn (7rG ic/ r //c-c 74e . /ovv appop,.iz f--C - /leek, 6,/ �/'�Gjr� b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. E/i"-G /ova fe.e..• p,� /arss, 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities�urrently available at the site: electricit septic system, o er- e 1 10 1 Environmental Checidist — • b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. _ p � e�j //a fvrei &as - v I �afvd� Gas T/erhan-e - U,S. We s f j Wa+ - GJ,5 o cr f2cti�z�, C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non- significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful k of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: Name Printed: Damlel CJardiH_i Da te: 12- 2 q - R.5 • 11 I I OWNER: Valley Medical Center ADDRESS: 400 South 43rd Street Renton, Washington 98055 KING COUNTY TAX ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER: (312) 305-9002 • LEGAL DESCRIYI'ION: • LEGAL DESCRIPTION All that portion of the North 1/2 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 31, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. lying northerly of the northerly margin of South 180th Street; westerly of the westerly margin of Springbrook Road (Talbot Hill Road) (96th Avenue South); easterly of Primary State Highway No. 5 (East Valley Freeway). Located on South 180th Street between Valley Freeway on the west and 96th Avenue South on the East. 8570.01 C001.GL — -A ----. /----i — y : --■PIPA�N► :"" � :: . . la� g/0 • F -.\ - ---- . 1.Vr45 . 31s I =liarp12i \!1i .` I . 4v. OFM7 \ + t w - •► SRENTONVILLAGE ESt _�.y1e, _ 1 • •tN$ Ili I. 3aiii > •tN T•-- I I 9 '.F . •" -�,' . 19t f VS -0O� I �J��' • ?4 • S s VAL.1.-E% a � ' Ili T s WM fr IN .,. I , P' J 20 G G 22 •I 23•) `t-t F.� IL 1��, L` . - M 60 CM., i51 .rn$T �1Ni'� \A ■Lff `� r�� I, mg e41 :?k:." '.SIM tot J '} 2 tµ- �',� { �It�- Race 1 � 9 : ri:......................., irri:: s;Lc;+,�;:.:. .L 7rw u R p _I - R E N l"• N G ,-- Ilia.s. _Y 1 I f..1.•TJ . trtn ; 3 MN_- 1.+ I�: !!G■!tti ?fl'�I nk:',•N w, T--T— .� n�� • t•loiN i7•iX .T It �+�` r E I I II f7711)fy ti :.•ry>RC•• ' '.1.7411P.r i J��//\41. •1 ♦ `r� I 1Ltj < W78rN Jt 1C ^w wC'� ,M I M \ lu z 1 ��r 168TN '� 1.1 ' • +1l E I �, I' 1r J. sln 1'y - 26 251 Ir I I3 • $` .LN$T tl , +1i "' ,. I S. ,. IT I ¢ \ _. ® l 770T,N.:C 1, 1 R � \ I I • I I 6 n trIl L 1 $ ;,nr--itnea1.1 Lie — I i4aa, _ 'r5 sues 1 x sr 7�� MTN ST 4WOfACY PS C6Yt4 I > t t I ` PRE; ';-•JST/9,.Iwr l 0 yRIdtlILOA dj' i M ■w�i strn S I / • �•• I b • !.T. r InIEMN . i A. 'r'17:In ( f[ O ORS I VALLEY '. ; L �t� I t , __IE9GND.lt0. I N > i ; ' r Nt[R•.�.�: .t� O/ 'JI riN INIEo I IQ I 1 I n "1. ' 1 t ��''�� 11 t t[17■MK OYf177 it I u• 2 w (.': SW I x0 ! ST I / >A I C Y MIA •I■I a I NOY4fAM_ ,. . 1 T fT ;� �'' I Y+t.t 7t �� , 1 OGITTYY :OI .•{ , ar I• I I t.(� y II j .I 11 I I. .. asp.. ION' ••:�i';+;7; I 1 p QO 1 Ir _ yl�dl rir _ _1 _ —I — . ..7,,;.s�Ary:�.y. I y 1 1 v I --� p 73. 2R: I}.yM�f� .„..t� E� ` t� 1 1 I t I , 11 f' SE IILTN T N l �A✓VC:�!\~ ` (}7• •• , AMU _�I I i 1 LN I 1 E I SE IUTN T fE .u. M • L 1 I '`I • ff I ST t 4 r ' r iW , I -.^. i T • IITN fr Y ' ,�qTN I IltlriQa I! Knot 'f7 /' �[ R7 • .--.._ ... I SI J L I to .Xt[I N ■_ a1 y 14- I �"ts�',nx7 .•. • ,-,,,, tT -,JEVTILRI.. > 1 IC tl N °� sE 190TN —.-T-•--- '-•• �D u -- =- Si[UTI14j 1E PS i - IR9 - _ _T. r --- ! 0 ee, 1f(,EE•�� T 2 i I I r� lti .. [ T = 1\1� IN Sl t IMMfT � 4•= LE IMT 1141 L. ► L. FIK,.... . •� r MTN __fI____ ,., 1c N•tn SI 1 > �6 2 ,+ ;3 I� _>�panfL i 104,,,in`` • j $ 11. g• 5 " 'i WOW KROtfIKE MOM 3 I S E 7C0'N ET I.w �• >~j L:11-1,--1 . 2:11-1?_ %$7 1 ti> a S $' A / I B ,_ MNG '• fT 1RtH 3 -_s Ism_Q_ 1t w 6444411.s -3 O 1 , r - . _ _ _____ - •/ • - I-----7 11 ifQ . . 4111114%-5---.: COMMERCIAL I , --1cHtt i ,fL /7. . . • .4<3.- 1c) • f .• ..1 . E fc----•-- t ... tre.,,,,.... . /-ri•m.lboT ., . : ISLJ ILO It.141 ''. • P ••••••• 4i 7 • . . tioc.errAL. C.2)0 HEufbez ...%.*.: i P L. 44 ,.., t . m .. ...„. •• 1 . . :.,:.„,:. •,,. ....„.. •*._.., : •------. .." . , ..7%%Thip;.........„..... vaiwor.4 17 I •:•:::.;;V: () Lt_ttzcriuprtou 0 -rr.e.e. c.4F-aaHr.ecr ,,........r."ffill- i .prxie .... - .-.-.....A111111111116161E fkiiJeCfr .P7' LI:Mii. D Accss r. . .j NORTH REEWAy sa /67 f VALLEY Rio .S4,14 MEDICAL CENTER. ' � J SECTION 2 • j SECTION 2 - EXISTING FACILITIES Valley Medical Center (VMC) is the operating entity of Public Hospital District No. 1 of King County, organized under the laws of the Sate of Washington. The VMC campus is located in the southern section of Renton,Washington at 400 South 43rd Street, Renton, Washington 98055. The campus consists of 6 main buildings, the Medical Center Main Building, the Radiation Oncology Center (ROC), the Northwest Pavilion (NWP), the Talbot Professional Center (TPC), the Valley Professional Center North(VPC), the Medical Arts Center(MAC), a Parking Garage and assorted warehouses and other support structures. Electric power, steam, hot water and chilled water are provided throughout the campus. Figure 2-1 provides a large scale area and small scale site map of the VMC facility. The existing installed energy systems include three boilers with steaming capacity of 12,000 lb/hr each operating at 90 psig. Two boilers normally operate in the winter, only one in the summer. Total campus steam demand varies from approximately 11,000 lb/hr in the winter to 5,000 lb/hr in the summer. Average monthly steam flow is shown in Figure 2-2. All boilers are fueled by natural gas. The major steam users with estimated winter steam consumption and condensate returned are listed below. User Approximate Approximate steam flow condensate return Lb/hr % of steam flow 1. Sterilizer 600 15 2. Domestic water heating 2200 80 3. Kitchen wash water heating 1500 100 4. Kitchen cooking steam 1600 80 5. Building heating 1800 100 6. Lap and therapy pools 70 100 7. 1983 expansion mechanical room 2200 100 8. Campus out buildings 300 100 9. Deaerating heater 700 100 Steam pressure reducing valves reduce the 90 psig header pressure to that required by the user. Steam system branch operating pressures range from 60 psig to 10 psig. The existing steam and condensate system is shown on the enclosed drawing P1, "Existing Process - Diagram, Wmter Flows". The drawing shows only the main components and flow paths. Equipment multiples, controls, valves, side flow paths and all other components are not shown. 2-1 I IA 1 MAIN ENTRANCE - ! 1 2 EMERGENCY ROOM 15. i 3 SURGICENTER = 4 NORTH WEST PAVILION (NWP) I 5 MEDICAL ARTS CENTER (MAC) x�j f II 8 PARKING GARAGE , p 7 MEDIC ONE i " f 1 L I r 8 MRI BUILDING „ �`_ I9 VALLEY PROFESSIONAL CENTER NORTH= 10 TALBOT PROFESSIONAL CENTER (TPC) r. 11 VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER MAIN BUILDING s \�I 16) 12 RADIATION ONCOLOGY BUILDING (ROC) . ' \JT� ��(�r���y7/ .11_ 13 WAREHOUSE / DATA PROCESSING �VV/ o�J� )/— -� ' 14 FACILITIES / ENGINEERING BUILDINGcJ15 AMBULATORY / DAY SURGERY ��( �iI , ��� 1 / 18 BEHAVIORAL HEALTH CENTER / V-M- RECOVERY CENTER �.. p( _ _ _ _ _ 17 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Ce zLI „,/ ,., _ ^ _, _ :- - I 18 RENTON PHYSICAL THERAPYis�s��iu• ICI I ,' C l' fi!1,14 4 ir j r F9 / '1 j I-61 ) liet ..........„..,... L------F--- I ON �4 p�'\�, ' �rr 4`05 Air Illit 2.: / GO SOUTH ON HWY 167 O EXIT OFF S.W. 41ST ST. / \ / 44 . ! <� EAST VALLEY ROAD / I Q i /` �K`� S. 180TH ST.` = TURN LEFT AT , Y ALLEY `1 �� ��' EAST VALLEY ROAD TURN LEFT AT \, I EDICAL �� S.180TTH ST. GENTER ii . RT. ON DAVIS ST. PETROVITSKY ROAD+ nQ9 t: AIAi. I'/ � �� , , / ^ ti S 41st ST. Q _._ _ i — �• '3 � '' ��.� . .. co ,� `' ����'� -/ _ S. 180TH ST 1 I S-W. 43RD t� >' ' / _ � Q CARR ROAD ;y>s�� „/::.f , '/ r' f 8f } THERAPY 0 ° \�1%.,""„/T/ `atillift_- ir� "�/ ' lu EMERGENCY ROOM = ail i % i iil SURGICENTER _ RT. TO UNDERGROUND t _ ' / ¢ 3 TUNNEL cn °: - - - - - - - - r�ZZtILjrc�=Ltdt PF - - — GO NORTH ON HWY 167 • luNNEL 131.1.17— I FF :- icN II - 0TH ST/ T____ _ ____ - ____ - _ ____ —____ ___ —_ —__ __ _ __ __ __ _____ __ _6_ •• EXIT I S. 18 1 / TRANCE - I I S.W. 43RD � " i I `.`\ ? 1Tf{ ST RT. ON DAVIS ST. `/ Af r. �'� 4_ IA,yii ,`,��,i: � ER .;, ', __ _ //_ = ` ANY N j — FACILITIES AND PLA.,7 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT R.L. 11/15/95 OR ‘9 - -- FIGURE 2-1 VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER • AVG. MONTHLY STEAM USE moo moo — 9000 — (n m 8000 — 0 • lL 7000 — 2 LU 6000 — CO 5000 - 4000 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I 1 I I JAN 1'ISII MAR Al'lt MAY 1t1N JUL A11cl SIP OCT NOV fFC STEAM LBS/HR (1176 Btu/lb) C r N lv - t is l \ :.;� _—- i.. • 6) 1 • -1 1 rn 1 v i 0 1 CO 1 D r` V p • S % 579 LB/HR Q Gg I 13 $s IV — - �g % i i+ • 1 ,�g$ OOOfff I T—� 11,579 LB/HR 579 LB/HR 11,579 LB/HR � 1III1I • v 0 co + O • 1 ow T 1 • 4 rn 2,200 LB/HR • 2,200 LB/HR • P . 1 1 625 LB/HR Q d4• � 563 LB/HR CD MEOW 62 LB/HR TO WASTE g 1 p 5,275 LB/HR Q 2,151 LB/HR _r.:.<1 1 31,250 LB/HR TO USERS t 4 r 1,720 LB/HR _ ti —J- @ 430 LB/HRI • LOSSES I,580 LB/HR p 1,264 LB/HR I i £ i_ 6 316 LB/HRI — d A LOSSES 1,544 LB/HR STT 13,889 LB/HR TO USERS rQ a 1,544 LB/HR a 4 1,822 LB/HR i.CO li< .. . . ._. ... .__ _ _ _ r —. s 1 M f 1,822 LB/HR L_ Ili 7A5LB/HR w 61 LB/HR S 8 i I +' • I �O +'� - III X ? 75 LB/HR + `Z� r§ 14 LB/HR bbS Z :_ p� Y - m f� 4Cn i--- ---_ � c 1 a m 300 LB/HR w c� 300 LB/HR I G) '1 in coD of :m; Electric power is supplied by Puget Sound Power&Light Co., the local utility. Two 650 kW each, and one 600 kW diesel engine driven emergency generators are installed to back up the power system. Approximate average power use varies between a low of 1.7 MW in March and a high of 2.3 MW in September. Electric power demand peak is approximately 3.3 MW occurring in August. Average monthly electric power use is shown im Figure 2-3. VMC has performed studies that show that the installation of a gas fired cogeneration system will reduce overall operating costs. By burning natural gas in engines instead of the existing boilers VMC will be able to self generate electrical power to reduce purchased electricity costs while at the same time meet the steam and hot water needs of the facility. The high efficiency of the cogeneration cycle makes its use desirable. The selected cogeneration cycle is described in Section 4. • 2-5 VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER AVG. MONTHLY ELECTRICAL DEMAND (90-94) 35 - 3 - N...s.....,..,,.._.,_,0 Er_ Z Q 2 zs — . W oar 0 -._--'_a I— W s milliN /-. ii m W - 1s - 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I 1 JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC _.- Avg. Demand (MW) -o- Peak Demand (MW) rn N . W I , SECTION 3 I r � - I SECTION 3 -EXISTING EMISSION SOURCES. VMC is operating under current PSAPCA permit Number 16155 (enclosed as Attachment 3-1)for existing air contaminant sources. The sources include three(3) gas fired boilers, three (3) emergency diesel engine generators, one(1) incinerator and one (1) ethylene oxide disposer/sterilizer. On their last visit PSAPCA inspectors noted that there were no violations. The boilers supply steam for space heating, water heating, and hospital functions such as sterilizing. Steam production follows facility demand as dictated by hospital population and ambient air temperatures. Each boiler's natural gas burner is rated at 15,788 standard cubic feet per hour(157.88 therms/hour). The emergency generators operate whenever the normal Puget Power electricity supply to the Medical Center is lost. Length of diesel engine operation is dictated by length of the power outage. Each engine is tested once a month by being started and operated for an hour. Fuel used by the engines is low sulphur diesel fuel with maximum sulfur content of.5% by weight. Diesel engine emergency generators were not included in the emission calculation because of their very short annual operating times. The hospital incinerator is operated on a set schedule to burn pathological/anatomical waste. The incinerator is natural gas fired. 500 therms of gas per month are consumed to fuel the incinerator. The existing equipment emissions process flow diagram is shown in Figure 3-1. Actual 1994 emissions from the VMC boilers were calculated. 1994 monthly gas flow was tabulated. The 500 therms per month used by the incinerator was deducted. The remainder is the total gas flow consumed by the boilers. Actual boiler emission were calculated using AP 42 emission factors for small industrial boilers sized from 10 to 100 million Btu/hour. Calculation details are shown on Table 3-1. Calculations show that 1994 emissions by the boilers were: NOx 5.00 Tons/year CO 1.25 Tons/year VOC .10 Tons/year PM .49 Tons/year SO2 .02 Tons/year 3-1 . Maximum potential to emit by the existing boilers was calculated by assuming all three boilers operating at rated burner load for 8760 hours per year. Maximum potential to emit is: NOx 29.04 Tons/year CO 7.26 Tons/year VOC .58 Tons/year PM 2.84 Tons/year SO2 .12 Tons/year Excess and standby boiler capacity for the hospital has been provided resulting in low boiler operating factors. Actual boiler emissions are approximately 17% of maximum potential emissions. 3-2 Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency 1995.Annual Registration Certificate. Upon-#11.payment of the 1995 annual registration fees, this certifies thatthis faciliry,i is registered to operate air contaminant generating equipment and/or control equipment during calendar year 1995. .5: • .•-.: Registration Number • Effective Date -.EXt)iration Date . - 16155 0 —01—95 12-31 -95 •, • . • " LOcation: : VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER , . 400 S..43RD ST 40.9 S 43.0 ST RENTON, WA 98055 . 'RENTON 4JA:: 98055 • . • . . Air Folluti Control OrTuor .. • • ' • • . • , • • . _ • • . . • - • ' ATTACHMENT 3-1 I I 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 s 7 • 8 • 9 . A 1994 ACTUAL VALUES A TOTAL EMISSIONS TOTAL EMISS= NOx 5.0 TONS/YR CO 1.25 TONS/YR CO ITgGNF T VOC 0.10 TONS/YR VOC INSIGNIFICANT n A A .' A A IDIESEL > • C INAT GAS >--0- G ITO HOSPITAL }. . - — I STEAM • 571.000 TFERMS/YR D r $ LA t 1t 1f . If � D • ow g R 2 i W W W " STEAM t , STEAM I -' E I E —0— —0— • twING E)OSfHdG EXISTING E)0 NG EXISTING IX EXISTING ISTING BOILER 1 BOILER Z BOIIFR 3 EMERGENCY EMERGENCY EMERGENCY • NERATOR C � GENERATOR GENERATOR GENERATOR otspossivssat ip Q DIESEL 1 DIESEL 2 DIESEL 3 L I .• 1 F Z �a a, CC a, a` cc a, V el a, a . G FIGURE 3-1 G I MINI" I 6r: Wieland Lindgren ...tea NO ' == AIMED FCC MINIM VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER pm oocnPru� �. ,'� • H .. COGENERATION MOM nttt: H. EXISTING SYSTEM EMISSION `..��"°. OWING TITLE DIAGRAM - _ .. ...- Ace• vcRs Ia 12 ow n LATE Ion r our Immo are I w I arc ICSLE re=rem I stone nano� ' r FILE:P:\2455\ACJD 156-P3 I JR JR MS ACNE 2456-01 PS I 2 3 • 4 I 5 . 1 6 W7 1 8 - 9 . TABLE 3-1 1994 BOILER EMISSIONS - r, BOILER RATINGS Ap 42 emission factors, Small industrial boilers Number of boilers 3 Small industrial boilers 10- 100 MM Btu/hr Steaming capacity 12,000 lb/hr PM 13.7 Ib/MM cu ft gas Boiler burner rating 15,788 s cu ft/hr SO2 0.6 Ib/MM cu ft gas AP 42 gas heat value 1000 Btu/cu ft NOx 140 lb/MM cu ft gas Boiler burner rating 157.88 Therms/hr CO 35 lb/MM cu ft gas Incinerator gas use 500 Therms/month VOC 2.78 lb/MM cu ft gas MM = million VOC =Total non methane organics 1994 ACTUAL BOILER EMISSIONS 1994 ACTUAL GAS USE 1994 ACTUAL EMISSIONS Total Incinerator Boiler Boiler PM SO2 NOx CO VOC 1994 Hours therms therms therms MM cu ft lb lb lb lb lb Jan 744 82,853 500 82,353 8.24 112.82 4.94 1152.94 288.24 22.93 Feb 672 81,453 500 80,953 8.10 110.91 4.86 1133.34 283.34 22.54 Mar 744 77,781 500 77,281 7.73 105.87 4.64 1081.93 270.48 21.52 Apr 720 58,280 500 57,780 5.78 79.16 3.47 808.92 202.23 16.09 May 744 47,184 500 46,684 4.67 63.96 2.80 653.58 163.39 13.00 Jun 720 48,358 500 47,858 4.79 65.57 2.87 670.01 167.50 13.32 Jul 744 38,808 500 38,308 3.83 52.48 2.30 536.31 134.08 10.66 Aug 744 34,830 500 34,330 3.43 47.03 2.06 480.62 120.16 9.56 Sep 720 42,159 500 41,659 4.17 57.07 2.50 583.23 145.81 11.60 Oct 744 48,424 500 47,924 4.79 65.66 2.88 670.94 167.73 13.34 Nov 720 66,794 500 66,294 6.63 90.82 3.98 928.12 232.03 18.46 Dec 744 93,265 500 92,765 9.28 127.09 5.57 1298.71 324.68 25.83 Total 8760 720,189 6,000 714,189 71.42 978.44 42.85. 9998.65 2499.66 198.83 Actual 1994 emissions, Tons/year 0.49 0.02 5.00 1.25 0.10 BOILER MAXIMUM POTENTIAL TO EMIT MAXIMUM POTENTIAL FUEL USE POTENTIAL EMISSIONS Number of Annual % of full gas use gas use PM SO2 NOx CO VOC boilers hours load therms MM cu ft lb lb lb lb lb D 3 8760 100% 4,149,086 414.91 5684.25 248.95 58087.21 14521.80 1155.11 rPotential emissions, Tons/year 2.84 0.12 29.04 7.26 0.58 w , SECTION 4 SECTION 4 - SELECTED COGENERATION SYSTEM An acceptable cogeneration system must meet the following minimum requirements: 1. Operate at the highest electrical generating efficiencies possible. 2. Operate at the highest cycle, electrical plus thermal, efficiencies possible. 3. Be capable of electrical power sharing with the utility. 4. Provide the current thermal needs, as steam and hot water, of VMC. 5. Provide maximum flexibility in meeting summer and winter electrical and thermal needs. 6. Provide redundancy by meeting normal operating conditions with the largest single operating unit out of service. 7. Provide reliability by using well proven equipment. 8. Provide 100%VMC campus electrical demand of approximately 3.6 MW while disconnected from the utility. 9. Air emissions must meet current Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) • standards. 10. Existing VMC steam,hot water and electrical generating systems must remain operational as backup for the cogeneration system. 11. Reliable State of the Art technology will be used for all components. 12. Existing equipment and systems will be utilized as much as possible. VMC SELECTED SYSTEM VMC has examined numerous alternative cogeneration cycles. Operating cogeneration systems were visited and operations discussed with their owners. The system selected as most appropriate for VMC consists of four independent cogeneration trains operating in parallel. The system is shown on drawing P2 "Cogeneration Process Diagram, Winter Flows". The drawing shows only the main components and flow paths. Equipment multiples, controls, valves, side flow paths and all other components are not shown The VMC selected cogeneration systems will be installed into a new approximately 50 feet by 80 feet by 25 feet high cogeneration building to be erected on the VMC campus directly west of the main hospital building and the existing electrical transformer yard. The existing boiler room is inside the hospital building's west wall and is therefore the part of the hospital closest to the cogeneration facility. The cogeneration facility Site Plan, drawing A1.1, is attached. Approximate locations of the existing emission points are noted on the Site Plan. The new cogeneration emission points are noted as Emission Points 1 to 4. The cogeneration building site is a portion of the existing parking lot. 4-1 f 1 = 1 p, o 1 m 1 Fr1 1 0 1 c) 1 co 1 D s Al 253 THERMS/HR sf0 THERMS/HR 3 N ri0 0 - Q 25 0,o �DI c7 J a E N N o :.1 8 LB/HR 272 1 _ no �� 5,447 LB/HR 0 LB/HR I • 5,447 LB/HR '� E ' 3J1 L : i a, 1,423 LB/HR oo � 14137 THERMS/HR x _ __ - L. � 11,239 LB/HR 977 F I m EXHAUST / 389 F m l c�_ j 1,903 LB/HR v� 69,600 LB/HR EXHAUST 5 I' 1,808 LB/HR v �_ ( — — — - - 1- -, & dci _ S EXHAUST GAS l_ z - o j < I �Z m �i oNa -^� o ..--- - u EXHAUST �m 1 x E x% rn ' EXHAUST GAS 1_ m "F. 0 6 Z u j < IEXHAUST x� •— — o ,. r 1 _ 1 AlOM m EXHAUST GAS — - _ -�� m 1. 2 z 2 A - EXHAUST f m (1 -r 1En 0 IIin 5,174 LB/HR m 273 LB/HR z a Q 2,200 LB/FIR m m .......—{ 6 CM1 L. 2,200 LB/HR 1— Un 45,139 LB/HR 55 F 33,234 LB/HR c s • -1-----... 2 x Ti 1 " 120 F 19,345 LB/HR — 160 F XI m z 1---- 10 625 LB/HR 1 6 563 LB/HR OT 63 LB/HRxi - TO WASTE _I. m io — 9 0 LB/HR 15 f Sl r+ 31,250 LB/HR - s 6 III - 1 0 LB/HR - TO US ER i-- 1 - ! : m ill xi1,264 LB/HR - zr x $ E ! 1 - 316 LB/HR s 0 J J Q 6 M \ LOSSES 0 LB NNR is /" 1 g 0 LB/HR TO US`ERRS 7( P - ---- - --- - - - - - 0 LB/HR _ - - ._ l- - iA 11 ! 7 g 4 Ld�4 � i 1 N 0 LB/HR1i AI U 1166F 1t L 0 LB/HR 148 F �— I Q 61 LB/HR •� Q I d4 I 11 v L 03 q 75 LB/HR �'— In Z a. 14 LB/HR - a g rti I $ Z d i' ci L--- ---- MD 1 if Qt"C +— a up I m ' 8g e n 300 LB/HR Q 14 LB/HR g S g iv p pc. • — 300 LB/HR + g _ 1 0 1 TT 1 m 1 o 1 o 1 0o 1 D a SXL�j.f I N �1`/11 l O hi 1'O l N'r �'fa I�i'?O�� r7"rBIZl I�l2 E}z- Gj TA L • I � 1;NIIiiDi� . /- x_v.7_1-11,141. • • POINT lsrl:tZ. ••TONIRSIORRE F�"h-uT �,-t'?,� Mt.• Yb Pf A4. w-r • �® 1 VGENERAL NOTES f ,L( 1101111 �H• "�"'�°"a` .`' I. PROVIDE ALL NECESSARY U7TUTY SERVICES AND CONNECTIONS TO COGENERATION BUILDING WHETHER SHOWN OR NOT a'v,a.G��ALL SERVICES AR£ TO 8E UNDERGROUND. . !-•'Pi e.. .5 �t, �. -+` „ I 2. RESTORE ALL SURFACES AND LANDSCAPING TO CONDITIONS PRIOR TO BEGINNING OF WORK. �/X�!-C1i�IG�( 1;MI�' ION CONCRETE LI17`RFINFORCING J. PROVIDE NEW SURFACES AND LANDSCAPING TO MATCH EXISTING ADJACENT CONDITIONS pO II�t'f._ 1,1'-dille • WHERE REQUIRED BY WORK IN THIS PROJECT. �� • �� ' • LNG t '4!0.0.. 1SO.C+a...Her 4. PROTECT ALL EXISTING LANDSCAPING, SIGNS, LIGHT POLES AND OTHER SITE FEATURES 7•T�K OI.A A.,.44 T 4•,rs'NOT SHOWN TO BE RETAINED OR RELOCATED. _ a T 1� i �7 Af l/•' HOSPITAL BUILDING i�. aw•�o ` 1� /�(�G�Q-.�1l1�i t/�/I /I ..W+K A F1.l M+cv. Y ri :.�.'.. ••�i✓ �,j- Medical A`L1ld�l.al • (41 44 AAP.,ccu?'GTO, _� tree dw.e9 6 1-0 0e /4' \l _ •1• L2,r�,c�0''Fir w E7•Boa' i— 'i-. �1..e 6b\1.,5 ra.b+.1.1,75 -� c+.YuEr r. Y�iO tob17R P4uh / / // �` E.Y,STTNG CONCRETE G�/II/T /' T• . .��rT`I / / !/ / ENCASED TANK �X N� E• 's+D'P•sttS.AG.V.NA`I- w I / /17 / / NT! . - 1 F� � emu.f / /7/1 ( P.•e✓nu rr r 3 tnurr■serc 1 7 / I , 1 MAHLUM / / _ i �/ / I. • 1 ,� ' �Y ` I r� !-- d}s4 & NORDFORS ````. • // //(/ / v !\', ///�� /� 1 r9.a,.•Tw1-a:r Co-..,+.o<..�.al+`�cw-r�.n,wn.�-�:o- ..a .uy M e K 1 N L E Y _ ..�TYPICALUT1LilY TRENCH SECTION GORDON ��J2505 / /// / - / \�%' Third Avenue !/ /; ! /r �/ / / Seattle.WA ` Ec cTRICAL / / i L / 98121 ` •��` VAULT C 6 /'rOJ •/• l `2-GAS METERS // /./ 20 6 44I 4151 ' �����\``\sT ��� // • J�ti. J'mT:: :' `2c'T,�w 2. o . ��`` // 20 6 441 0478 F • do A • •- I MAINTENANCEg :�\� ', ••. o� °�/ I2 CUP i ri /l;' L�L D G PROVIDE 6•SANITARY �,`,\ `\r \7: Q,,,.Q C'� 'CFNs �/ 'CB #39 ' -..,�i� K / -.::- � . SEWER COVNECTTCN 7D �`,\> l L, / S NO ,/ �`; '? %O EXISTING SANITARY e ����� °Ro ,RIlv1 = 62.39 7 'h✓J `\` SEWER LINE ; ❑ : :.: ..`` ; / o O LE. = 58.797 044111F I '7'. 41.4iJki. I `i�T ���` ji �� l I `\ - ` PROMO£1T'WATER MA IN /l(/ • /--..../ / BYPASS AROUND , `� �` ���` ` /, �J .J �`� SS • -s. •. \-. COI.'1JE"P.A])ON 8UI• -/ (�, l J / [1, C/ �\ � V PROJECT NUHHBR 45158 `���� % �U�J `` 4� ►~ .r i2 [�� ,o j DATE: NOV 29. 1945 � i f`1 1 v°=2e G a / J./ DATE CHECKED: �. CON �� /`` i I }t�0� Q _� j / /CO`� \\ f / 2 �J! v/ / 4 4, I 1 spa 2•9 J� • `�- .• \ / • ll , REOL9I0N9 SX_Lef?T1 N G'1. 1,,,..., , , O.\�\ a� 1 cr�z�40s (� r7 G F / �� o I 1 ,,,o p STMH #37 01 (� j LML4i4itoN Po1N�. ,/ / 1 � I _ r / �� a p RIM 70.13 O `tor 1 •:<'-=- i LE. 60.23N. ' KTO� NFrr / \��\�\� it i �oG<" O �.,\ II , STMH #42 - A.��,� cr v RIM = 62.25' D`t' at \\\\\������ •. \ :JJ'l ' I _ ,�2 9 l} „ I.E = 55.23' coya �, o I .. it s ,1 ✓'• 'fern sc<,,ti S/teill AROyDF Ref . C• 1 killiiiiii...6., T�, , -s , - RQOCATED UCHT POLE /IL Y�,72 ON.4r�<4S� - ` [�3-�/ �- - �_ - -_- 1 n -_ I CJ ! �F'nSA nNG'Nc ,• 'I C� - 5--1---__�______ 3. NEW CURB '56' "" t L 155 1 _ 6 �l n' °OQ'10 _ N`:29 92 . L = 0 0 1 " SO2 52 :_ _ MISSIOf7 P01 f'1T I CO—GENERATION — — — ---" — -- — - E M IDS I0 f'1 P01 rl T 4k 2 FACILITY 14 %72. 0 EMISS 10 n POI FIT 3 CITY OF RENTON imc T A EDSDNC N.V.ELEC]RICAL Fc-EDER(l• /F'1� I�Q 10 p01�T -J.� DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS SITE PLTIN 55 z „C LOSIING UNDERGROUND CCMMUNICA?IONS FEEDER(YER,FYJ� S07'23'3� 3 TITLE SUBTITLE • I OESK.E0:DEYINED , Der; J09 NO. 1 y I CKC.ED: O,EIXED SCALE JOB-NO A1 . 1 —— OWG-NO _... ___.._. 1 r0. aE,•„... 1 Or' aP �,i 1....CAM APPAO.E0 s•.,pa.orn SKr:91T Or.AN 1 Each cogeneration train consists of a spark ignition natural gas fueled internal combustion engine driving an electric generator. Both are mounted on a base frame as a single module. The engine exhaust gas is ducted to its waste heat boiler which transfers the energy in the exhaust gases to 90 psig steam. At rated load each of the four cogeneration trains should produce 898 kW of electricity at the generator terminals, 139 gallons per minute of 185 F water and 1808 pounds per hour of steam at 90 psig while consuming 87.7 Therms (HE V) per hour of natural gas. The cogeneration facility is supplied by Jenbacher Energiesysteme Ltd., of Austria with United States offices in Norwood, MA. The selected engines are V block with 20 cylinders of 5.3 inch bore and 6.7 inch stroke. Total piston displacement is 2,970 cubic inches. Normal engine operating speed is 1500 Revolutions Per Minute (RPM). A gear box increases the generator speed to 1800 RPM. The engine and generator module is approximately 24 feet long, 6 feet wide and 8 feet high. The engines are Jenbacher model JMS 320 GS-N.LC. An engine descriptive brochure is enclosed in Appendix A. Detailed engine specifications are enclosed in Appendix B. Engine fuel is delivered to the engine fuel train from the existing campus gas supply pressure reducing station. Natural gas pressure at the fuel train inlet is controlled to a minimum of.725 psig and a maximum of 1.45 psig. The fuel train includes sensors and controls to ensure safe operation during all engine conditions. The fuel train downstream of the shut off valve is vented to atmosphere whenever the engine is not in operation. Combustion air is introduced to the engine through an air filter. The electronic fuel mixture control combines the proper volumes of air and natural gas. The mixture then flows through a turbocharger and is introduced into the engine cylinder. The electronic control system then fires the spark plug at the proper time to ignite the fuel. Engine lubrication is provided by the internal oil pump. An electric driven oil pump provides lubrication for the generator and gear box. Lubricating oil can be replenished during engine operation. The engine will shut down if lube oil reservoir levels exceed the minimum and maximum conditions. The engine is started by an engine mounted electric starter motor. Starter batteries with continuous trickle charging are provided. The generator is self excited, three phase, 12.47 kv, 60 hertz driven at 1800 RPM by the gearbox. It is equipped with a permanent magnet pilot exciter, exciter, a power factor controller, and a voltage regulator. Internal combustion engines generate significant quantities of hot water that must be used to obtain reasonable cycle efficiencies. A new, closed hot water system was added to distribute and utilize the hot water. The external hot water system return enters the internal engine cooling circuits at approximately 158 F and exits at 185 F after cooling the turbocharger, engine jacket and the lube oil. 4-4 Upon leaving the engines the water enters the external hot water system consisting of building space heating, domestic water heaters (three parallel 60% capacity ,each), radiator heat exchanger(two, 60% capacity, each) 'and hot water circulating pumps (three parallel 60% capacity each). Existing VMC systems that currently use steam were revised to maximize use of the hot water. The changes are: 1. The existing building hot water space heating system was revised to allow direct flow of hot water through the heating circuits and then return to the hot water system. The existing steam heating system is maintained as a backup heat source. 2. Three 60%capacity double walled cogeneration heat exchangers (one generic heat exchanger is shown on Drawing P2) were installed to heat domestic water to 160 F. 3. Two 60% capacity, radiator heat exchangers (one generic heat exchanger is shown on Drawing P2) were installed to remove any remaining heat from the hot water. 4. Three 60% tY ca aci hot water circulating pumps(one generic pump is shown on Drawing P2) capacity that return the hot water to the engine internal cooling system were installed. City water enters the VMC system at approximately 55 F. A portion flows to the new cogeneration heat exchanger where it is heated to 160 F. The 160 F water flows to the existing hot water outlet of the kitchen washing water heat exchanger and on to the users. The existing steam heating system is maintained as a backup heat source. The remaining 160 F water is cooled to 120 F by tempering with cold water. It then flows to the existing domestic hot water system. The existing steam heating system is maintained as a backup heat source. The two radiator heat exchangers transfer excess heat to a closed glycol cooling circuit. The glycol flows to radiators which dissipate the excess heat to the atmosphere. The glycol system includes appropriate pumps, fans and controls. (Not shown on drawing P2). Temperature controls and heat exchanger flow control valves ensure that energy in the hot water is utilized to maximum. Non return valves ensure that proper water flow is maintained. (Not shown on drawing P2). Transfer of these existing steam users to the hot water system changes the total VMC steam demand by reducing it from 11,000 lb/hr to approximately 5,200 lb/hr. The winter thermal demands shown on the drawing P2 are met by operation of the equivalent of 2.86 engines at full load, or, in reality, 3 engines, each at 95% load. A standby engine is available in case of failure of an operating engine. All four engines operating will meet VMC's power demand at times of utility power failure. The emergency diesel generators will provide power if all the cogeneration 4-5 systems fail. The cogeneration system will supply electric power to the VMC electrical system to reduce or eliminate purchased power from the utility. In addition, the cogeneration system waste heat boilers will produce steam and will be the prime steam suppliers to VMC. They will be installed in parallel with the existing steam boilers. If steam demand exceeds their capacity, the existing boilers will start and provide additional steam as required. The waste heat boiler for each engine train is supplied by Vaporphase Engineering Controls Inc. of St.Louis,Mo. The waste heat boiler is a circular shell and tube heat exchanger that extracts exhaust heat and also silences the engine exhaust. The horizontal boiler is approximately 15 feet long and 4 feet in diameter. Vaporphase waste heat boiler drawing and information are enclosed in Appendix C. Engine exhaust at approximately 977 F enters the shell side of the boiler and exits at approximately 389 F. Boiler steam side operating pressure is 90 psig. A boiler bypass duct and control damper is provided for use when desired power generation, and thereby exhaust gas flow, exceeds the steam system demand. The bypass damper will open to reduce steam production and to avoid dry operation of the waste heat boiler. Waste heat boiler feedwater and chemical feed will be supplied by operation of the existing deaerator, boiler feed pumps and chemical feed systems. An exhaust silencer will be installed downstream of the waste heat boiler to control engine noise. Since the cogeneration system will be installed next to the hospital building noise control measures will be taken as necessary to contain noise within required levels. The cogeneration system will be controlled from a central control room located in the new cogeneration building. Each cogeneration train's individual engine and electrical control panel and the system control cabinet panel will be installed in the control room. The system cabinet will allow load sharing between the cogeneration trains. Cogeneration system operation will be manual or fully automatic. Local system controls at each cogeneration unit will be provided to allow local operation. Annunciators and alarms will be installed in the control room. Annunciators and indicators from the existing energy plant will also indicate and annunciate in the cogeneration control room. Instrumentation will provide fuel, power, hot water and steam generation and use: VMC campus operation will be optimized by extending the existing VMC facilities management system to the new cogeneration system control room. The extension will be such that all activities performed by the system operator at the existing location can be performed from the cogeneration control room. Three modes of cogeneration system operation will be possible. 1. Electrical power demand following 2. Steam and thermal demand following 3. Electrical base load. 4-6 i Upon selection of the desired mode and sequence of cogeneration train operation the control system will start the engines, synchronize generators, close the electrical breaker and operate in full automatic. Instrumentation, indication and controls will be installed to ensure the most efficient operation of the system at all times. Metering of cogeneration system inputs and outputs will be provided to allow daily and hourly calculations of the plant's thermal, electric generation and cycle efficiency. Equipment layout inside the new cogeneration building and location of the cogeneration emission points is shown on the Floor and Roof Plan drawing A2.1. The building is sized for five cogeneration systems. The fifth system might be installed sometime in the future as the hospital grows. Exhaust stack(emission points)height for each of the four systems is 15 feet above the cogeneration building roof (40 feet above the building floor). The building will be designed and built of materials to architecturally match the existing VMC campus. The building colors will match the rest of the campus. Engine radiators shall be mounted on the roof or other appropriate part of the building. False work will be installed so that the radiators and associated equipment are not visible from the campus. Air flow through the radiators will not be impeded in any manner. Cogeneration system noise, dirt,vibration, and all other emissions will be contained within the building. Maximum noise emission from the building will be 50 dBA at a point three feet from the building. I 4-7 v En inE#4 EnCInE # I • FUTURE- \ EnGI17E 2 1 EnGInE 43 _ ACM, WNDOS V V GENERAL "ES eV�� -Y e-Y }rir. s'-Y .r-e. e•-Y - AJ'-% s-Y / :c-D- 1 I. DRAWN=SNOW A MIK N/STANDARD FOR COGENERATION BUILDING ANO ARE NOT INTENOEJ'' MBE COMP---CONSiRUCDON DOCUMENTS. I I tie ma 71i-UP DEW1T17S FROM YAU: S.DIMENSIONS,LAYOUT.AND DESIGN WILL BE ALLOWED ONLY AS DMIM ACCE'TiEE 3Y THE OWNER. I i I l /^C'y ,E PA105 AT COMM Vey 2. IT IS THE CONTRACTOR'S RESPON9WUTY TO PRO2Z€FINAL COMMOTION DRAWINGS.STAMPED BY AN ARCH C AND ENGINEERS - ! I // !/ was-LRtER (L)� + f LICE'NSL Y THE STATE OF WASI3NCTON. T -�' 'III-IL -- - - - I I 3. ALL D,SIGNS TO FACE OF CONCRETE AT IOCTE R TILT UP WALLS OR FAC_Cl GYPSUM WALL BOARD AT MTEROR WALLS. 57FJY INN 1`- "'I in REM DPATE I Y - . ' I -� 4. SECOND RDOR ROOMS AND STADtWAY TO BE INS:.SAT03 IN COMPLWNCE WITH THE WASHINGTON STATE ENEC.CODE ' _ I L I to--C' f II ,: t • I I , i ' :>-: _ ff I =- 1 I { '"'-2 Valley �"" '1 5. ALL F:JCPS AT FIRST LEVEL TO BE CONCRETE FlY.S.I WITH CLEAR SEALANT.ALL FLOORS AT SECOND LEE E%CEPT TOILET ROW TO BE 1 { I ^'t , • . • FlMSI- 'AIM LEES COMMERCIAL CARPET PEBBLE WEAVE D.TOILET ROOM TO RED FMISIIE WOH ARMSTRONG SLIMED SNEE VINYL ALL I i /��7�..�1 ROOK MTN FLOORS)M HAVE E BURKE TOPS_RESTL IANT BASEb `r , -1 - -1-i I- -i-- ---- I i Medical l�S.l1G�l 5- All POCvS AT SECOND LEVEL TO WAVE Y,4•S.:45NOE.D CEILING SYST'll WITH ACOUSTIC PANES. 7 - I I , - , -I.- I- -I; ^. - --c. - ie - I Center 7. ALL irOES SHALL COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE CODES AND ORDINANCES IN FCRCEE AT TIME Cf^ UCDGIL i I al' I I' I i r I - - -- ---- i; -ry! • a. Van'AL DIMENSIONS AND COMMONS ON DE-GE.BEFORE PROCEEDING WTM THE WORK DISCREPEHCS.7 ANY,AGE TO I' I' ! ! I I I i I ! I -'-•" 1IMIWINEMINImilln BE IMTEIATELY RM.:FRFD TO TIE ARCHITECT FO:DE ERIRNADON ON KW TO PROCEED. 11 '-II 1+m_R L C SLIM I I 1 I ' ) .:ra,A-, I I • I b,i D .qOR •.I ' ISPAT Ga'%:ca.'7 9. ALL DCCR.S.NOT LOCATED BY DO<cNSAN 0.Y PLAYS OR DETAJS,SHALL 9E 5 FRCAI FACE d STUDS iD E.C's DOOR C?EVYNG. I (1 I,J ' ' - _ I. _I E 10. THE ?ACTOR SHALL PROVIDE ALL OPENINGS AID RCUGN-0OUTS Tr'.RC)rti SLABS.Wk15,OR CEILOICS R OCCT5.?L .COI ATS. I •! M1I-1 :� I -i I� I -- -- ' CA3LVE'AND EQUIPMENT.CONTRACTOR SKILL VE2)Y SILK AND LOCATION Of AL PENETRATKNS BEFORE PING WIN WORK. {I L;j- --- I , - --- L --- --- _ - ---- I i 1 1. PROVIT.CSIIRE MEETING THE R'_OUIREMENTS C GOVERNING FIRE AUTHOWITS,BETW£cA ALL FIRE RATE;=_OCRS.SHAFTS,AND • I gLJ.A]AY TRENCH 22 W O.:2:r (2)3.--I PAI OOGT ^� BW1.^"h,R.ARIRICNS AND ANT PEN._,RATINC DIUZ>,PIPES,CONDUIT.UECWA' ELCTRCAL AND OTHER.:_VS. ?I ?wnATrro aw. -ARII'COI•S'L:SEWS II-A �- "-C HM M A R L U M (2)3'4 MI DOGS (2)250 TA.O2 Doe., I LI( 'A PRLFACRICATED DROP- D0.1RS 12. THE WN7ACTOR SHALL VERIFY AL ROUWL-IN ONJENS'ONS AND EQUIPMENT FIRNELM AND INSTAN.LE1,`_`r_CN PACTOR OR OTHERS "I wTH ACOUSTIC SFAS ,DPIDWZ?Lwi IT 13M.If n3 IG.MI CNRS MO.PC I��J M LEX i:ARRAY & N O R D F O R 5 PRIOR-.r"4.DCEa'C1NC WITH THE WORK �- • r 1 \ Y M t K I N L E Y i -- :--1 - I-- 1 -- ti--1 -- ,---1 -' L Ill, / .1"I 'Tw :.,i GORDON • 13. ALL,C IT ACTCA FURNISHED GE tS SWILL BE SL-:7 WITH REQUIRED MEC'AYICU_AND P..ECT TCAL SERR:CES TO"rR.R'S'�E PROPER I E i 'I ) OR .AX.'v OF(T3LS FURNIS40_ - I� tp•-7 { ) I.�N' I 11 fO• 1 - .-. u i (z)rx Nu DDDRs 14. CC4 RI..^' W.L COOROIKTE 51111 ALL CWh'E?�?YISNED STEINS AND F9'�1'.T.E ALL REUSED MECIAAA0- ELECTRICAL I I 4 II I, 4 I I ,I Y rwIDN ACONs,�sFAs I tl 2505 CONHEC LNS.RRCWDING 5TU9 OUS FOR NEW Ah,FUTURE WORK L1 ,F I I,ti;_ { I _• L ' I I• --41 I __ J Third Avenue 1 �� ) 3 =:. -1 Suite 219 15. ALL ELECTRICAL PATES.FIRE E CTIM0.l'ER CARNETS AND O:T'4..i REC'.5,'•ED CAS'NET SNAIL:E:.:1157R17CTEO TO I I: I F �' 'I �:- WUhTAN THE FLOE RATING OF THE PM�.,.ON IN WHICH THE UhTT 5:STALLED. 1 11 i, Y�� 1 % �: '1 -1 'i ;' =! I I Seattle.WA • N ? 98121 16. AT ME.A STUD PARTITIONS.SITMS ARE TO!CENT:FROM FLOOR TO U.NtE CF STRUCTURE ABCVE,Lin OTHEWISrE NOTED. 1 -- --- '--- --- '-, '-l- . I I i WHERE=_-l'CANNOT CO 50,00 TO LV^,Eh'fE.REti'E Cf OLSR,PIPING.�PROVIDE?.RAC:L'o TO SDRNMS ABOVE ip PRO,RW'E FOR t - N • 206 441 4 1 S I - ECLIVAit-YT SUPPORT OF?AMMON.ALL FIRE RAC RARRDONS SHALL BE CJrTiRArYD TO MAINTAIN TTTR RATING FROM Fuca TO I IT ' ~ 20 6 441 0478 F UE'OEZ° OF STRUCTURE ABOVE --.-.FIRST FLOOR PLAN � EM 15310 n POI N T 17. ALL WKMLv CONTACT WITH CONCRETE CR MHASN'T"'SHALL BE PR CITE-='FETi:ATP,40 EAtSD. '--� WL•' :/d'44-0' !s S IO PC I I A 1 T -'H�2 18. LOCATE 000?OWN:.AT AU.WALL YOLMTE,D ITEVG. AL WOW BLOCKING EMI. FU4E-RETAR 4V'T MATEi:A1 {.'M �+Q �y r 19. AL,Ca NG ?ENS SOON SYSTEMS '1 HAVE-wNC REST�..NTS PER LWA RUE- NG^-:.-=AND Ofie7w CO< Ell t 1 s V I o l T POI N T 3 i2C. ALL O.in CRR?AMMONS Yu ti 3-S/5 lAL S'wa UNLESS OTHMISE KM. Mlssion poi nT4 • civ • 83'_. - ' I - -2 d-Y .r-i. -e-Y Y-t _ .-_ S•-C, c is d I i I 1 1 i PROJECT NUMBER: 98258 DATE: NOV 28, 1995 I I IVDT DRAWN: SDH CHECKED: S I I f]'ODOR SEALS , I I \ Sale SOMA SCUM I, SOUM SCUM/ /.`/ I I .1 ! I I I r I ' - : I ATGDAMTOR ARO0LROR (ATT IIUATLXa.1 I A (ATTEYLNITR '..:. O / 27•_:7 I REVISIONS 1 I , -ACOUST4 OLA21C _ :t•-t' PR7!°?",A:e-D VEIN.S13t �.,.;I /�> Ill --- (Li 1DMras 1 N / �� I I J al \ I ?FOR;* :V- I \ I �, `t.r i `Yj - 'l� :i�� /!�.� ( -Al �N f^^� :- �- > ' � 000 I\�4 "11 WIDOW PAD I -� I I ILJ I�� I I ! -. -.-. -. -. -. . J. . -.- .- . I 15_A• -. _ - - I III:ICR 1 � •N �Jl••-P, r-a 1 1 _ FUME EWA SUDOC ' A ROHLR sA7S l I L` I �i (4)BOIIE.':,AfJIS -\\\ _I -- ^i -;..'--2-,_'' !!c) D-1 _() d 1 !! c 7 o d�� 1• _ , �i CO-GENERATION 1I 'I ` " ' FACILITY f \.cd� ! , ,, `L®� /` �-I11RRE RDeLR SAO DrRNSPDur-, \LL_ I rJ I C....LJ/ (70 3 ROOF F'AN ,-SECOND FLOOR PLAN FLOOR AND ROOF PLANS SCALE: lit•'•-'7 •2,SLOE, I/Y.r.-7 L al • Z A2. 1 SECTION 5 SECTION 5 - PSAPCA REGULATIONS Since the cogeneration plant is a new source of emissions, Article 6, New Source review of PSAPCA Regulation I was reviewed for applicability to this project. It appears that this project is exempt-the engine cylinder bore is below the threshold level. A preliminary permit application was prepared and discussed with Mr.Fred Austin and Mr. Jay Willenberg. Their feeling was that a permit is required. A copy of Mr. Austin's letter is enclosed as Exhibit 5-1. The letter confirms that a permit is required but does not cite the applicable regulations. VMC has reexamined the regulations and reconfirmed the initial conclusion that this project is exempt from a PSAPCA permit. The applicable PSAPCA regulations with key paragraphs marked are enclosed as Exhibit 5-2. PSAPCA's comments on VMC's interpretation of the regulations are welcome. VMC's conclusions are based on the following regulations: 1. Section 6.03 (a) states that a Notice of Construction and Application for Approval is required for every"air contaminant source, except those sources that excluded in Exhibit A of Section 5.03...." 2. Exhibit A - Insignificant Sources lists 11 emission sources that are excluded. Exhibit A- Insignificant Sources (4) excludes "internal combustion engines less than the size thresholds of the proposed United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) New Source Performance Standards(NSPS)40 CFR Part 60 Subpart FF (Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, 44 FR 43152 7/23/79)...." 3. The 44 FR 43152 regulation Article 60.320(a)is applicable to"all gas engines that are greater than 350 cubic inch displacement per cylinder or equal to or greater than 8 cylinders and greater than 240 cubic inch displacement per cylinder". 4. This cogeneration project will have four, spark ignition, natural gas fueled internal combustion engines. The proposed engines are not large bore. Each of the Jenbacher engines has 20 cylinders with a total displacement of 2,970 cubic inches or 148.5 cubic inches per cylinder, well below the large bore regulation applicability threshold of 240 cubic inches. 5. Thus, VMC concludes that the requirements of 44 FR 43152, do not apply to these engines because their bore is below 240 cubic inches. The exclusion criteria of Exhibit A - Insignificant Sources is met. Per 6.03(a) the project is excluded from filing and obtaining PSAPCA approval of the Notice of Construction. VMC selected these engines because they are the lowest emission, highest efficiency engines available today. The low emission criteria was imposed for the specific purpose of meeting perceived PSAPCA regulations. VMC was not aware that a PSAPCA regulations did not apply until the permit preparation process discovered:the lack of regulation. VMC has been and intends to remain a good citizen of the Puget Sound area and does not wish to set the precedent of a non PSAPCA permitted project. The project meets PSAPCA standards. VMC has therefore decided to follow the intent of 5-1 PSAPCA regulations as if the project was NOT excluded under Article 5.03 Exhibit A-Insignificant S � � Sources. 44 FR 43152 subpart FF 60.322(a)(3) defines the NOx standard for engines with brake-specific fuel consumption of less than or equal to 10.2 kilojoules/watt hour. The expected fuel consumption by engines selected for this project is expected to be 4.53 kilojoules/watt hour. The criteria of 60.322(a)(3)(i)fixes the maximum allowable NOx emissions 1576 parts per million volume corrected to 15 percent oxygen on a dry basis. The manufacturer guarantees that the engine NOx emissions will not exceed 87.5 parts per million. The NOx requirements are met. The standard calculations are detailed in Table 5-1. The above calculations show that the selected engines meet the emissions criteria. The second test is to establish if the project is a Major Modification. PSAPCA Regulation I Sections 6.07(c) and(d) lists the applicable criteria. The emissions criteria of 6.07(d) apply to a Major Modification. Major Modification criteria, calculated project Maximum Potential Emissions(operating all equipment at full load for the maximum annual hours), and range of expected project emissions are tabulated below. Since the project is burning natural gas in an internal combustion engine, the PM10, Sulfur Dioxide and lead criteria at not applicable and therefore not listed. The expected cogeneration operating envelope is varied based on thermal and power demands form VMC. Emissions listed are for the minimum and maximum expected operating conditions. Actual operation will probably fall somewhere within that range. The cogeneration system operating conditions and project emissions are discussed in detail in Section 6. Pollutant Major Modification Range of Actual Expected Tons/yr Tons/yr CO 100 40.04-58.42 VOC 40 6.30-9.15 NOx 40 15.64-24.83 The above values show that the Ject is not a Ma J ro' jor Modification and Section 6.07(d) does not P apply. Only the criteria of Section 6.07(c) apply to this project. The following section discusses the emissions calculations and demonstrates that the criteria of Section 6.07(c) are met. it 5-2 _ r PUGET. . SOUND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY __.,......__.._._._.__.__....___..._—_=_ KING COUNTY ,5 KITSAP COUNT\ PIERCE COUNTY SNOHOMISH COUNTY r January 18, 1996 RECEIVED Romulo M. Almeda Administrator-Support Services Valley Medical Hospital .lr:'t, 199E 400 S 43rd St ,WIELAND,LINDGREN&ASSOCIATES,INC. Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Almeda: Preliminary Notice of Construction Permit Application Valley Medical Hospital Cogeneration Plant After reviewing the information supplied for the planned cogeneration plant at your Valley Medical Hospital facility, Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) has determined the requirements of Regulation I, Article 6, New Source Review (copy enclosed), apply to this installation. The current Notice of Construction Application is stamped "Preliminary." When we receive a complete application, we will evaluate it for approval with respect to applicable regulatory requirements and the employment of Best Available Control Technology as defined in Regulation I, Sections 1.07(k) and 6.07(c)(3) (copies enclosed). In your submittal, page 6-4 contains guaranteed emission rates and asserts that "Performance of the system indicates that it is the Best Available Control Technology for this application." Please provide more details to verify this assertion, such as examples of other comparable installations and include basic economic evaluation for emission controls. Please contact me at 689-4055, if you have any questions. Sincerely, ` a a/ Fred L. Austin Air Pollution Engineer mj Enclosures cc: D. S. Kircher J. M. Willenberg - D. J. Gribbon ocnnis I..\c1erran.Air Pollution Control()nicer BOARD O F D ! RECTOR S Ch.nrrnan:Win Craniund,Commissioner,Kit%ap Count., Lvn!:'S.Horton.Mayor.Bremerton ' lanes CI'aluur:ik,Member at Large R.C.Iohncon,(::ounrilman Snohnmi.h(hunt, Edward!).Hansen.Mayor,Everett Gary Locke,hint;Counts'Exe<uric EXHIBIT 5-1 110 Union Street, Suite 300, Seattle,WachinWlon 981L11-2038 i20E,t 343-8800 (800) __ ARTICLE 1: POLICY, SHORT TITLE, AND DEFINITIONS • SECTION 1.07 DEFINITIONS Adopted 03/13/68(12) Revised 07/08/70(126), 11/10/71 (135), 04/12/72(141), 05/10/72(142), 06/13/73(194), 03/18/76(361), 03/13/80(461), 10/13/83(547), 05/10/84(556), 02/13/86(597), 11/12/87(616), 06/09/88(621), 11/10/88(634), 12/08/88(636), 01/12/89(639), 08/10/89(644), 06/13/91 (700), 01/09/92(716), 11/19/92(738), 04/14/94(784) When used herein: (k) BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGY means technology that will result in an emission standard, including a visible emission standard, based on the maximum degree of reduction which the Agency, on a case-by- case basis, taking into account energy, environmental, and economic impacts, and other costs, determines is achievable for such source through application of production processes, available methods, systems, and techniques, including fuel cleaning or treatment, clean fuels, or innovative fuel combustion techniques for control of each air contaminant. In no event shall application of the best available control technology result in emissions of any air contaminant that would exceed the emissions allowed by any applicable standard under 40 CFR Parts 60, 61, and 63. The Agency may prescribe a design, equipment, work practice, or operational standard, or combination thereof, to meet the requirements of best available control technology. Such standard shall, to the degree possible, set forth the emission reduction achievable by implementation of such design, equipment, work practice, or operation and shall provide for compliance by means that achieve equivalent results. ARTICLE 6: NEW SOURCE REVIEW SECTION 6.03 NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION Adopted 03/13/68(12) Revised 11/10/71(135), 11/21/74(285), 03/13/80(461), 12/09/82(531), 02/13/86(597), 11/19/92(73?) (a) No person shall construct, install, establish, or modify an air contaminant source, except those sources that are excluded in Exhibit A of Section 5.03, unless a "Notice of Construction and Application for Approval" has been filed with and approved by the Agency. I I (b) Each Notice of Construction and Application for Approval shall be submitted on forms provided by the Agency and shall be accompanied by a set of plans that fully describes the proposed source, the means for prevention or control of the emissions of air contaminants, and any additional information required by the Board or Control Officer to demonstrate that the proposed source will meet the requirements of Section 6.07. (c) Within 30 days of receipt of a Notice of Construction and Application for Approval, the Agency shall notify the applicant in writing if any additional information is necessary to complete the application. SECTION 6.06 PUBLIC NOTICE Adopted 11/21/74(285) Revised 03/13/80(461), 04/14/94(784) (a) The Agency shall provide public notice for any proposed Order of Approval if: (1) The proposed installation or modification would increase the emissions of any air contaminant by more than the following: Air Contaminant Tons/Year Carbon Monoxide 100.0 VOC 40.0 Nitrogen Oxides 40.0 PM10 15.0 Sulfur Dioxide 40.0 Lead 0.6 Fluorides 3.0 Sulfuric Acid 7.0 Total Reduced Sulfur 10.0 (2) The applicant requests a limit on the potential to emit; (3) The applicant requests to bank emission reduction credits; (4) The applicant requests approval of a risk analysis; (5) The proposed installation or modification involves refuse burning equipment; or (6) The Control Officer determines that there may be substantial public interest in the proposal. • SECTION 6.07 ORDER OF APPROVAL - ORDER TO PREVENT CONSTRUCTION Adopted 03/13/68(12) Revised 11/10/71(135), 10/10/73(214), 11/21/74(285), 10/13/83(547), 02/13/86(597), 11/12/87(616), 05/11/89(643), 11/19/92(738), 07/08/93(756), 04/14/94(784) (a) Within 60 days of receipt of a complete Notice of Construction and Application for Approval, or as promptly as possible after the close of the public comment period if subject to the public notice requirements of Section 6.06 of this Regulation, the Board or Control Officer shall issue an Order of Approval or an Order to Prevent Construction. A person seeking approval to construct or modify a source that requires an operating permit may elect to integrate review of the operating permit application or amendment required by Article 7 of this Regulation provided that any such application shall be processed in accordance with the operating permit program procedures and deadlines. 1(b) An Order of Approval may provide such conditions of operation as are reasonably necessary to assure compliance with all applicable emission standards. (c) No Order of Approval shall be issued unless the Notice of Construction and Application for Approval demonstrates to the Board or Control Officer that: (1) The operation of the source at the location proposed will not cause or contribute to a violation of an ambient air quality standard; (2) The source will meet the requirements of all applicable emission standards; (3) Best available control technology is employed for the installation of new sources and the modification of existing sources; and (4) Reasonably available control technology is employed for the replacement of existing control equipment. SECTION 6.09 NOTICE OF COMPLETION Adopted 03/13/68(12) Revised 02/13/86(597), 11/19/92(738), 04/14/94(784) • Within 30 days of completion of the installation or modification of an air contaminant source subject to the provisions of Section 6.03 of this Regulation, the owner or operator or applicant shall file a Notice of Completion with the Agency. Each Notice of Completion shall be submitted on a form provided by the Agency, and shall specify the date upon which operation of the source has commenced or will commence. • ARTICLE 6: NEW SOURCE REVIEW SECTION 6.03 NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION Adopted 03/13/68(12) Revised 11:10/71(135), 11/21/74(285), 03/13/80(461), 12/09/82(531), 02/13/86(597), 11/19/92(738) (a) No person shall construct, install, establish, or modify an air contaminant source, except those sources that are excluded in Exhibit A of Section 5.03, unless a 'Notice of Construction and Application for Approval" has been filed with and approved by the Agency. (b) Each Notice of Construction and Application for Approval shall be • • submitted on forms provided by the Agency and shall be accompanied by a set of plans that fully describes the proposed source, the means for prevention or control of the emissions of air contaminants, and any additional information required by the Board or Control Officer to demonstrate that the proposed source will meet the requirements of • Section 6.07. (c) Within 30 days of receipt of a Notice of Construction and Application for Approval, the Agency shall notify the applicant in writing if any additional information is necessary to complete the application. SECTION 6.04 NOTICE OF CONSTRUCTION REVIEW FEES • Adopted 10/10/73(214) Revised 12/12/73(218), 11/21/74(285), 03/13/80(461), 02/13/86(597), 06/09/88(621), 05/11/89(643), 11/14/91(710), 09/10/92 (734), 11/19/92(738), 07/08/93(756), 10/28/93(765) A Notice of Construction and Application for Approval is incomplete until the Agency has received a plan examination fee as shown below: • Fuel Burning Equipment: (rated heat input- million Btu/hr) 1 less than 10.0 $ 300.00 10.0 or more but less than 100.0 $ 1,000.00 100.0 or more but less than 250.0 $10,000.00 250.0 or more $20,000.00 Control Equipment or Equipment Used in a Manufacturing Process: (acfm) less than 25,000 $ • 300.00 25,000 or more but less than 100,000 $ 1,000.00 100,000 or more $ 5,000.00 • Refuse Burning Equipment: (rated capacity) 12 tons per day or less $ 5,000.00 • greater than 12 tons per day but less than 250 tons per day $20,000.00 250 tons per day or greater $50,000.00 EXHIBITS-2 10/95 6-1 Regulation I. EXHIBIT A - INSIGNIFICANT SOURCES Exclusions: (1) Ventilating systems, including fume hoods, not designed to prevent or reduce air contaminant emissions. (2) Fuel burning equipment that has a maximum input rate of: (i) less than 0.5 million Btu per hour (0.15 million joules per second) burning waste-derived fuel; or (ii) less than 10 million Btu per hour (3 million joules per second) burning natural gas, propane, or butane; or (iii) less than 1 million Btu per hour (0.3 million joules per second) burning any other fuel. (3) Insecticide, pesticide, or fertilizer spray equipment. (4) Internal combustion engines less than the size thresholds of the proposed United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart FF (Stationary Internal Combustion Engines, 44 FR 43152 7/23/79) or the promulgated EPA NSPS 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart GG (Stationary Gas Turbines). (5) Laboratory equipment used exclusively for chemical or physical analyses. (6) Laundry dryers without control equipment. • (7) Dryers or ovens used solely to accelerate evaporation. (8) Routing, turning, carving, cutting, and drilling equipment used for metal, wood, plastics, rubber, leather, or ceramics which does not release air contaminants to the ambient air. (9) Storage tanks: (i) that do not store substances capable of emitting air contaminants; or (ii) with a rated capacity of 1,000 gallons (3,780 liters) or less used for storage of gasoline; or (iii) with a rated capacity of less than 10,000 gallons (38,000 liters) used for storage of volatile organic compounds; or (iv) with a rated capacity of less than 40,000 gallons (150,000 liters) used for storage of volatile organic compounds with a true vapor pressure less than 0.01 kPa (0.002 psia). (10) Sanitary or storm drainage systems. (11) Welding, brazing, or soldering equipment. 10/95 5-2 Regulation I 810 ENVIRONMENT REPORTER , Dated:July 11. 1979. (d) "Peak load" means operation at (J) From any stationary internal . Douglas M.Castle. 100 percent of the manufacturers design combustion engine with a brake-specific 9drrtinrs:raror. capacity. fuel consumption at peak load of less It is proposed to amend Part 60 of (e) "Diesel engine"means any than or equal to 10.2 kilojoules/watt- Chapter I.Title of the Code of Federal stationary internal combustion engine hour any gases which contain nitrogen Regulations as follows: burning a liquid fuel. oxides in excess of: 1.By adding Subpart FF as follows: (I) "Cos enine"means any stationary Internal combustion engine burning a Subpart FF—Standards of Performance for gaseous fuel. (i) SI'O = 700 1° 2 for any gas engine, • Stationary Internal Combustion Engines (g) "Dual-fuel engine"means any 10.2 stationary internal combustion engine (i i) STO = 600 —� for any diesel or Sec. 60.320 Applicability and designation of that is burning liquid and gaseous fuel dual-fuel engine ' affected facility. simultaneously. 60.321 Definitions. (h) "Unmanned engine"means any where: 60.322 Standards for nitrogen oxides. stationary internal combustion engine STD = allowable NO,emissions(parts-per- ' ' 60.323 Monitoring of operations. installed and operating at a location million volume corrected to 15 percent 60.324 Teat methods and procedures. which does not have an operator oxygen on a dry basis). th Auority:Secs.111 and 301(a)of the Clean regularly present at the site fur some Y = manufacturer's rated brake-specfic fuel Air Act,as amended.(42 U.S.C-1857c-7, portion of a 24-hour day. consumption at peak load(kilojoules per 1557g(e)). and additional authority as noted (I) "Non-remote operation"means any watt-hour►or owner/operator's brake- below. engine installed and operating at a specific fuel consumption at peak load as loction which has an operator regularly determined in the field. Subpart FF—Standards of present at the site for some portion of a (b) All one and two cylinder PKforntanea for Stationary internal 24-hour day. reciprocating gas engines are exempt ' Combustion Engines (j) "Brake-specific fuel consumption" from paragraph (a)of this section. 6o;32a Applicability and designation of means fuel input heat rate, based on the (c) Emergency standby engines are affected facility. lower heating value of the fuel, exempt from paragraph(a)of this • expressed on the basis of power output section. 1 The provisions of this subpart are (i.e.. (kJ/w-hr). applicable to the following affected ¢60.323 Monitoring of operations, facilities which commence construction (k)i"Weekly basis"means at seven beginning30 months from today's date: day intervals. (a)The owner or operator of any y (1) "Daily basis"means at 24 hours stationary internal combustion engine. -. . (a)All gas engines that are either intervals, subject to the provisions of this subpart , !relater than 350 cubic inch displacement must: a on a weekly basis for unmanned ' der cylinder or equal to or greater than 8 (m) "Rotary engine"means any engines and on a daily basis for n need cylinders and greater than 240 cubic Wankel type engine where energy from engines, monitor and record the inch displacement per cylinder. the combustion of fuel is converted following parameters.All monitoring (b)All diesel or dual-fuel engines that directly to rotary motions instead of systems shall be accurate to within five reciprocating motion. are greater than 560 cubic inch (n) "Displacement per rotor"means percent and shall be approved by the displacement per cylinder. Administrator. -the volume contained in the chamber of (c)All rotary engines that are greater a rotary engine between one flank of the (1) For diesel and dual-Fuel engines: than; 1500 cubic inch displacement per rotor and the housing at the instant the (i) Intake manifold temperature rotor- inlet port is closed, (ii) Intake manifold pressure ¢f30.321 Definitions. (iii) Engine speed §60-fl22 Standards for nitrogen oxides. (iv) Diesel rack position(fuel flow) As used in this subpart, all terms not (a) On and after the date on which the (v) Injector timing defined herein shall have the meaning performance test required to be (2) For gas engines: given them in the Act or in subpart.A of conducted by 4 60.8 is completed.no (I) Intake manifold temperature this part. owner or operator subject to the (ii) Intake manifold pressure (a) "Stationary Internal combustion provisions of this subpart shall cause to (iii) Fuel header pressure engine"means any internal combution be discharged into the atmosphere. (iv) Engine speed engine.except gas turbines, that is not except as provided in paragraphs(b) (v)Spark ignition timing self propelled.It may.however, be and(c) of this section— (b) For the purpose of reports required mounted on a vehicle for.portability. (1) From any gas engine.with a brake- under Q 80.7(c). periods of excess. (b) "Emergency standby engine" specific fuel consumption at peak load emissions that shall be reported are means any stationary internal more than or equal to 10.2 kilojoules/ defined as any daily(for manned combustion engine which operates as a watt-hour any gases which contain . engines) or weekly(for unmanned mechanical or electrical power source nitrogen oxides in excess of 700 parts engines) period during which any one of only when the primary power source for per million volume.corrected to 15 the parameters specified under a facility has been rendered inoperable percent oxygen on a dry basis. paragraph (a) of this section falls during an emergency situation. (2)From any diesel or dual-fuel engine outside the range identified for that (c)"'Reference ambient conditions" with a brake-specific fuel consumption parameter under 4 60.324(a)(3).Each rneans standard air temperature(29.4*C, at peak load more than or equal to 10.2 excess emission report shall include the or 8.5 F), humidity (17 grams H.O/kg dry kilojoules/watt-hour any gases which range identified for each operating • . - . or 75 grains H.O/Ib dry air), and contain nitrogen oxides in excess of B00 parameter under f 60.324(a)(4),the 1 ' assure (101.3 kilopascals. or 29.92 in. parts per million volume,corrected to 15 monitored value for each operating 1 Hg.) percent oxygen on a dry basis, parameter specified under f 130.323(a), 7-27-79 Published by THE BUREAU OF NATIONAL AFFAIRS.INC.WASHINGTON 0 C 20037 1 • • TABLE 5-1 ENGINE NOx STANDARD NOx standard for internal combustion engines per 44 FR 43152 Subpart FF 60.322 (3) For any gas engine with fuel consumption of less than or equal to 10.2 kilojoules/watt hour STD=700 X(10.2/Y) Where: STD= allowable NOx emissions, ppm at 15% 02. Y= manufacturer's rated brake specific fuel consumption at peak load, kJ/w hr Jenbacher engine specific fuel consumption 6,332 Btu/hp hr Conversion factors Btu/kJ = 1.055 kW/hp 0.7547 Convert 6332 Btu per brake hp hour to kilojoules per watt hour hp to kw 6332 Btu/hp hr X 0.7547 kw/hp = 4,779 Btu/kw hr Btu to kilojoules 4,779 Btu/kw hr / 1.055 Btu/kj = 4,530 kJ/kw hr kw hr to w hr 4,530 kJ/kw hr / 1000 w/kw = 4.53 kJ/w hr Result 6332 Btu/hp hr = 4.53 kJ/w hr Calculate NOx Standard for Jenbacher engine STD = 700 X(10.2/Y) Y= 4.53 Specific fuel consumption from above 10.2/Y= 2.25 STD = 1576 ppm NOx at 15% 02 Jenbacher guarantee NOx emission 87.5 ppm NOx at 15% 02 Performance exceeds standard 18 times Actual NOx as% of standard 6% SECTION 6 SECTION 6 - PROJECT EMISSIONS The new project is a cogeneration facility. It will burn natural gas in engines to generate electric power and also supply the thermal needs(as hot water or steam)of the VMC campus. Water cooling of the engine jackets will provide hot water for VMC use. Engine exhaust gas will flow to waste heat boilers which will generate steam for use by the existing VMC steam system. The existing boilers will be shut down at all times the cogeneration system is in operation. This versatility of the cogeneration system allows many operating modes. Cogeneration Operating Modes The thermal and power demands of VMC shown in Figures 2-2 and 2-3 do not exactly match the thermal and electric power generation capabilities of the engines. When the engines are operated to match thermal demand, they do not generate enough electricity to meet the electric power needs of VMC. This electric power deficiency is met by power purchased from Puget Power. This operating mode is hereafter called Thermal Demand Following. The cogeneration system can also be operated to match the electric power demand. In this case, an excess of thermal energy is available which then must be dissipated through radiators and bypassing of the waste heat boilers. This operating mode is hereafter called Power Demand Following. Three engines will meet the requirements of VMC under either mode of operation. Since VMC is a hospital the fourth standby system is installed. It will not normally be operated. Normal operation of the cogeneration system will be with three engine trains operating under load conditions that will vary between the two extreme conditions of Thermal Demand Following and Power Demand Following. VMC and the surrounding area have experienced occasional failures of the Puget Power electric system. The cogeneration plant is designed to continue operation during times of Puget Power outages. Upon failure of Puget Power the tie breaker connecting VMC to Puget Power will open and VMC will continue operation. It is not inconceivable that during times of power outages Puget Power might request that the tie breaker be reclosed to allow VMC to provide power to sections of the Puget Power system. In this case the electrical demand of the cogeneration system will require full power operation. Two full power scenarios are possible, three engines running at full load, or all four engines running at full load. Since this full load operation first requires a lengthy failure and then cooperation from Puget Power, this operating mode is not expected to be occur frequently, if at all. It is included here to provide a description of all possible operating modes of the cogeneration system. The operating modes are shown graphically in Figure 6-1. The figure shows cogeneration power production during the various operating modes. The striped area under the lowest curve is the power generated annually if the system were run in the Thermal Demand Following mode. The total area (striped plus white)under the second lowest curve shows power generated annually while operating in the Power Demand Following mode. The actual operating condition of the cogeneration system at any specific time will be somewhere between the two curves, or within the white area of the chart. 6-1 • COGENERATION SYSTEM OPERATING LIMITS Basis - 1994 actual thermal and electrical demands ® Thermal Demand Following ❑ Power Demand Following Maximum cababilty 3 engines ❑ Maximum capability, 4 • engines 4,000,000 3,500,000 3,000,000 2 50 0 000 _ . ..:.... ........ :: ................ Sri L !i 2 r 000i000 Ili As��+* 4 Ili II u �llllI:!�::lLi.IpI iI .i";t u:t:•.!: GJ., s,I�.rtt,i :t"•i #,.. 1�{yh-.��� "S°•!�`�}.�;`.1,500,000 - 1,000,000 - Cogeneration operating region 500,000 0 - I I I I I I I I I I Jan Feb. Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec MONTH Cr, The area under the third curve is the maximum annual power generation if three engines were operating at maximum load. The power in the shaded above the white Cogeneration Operating Region would have to be sold to Puget Power. Puget Power does not require additional power supplies for the next 5 to 10 years and VMC has not considered producing power to supply Puget Power. As mentioned above, operation at this level could be expected only during Puget Power outages. The top curve is also a hypothetical operating condition. It shows the annual power generated Wall four engines operated at the maximum capability. The operating mode corresponds to the Maximum Potential to Emit condition calculated per the permit application requirements. The curves clearly show that existing VMC campus thermal and electrical power needs are such that 3 engine trains will satisfy them. Since the systems serve a hospital, the fourth cogeneration system is installed as a standby system for the normally operating systems. The existing boilers become a second level of standby to be used only when the capacity of the cogeneration system is exceeded. The project emission process flow diagram is shown in Figure 6-2. Calculated emissions values shown are for the expected operating boundary modes of Thermal Demand Following and Power Demand Following. Expected Emissions The energy needs of VMC are primarily dictated by the hospital population and ambient weather conditions. Expansion of VMC facilities is not anticipated, the population in the immediate future will remain as it was in 1994. The local weather in 1994 was close to the average experienced in the area. Thus 1994 use of natural gas by the boilers is also a very reasonable predictor for expected operating conditions of the cogeneration system. Expected cogeneration system operating conditions and emissions were calculated for the boundary operating conditions of Thermal Demand Following and Power Demand Following. The calculations are displayed in Tables 6-1 and 6-2 respectively. The Maximum Potential Emission calculations are displayed in Table 6-3. The step by step calculations are described below. Thermal Demand Following, Table 6-1 1. Column 3, Existing Boiler Therms is the actual 1994 monthly boiler gas use reported in Table 3-1. 2. Column 4,Existing Boiler Therms as Steam converts the gas use of Column 3 to boiler steam production assuming an average boiler efficiency of 80%. This boiler steaming rate must be matched by the cogeneration system. 3. Dividing Column 4 by Column 2, Hours per Month yields Column 5, the average monthly steam flow in therms per hour. 4. Each cogeneration system at full load will produce a total of 38.78 therms per hour of usable thermal energy. Approximately 54% of the energy will be as hot water and 46% as steam. Since only approximately 12%of the VMC steam supply must be used as steam in equipment like the sterilizer,the remaining 88% of the steam is converted into hot water. Thus all of the 6-3 �.. ..diiiivela I 2 3 4 5 6 7 IL 8 I 9 . A TOTAL EMISSIONS TOTAL EMISSIONS.(ToNs/YEAR) TOTAL EMISSIONS. (DNS/YEAR) A NOX o TONS/YR NOx INSIGNIFICANT OPERATING MODE NOx Co VOC CO 0 TONS/YR CO INSIGNIFICANT THERMAL DEMAND FOLLOW 15.64 40.04 6.30 VOC 0 TONS/YR VOC INSIGNIFICANT POWER DEMAND FOLLOW 24.83 58.42 9.15 nn A A A EMISSION EMISSION EMISSION EMISSION • PONT 1 POINT 2 POINT 3 PONT 4 B A A A A B EXISTING EXISTING EXISTINGEXISTING EXISTING EMERGENCY EMERGENCY EMERGENCY ETO INCINERATOR GENERATOR GENERATOR GENERATOR v~i (UNCHANGED) (UNCHANGED) DIESEL 1 DESEL 2 DIESEL 3 33 (UNCHANGED) (UNCHANGED) (UNCHANGED) W 6 6 Z,` Z C } _,g -1. HOT WATER HOT x R . TO HOSPITAL C 6X - I •• HOT WATEI� 308.000.THERMS/YR } } } } STEAM 6 6 STEM 6 TO HOSPITAL _ . . I. -1 STEAM > - 262.000 THERMS/YR Z. - NAT GAS - .- < g i 1 - 3 1 _ _ r _ D ~�8 `S DEB — I . — — D 0 x STEAM - } } } - EXHAUST L _Cl:)._ 1La ..... DiUtE _ WA _ BEAT =- . BEAT -. IFS -•. BEAT - • • MN L —0, —0 DfEMr i E M M M BO1EER 1 BOILE�.2 BOILER 3 BOILER 4 •. } STEAM f } 11 , I _i HOT WATER — 1 GEN 1 © r GENERATOR? © . 0 . ENERATOR 3 © r GENET R 4 l EXItER BOILER EOILER I ---� N ---i- I I TO HOSPITAL .I ELECTRIC 9 . �_ B41LEB 1 �_ B 2 B�LE�3 13 200.000 KW/YR F 7 F Q iF�l4X° ems° • 1Ee►!4x° �' Ste. MOM Sal. �0IflRO. I 1- 1. j - + NATURAL GAS NATURAL GAS _ 0 THERMS/YR 1,292 000 THERMS/YR ___ -_- _---__- - - �� - - zi - &.- _ R z G FIGURE 6-2 G i . "I'®n: Wieland Lindgren . .- WI s1...r Woof.Mt.I4 NONE a.�n•,r��.. rim MIS iah VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER EV we 1 monrna rr ac nnldu,.l I W : OOCEIERAIDI FACILITY H �i,�: H COGENERATION EMISSION mrro o. OV- 11I�O TINE FLOW DIAGRAM II AGO VERSION 12 NM Om MIMICSMIMICS- U OnE WO ouE 6WE WNW sum ono moot in I FILE:P.�2456\M'JD .2466-64 -i it I I--- 1 TOE J 2456-0I I M I IL 2 1 3 IL 4 1 5 I 6 IL 7 I 8 9 TABLE 6-1 COGENERATION SYSTEM EXPECTED OPERATION -THERMAL DEMAND FOLLOWING SINGLE COGENERATION TRAIN PARAMETERS Existing boiler efficiency 80% ' Full load steam gen 1808 lb/hr 1,790,643 Btu/hr Full load hot water 69,600 lb/hr 2,088,000 Btu/hr Total thermal 3,878,643 Btu/hr= 38.79 therms/hr Full load power 1274 hp/hr = 898 kW/hr Full load fuel 8,048,908 Btu LHV 918 Btu/cu ft Full load fuel 8,767,874 Btu HHV 1000 Btu/cu ft Full load fuel 87.68 therms/hr= 0.008768 million cu ft/hr • Engine emissions, full load, per engine Emission grams/hphr Conversion factor lb/hr NOx 1.00 454.55 grams/lb 2.80 CO 2.00 5.61 VOC 0.31 0.87 Existing Existing Existing Number Number EXPECTED COGENERATION Cogen. Boiler Boiler Steam engines engines % load ACTUAL EMISSIONS Power power total therms flow at full in on each NOx CO VOC demand generated Hours therms as steam therms/hr load service engine lb lb lb kWh kWh Col1 Col2 Col 3 Col 4 Cols Col 6 Col7 Col 8 Col 9 Col 10 Col 11 Col 12 Col 13 Jan 744 82,353 65,882 88.55 2.28 3 76% 4,761 9,522 1,476 1,850,526 1,525,337 Feb 672 80,953 64,762 96.37 2.48 3 83% 4,680 9,360 1,451 1,601,636 1,499,407 Mar 744 77,281 61,825 83.10 2.14 3 71% 4,468 8,935 1,385 1,595,356 1,431,394 Apr 720 57,780 46,224 64.20 1.66 2 83% 3,340 6,681 1,035 1,553,026 1,070,198 May 744 46,684 37,347 50.20 1.29 2 65% 2,699 5,398 837 1,529,546 864,678 Jun 720 47,858 38,286 53.18 1.37 2 69% 2,767 5,533 858 1,582,126 886,423 Jul 744 38,308 30,646 41.19 1.06 2 53% 2,215 4,429 687 1,707,696 709,539 Aug 744 34,330 27,464 36.91 0.95 1 95% 1,985 3,969 615 1,539,576 635,858 Sep 720 41,659 33,327 46.29 1.19 2 60% 2,408 4,817 747 1,700,176 771,606 Oct 744 47,924 38,339 51.53 1.33 2 66% 2,770 5,541 859 1,392,496 887,645 Nov 720 66,294 53,035 73.66 1.90 2 95% 3,832 7,665 1,188 1,611,396 1,227,894 Dec 744 92,765 74,212 99.75 2.57 3 86% 5,363 10,725 1,662 1,453,070 1,718,188 Total 8760 714,189 571,351 41,287 82,574 12,799 19,116,626 13,228,166 ,..3 Total cogeneration emissions,T/yr 20.64 41.29 6.40 a Boiler shut down emission reduction, T/yr 5.00 1.25 0.10 rNet effect of cogeneration on emissions, T/yr 15.64 40.04 6.30 Cn rn • A useful thermal energy from the engine, steam and hot water, can be used by the VMC system. Column 6 is calculated by dividing the hourly average steam flow of Column 5 by the 38.79 therms per hour per engine to derive the average Number of Engines at Full Load each month. Since partial engines cannot be operated the value of Column 6 rounded up to the next whole number results in Column 7, the actual Number of Engines in Service. 5. Column 12 tabulates the electric power demand in 1994 and Column 13 provides the actual power generated by the cogeneration system operated to meet thermal loads. The values of Column 12 are plotted in Figure 6-1 as the Thermal Demand Following curve. Column 13 is plotted as the Power Demand Following curve. Comparison of the two columns shows that the Thermal Demand Following cogeneration plant in the will provide about 70% of VMC annual power use. 6. The Jenbacher Leanox control can maintain minimum NOx emissions at engine loads between 50% and 100%. NOx controls deteriorate if engine loads fall below 50%. The average load on each engine (assuming the load is shared evenly) is calculated by dividing Column 6 by Column 7. At no time is the load such that load sharing will result in engine loads of less than 50%. Operating standards will require that should shared loads fall below 50%, one engine will be secured and load increased on the remaining engines to maintain load over 50%. The Leanox control system effectiveness will be retained at all times. 7. Jenbacher will guarantee that engine emissions at full power of 1274 horse power will not exceed the gram per horsepower hour(hp hr) emission rates shown in the Engine Emissions section of Table 6-1. These values were converted to the pound per hour emission rates shown. The pound per hour emission rate times Column 6, Number of Engines at Full Load, times Column 2, Hours per month provides the total pounds per month of emissions discharged as tabulated in Columns 9, 10, and 11 (Please note that the computer spread sheets carry longer numbers than the rounded off numbers shown. Calculated values using the rounded off table numbers as inputs might not exactly match the results shown). The columns are summed to calculate total annual expected emissions and then divided by 2000 to calculate annual emissions in tons per year. 8. Step number 7 above resulted in annual expected actual engine emission during normal Thermal Demand Following operation. The existing boilers will not be in operation when the cogeneration system is in operation and will no longer produce emissions. Therefore the true effect of the cogeneration project will be the net resulting emissions, new engine emissions less boiler emissions not produced. Boiler emissions not produced are equal to 1994 actual boiler emissions as listed in Table 3-1. The values are reproduced below. 6-6 •t A Net Emissions During Thermal Demand Following Operation Emission NOx CO VOC Tons/yr Tons/yr Tons/yr New emissions from engine operation 20.64 41.29 6.40 Less boiler emissions eliminated 5.00 1.25 .10 Net new emissions from cogeneration 15.64 40.04 6.30 Power Demand Following, Table 6-2 1. Column 3, Power Demand is the actual 1994 monthly power use by VMC. It also is listed as Column 12 in Table 6-1 and plotted as the Power Demand Following curve in Figure 6-1. 2. Column 4, Cogeneration power is equal to Column 3 and is the basis for all other calculations in the table. This ensures that 100% of the VMC power demand is met. 3. Dividing Column 4 by Column 2, Hours per Month yields Column 5, the average monthly power generation in kilowatts per hour. 4. Each cogeneration system at full load willproduce a total of 898 kilowatts per hour of electric g Y power. Column 6 is calculated by dividing the hourly average power of Column 5 by the 898 kW per hour per engine to derive the average Number of Engines at Full Load each month. Since partial engines cannot be operated the value of Column 6 rounded up to the next whole number results in Column 7, the actual Number of Engines in Service. 5. The Jenbacher Leanox control can maintain minimum NOx emissions at engine loads between 50% and 100%. NOx controls deteriorate if engine loads fall below 50%. The average load on each engine (assuming the load is shared evenly) is calculated by dividing Column 6 by Column 7. At no time is the load such that load sharing will result in engine loads of less than 50%. Operating standards will require that should shared loads fall below 50%, one engine will be secured and load increased on the remaining engines to maintain load over 50%. The Leanox control system effectiveness will be retained at all times. 6. Jenbacher will guarantee that engine emissions at full power of 1274 horse power will not exceed the gram per horsepower hour(hp hr) emission rates shown in the Engine Emissions section of Table 6-2(reproduced from Table 6-1). These values were converted to the pound per hour emission rates shown. The pound per hour emission rate times Column 6,Number of Engines at Full Load, times Column 2, Hours per month provides the total pounds per month of emissions discharged as tabulated in Columns 9, 10, and 11 (Please note that the computer spread sheets carry longer numbers than the rounded off numbers shown. Calculated values using the rounded off table numbers as inputs might not exactly match the 6-7 TABLE 6-2 COGENERATION SYSTEM EXPECTED OPERATION -POWER DEMAND FOLLOWING SINGLE COGENERATION TRAIN PARAMETERS 4 Full load steam gen 1808 lb/hr 1,790,643 Btu/hr Full load hot water 69,600 lb/hr 2,088,000 Btu/hr Total thermal 3,878,643 Btu/hr= 38.79 therms/hr Full load power 1274 hp/hr = 898 kW/hr Full load fuel 8,048,908 Btu LHV 918 Btu/cu ft Full load fuel 8,767,874 Btu HHV 1000 Btu/cu ft Full load fuel 87.68 therms/hr= 0.0087679 million cu ft/hr Engine emissions, full load, per engine Emission grams/hphr Conversion factor lb/hr NOx 1.00 454.55 grams/lb 2.80 CO 2.00 5.61 VOC 0.31 0.87 Cogen. Number Number EXPECTED COGENERATION Power power Average engines engines % load ACTUAL EMISSIONS demand generated power at full in on each NOx CO NMHC Hours kWh kWh kW/hr load service engine lb lb lb Col1 Col2 Col 3 Col 4 Col 5 Col 6 Col 7 Col 8 Col 9 Col 10 Col 12 Jan 744 1,850,526 1,850,526 2,487 2.77 3 92% 5775.78 11551.57 1790.49 Feb 672 1,601,636 1,601,636 2,383 2.65 3 88% 4998.96 9997.92 1549.68 Mar 744 1,595,356 1,595,356 2,144 2.39 3 80% 4979.36 9958.72 1543.60 Apr 720 1,553,026 1,553,026 2,157 2.40 3 80% 4847.24 9694.48 1502.64 May 744 1,529,546 1,529,546 2,056 2.29 3 76% 4773.95 9547.91 1479.93 Jun 720 1,582,126 1,582,126 2,197 2.45 3 82% 4938.07 9876.13 1530.80 Jul 744 1,707,696 1,707,696 2,295 2.56 3 85% 5329.99 10659.98 1652.30 Aug 744 1,539,576 1,539,576 2,069 2.30 3 77% 4805.26 9610.52 1489.63 Sep 720 1,700,176 1,700,176 2,361 2.63 3 88% 5306.52 10613.04 1645.02 Oct 744 1,392,496 1,392,496 1,872 2.08 3 69% 4346.20 8692.40 1347.32 Nov 720 1,611,396 1,611,396 2,238 2.49 3 83% 5029.42 10058.84 1559.12 Dec 744 1,453,070 1,453,070 1,953 2.17 3 72% 4535.26 9070.52 1405.93 Total 8760 19,116,626 19,116,626 59,666 119,332 18,496 Total cogeneration emissions, T/yr 29.83 59.67 9.25 YBoiler shut down emission reduction, T/yr 5.00 1.25 0.10 IT) Net effect of cogeneration plant, T/yr 24.83 58.42 9.15 r rn o, N .t �t results shown). The columns are summed to calculate total annual expected emissions and then divided by 2000 to calculate annual emissions in tons per year. 7. Step number 6 above resulted in annual expected actual engine emission during normal Power Demand Following operation. The existing boilers will not be in operation when the cogeneration system is in operation and will no longer produce emissions. Therefore the true effect of the cogeneration project will be the net resulting emissions, new engine emissions less boiler emissions not produced. Boiler emissions not produced are equal to 1994 actual boiler emissions as listed in Table 3-1. The values are reproduced below. Net Emissions During Power Demand Following Operation Emission NOx CO VOC Tons/yr Tons/yr Tons/yr New emissions from engine operation 29.83 59.67 9.25 Less boiler emissions eliminated 5.00 1.25 .10 Net new emissions from cogeneration 24.83 58.42 9.15 As discussed in the Cogeneration Operating Modes section above, the two emission calculations above are the extremes of all the cogeneration operating modes possible. Actual annual emissions from the cogeneration plant will be somewhere between the extremes. Exact condition would be defined by the weather, number of patients requesting treatment,type of treatment required, and other ambient conditions beyond VMC's control. The range of expected net emissions as calculated above is consolidated into one table below. Expected Range of Cogeneration Project Emissions Emission NOx CO VOC Tons/yr Tons/yr Tons/yr New emissions, Thermal Demand Follow 20.64 41.29 6.40 New emissions, Power Demand Follow 29.83 59.67 9.25 Less boiler emissions eliminated 5.00 1.25 .10 ' Range of net new emissions 15.64-24.83 40.04-58.42 6.30-9.15 6-9 . p. Maximum Potential Emissions, Table 6-3 Maximum potential to emit as defined by the Regulation (maximum capacity to emit an air contaminant under its physical and operational design) was calculated for the engines alone and also for the entire cogeneration project. For this calculation it was assumed that all four engines would be operated at full load during all times except during scheduled maintenance. As noted in the Cogeneration Operating Modes section above, this type of all four engine operation is very unlikely. Planned engine maintenance will require on average 750 hours, slightly more than a month, per year. Maximum possible engine operating hours then are 8010 hours per year. Planned engine maintenance will be performed in sequence during the low power demand months of March and April and November and December. The calculations are tabulated in Table 6-3. 1. Column 2 lists the actual hours per month. 2. Columns 3 - 6 show the operating hours of each of the four engines. All engine monthly operating hours are summed in Column 7. 3. Multiplying Column 7 times the engine emission rate gives monthly emission rates listed in Columns 8,9, and 10. The total of the columns divided by 2000 yields the emission rates in Tons per year. These values are the maximum potential to emit by the engines. 4. Column 11 is a tabulation of VMC's actual power demand (as tabulated on the other tables and plotted in Figure 6-1). Column 12 tabulates the power actually produced by operating four engines at full load at al times except during maintenance outages. The data of this column plotted in Figure 6-1 as the top curve. Whenever the engines are operating the existing boilers will not be operating. Maximum potential to emit by the project then is the net of engine emissions less the boiler emissions. The boiler maximum potential to emit as calculated in Table 3-1 is subtracted to obtain maximum potential to emit from the cogeneration project. The resulting cogeneration project maximum to emit values are listed below. Project Maximum Potential to Emit Emission NOx CO VOC Tons/yr Tons/yr Tons/yr Engine maximum potential to emit 44.90 89.80 13.92 Less boiler maximum potential to emit 29.04 7.26 .58 Net potential to emit from cogeneration 15.86 82.54 13.34 PSAPCA major modification limit 40.00 100.00 40.00 6-10 TABLE 6-3 COGENERATION SYSTEM -MAXIMUM POTENTIAL EMISSIONS SINGLE COGENERATION TRAIN PARAMETERS Full load steam gen 1808 lb/hr 1,790,643 Btu/hr Full load hot water 69,600 lb/hr 2,088,000 Btu/hr Total thermal 3,878,643 Btu/hr= 38.79 Full load power 1274 hp/h = 898 kW/h Full load fuel 8,048,908 Btu LHV 918 Btu/cu ft Full load fuel 8,767,874 Btu HHV 1000 Btu/cu ft Full load fuel 87.68 therms/hr= 0.008768 million cu ft/hr Engine maintenance 750 hours/year Engine emissions, full load, per engine Emission grams/hphr Conversion factor lb/hr NOx 1.00 454.55 grams/lb 2.80 CO 2.00 5.61 VOC 0.31 0.87 Maximum MAXIMUM POTENTIAL Cogen. Engine 1 Engine 2 Engine 3 Engine 4 Total COGENERATION EMISSIONS Power power Operating Operating Operating Operating Operating NOx CO NMHC demand capability Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours Hours lb lb lb kWh kWh Coll Col2 Col3 Col4 Col5 Col6 CoI7 Col8 Col9 Col10 Col11 Col12 Jan 744 744 744 744 744 2976 8341.13 16682.27 2585.75 1,850,526 2,672,448 Feb 672 672 672 672 672 2688 7533.93 15067.85 2335.52 1,601,636 2,413,824 Mar 744 0 744 744 744 2232 6255.85 12511.70 1939.31 1,595,356 2,004,336 Apr 720 714 6 720 720 2160 6054.05 12108.10 1876.75 1,553,026 1,939,680 May 744 744 708 744 744 2940 8240.23 16480.46 2554.47 1,529,546 2,640,120 Jun 720 720 720 720 720 2880 8072.06 16144.13 2502.34 1,582,126 2,586,240 Jul 744 744 744 744 744 2976 8341.13 16682.27 2585.75 1,707,696 2,672,448 Aug 744 744 744 744 744 2976 8341.13 16682.27 2585.75 1,539,576 2,672,448 Sep 720 720 720 720 720 2880 8072.06 16144.13 2502.34 1,700,176 2,586,240 Oct 744 744 744 0 744 2232 6255.85 12511.70 1939.31 1,392,496 2,004,336 Nov 720 720 720 714 6 2160 6054.05 12108.10 1876.75 1,611,396 1,939,680 Dec 744 744 744 744 708 2940 8240.23 16480.46 2554.47 1,453,070 2,640,120 Total 8760 8010 8010 8010 8010 32040 89,802 179,603 27,839 19,116,626 28,771,920 H btd Maximum potential emissions, T/yr 44.90 89.80 13.92 m Boiler shut down reduction,T/yr 29.04 7.26 0.58 Q, Net effect of cogeneration, T/yr 15.86 82.54 13.34 w The values show that the project emissions are below those defined as a Major Modification. The above is a comparison of required but probably unrealistic values for the both the engines and the boilers. It also provides unrealistic conclusions. The net maximum potential to emit by the Cogeneration Project is lower than the expected emissions in the Power Demand Following mode calculated in Table 6-2. This is due to (1)the unused standby boiler contributing to potential to emit values and(2)low actual boiler operating loads of approximately 17% of maximum potential loads. Under these conditions comparing engine maximum potential to emit with boiler actual(not potential) emissions might be justified. The results would be the worst case situation. The values are: Revised Project Maximum Potential to Emit Emission NOx CO VOC Tons/yr Tons/yr Tons/yr Engine maximum potential to emit 44.90 89.80 13.92 Less boiler ACTUAL emissions 5.00 1.25 .10 Worst Case cogeneration emissions 39.90 88.55 13.82 PSAPCA major modification limit 40.00 100.00 40.00 These figures also show that, even though the definitions of Potential to Emit are different for the engines and the boilers, the project is still below the threshold limits of a Major Modification. In both cases, the rigorous definition and the realistic definition, the cogeneration system maximum potential emissions are lower than PSAPCA major modification requirements. The requirements of Section 6.07(d) do not apply to the project. 6-12 Best Available Technology The low engine emissions achieved by the Jenbacher LEANOX engine control technology was one of the key factors in the selection of the Jenbacher equipment for this project. The engines are of the generic lean burn technology Most engines available for this application are not lean burn and are therefore rather dirty with significant emissions that must then be cleaned up by use of emission control equipment. The lean burn technology utilizes engine combustion chamber design and combustion controls to reduce the production of emissions, eliminating the need for end of pipe clean up equipment. The Jenbacher lean burn technology is considered to be among the best available. As noted in Section 5,the proposed EPA NOx standard used by PSAPCA applicable to these engines is 1576 ppm at 15%02. The calculations in Section 5 showed that the Jenbacher engine performance is many times superior to the PSAPCA standards. The engines also meet BACT Standards promulgated by other air pollution control districts. The lean burn engine technology has been judged to be Best Available Control Technology(BACT) by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District in California. A copy of the assessment is enclosed as Exhibit 6-1. The Jenbacher technology exceeds the BACT requirements for CO and VOC by a substantial margin. Jenbacher guaranteed emission rates for the engines are: NOx CO VOCINMHC) ppm @ 15% 02 87.5 285 38 grams/hp hr 1.00 2.00 0.31 Bay Area BACT criteria, g/hp hr 1.00 2.75 1.0 The LEANOX control is an electronic system that collects engine operating parameters on a continuous basis. It controls a gas mixer to obtain a desired natural gas and air mixture. The mixture then passes through a turbocharger, cooler, throttle valve, and is injected into the engine cylinder. The engine control diagram Technical Diagram E 11516-3 is enclosed. The control maintains an actual to stoichiometric air ratio of 1.6 to 1.7 to minimize formation of NOx. Exhibit 6-2 is a detailed description of the LEANOX control system. Note: the hydrocarbon(HC) emissions shown on the graph in Exhibit 6-2 are total HC that include methane. The values on the graph and the engine guarantees do not agree because the guarantees are for NON methane HC only. Jenbacher's clarification is enclosed as exhibit 6-3. 6-13 RECEyVED BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISI DGREN ASSOCIATES,INC. BEST AVAn B E CONTROL TECHNOLOGY(BACT)GUIDELINE I J Source (equipment or process):IC Engine-Spark Ignition,Nat. Gas Revision:2 Class (rated capacity): >250 Hp Output Date: 03/19/93 :: > *;ACT..::L::: fo#:** sett .e::::::::: `:: :>::: :.. .;..:...::....::.:...:.:....:::.:...:.....:.: >:•:•:>:•::•:•::•:;;•: :;;• POC 1. 0.6 gm/bhp-hr a 1. Rich Burn + Non-Selective Catalytic Reduction(NSCR)a 2 1.0 gm/bhp-hr a 2 Lean Burn Technology a NOx 1. 03 gm/bhp-hr a 1. Rich Burn +Non-Selective Catalytic Reduction(NSCR)a 2. 1.0 gm/bhp-hr a 2. Lean Burn Technology a SO2 1. n/a 1. n/a 2n/a 2. n/a CO 1. 0.5 gm/bhp-hr a 1. Rich Burn +Non-Selective Catalytic Reduction(NSCR)a 2 2.75 gm/bhp-hr a 2. Lean Burn Technology a PM10 1. nld 1. n/d 2 n/s 2 Natural Gas or Liquified Petroleum Gas a NPOC 1. n/a 1. n/a 2n/a 2n/a References(BACT Determination) a. BAAQMD EXHIBIT 6-1 Page 963.1 %:L.C.•VG - -..:it A -.i au.ri:S..i -- •.Y._' _ . . ->1ii: Y... "l/ - a.•. p:.: / t./ C:./ ' ! an e'. imsra.CT1041R/ST 9± S': - C•ER OT T.E CLIENT TO J[S. TO PATER Ol.JALITY I{C�w-/j_■ .��•a.n. r nr -.• Et./ ■r he air Y. L775ERrCD ➢lE•OINc LJ fuEl GAS IS NoT n•rliTED CATER pJ..ITT FGR TE.PERATLAE .100•C t.OM 1t30, 11720 I73.Od112)7ISa13..I13117,I.7,1IIISN7t1I1tr77C01 171 Inrsl vatutld Cf Ommua IC Smal.. KC?)DI•C. r0I-CODES 2035 CROUP • JQ TUBE CAS ai cz Ti to i•3O0 PRESSURE t+OI FOR i[v a100'C AC:9ROt•G r•rutr- 13a'f . V T ►IORl1c JINp scanrla�"��s r•tlrur KLOKO RATE CO C2•ANGL s+a•O•J105. ATHE TECNICAL DATA (1995) ARE PRELIMINARY '.710 - 71'-+at•G NOR GAS►RESSU/+[ IS 0.0.7 KI/JO••c (r CASE tY COAT CO.i ACT J[S ••_ - � �'+COS i'i;��, . __ PARAMETERS FOR JES GAS - ,0 rRut. ? i , ENGINES ACCORDING +�___ TI 1100-0110 Yy {.cirE rElKld L rE■i LIMES i0 DE .F3 INSTALLED I.4 K l {n1A(rsr [rISSIOrt tR /I�r7 !r �•I►x._.r 50-FJYIN o.T CeN.lrsr GAS A•0 u�1 stCRIK of 2. v IA lass I Itr.i m A x...'- PSI CO r. ■.a. t• p r f� .r• ..r.r IAr [ro Tr/ .Ntr 1a.rom 1 �__�--� OOJAAATEED (XXAUST[vISSI04 w ELECIRON1ll j ,i� O G O $ 1 B1 .0 •ILO . - 10. CO- R riatlA. tDp+ROE 1 ' • y 1 •, o�`a ..� ©- 4} i STEAM SCMSIG t ( .)situ•TOUT/r WC TN.tat)Rrl�m Olalo■ a...r I�"�•• ' met�• � _ Pi.al 1 .©----+--• ••\` ;' ,, 00.c..ca O� AMEN.MICAL CUM(JKCd011fi 2• r • `' �i/ •. . w .. _ IT�. ISO JO.a AT I500 arr _ Q 0 M ��// O.. {L[CTaltal QJfrVr AT r0.E1f•CTOt.I • r •_ r �� irZar.rc [Ia1a1tST GaS Iq•I 1 O� {I[RGT IIrVT ($Sal a f• • • Z V iA • mug-pltLR a.00 A) I• Y� .POLL GAS FLOC RATE IIS2) 0. 4 )r Q _• �• its-WITT FILTER IS• DE(•) !r)0• CME■ . . ©- V. �qusrid AIR TOLLAt UM/ sarETT FILTER WI'___• 0- vtRArld of I T GAS 1 O., .INTCRcaaaa1 HEAT (ill) StrCaATC CRUST CAS •bop T:.. .rat.000tawr i[ar. ra (NTtIro NCR I.Sari o- O _ -A rI►INc ra L.or raouu CI> CO toK 7 ••• II.- _ I , rAaliam.aAa►Ltsutt •• CL.. ..LRE OIL MEAT (1111 -, !ROC[auvST SILENCER O.. .,.atr uru NUT (.aa) W"m _ 1 a uss Dues 0.1.rSI • 14. ,I _ e1�ry Ow {u,aOSt 45 K•T ICCOrER±D TO 120•C lrC2 J I as , Q AFTER ENGINE S!Or CI"' -RECOvERARL[ TNERr•L OJTrLIT (aaa) �!i ( lr� - d� •--~1 .- TK pNo,.0 COED V.. .,.GT PATER FLOC RATE (a1L1 - 1Y1, }{.. o- -- : 1 TO u r ld..u+[S Y•' {awJ.OSi GAS wSS flOr SET (Lai) y iII 1 SSnit.. T yj.S. O- 'Xl _ �0 : Al 0..0.. {ALI.+C[d{AT !ENGINE ar0 CtIRaid) . Y STSiIr RD.OC.N �.,\\� .••.r III •I• ` F• .ELECTRIC.. (PFICIENCT coot■sap[ ---- O I. .TOtAL EFFICIENCY STI.O.( ■1■. i,p.p.�(o( - .AiER .I l.�.tlal. • 1 0 GAUGE/0.21 rst i - i; ...AA?: :S1 [zemcno S �-•¢rnrsrla.Ay. A MEAT IMG CATER TOST M: • • __ 1 2 r-. . • TOIL CAS b PEATING CATER'S:_: T • r ' 1 - (...JTT cAS SI STtAM CCNNEC7 TT . 1 1 -(7.nsCaSt••t.ind• C E1.AUST GAS Out.ST M I J..�(r•il. 0 Fu(L CAS INLET -Car poly. E MAIN I , I G' RENUT7 Ca•:• r . -a.p..,l. _ ♦ L -w(oil G JAOI[r urER •_ 1. SAFETY v.LK y. 1 .� I I ER ISe•dr --•coo.%SICN.L n SATIETmOT Y VALVE a. 1 ' 2ei) a O1 SAJ OIL V•[ 11 I ,�„ , OIL DRAIN e FILLING J 1 ratl �:•1 1Ya_,bs•r 1. r INTERCC LER PO.E- 1 iV Vt S OJRtOC(w[ 01(000IU LI�12- 1 ♦j 1 7 t.( L!N asp er1�tS•.�,.D(f t0•.T IOo r FILLISTION e(R�L±- - 1 1 . 1..:p:.0 OI.pM.r � r' 1 1 .a•_I ? a[...Lt No'•OL ��NN .w �1 1 1 rl raL. 1.OlrriOR 10' C V;.il 1�•/1 CC•L•.rGAi T , •0 r.7.C71..TU • O .CO••A ,s Fla f.„.. - 1 'RI ' r r.s.r•.ITrl,r(• La.•.,:. I ,S0•r,•i• Cry Tip � yrC � LI a[aU I•otura I Lii:A e2YL.-_O tl�l •� B Lf 1(Ka S•1Ca I ➢..i. nr • ��yj %'r1 gla 5♦140t2pt'T -- • . Wry. T i _ _ _.1; . + 7 . • .. 1 10-170•C ' . •..Sul(CD.r.Q.4K rrP• 177•f f • frQy1 yC I MI ..(fft/t Dl,rl•(•r:u. TWl yl�..Fl nCc E G ,/2 'CS Mstson 0..rt.t.+1.t r pT�Y ��t V, JACKET WATER PRE-HEATING Z.5' •f »(ss✓t s.T,o. • pT PSI I I z A d DEVICE ABOUT WARY WATER .F3 Z. ..tssr(s.+tr..r.( Ca 5.5• (Pr v o v V V O INCLUDING COOLING DOWN B" n »( (u..9.IrrP CA. I. Cp. T R1aJIc `iL-.[CET ioN x 3...r)T.C0.4't. . • • DR CT pyrif•nrs..ICJIf Y•fa1 .r Tr■ CNq NC STOP a 1 a ---- J ELEKTR IC r7' `( f f.rtr.•rK a� p0•C1•4 is HEATING �a(t;_-- v. a.irr •.aK NEEDED ri7RR. •-' ! ��✓2.I rSl 1 _ Y. t1a Orr•.LK - S rl WtEs 370 r , , 1C SPITS C AL - ..w1 1. .el sto . /\ o • )/• •bO v s* SO.(I V 0. 121 PSI g ^ I :.C.L T .F3 t a• E = rC •(ry..T1/t[?n4L■ )) , 2,2•r .T(• R./ ,00-C .b0 r C ,/2 TC• e(rt•.101 �r•4•YK • 0» 1 _ ^ I r - It71'1 •©. M i202SM1 I r r , _ II etPTI.rrt t.0t4 O T ,H 1111101 -- __ _ ____ ,V10 70.•1 SS . 01a Flat..-��+�F1 - - Is _ ..r PSI! �• f - - . __........_........ ___ __ ___ _ _ . .E•rl.c.•DER I .:..7. - • • SYNCHRON- ` 2• v. /\ r 1. O••1 Ott nr✓ �� t' GEN RATOR T 1 (II" -c g �_' 0 pQ ow 4 I G O,• u 4 sp,r�_ 4't,PSI 4330 • • 4X JAIS 320 OS-iV.LC 1 ,x• E TOLL LOAD OPERATIOC IS R[®!(� r t0M. V IDLE LOAD fd aluiaw Of OC9-7+fat/OAC.- ,� O.1 YI■11AJr LOAD O•LEM Rl�l?Br�•:0 s0i �'1LJ-Gt lam Ir i __ a.R 107 97GAL LJBLT=mIL CORRESP. 71 1000-1106 G.1 1/: LAD OP LEA+t�/er�sRTra 2>s r PST TIC K•rI.G CIIOIIT,.AS rm�SSta1m FOP 1__ Q L� .-- C . ��a•R.�s� rir2Wr RYC TIIC or 1-3.m6>R SS.RT. I. M f A TEOSICAI SOCIATIC OTA�PPI'g')E CJr►I TC p i i•MMW42r KAT MG STSTEU IICLLAEO Ta t NA•CCO T 1.»` ,��. --- 0 Q L C?•1tC7la 47.771 J E�w SrCLIENTout .TO JES.(S p■rt.0 �� J �- 1I// 0111 + TK NAail. TIaac AR Ea1GTac:IS TO .- w- f y 1 DEBATE CI TMO{TT PROPER/rOaCta16. 1 }.....�. �S' TIC I 13 GAL Y►Rd(r•TELT 30-i0•••• �w.� � L � E7 MLUBAuTE Olt REFILL 2.4 v` •.2 PSI »E rOLS:M I 41":i✓� j.." �'F-�.�AO POTENT IK carENSATid .. 1 �� G ,o( ,. �iY6! . TEC ttuL oiAc((.r N • __ rOTENTIK CO/[IryTid (Ft7��[i-EYTw1aC_EApiM STuc[. _ DOTCMt2K-CO,ENS•i10.���"•-7IOM Or T.( POTENiIK C?PCNSartd ` .i OIL TR.LIr J� 72 TO TNE ST'..oa ND rAS ro I li PT rK�r R 3ENSAOHEA E 11516 -3 0 1•T.nna.M.fa..M•a.a.. 111M1 .�232008 T . . • . ZJENBACHER ENERGIE JENBACHER ENERGIESYSTEME PATENTED LEANOX ° - COMBUSTION CONTROL SYSTEM All energy transforming systems (boilers, burners, reciprocating engines, turbines, etc.) based on fossil fuel generate contaminates polluting the environment in one way or another. The main emitted elements are Carbon dioxide (CO2), Nitrogen - Oxides (NO,NO2) and Hydrocarbons (VOC,TOC). created whenever carbons are burnt and only depends on the kind of CO2 is fuel used (coal, heavy oil, diesel, gasoline, natural gas, etc.). Due to its chemical constitution, methane (CH4) generates the lowest amount of CO2 per fuel used. CO2 is non- toxic but affects the atmosphere and contributes mostly to the green house effect. NOX(NO, NO2) is mainly dependent on the temperature and subsequently on the air ratio of the combustion process. It is virtually independent of the fuel. The contaminant is a strong nerve poison and forms nitrous acid in connection with.water. CO depends on the air ratio and on the quality of the combustion process.The more air used for the process, the less CO is created. For the spark ignited OTTO engine the CO increases for air ratios higher than 1.9 due to deteriorating combustion. CO is a blood poison which oxidizes to the non toxic CO2 in the atmosphere after several hours. EXHIBIT 6-2 TOC/VOC are created in case of lack of Oxygen (that means low air ratio) or bad quality of the combustion process. Therefore, higher efficient engines have lower VOC/TOC emissions. Cyclical and aromatic hydrocarbons are carcinogenic. Plants are contaminated by the photooxidents which are created from hydrocarbons and NOX(Ozone). The attached graph shows the correlation between the elements NOX, CO and VOC and the air ratio.This number ( 71.) is defined as the ratio of the actual quantity of combustion air and the required amount of air to fulfill a stochiometric combustion process. Subsequently, an air ratio of one defines the stochiometric combustion. Every air ratio higher than one, describes a lean combustion. Every air ratio lower than one,means a rich combustion. A so called rich bum engine is therefore operating at air ratios lower than one (approx. 0.95). As indicated in the drawing, all the three toxic emission elements are tremendously high. Subsequently,in all cases an aftertreatment in the form of a "THREE WAY CATALYTIC REACTOR" is required to bring the levels down to the emission regulations. This type of converter is only able to perform at the aforementioned air ratio, and has a very small operating tolerance. It needs a sensor in the exhaust gas which controls the engine and tries to keep it in the necessary air ratio range. Every load change, for example, contributes to the high shown emissions for the time the air ratio is out of the tolerance. JENBACHER ENERGIESYSTEME AG was the first company to develop a com bustion system which is based on the lean combustion principle. Due to the comparatively high air ratio and the subsequent low temperature, the NOX values reach levels of 1.04 g/bhph (500mg/Nm3), the CO 2.0 g/bhph (950 mg/Nm3) and the VOC 0.31 g/bhph (150mg/Nm3). These values are all mere engine emissions. No exhaust after treatment has to be used to reach them. Moreover,in case the air ratio leaves the optimal window, the emissions are still not significantly higher, since the emissions trend at this high air ratio range is already low ( see attached graph). Therefore it does not need any sensor to keep the engine combustion within a certain air ratio level. As mentioned before, the NOX values are not affected and stay at the level which the engine is adjusted. In order to achieve that high performing and stable lean bum engine, we make use, not only of the particular configuration of the combustion chamber, but also of the direct correlation of electrical output, intake pressure, intake temperature and emissions. Our internationally patented LEANOX ® combustion technology is based on this principle and adjusts the variation of parameters which influence the emissions. It guarantees stable emissions regardless of load changes. As already mentioned, no aging sensor in the exhaust gas (approx. 950°F) is needed. The attached schematic shows the working principle of the LEANOX system. It takes the values of the output, the intake pressure, as well as temperature, and calculates the position of the mixing valve and the throttle valve in order to achieve the required emissions. If any of the values change, the system adjusts the valves accordingly, and keeps the emission constant. The response time is extremely short. FEATURES: LOW SPECIFIC FUEL CONSUMPTION HIGH OUTPUT PER ENGINE-DISPLACEMENT( HIGH 'MEAN EFFECTIVE PRESSURE') Low THERMAL STRESS FOR THE ENGINE No SENSOR WITH AGING TENDENCY REQUIRED - SUITABLE FOR auzEtRENT]BINDS OF FUEL GASES(BIOGAs,LANDFILLGAS, PROPANE) FULLY STABILIZING OF A FLUCTUATING CALORIFIC VALUE I EXHAUST GAS POL LUTANT EMISSIONS OF 4 STROKE GAS ENGINES N CHARACTER OF AE RATIO EMISSIONS ( m /Nmi) IN SELECTION TO 5% 02 9000 8000 1 1 1 wo 7000 z a 1 a: 6000 1 NO X z 1 'i 5000 1 a:,--' u_ 1 w 4000 % 1 '),/ 3000 j HC _ j 2000 — 1 000 LIMIT CO . - / LIHIT NO, 0 I I I I I I I III/ 0 . 8 0 , 9 1 , 0 1 , 1 1 . 2 1 , 3 1 , 4 1 , 5 1 , 6 1 , 7 X AIR RATIO Till now usual operating range f . k „„:„„,„,:,„.„,.,„:„.,;,,,: NMI - operating SCR - operating ' - -LEANOX® LEAN opt SCM•StotM/E/t994i, DAS 2000 1 i 4-- P(DESIGNED VALUE) 51 11.:{_• =m COMO:1110" "'R• FUNCTION //LEANOX. :••• AIR FILTER 1 A ! 1'•• li ii 1: i CIG- ' 1 A i 1 ,� I PDS 0 1 ^ 1 I I.--•' ? -4 ET' he . [I/ \ IC:11 �. cis . \ ] sET MIXTURE COOLER TURBO CHARGER GAS MIXER GAS TRAIN (ANNULAR GAS GAP) LOMJ(SHI*/(/1991/• JENBACHER HYDROCARBON-EMISSIONS As mentioned in the paper about the LEANOX control system, IOC(hr)/VOC(NM.HC) are created in case of lack of Oxygen (that means low air ratio) or bad quality of the combustion process. Therefore, higher efficient engines have lower 7OC/VOC(NMATC) emissions. The abbreviation VOC (NMEC) stands for 'Volatile Organic Compounds' ('Non Methane Hydrocarbons') and covers all Hydrocarbons except Methane. The term TOC (HC) or 'Total Organic Compounds' ('Hydrocarbons') covers also Methane. The emissions (38ppm or 0.31g/bhph) mentioned in JENEACHER's engine specification indicate the Hydrocarbons without Methane (NMHC) as it is normally required by the regulations.The value including Methane (HC) would show a number which is about twenty times higher than the aforementioned. That number matches with the graph in the attached drawing which shows the HC emissions, Hydrocarbons including Methane. EXHIBIT 6-3 ZO 2St1d 'Cll S=C L88SSSZLt9 95:41 966t/tt/t0 APPENDIX A , , . ..,.., ,.., ' I --.,,j- 1, ''' i 4,..;,I.:-4' :.- 7.• • !,,...'...;':, 'kJ'i.•21'..,,,.•-,:•:41,z{'""'•••`•-ntl'.1,;•q,*,2*4.1'4 ki••k1/4•1:,"• 1.1,1.;%cl'';'‘'...'n:0 fir ti`;"'"''1'.- ':- ' " : ' - .".FP2e.''c:.'':t..‘. ,"." .-.i'..1.47°.,....: :. .. . .., . . . .....fol.: : 1'T 1;'`.•"•.?'""L'••••'".' ,,.:'••:.,i'.1 ,f•.',;••,..••t•••:N.••-•,•,: ) ••,.1••••',•i:F•f*,•••'.ii:V1;.`:•.•••..,.:::..!:•.;;;•;.,;-C".1.-% ,;'•...,:,... •?'“::',.•'5, 5 ;.•1-'.'"4.1:;•.' .; .'•.7:4.''':.i'•:1`..;,..•''.:....,1•,'-r-T••')::•:' ..'ii.:‘,•:,';'..•'f'.. ''''''..r•.`..";" ';'....:: =. . '''-i';'.. •' '4%. '....rt...-• 4 7 ' - . .,-"'•.1..,- 1 • . .i.ri..-.,•:. ... ..--zi.t. ;..,,.',.;•,,•.,.,.% ......ir,,...-.•.. .',,'..'.1'.1',"•14:.0.-z:••••"•‘k.. f.,••••'•1,r;:,,,,••,.zi\.. ..";:i.;'.; •'-,... .."......, .., • •,e --... .• .. •• -•,• , • - ,,.... . .• • , :•.............hc.'•").,....;-.,...;!,-........v,..,,,/, ..-....:,,.;.,,'"•-24.`" 1,-- •,f,, ;.. ••. lig .._ ..0....„ ,,,, •,._ ..,.....„...„ • „....,... ,.,.„., „.„, , ... 4_,m, .•: .„.,...,•-:.:*-.-/ .:_:.- . . . • N-4...•.q.•. .•••i. •1'..'. '. • - ' ... •••••.'':-::;,..•••• JI-...- ••(f" •:' :-'•,•4....'-• ./..!"t-, ....., • .....,.....;,,,,...;...,-(:.,,,,,;, ,-. ..-....., ,.,,.i.;,ii.,‘,..:7;;. :,-.,,:!,i,,.. ..,..4.,,,s,:-•• ••••,•:::,.:-,-. '.':,...... . ar..., ‘ , • - .,..1. •?........ ,... .. .. ....." ,, , ,4.,.„.z.z. t.' •••••(:.,• •, --. - ,,,:.,- ...-• ,•••, ', • , --.,.• , • ,„... •10,-S.,_.------..., ..---• ..., .,'-,*Air,',,.. ..-,., • . %All,' ..I.,.. v,..,. =7.1- , ...t. :'..4 J z.-..!:,:.....- •te.:,:i..a...-.....-,• J.., —., .4. ;t I t 1 '..t.14.:.:.111 • ' • ... ..!. . .:s.: ,IV: !' .: ' ' - ' il .,•:' - • ..f,...0..-! .• ."- -,Iyo 4,,,•1 . ‘. CC :,;.,-.;,::.•13•••• • ' :4•'.', • -.- .,-,,,.42,,,•. .,1,,, -go,,,; , mu ..- i., , • i 14.\tr .V. !.. .... '.-," - . . • : ' . ' • . a ...••.:-.7.:.,;;•.1,y4;.. .1' '.. ,IY .,.,"-'401,-?...11. - ... ..,,I, •!ttr.:4• 1 Ea s.,...., -4....' .:‘.`.••• 1 -..--.1: ....0.' ''07-vs's.'' ' •..t,,J,.. : • ,''',.... ‘. '..''"•,-..7....,..•••••,:,...:-....:::.,, :, , : :el ....1 r'•.•' • • ••••, ..., , • ,. . ..s 2, 1. • k • ' . , I • .... .. .. . . . tr ,,. ., f h A-rlir,` • ,--. 11J , \ • • 4, . • : 0 t ' ... I n I , . .. I, ...... t\ ri '''‘'':'• . .. .,'•.'• ..-' .. -. t Z:. .-•..• , ,r .• VS.. ..... 9 • . . , ' . W I r - _.1.. _1.- •••,. • • , ILI • Z • 1JJ • 1— ) V1 • ,- •,•, Lu• 1.4 . . t..0 • CC LL1 . Z „, ,. • , ILI • , :, • ae . • • = 1.1 s .11C • . ea ^ • Z " ' LU rl •• ... • ,.— .r.,••...s::,.., , .• ,• •,-- ..". •' tr:" ?::. • ..* --,'",-/k, Alf 4.. ••.. .,.. .--• / -g)! •-::,:.L,4 -- 41- •. .,. . „. -tk ..... *- 4.-•••• - - • "• .. . "1.t• • ..,4,1,. . • .•:-.,.4 , --. • , •••t- i o• ,4-,,//:•61.4-_-=‘...-,:r,. -:Itt, '.1 ,141 1 i-.-lb' •., It .. •• ii4,4 • 7;,. : ,:,, : a, .'r -. bgtv• ..w °di( ,',.', 1 1. • 410 . . ....., •• - I, ck- -4 . . 1;: •;.,•,i,........ . •.,r .. .1, .. '11b. . ')11,1! . I i .4 • (?i,,pf", 1 j(4,.. . 4: , if ,, , • ) ..1 .f. • i "I•'i .“. ,• ! a.., .••.I. ,' 0.i. ,...,....1.•A. 1,4'9 2:: , . „..- •••-•",I - • ' ,. ._ •...• ...--, .• •.. ..•••••• . ,.....;_„ :„...... •— ... . . • v e' LET'S TAKE THE FUTURE INTO OUR HANDS I Lyam`.rye..-- x .•. • C \- .. t\-..„..,,,, , . - - �• -., , ,,,-.:.. .. ........ „, „.,...., , ,.,_ .,..., .. ..,,. ...„ -,,,,, .... .. .. , 'ilk. `..4"'•2`1- , • ::4AN''''::e'...''‘.* -1..4 \...._ .‘s'S..:2: \11, .71,.. ' Flexibility and approved . ' .� •-a technology that fulfill strictest '`:_ `,••J environmental requirements 's ram;: .. assure Jenbacher Energiesysteme ,i -. a promising future in T . - ✓" - -- r i the world market. 'f• - - tit '£ _ ", V. i t ' - �. f`- ' • ' = s.�'-7"i`,ram`� " fi .� .ct�'''. t -_"� �. .• .y - 1 I ' IEFFICIENCY AS A PRINCIPLE Decentralized I The Jenbacher Energiesyszeme AG, a company of the Jenbacher group, operates Ienergy supply • worldwide. More than 90 of the engines and energy systems manufactured in Jenbach are exported. Jenbacher gas-cogeneration systems generate electricity and heat as well as refrigeration at the place of need and offers the highest efficiency of energy conversion with a minimal environmental burden. Furthermore, Jenba- cher diesel and gas engines are used as compressor drives, as traction engines in locomotives or for pure electricity generation in generator sets. Decentralized use Already thousands of Jenbacher energy systems which chiefly supply energy to industrial enterprises, district heating plants, residential and office buildings, hospitals or swimming pools are being used worldwide. Several hun- dreds of units make use of the biogas produced on waste disposals or sewage works for electricity and heat generation. IDecentralized I By being in the vicinity of customers, individual solutions and relia- di stri b uti o n and ble operation are possible: our own marketing and service companies are avai- 1 after-sales service table to the customer in the main markets of Denmark, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands. Local competent partners take care of the other European court- tries, overseas markets in the USA, Canada, Australia and Japan as well as lar- ge areas of South East Asia. 2 I .. „. • / • . , . . " ' , i . • . . .. • , • • ... • .. . . -• ....‘ -----, ir\,:...'.ki,...::',"......„,"1.,......",,,,,.1•-•,-- .4_:.,....•••ti..:-'..1Z,..4 -.•‘.(i• • ,,,j,".' ' 1.• 4 4 / . t.7%."",i,-:3 i/'• '-,.,, .••.,,, !•\1" :illr / ' .f.., • - 4 ...,.. .4 ,..), / .,•,/,'.,' ,.• , r. „:. ,...:(. ,• ••• ::,.1.: :•:':•'!' . . t 1.17 • .;`1•••;:•'. -..,•24, ., \\. . :.) ..0. . . .:;:.. ..1.; L . N. 1.1i23.4 • 1 •.4f• : .• . •: •i• -• er.tr4-•!-• . " ••;•" ,. -0-41111110 lir „ • ..;.!' •,. • 1.• ' • ••'.0•1•. . re. '- •. , ,, ' ''•'' ••`,,, ' 1;'1. . .;-1 CD J 1. • i.. 1 -, , . ):'; 1-tril "q4",. 11) ...,•,. A . •.• l'''.: 1 . 1 • • , , • .• .; • •1 • • ilM 1. . . \ . • . ' ":75.-. • 11.;•.0 1•'' , • .441' • \‘,. (...''.;:, . SO:Pk 1,.. • ., .. • ,•,...,,, .1:.Y..iil.'• I , \\ Hi. 0 • '. •0',,,,i!,', ...., Oil. ' , ••• . •,,,.,..,.., ,.. , "• i. :,. .... . \ .,-.:4•••:k. . ,i 1k... .1••--.;. , ,, - . ,%.• ' ''',:i •'' Al . . •'.. \ . T,„ ,,•• 1,,, i ,•• "•: ,..t- , ', .11 !- i 1 ••Irl / 1 • ' • •\ - I. ... . . - .., 17T,4:,-tirl:-1.17,:•'• " ,,,*••," , ::. T. I. ,..,-.,,,,.....• 4. 4',1. , k . ' v./ ..... .' ... ;44- .•....',1:.. ...k., :.• ...• • ; ,' ' • '• .•, • . - '• • •. . • . ......•-' ''"•,--,- 411r , • . . 4 • .. - •• i / • • ., . •. . '•1 . * • • „... :, 542M:,••••.'She• . - , ,,—, : • s: .., Vik. ,„ • ... ....I . '.•'..5:.=0-51-=' ' .',.'• i• 0 Po.,...••••••—' :'..••";:'•,1 V.-'. \ ,T ...„.i,1•7.!.) •Si.!, \ - .i.:..:;j•,,, \'.\.'N"............-c...,. • 1: ,.• P ,,,,„, . 5:re. . , . . • ,. . \, \ • . ,i' t,. ' -:sp ii, 1 '‘ • '''' ' • '',!;i4'.,.5,,,,,..,. i , • ' . • '?!.•' - . . • ./ 1 i''-'41.'".• ••,.;,..r d•,.i...,;,,....• ......• . • . , . , ... . •riy,:,, ••••2.ai Fr. •;,?.1/." :"*"... , • •, i,,,,,,I,itc,,. i.,.,ile•,i;., ' 1. . . .? .;.f.4P. . tr. .. . -.," • . • . . et.• • 1 . 1 . Ile 1 • , i • \*.1- ,,...--7-.;•,-, 1 , • ..: . A.,1 •:./to Id tz, — . 1 .. . • . I irr:- ... ... . ..) ••, : c•27,7-1 , •:• t IT.,• . . • • I ri, • . I.21ilf _.......... r-- ....*Ar4 . . . ,..1•, 7;-... -- - , '•t 1.:1,1 : ... 1 . l l 111- IENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PAYS OFF I Growing ecological consciousness and the knowledge of .he resources of fossil I ' primary energy call for the most economical use of available energy sources pos- sible. 1 ' The separate generation of I The gas engine cogeneration system perfected by Jenbacher Energiesy- electricity in thermal power steme AG is the ecologically beneficial alternative to co-7entional energy gene- stations and of heat in hea- ration: Electricityisgenerated bymeans of agas engine andgenerator. A large 9ne " 9 ting boilers is harmful to the environment and inefficient portion of the wasted heat is used via heat exchangers and can be applied for because two thirds of the various heating or cooling purposes. The simultaneous generation of electricity energy used are lost through and heat/refrigeration can achieve a total efficiency of more than 90 %.Thus the wasted heat. The gas engine percentage of energy loss is reduced to a minimum. The use of clean natural gas cogeneration system is the in combination with our patented •LEANOX' combuston controls make the ecologically beneficial alternative. systems extremely clean and meet the strictest international emission standards. Operators of such systems can save up to 70 % on their power supply costs. I The installation at waste disposals or sewage works is of special inte- rest: In this case, cogeneration systems are operated by.means of the produced biogases - energy which otherwise would not be made use of. Further the uti- Ilization of biogas is CO2 neutral and prevents global warming. iy .- I .' ....•fir.r; M -, o >{ ! ,,,,---1 _ '/ �` �2~ .• - _ - fir. If J mot' 1. - I.- (�`�� s� ,, i __ n h"-:Tr1' I r 1. !.. ..� , •te r :� __ :L Fi'`= r. iiy. J '^a•:," << may ...:•::'.'. 14i - - - i' . rz. -. '_y . +' ,,.,..-_ ' ../ . 'ia �.. �,{, -�'r _ ,, •_ - .1,,'! - w =,�' �� •--tee...:-_: - :, — N fix^,... m 1T• :: ill 1 a ;• KNOW-HOw FROM EXPERIENCE I .1 Having produced gas and diesel engines for decades, Jenbacher Ener- 'I giesysteme AG has concentrated on a decentralized energy supply since the ear- ly seventies. Over and over again, the company has been a pioneer in its field and has received international recognition. _I In 1983, the first plant operating on biogas was delivered to Germany. In 1985, the•LE4'JVOX• lean burn gas engine which realizes a low pol- lutant level far below legal standards entered the production and patent stage. In 1992, the company placed a new generation of high-speed gas engi- -I nes on the market which achieved for the first time an electrical efficiency of more than 40 % still meeting strictest emission regulations, a value which non of I ( our competitors have been able to meet. A know-how which is acknowledged: National and international honors I View over Jenbach 1I have already been awarded to Jenbacher Energiesysteme AG for their developments. and its environment. - 'i.:. 1„' -',, - ter. -' w-• -.ti+- _ ,. - �•�� -• .-.4 —El .s. • Ib" vi ti _ J „1114I� �-^i Syr a1'9 a_ a. i • ' ' - " 011 'Jr:/id ,...J-f-x » --,.,rr .;,...zz : !✓ ue ...r'� .. . -Saj •' !V 'ti _y a z�."�• .• y -^ � . , • _� sysi�'.. gip.: r._�:� •;"- .� y_ -_- _- • • ,J I. •a - r''1 'yam H J• 1 II ^- `1 .sr..y�, •--_- ^J • (` A /n -S ' ` ,, , _\— 7 . :_,,4 ,� ,� ' .,,I? II ss " Will!, -`�K_ -- �— rI .,:."'ci.-` ram . _ s�-"r';� -". „t. _s.:- - • r 5..c s-•..,....'T"'. -.. i ._"' -11_' _ . .c. _--------..'.� ..- +"'"--------- ---_ - ...�.�-�� f,,..-,� Il-. .' ---- ---4..-,.- .••-•-`�'�;'=Sj� .... __-- -_-._..-...�..��_•__-._-�.,- .....-•_.�.__.`._r- ®1 I INNOVATION IS NO ACCIDENT i i 1 i • E ci _TiaUGCREKT End-T• L.: . O , o . 7 8 9 ' • () C » aENBACHER - 4 : 5 .. 6 MIIIIMIIIIMINEMENERGIE .. - . i ( ) / Bypass Ercr 1 2 Q �— P.. . ( _-- C ) li C r 1 t c ) : 'RIESS AMPEN , STAPT s c= I ( ) AuzE_C_ TES- f0 I i ' ( ) < ( ) IIJenbacher Energiesysteme I Four sophisticated engine test benches in a power ranee of up to 3,000 AG spends 8 % of its sales kW are exclusively used for research and development tasks. Another endurance II on research and develop- test bench is designed as a full cogeneration system and feeds up to 1.7 hi;Y into ment which is significantly the grids. The waste heat is used for heating through which 400 t of fuel of can higher than the internatio- nal industry average. More be saved per year. Ithan 40 highly qualified engineers guarantee conti- Ecological benefits and efficiency are highly significant in research and I ; nuous innovations. development work: At the present time, Jenbacher Energiesysteme works at improving the efficiency of engines, minimizing the pollutant emissions, exten- ding the life of the components in order to improve the operative reliability of II the systems as well as to extend the product range. I I I 1 ' I 6 11 (V. . EXPERTISE AND MOTIVATION I 1 1 Supreme achievements are only possible with excellently trained and motivated i personnel. Jenbacher Energiesysteme AG itself trains a large portion of the requi- red specialized technical personnel. The company's training workshop instructs Ian average of 90 trainees. Many trainees have been national winners and have received awards at national and international trainee contests. For years, the company has promoted the access of women into "typical" male occupations. For 1 I; >4i example, women are currently working as skilled workers in mechanical manu- t z facturing as design engineers and planning engineers. By means of the Jenbacher Energiesysteme trainee program, it is possi- ble for graduates of technical colleges to get to know all company areas and to : � . - f I make a career in what is of most interest to them. Within two years, the qualifi- • i cations necessary for a career as for example a technical designer, development I. • engineer or project manager can be achieved. Furthermore, additional trainings � ! 1;5. - I• are possible. n, - ' Personnel training is given highest priority in regard to the increasing '' - technical demands. The focal points are specialized technical seminars, electro- ' _` ' • nic data processing, foreign languages and the formation of personality for - ._- example for communication, personal management and teamwork. The self initia- tive of many employees is promoted as a welcome supplement to the training s. , Cr.t_ —":__,,.."..--"."-...'7. __7. plans. , F. '`� ,1 • , -- - Orientation toward the market and the customer is most important. \ - High product quality, on time delivery, efficient after sales service and prompt i --' f • - spare parts delivery are always in the foreground of the endeavours of the moti- '- ''., y_ vated Jenbacher Energiesysteme personnel. — yam"-`" ---` 1 j-0 0 a 7.1 -! 7 ' V. • - I QUALITY THROUGH PRECISION I y i • Whether the consultation, planning, design or manufacturing -the highest tech- •' nical standard goes without saying at Jenbacher Energiesysteme AG. The integration of plan- I The CAD equipped engine and system design is provided with sophisti- c I ning, design and manufac- cated hardware and software. Due to the broad application of computer-aided tore guarantees the most manufacturing (CAM), operations scheduling, tool control and job-oriented I • efficient production of !I standardized components manufacturing with goal of computer-integrated manufacturing (CIM) can be ' as well as of tailor-made simplified to a high degree. i' systems and, furthermore, superior quality. Each module and engine is subjected to a running-in program at our special test benches for customer systems. The following test run contains all customer-specific functional tests and measurements referring to performance �l I and emission values. • iI The products of the company fulfill all world-wide quality standards. Already in 1990, Jenbacher got the internationally recognized certificate 1 ISO 9001 for meeting the highest requirement standard of integrated quali- ty assurance. I r. , ler—g7-141?1,*t'l: ';'-.1H-pi,';'1 •'Jr.—1 -----1 : , •tt:, -. ..; ,' i •-, 3.2 !7-1 p.0 4 1 ;I.e.r2g..4 ..; .,..1. ...;-xi.' 6.p.T'0,- , •.rai;4-..„....:41, tty i - 1 oi .ii r ,, 12 r.-,igitlii V:..t N, ,i..fy, .. ... T .;._ , . . I .: ._.•__I :, ' {Ur Al - • — tt g � a��-- x -a':a +�' 2 •.°n,_ a • i3i : '.. . & -f, 1. r , � ' y f ; rs; �;.` , ;ter i �+"J� . 5 ':t �:'...j ' Al _.1 --,�_} �...��Y'�✓�Y.' is"^'� � •� j �4. M$.r+.., iiys•. •= `..< i.. :1,.: 1: ,..a •''''—f---- - • 7 .. • rl.... ?:'41L;Pid, r".. "jk, I ifb ., ,1 ... - OD • .. ''"-,` act=`—:.-:.-:;:,- �'� i1 a .., MI,,,,,,,NW $ I C t I 1 1111H11114111111MiatINIMOHNNI414MMIIIHIWO10111, . 110 I 1 . . • ' . / inn 1 1.41................ I . : .„ • . „ ,., , . .„ ' I ; ... I .." 4i I f" '111.1 .• i ''' i .... ! 41 IOW . . . : . . . . . : : . _ 11111:114111tillilliiii . 1...4.7....12.!flillifttloiliilotiii;iillimilite oviiivil liottiteretommilui I 1 ”-.....?5,!. 41 .+ ,•:. . I I Jell,A11101 • . ,41,i.si a A ,, .: aliamimmoolith,•ii,-4,rlii ,. ,10,r:,. „,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,Niii .,. +,01 001,..,.• ,,111%,. i.„1111h.. .",', 'lir . . Ili,:'I '' •,::lIl "mit MON.. iiiiimmilli , 'Illi. 'II .„,01,11 ,,i ,, • .. . li Ig:i. oitizifs. 11111 • • '..7',.."""'•...1 I 1 1111" 1 I II '"11.11), •,$.0,. .1::&AL...,,._.....ntr.• 1., ,....., .. IIIIII ,_ •',:j Irk_ I li. I." . '',1•.„.•'-..; .11.. , .1. /4. . ., I ii '''01. '' 1"‘" "1111r !1111141'.fill r'i: .................. 1::;...:* -, 1.1 ._ _, II hir.,',..% -1.• I 1,,,,,iii:::-I„r,' 9-';',114titt•.1... .0""..... „isctt: -'''',„t„, 11::',41:11!,•Iiii,i'l '",: .......',...*,., 'ill • III, '0.),1 11,.. I 11,..''' '''''...;.., -.,..,'„ ,.,'''''''•:i.,`, ij,4•.. 1;0.,',..''''''''i. 1111111"'' :'. ' 11\ ,IA0041 1, ''''qIIII' I I ., 1 :...0.,1 • , : 11,111 I '''' ":''' • it I. ' ill..1111 .,11Lf" Ii,01, .,••;ii i _pill: Ti 111'1' 11irill j'f,.:;',;',!!''''.,Iii',1,!'i. "l'''' ',,',I.,11'''':',i.,',1,... ;111111 I:, ii,.,,illii,,.. :.:,,11.1,14,"111111, . " ,''''. ,;.• 'c• i illl I I ill 111 1111.1 ill I: li; .1 ,, i'''''. " ',. , l'''' '. 1' l,"'''' 111, ,1:11',',;:',1101::.,„“, ,• ;:. -,.....,....:• ,. ..!,. . .,,,...' ','.'',. - 1 111 I ill'', ,,. 11. di ,..-,,,,......:..,. .,,I,,. ", ',...„'',.1,,',0,P„ • •, • • 4. •.:. . ,,,,,:,,•,.11 ,,,o, ,.4.1, , .,...i.ill..: .. ',!: , Lir ,III, " 'oliiii`.,,::',1,4.41,11 '".. ' .... , - ,„,'•:.!.!,!.. .. ' - -.'!,:,"i, ,...' I: • ! .....iiiii, .1 , ,.,'.1111 , •,, i .n • . ,, ... II.,,,,,,,.,,,i .011: IIIIii IIII.,,.' .. ..11111"..._'4 .1, ii,.:.;X., •,,- :, .„.... • .... !I,. ii,,,,,, .,„in , ,i,1 Ih.„,.,; „,, .pi. .1. ,ii'llil I".• 1 '.iiii „pit ',4',..i..11 ... . t'''. -,,,,g4,:::..,1 „. ._404I,1 F Itt,'• 1, .911111: V'Opt 1411 ',.!, iiIii:11' "..„ 11 '. ,IttIllill',',1111. iiiII.'illI ''''......".;'il....1... ..;:''7.:'!' , ,...,..1.--0. .1.- . ialli '0,,, 111,1.1.14i 117,6111,1, ' • '.... ,,.!... le . .1.:. pr....,'. ;1',.1 . ''::.kii,I,.:;•:4: •• '4*.tv.:IID''.:;,' :ger ".....id, : '• • • •II I" 1 'iii l'I,'',, 'j ;r1IIII I Rot :'...1•1 *:, ,'Id,0,41111P',111;...;1' Ai ..ril- • „HI' . : ,i " 1;, .....,../•., 1'4 ''I'411.i...11110 iir,1:•.;1' ,:Ill " ,!;;III:1 li,• , I II! ,ti:liti:tl ,,li' r't It. • q,„, . ,,• 11,19,,,I, ....,.....,,,. ,...i.,11 .',L.,. III. . . ,„, 11 ,• .,. ,'.e. 1, . .1 I , ..,,!:' .v: 1 .. • i; , .11 , ,,.... 1 1 '. , . .„,,,,, ;re. .....m.,..1r -1,,.,,.:444,' ,..- il ,:,.." 0,-i-1;k /.....1„ '• . ... , 1;1 ", ., ... ,,, , ., . :,.. ..0.! , 1 ,,,, . ? i - r i„,.., ," ,..., ..... ..,---..,,,,,,.., • I ..,,, i.,4:,14:i ,:--r---- ... . ..,„ ..,..„.„4:;.1. t - . ' ii, il „..... .,, ..,.4. .4 c,.. d-,,;.'..:,!! • ,,. ..,,, ..1: • , . '. .,1 . ,._ ,, , .....,I • ""4.....11 ,• „Imo imr,,,;,;:-., 1 , .„................ 1 1 1, I; ,i.' -, ,.•"";,...........e,"1 i."' ii. I .' ,*,..- •,.,, I • "' 1 1 14 .i- ,,• 1 1-- ,., 1 1: i • I 141141 • • A- ',......,,F.I., : 1 I la. .., li • 1 1 I I II 1 .} • ji..9.1.1 ,. 4,, Ili :,.' 'II,,,,...,_.....0. 1.....,0 .. ... • ..:*, ,' ii1':', 'i- ,. 4., 1, I, -.. , . 11481, 11,,I,,,,,,,,. ,,,,,,iiiiii: ii ,, ,,,,,,u.................Iel HI I,i1 • • I•1111 11 "' ......t • I IL ll . .., 1 i • , ,i •ou• pi -0'.. '',,'.'".......1":..., , . 111111 1 . . utsmi til 1 ' . 111.10.1111 1111M11111111111111 I •'. III -.. , I 1 • • NMI •I 1•11101•111.1•114,1111.11.61 •i 1 . •1.. i .• , . i ... 11.111111 1 .41 111.1'1 • I -- till/Ill.I 1 I 1 I- ..I i imim• 11'. i .1 .li diiimmumuimol,„m„,„„k„,,,w„,01111h, „Immu1111411111lioli 11 L , .i . , . . . .. _ • • IA RELIABLE PARTNER FOR THE FUTURE Jenbacher Energiesysteme AG offers current state of the art products. Contin- 1 uous attention and consultation during operation are secured by means of an extensive after-sales service. Through decentralized after-sales service the quick availability of spare parts at site is possible thus reducing down times. According to the leading principle of customer orientation, Jenbacher Energiesysteme AG offers individual maintenance contracts. Inspection contracts I For plants with sufficient qualified service and operating personnel Standard maintenance I For plants without sufficient service and operating personnel contracts Full service contracts I With plant management and participation for plants without qualified service and operating personnel, especially in the case of large cogeneration plants or biogas plants. The company was able to I In order to guarantee that the plants always comply with the technical achieve a continuously in- state of the art, retrofittings or backfittings are carried out for the customer in creasing business growth regular intervals, e.g. of engine components, ignition systems, controls etc. Fur- in the Last years. By means of high productivity and thermore, Jenbacher Energiesysteme keeps the plant operators continuously it strict cost management, informed by means of its own newsletter. successful operation was • possible and thus the By means of flexibility, sophisticated technology that meets the stric- foundation for further test environmental demands and simultaneously guaranteeing highest plant effi • - expansion was created. ciency, Jenbacher energy systems assures promising prospects in the world mar- .I kets now and above all in the future. JJ it 10 4 1 ENERGY SUPPLY WORLD -WIDE ! .! Jenbacher Energiesysteme AG is one of the most renowned international sup- I Already today, Jenbacher • pliers of low emission cogeneration plants. Germany, the Netherlands, Italy, Energiesysteme AG is making '' a small active contribution Great Britain, Denmark and Sweden are the focal markets in which the company to salve the global environ- gains the major market share. Also other European countries as well as the over- mental problems, Like the ' seas markets USA, Canada, Japan, Australia and South East Asia are growing mar- destruction of the ozone - kets for high-tech cogeneration plants. layer, the climatic effect or the exploitation of ;I ressources. The sophisticated concept of the Jenbacher Energiesysteme was one of the first in line with the international trend toward high efficient decentralized Ienergy supply as an alternative to unefficient centralized energy supply. The pro- duct characteristics of the Jenbach energy units correspond to the customer demands for efficiency, reliability, savings of ressources and cleanliness. ■■■ 0 ,:,,,,t,..„,1_, . i,...,...„...____ _A --4.^'421.-',''.7.-1,„'S'''''l '-'‘'''' 1% . '.-' - I ' -:"...,.' • tr--1 ` .. .ems` .s+•-erY-.•-ham--. '', •r.. -.. • .ti r '5 J'�r.•�--' 1 �k _ •�••a :: .. J • ,.. , 1 T .xi .6"r :�Uj.3� ;t h i-WV.,,. S' r - T.. ! s , f- .�. 3. 3. � el s x y-i�y ,t .t (j,. 1 s. Y .- .. 1"'. 4 1 ,. 'l E 4 • a ,J, _. "i`r���� sy _ -, ® I - - - Jy ., .jr Y I .�/ �.� �� •. ra k<s>zx _ �� �- ,i,.+) •S,a i =t.Ii. 1.•`„t s. tit . a I The new Jenbacher gas-engine generation of the series 3 e achieves a mechanical output # of more than 40% through a range of innovations and improved components. 11 11 l ......4,.I ,,,tt, .....-;_-__ -__r:-.,---____ _____- ___. -..,, ,,-„,_ _ _k_ _ ..,.. ,, Tw•ili i it : l- ���1aI , ;. 7.. Lf to ��. - +�.•.•r r y{, I ! 1— - -4 .1 1 . ,' Dieselhydraulic Jenbacher f.. •'j- "�'° `- , T shunting locomotive of , '*•' OBB-series• 2068 equipped .\ 1 - -- "u� `' ""`-� ,' I with Jenbacher � / N �� .- °,`, tz, •M _l engine J 608 D5. . %� �.a �5 ::nvx • ; FaAxy,„,a,„,,,,,,..,...,..„,,,... s. i� i. I ' I 'i -,, .„vie,- - :-_--':,--t-.442- ()--'s 1 'f a Use -z-i-ir.: -3 ',--. .- - 1 irk,; #' P ?r 4 h.,, 1 . i '\ :.,.i.,,-.i?._ .c Ste- s..L `; � < \ 1 z. '' r� .4- r' 1 I , �: �,^ . rya \ ,; ti\ ~~ 3x } f �� s rr \F 'ti; ADDRESSES I I Jenbacher Energiesysteme AG I Jenbacher A-6200 Jenbach, Austria Energiesysteme Group a I Tel:+43/5244/2291-0•Telefax: +43/5244/3255 Jenbacher Energiesysteme AG Branch Vienna Am Concorde Park 1/C3,A-2320 Schwechat, Austria Tel:+43/222/7079510•Telefax: +43/222/7079328 Jenbacher Energiesysteme GmbH Amselstrafie 28, D-68307 Mannheim, Germany Tel:+49/621/77094-0•Telefax:+49/621/77094-70 Jenbacher Energiesysteme A/S Industrivej 19, DK-8881 Thorso, Denmark Tel:+45/8/6966788°Telefax: +45/8/6967072 Jenbacher Energiesysteme Sri Via Caduti sul Lavoro 5-5A,I-37012 Bussolengo, Italy Tel:+4/045/6700932-Telefax:+4/045/6767213 Jenbacher Energiesysteme B.V. Amsterdamseweg 17, NL-3812 RN Amersfoort, Netherlands Tel:+31/33/652752•Telefax:+31/33/652708 Jenbacher Energiesysteme Ltd. 1502 Providence Highway, Norwood, MA 02062, USA Tel:+1/617/2555886•Telefax: +1/617/2555887 APPENDIX B VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER,RENTON,WA TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION COGENERATION MODULE JMS 320 GS-N.L ELECTRICAL OUTPUT kW 898 THERMAL OUTPUT BTU/h 3,668,582 EMISSIONS NOX ppm 87.5 (ref. at 15%02) CO ppm 285 NMHC ppm 38 NOX g/bhp h 1.00 CO g/bhp h 2.00 NMHC g/bhp h 0.31 TECHNICAL DATA 3 0.1 TECHNICAL DATA-MODULE-OPERATION ON NATURAL GAS 3 0.2 TECHNICAL DATA FOR ENGINE 4 0.2.1 TECHNICAL DATA OF GEAR BOX 6 ' 0.3 TECHNICAL DATA OF GENERATOR 7 0.4 TECHNICAL DATA OF HEAT RECOVERY 8 0.4.1.Warm water loop 8 0.4.2.Steam loop 9 I ' 0.10 TECHNICAL PARAMETERS 10 1. MODULE 11 1.1 SPARK IGNITED GAS ENGINE 11 1.1.1 Engine design 11 1.1.2 Engine accessories 13 1.1.3 Standard tools (one set per SITE) 14 1 1.2 SELF-EXCITED SELF-REGULATED THREE PHASE GENERATOR 14 1 1.3 MODULE ACCESSORIES 15 1.3.1 Engine cooling water system 16 1.3.2 Automatic lube oil refilling system 16 1.3.4 Gear box 17 1.4 HEAT RECOVERY 17 1.5 GAS TRAIN 17 1.7 PAINTING 18 1.11 CHP-MODULE CONTROL PANEL 18 1.20.01 Starting system 20 1.20.03 Electric water preheating system 21 ,2.1 COMMON SYNCHRONIZING MANUAL-AUTOMATIC 22 1 2.3.1 Power control 24 2.10 STATION CONTROL FOR 4 GAS ENGINE UNITS (.OPION: 5 UNITS) 24 , 12.21 PLANT MONITORING SYSTEM(OPTION) 27 3.21 LUBE OIL SYSTEM(OPTION) 27 3.23 SILENCER(OPTI(N) 27 3.30 RADIATOR SYSTEM FOR HOT WATER LOOP(OPTION) 27 { 15.VARIOUS 28 5.1 LIMITS OF THE SCOPE OF SUPPLY-INTERFCES 28 15.2 FACTORY TESTS AND INSPECTIONS 29 5.2.1 Engine tests: 29 15.2.2 Generator tests: 29 15.2.3 Module tests: 29 - 15.3 DOCUMENTATION 30 '5.4 ENCLOSURES 30 1 . f 1 , 1 MC!S?ADOC/12/19/95 2 1 TECHNICAL DATA 0.1 TECHNICAL DMA-MODULE-OPERATION ON NATURAL GAS I Fuel gas LHV BTU/s.cu.}t 918 I Data at: Full load Part.load 100% 75% 50% Energy input ut BTU/h [2] 8,048,908 6,223,488 4,398,068 Gas volume s.cu.ft/h *) 8,765 6,777 4,789 Mechanical output bhp [1] 1,274 956 637 Electrical output kW el. [4] 898 667 439 Recoverable thermal output: "' Lube Oil(gear box) BTU/h 41,626 39,579 29,343 "' Intercooler 1st stage BTU/h 501,564 221,780 17,060 "' Lube Oil BTU/h 482,934 373,409 263,884 "'Jacket water BTU/h 854,570 909,503 848,428 "' Exhaust gas 389°F BTU/h 1,787,888 1,357,976 955,360 Total thermal output BTU/h [5] 3,668,582 2,902,247 2,114,075 ` Radiation heat to be dissipated appr. BTU/h [7] 289,012 112,886 112,794 Intercooler 2nd stage kW Specific fuel consumption of engine BTU/bhp h [2] 6,322 6,509 6,905 Lube oil consumption appr. lbs/h [3] 0.44 0.44 0.44 Electrical efficiency 38.1% 36.5% 34.0% Thermal efficiency % 45.6% 46.6% 48.1% Total efficiency % [6] 83.7% 83.2% 82.1% Steam flow(90psig, 228°F Feed Wa.) lbs/hr 1,808 1,373 966 Hot water circuit Hot water forward temperature °F 185 181.2 175.6 Hot water return temperature °F 158 158 158 Hot water flow rate(+/-8%) GPM 139.2 3 139.2 139.2 I *) approximate value for pipes dimensioning [a Explanations: see 0.10-Technical parameters 1 - VMC IS2ILDOC/12/19/95 3 1 Main dimensions/weights Length in 300 ' - Width in 73 1 Height in 92 1 Weight dry lbs 37,926 ,I Weight wet lbs 39,470 Connections :Hot water inlet and outlet in/lbs 4"/150 Fuel gas(at gas train) in/lbs 3"/150 Fuel gas(at module) . in/lbs 4"/150 Water drain ISO 228 in 1/2" Condensate drain(pipe) in - Safety valve-jacket water ISO 228 in 2 x 1 1/2 " Safety valve-hot water in/lbs ' Lube oil replenishing (pipe) in 1" �, Lube oil drain(pipe) in 1" Jacket water-filling (flex pipe) in 1/2" Intercooler-water inlet/outlet 1st stage in/lbs 4"/150 Intercooler-water inlet/outlet 2nd stage in/lbs Safety valve-intercooler in/lbs ' 1 1 0.2 TECHNICAL DATA FOR ENGINE. General engine data 1 Manufacturer JES AG Engine type J 320 GS-B01 Working principle 4-stroke ; Configuration V 70° 1 No. of cylinder 20 I Bore in 5.3 Stroke in 6.7 i Piston displacement cu.in 2,970 1 ; Nominal speed r.p.m. 1,500 ;Mean piston speed in/s 335 Filling capacity Tube oil gal 98 Filling capacity water gal 40 Length in 131 Width in 53 Height in 71 Weight dry lbs 10,805 i'leight wet lbs 11,951 oment of inertia(flywheel) lbs/t2 216 Direction of rotation left Flywheel connection SAE 18' Radio interference level to VDE 0875 G Starter motor output kW 9 Starter motor voltage V 24 VDC I 1 4 VMC LS2ILDOC/12/19/95 I I Energy balance/consumption $IS0 standard fuel stop power ICFN bhp 1,274 Mean effective pressure at standard power and standard nominal speed Psi 227 , Fuel gas NATURAL GAS Min.required methane number MZ 75 Compression ratio Epsilon 11.80 Min./Max.fuel gas pressure at inlet of gas train psi/Psi 0.725/ 1.45 Variation of standardised fuel gas pressure % +/-10 Max. admissible velocity of inlet pressure variation . psi/30sec 0.04 'Maximal admissible intercooler water temperature 1st stage °F 158 Maximal admissible intercooler water temperature 2nd stage °F • Specific fuel consumption BTU/bhph 6,322 Specific lube oil consumption ml/bhph 0.26 Oil temperature °F 212 Jacket-water temperature °F 194 Thermal energy balance Energy input BTU/h 8,048,908 Intercooler BTU/h 501,564 Lube oil BTU/h 482,934 Jacket water BTU/h 854,570 Exhaust gas total BTU/h 2,692,068 Exhaust gas 356°F BTU/h 1,890,248 Exhaustgas248°F BTU/h 1,787,888 Exhaust gas 212°F BTU/h 2,306,512 Radiation BTU/h 112,596 Balance BTU/h 160,364 Exhaust gas data I - Exhaust gas temperature at full load °F 977 Exhaust gas weight,wet lbs/h 11,239 Exhaust gas weight,dry lbs/h 10,399 Exhaust gas volume,wet s.cu.ft/m 2,382 Exhaust gas volume,dry s.cuft/m 2,103 Max.admissible pressure drop after engine psi 0.87 Combustion air data Combustion air weight lbs/h 10,864 Combustion air volume J s.cu.ft/m 2,243 Max. admissible pressure drop in front of suction-air filter psi 0.15 5 VMC InA Dn'/12/19/95 i Sound pressure level Engine,average value lm distance dB(A) 101 131,5 Hz dB 85 !63 Hz dB 87 125 Hz dB 92 ,250 Hz dB 94 500 Hz dB 90 1000 Hz dB 90 2000 Hz dB 92 ' 4000 Hz dB 96 8000 Hz I dB 94 Exhaust gas,at im distance, 30° off engine dB(A) 108 31,5 Hz dB 111 63 Hz dB 111 125 Hz dB 114 250 Hz dB 103 500 Hz dB 105 1000 Hz dB 101 2000 Hz dB 100 4000 Hz dB 98 8000 Hz dB 89 Tolerance+/-3 dB 0.2.1 TECHNICAL DATA OF GEAR BOX , Manufacture EICKHOFF Type AN-080 Input speed r.p.m. 1,500 Output speed r.p.m. 1,800 Reduction gear ratio 1.2 Efficiency at 100%load % 98.60 75%load % .98.30 50%load % 97.80 ;Weight lbs 2,062 • VMC ib►mr/12/19/95 - I ' .i 2. 0.3 TECHNICAL DATA OF GENERATOR Make A.van Kaick Type DIDBN 130/125 g/4 ; Ratings at p.f. 1,0 kW 898 Ratings at p.f.0,8 kW 892 Rated output at p.f. 0,8 kVA 1,115 Rated current at cos phi=0,8 A 52 Voltage V 12,470 Frequency Hz 60 Speed r.p.m. 1,800 Permissible overspeed r.p.m. 2,250 Power factor 0,8 lagging to 0,8 leading 0,8-1,0 Efficiencyp.f. 1,0 % 95.9% Efficiency p.f.0,8 95.2% Weight lbs 9,482 Radio interference level to VDE 0875 N Construction IMB 34 Protection IP23 Insulation class F Ambient temperature °F 104 ICI YMC_LS2A-DOC/12/19/95 7 0.4 TECHNICAL DATA OF HEAT RECOVERY 0.4.1.Warm water loop General data Total thermal output of module BTU/h 1,880,694 Return temperature °F 158 Forward temperature °F 185 Hot water flow rate GPM 139.2 Nominal pressure hot water psi 87.0 Pressure drop warm water psi 14.5 Admissible variation of return temperature °F +5/-36 Admissible velocity for return temperature variation °F/min 18 Heat exchanger intercooler&gear box/warm water Type gilled pipes Nominal output BTU/h 543,190 Hot water inlet temperature _ °F 158.0 Hot water outlet temperature °F 165.8 Hot water flow rate in intercooler bypass GPM 139.2 Nominal pressure of hot water psi 87.01 Hot water pressure drop psi 2.90 Hot water connection in/lbs 4"/150 lube oil engine jacket water Heat exchanger / g ] integrated in engine jacket water cooling circuit Heat exchanger engine jacket water/warm water • - 'Type plate Nominal output BTU/h 1,337,504 Hot water inlet temperature °F 165.8 Hot water outlet temperature °F 185.0 'Hot water flow rate GPM 139.2 Nominal pressure of hot water psi 87.01 Hot water pressure drop psi • 2.90 Hot water connection in/lbs 4"/150 I VMC_I52A.DOC/12/19/95 8 0.4.2.Steam loop Steam boiler Nominal output BTU/h 1,787,888 PRIMARY Exhaust gas inlet temperature °F 977 Exhaust gas outlet temperature °F 389 Exhaust gas flow rate s.cu.ft,/m 2,382 SECONDARY Feed Water Temperature °F 228 Steam pressure psi 90 Steam Flow lbs/hr 1,808 'fl 9 C_152A.DOC/12/19/95 . 0.10 TECHNICAL PARAMETERS All data in the technical specification are based on engine full load (unless stated otherwise) at specified media temperatures and are subject to change. All pressure indications are to be understood as gauge pressures. reference conditions ICFN according at 1500 rpm and standard to DIN-ISO 3046 resp. DIN 6271 (2) according to DIN-ISO 3046 resp. DIN 6271 with a tolerance of+5 (3) average value between oil change intervalls according to maintenance schedule,without oil change amount (4) at p. f. = 1,0 according to VDE 0530 REM with relative tolerance (5) total output with a tolerance of+/-8% (6) according to above parameters (1) to (5) (7) only valid for engine and generator, module and peripheral equipment not considered Radio interference Through the ignition system (integrated ignition coil) of the gas engines radio interferences within the range of level G, VDE 0875, Part 3 are caused (approx.100-400 mega cycles per second) Definition of output IS0-ICFN continuous rated power: Continuous net break power which the engine manufacturer declares that an engine is capable of delivering continuously, at stated speed, between the normal maintenance intervals and overhauls stated by the manufacturer to be carried out. Power determined under the operating conditions of the manufacturers test bed and adjusted to the standard reference conditions. Standard reference conditions: Barometric pressure: 14.5 psi or 328 ft above sea level Air temperature: 77 °F or 298 K Relative humidity: 30% Output adjustment for turbocharged engines: Altitude: 0,7 %for every 328 ft above 1640 ft Air temperature: 0,5 %for every 1.8°F above 77 °F Parameters for the operation of JES gas engines The following 'Technical Instruction of Jenbacher Energie Systeme AG"form an integral part of a contract and must be strictly observed: TA 1100-0110 MARGINAL CONDITIONS FOR JES GAS ENGINES VMC_i52A.D°C/12/19/95 10 SCOPE OF SUPPLY 1.MODULE Design: The is compact package; The engine is moun to fr by m anti-vibramoduletion mountsbuilt .as The gear box and the generator are fixed onted the basethe framebase . ame This provides eans bestof insulation against vibrations. The remaining vibrations can be eliminated by setting the module on ' insulating pads (e.g. Sylomer).This, in principle, allows for placing the module directly on any floor able to carry the static load. No special foundation is required, measures against sound conducted through solids have to be taken locally. • 1.1 SPARK IGNITED GAS ENGINE Four-stroke, air/gas mixture turbocharged, after cooled, with high performance Altronic DISN ignition system, electronically controlled air/gas mixture system. The engine is equipped with the most advanced LEANOX�-LEAN-BURN COMBUSTION SYSTEM developed by JENBACHER ENERGIESYSTEME AG. 1.1.1 Engine design Engine block Single-piece crankcase and cylinder block made of special casting, crank case covers for engine inspection, welded steel oil pan. Crankshaft and main bearings Drop-forged, precision ground,surface hardened, statically and dynamically balanced; main bearings (three-component friction bearings) arranged between crank pins, drilled oil passages for forced-feed lubrication of connecting rods. ' n vbratzo damper Maintenance free viscose damper Flywheel With ring gear for starter motor Pistons Single-piece, made of light metal alloy,with piston ring carrier and oil passages for cooling;piston rings made of high quality material, main combustion chamber specially designed for lean burn operation. 11 VMC_LS2ADOC/12/19/95 Connecting rods Drop-forged, heat-treated,big end diagonally split and toothed. Big end bearings (three-component • friction bearing) and connecting rod bushing for piston pin. Cylinder liner ' Chromium alloy grey cast iron,wet,individually replaceable. Cylinder head Specially designed and developed for JES-lean burn engines with optimised fuel consumption and emissions;water cooled, made of special casting, individually replaceable;Valve seats and valve guides and spark plug sleeves individually replaceable; one exhaust and one inlet valve made of high quality material. - Crankcase breather Connected to combustion air intake system. Valve train Camshaft, with replaceable bushings, driven by crankshaft through intermediate gears,valve lubrication by splash oil through rocker arms. Combustion air/fuel gas system Motorised carburettor for automatic adjustment according fuel gas characteristic. Exhaust driven turbocharger, mixture manifold with bellows, water-cooled inter cooler, throttle valve and distribution manifolds to cylinders. Ignition system Most advanced, fully electronic high performance ignition system, one spark plug and external high performance ignition coil with Teflon-plug connection per cylinder. II Lubricating system - Gear-type lube oil pump to supply all moving parts with filtered lube oil, pressure control valve, pressure " relief valve and full-flow filter cartridges. Cooling of the lube oil is arranged by a heat exchanger. Engine cooling system J Integrated engine driven jacket water centrifugal pump complete with distribution pipework and manifolds. 9 9 Exhaust system Turbocharger and exhaust manifold Exhaust gas temperature measuring Thermocouple for each cylinder 12 VMC_IS2ADOC/12/19/95 t Electric actuator For electronic speed-I output control Electronic speed monitoring for speed and output control By magnetic inductive pick up over ring gear on flywheel Starter motor Engine mounted electric starter motor • 1.1.2 Engine accessories - EMS 2000 Electronic speed-,power-and LEANOX-control with engine management The Engine Management System 2000 is a microprocessor controller especially for LEANOX-engines developed by JENBACHER ENERGIESYSTEME.The controller is supplied with DC-voltage varying between 18V and 32V. The 19 inch-housing (width x hight x depth = approximately 255 x 150 x 250 mm) with 3 lines and 42 columns is installed in the front door of the control panel. Functions: • speed control for no-load and island operation mode • load sharing of several modules in island operation • power control for paralleling with mains (utility), according to either internal or external set value • linear power reduction at excess mixture temperature • reverse power control • LEANOX-control to control the charge pressure via motorised carburettor subject to electrical power and mixture temperature • signal processing of the electronic misfiring detection Data on numerical display: active generator power: set value & actual value speed: set value & actual value charge pressure: control unit deviation& actual value air-gas mixture temperature: actual value carburettor position: actual value Insulation of exhaust manifold: Insulation blankets easily to remove and install. Design of blankets: • High temperature resistant fibreglass mat • Stainless steel reinforcement mesh on the inside • Silicon coated cloth on the outside. 13 VMC_LS2ADOC/12/19/95 Monitoring system for engine • magnetic inductive impulse transmitter • jacket water temperature transmitter • jacket water pressure transmitter • lube oil temperature transmitter • tube oil pressure transmitter • mixture temperature transmitter • charge pressure transmitter ' • lube oil level switch minimum and maximum • exhaust gas thermocouple for each cylinder • 1.1.3 Standard tools (one set per SITE) • Standard tools • tools for spark plug (special socket, extension,torque wrench) • tools for removal of oil filter cartridge • feeler gauge for checking valve clearance • 1 wrench 17x19 DIN 895 • 1 wrench 10 • grease gun • measuring device for valve wear • turning device (one per module) • ignition voltage measuring device 1.2 SELF-EXCITED SELF-REGULATED THREE.PHASE GENERATOR with automatic power factor control The generator consists of the main generator (built as rotating field machine), the exciter machine (built as . . rotating armature machine) and the voltage regulator with a MOSFET-servo component, which is powered by a permanent magnet pilot exciter. Main components • main stator with frame • main stator with 5/6 pitch winding to eliminate neutral currents of 3rd order • terminal box includes main terminals plus auxiliary terminals for thermistor connection • main rotor with sufficiently sized shaft dynamically balanced as per VDI 2060, Grade Q1 • drive end bracket with bearing • non-drive end bracket with bearing, including exciter machine and permanent pilot exciter • power factor controller • voltage regulator Electrical data and features Voltage adjustment: +/- 5%rated voltage Static voltage accuracy: +/-1%at no load to full load and power factor 0.8-1 14 vMc_152A.D3c/12/19/95 1 W speed variation+/-3%, cold and hot machine i• maximum deviation of wave form according to VDE is 5%phase to phase at open circuit • generator suitable for parallel operating with mains and other generators • sustained short circuit current at 3-pole terminal short circuit: minimum 3 times rated current for 5 seconds. • overload capacity according.to IEC 34/VDE 0530: 50%for 2 minutes. • according to VDE 0530 the overspeed test ensues with 1.2 times of rated speed for 2 minutes. Additional components: • electronic voltage regulator • electronic power factor regulator • 6 posistors for winding temperature monitoring 1.3 MODULE ACCESSORIES Module base frame welded of structural steel to mount engine, generator and heat exchangers. ' Flexible coupling with torque limiter to couple engine with generator.The coupling isolates the major subharmonics of engine alternating torque from generator. Bell housing to connect engine with generator housing provided:withtwo ventilation and control windows. Anti-vibration mounts arranged between engine-generator assembly and base frame. Insulating pads (SYLOMER) for placement between base frame and floor(foundation), delivered loose. Exhaust gas pipe connection between exhaust gas turbocharger and exhaust gas pipework including bellows to compensate heat expansions and vibrations. Combustion air filter • dry type air filter with replaceable filter cartridges including flexible connection to carburetor, service indicator . Air/fuel mixture cooling system integrated in the warm water circuit, consisting of: -required pipework on module -vents and drains Module interface panel totally enclosed floor standing sheet steel cubicle with front door,wired to terminals ready to operate, cable entry at bottom. Protection: IP 40 external IP 10 internal(protection against direct contactwith alive parts) v4C_I?A' /12/19/95 15 Design according to IEC 439-1 (EN 60 439-1/1990) resp.to DIN VDE 0660,part 500. Ambient temperature 41 -104 °F,relative humidity 70%: Dimensions: height: 47 inch width: 32 inch depth: 12 inch Supply of control current from control panel Supply of auxiliaries: (from supplier of auxiliary power supply equipment) 3x 480/277 V, 60 Hz, 35 A Essential components installed in control panel: - strip terminal - engine safety switch and contactors for engine auxiliaries - locally PLC-input/output-modules, connected to the PLC of the control panel ' with a bus cable - trip device for generator winding temperature - speed monitoring for start and overspeed - exhaust gas pyrometer with position selector switch Step platform made of checkered aluminium-type sheet metal;:easier access to engine for inspection and maintenance purposes. 1.3.1 Engine cooling water system Engine cooling water system closed cooling circuit, consisting of: • expansion tank • filling device (check-and pressure reduction valve, pressure gauge) • safety valve • thermostatic valve • required pipe work on module • vents and drains I. jacket water auxiliary pump including check valve for cooling down run • jacket water preheating device (electrical or heating water connected) 1.3.2 Automatic lube oil refilling system Automatic lube oil replenishing system: Float valve in Tube oil feed line including inspection glass.Electric monitoring system for engine shut-down at lube oil level"MINIMUM" and"MAXIMUM". Solenoid valve in oil feed line only activated during operation.Device for manual override of solenoid valve for filling procedure during oil change. 16 VMC_LS2A.DOC/12/19/95 1 j Oil drain Set mounted cock 1.3.4 Gear box single-stage spur gear with overhead shaft and lube oil system, complete mounted on the base frame.The lube oil heat excahanger is integrated in the warm water circuit. The gear transmission ratio is 1:1,2 • 1.4 HEAT RECOVERY Engine mounted intercooler and lube oil heat exchanger,jacket water heat exchanger mounted to the module base frame complete with interconnecting pipe work. The exhaust gas heat exchanger is mounted to the heat recovery module. The insulation of heat exchangers and pipe work is not included in our scope of supply. Heat exchanger-air/fuel mixture to hot water (inter cooler) The engine mounted finned-tube type heat exchanger is integrated in the hot water return circuit. Heat exchanger-lube oil to jacket water The engine mounted lube oil heat,exchanger is integrated in the engine jacket water circuit. Heat exchanger- engine jacket water to hot water Plate type heat exchanger mounted to module base frame complete with interconnecting pipe work, for recovery of engine jacket water and lube oil heat. Heat exchanger-exhaust gas to steam (Steamboiler) Bare fire tube exhaust waste heat recovery silencer complete with aluminum jacketed blanket insulation, standard water level controls and steam trim for 90 PSIG steam generation, 150 PSIG design per ASME Code Section VIII, Division. Including: Pneumatic internal exhaust deiversion valve with pilot - Pneumatic steam back pressure control valve - Steam flow meter consisting fo a 4"vortex flow meter,pressure transducer and computing totalizer. 1.5 GAS TRAIN preassembled, delivered loose, for installation into gas pipework to module; consisting of: -hand operated cock -pressure gauge with push button cock -safety filter -2 solenoid valves VMC LVADOC/12/19/95 17 -2 gas pressure switch -gas pressure regulator 1.7 PAINTING Quality: oil resistant prime layer synthetic resin varnish finishing coat Colour: engine: RAL 6018 (green) base frame: RAL 6018 (green) generator: RAL 6018 (green) module interface panel: RAL 6018 (green) • control panel: RAL 7032 (pebble grey) • 1.11 CHP -MODULE CONTROL PANEL ' Totally enclosed floor standing sheet steel cubicle with front door,wired to terminals ready to operate, cable entry at bottom. Protection: IP 40 external IP 10 internal(protection against direct contactwith alive parts) Design according to IEC 439-1 ( EN 60439-1/1990 ) resp.to DIN VDE 0660,part 500 and DIN 6280, part 7. Ambient temperature 41 104 °F, relative humidity 70°/D: Dimensions: height: 87 inch (incl.8 inch pedestal) width: 32 inch (resp. 39 inch for single synchronizing) depth: 24 inch Supply of control current (from supplier of the control voltage equipment): From batterie 24 V DC (tolerance: min. 22 V, max. 30 V, incl.waviness, waviness Uss max. 3,6 V) Supply of auxiliaries: (from supplier of auxiliary power supply equipment) 3x 480/277 V, 60 Hz, 35 A Essential components installed in control panel: - lockable operation mode selector switch"OFF-MANUAL-AUTOMATIC" - freely programmable micro processor SIMATIC S5-115U with components to connect the locally input-output modules with the module-interface panel via bus cable for engine control(start, stop, cooling down run) and monitoring of engine and generator. - Engine Managment System EMS 2000: electronic controler developed by Jenbacher Energie Systems for speed-and output control, load balancing of several modules in independent operation,linear output reduce at mixture temperature to high, LEANOX control and reverse power controL datas on numerical display: active generator power(set value-feedback value); speed(set value-feedback value);boost pressure (control unit difference-feedback value) air-gas mixture temperature (feedback value); carburetor position: (feedback value) 18 YY.c u2A.DOC/12/19/95 - alpha numerical display for operational and fault readings and display at jacket water temperature, jacket water pressure,lube oil temperature and lube oil pressure as well - misfiring detection - interface relaies according to interface list - measuring transformer 0-20 mA for active output 4-wire for unballanced load - push buttons for START,STOP, QUIT,LAMP TEST, OPERATIONAL LOOP and FAULT LOOP - start-up counter - operation hour counter - Hertz meter Required voltage supplies with fuses for feeding of auxiliaries,if included in our scope of supply. . Lockable operation mode selector switch with positions: "OFF" operation not possible, running set will be shut down; "MANUAL" manual operation(start, stop) is possible, set at standstill is not available for fully automatic operation; "AUTOMATIC" fully automatic operation according to locally provided demand signal: - automatic start - fully automatic operation at full load - stop with cooling down run of 1 minute - for motor and 5 minutes for auxiliaries Shut-down functions with display: - lube oil pressure min. - jacket water pressure min. jacket water pressure max. - jacket water temperature max. - lube oil level min. = Tube oil level max. - lube oil temperature max. - overspeed emergency stop/safety loop - gas train failure • - starling failure - stop failure = engine start blocked - engine operation blocked - misfiring - mixture temperature max. EMS 2000 controler failure - EMS 2000 measuring signal failure overload/output signal failure generator overload/short circuit - generator reverse power - generator winding temperature max. - synchronizing failure Warning functions with display: 19 VMC_1S2A.DOC/12/19/95 :a - jacket water temperature min. - CPU-batterie failure Operational functions with display: - ready to start - operation(engine runs) - generator circuit breaker"on" Interfaces-module control panel Remote signals (potential free contacts) (max. contact load: 3 A at 24 V DC) 1NO= 1 normally open • 1NC=1 normally closed - ready for automatic start 1N0 (to Master control) - operation (engine runs) 1N0 - collective signal"shut down" 1NC - collective signal"warning" 1NC Following signals and orders must be made available locally: - engine starting demand (from Master control). 1N0 - fault in warm water flow 1N0 - warm water temperature max. 1NC - warm water pressure max. 1NC Following signals must be made available by the supplier of the generator switch gear respectively synchronizing system: - generator circuit breaker ON 1N0+ 1NC - mains circuit breaker ON 1N0+ 1NC - mains failure operation 1N0 - transformer current /5A 1M5 60 VA for measuring - generator voltage 3x480/277V(3x100 V at medium voltage 60 VA, class 1) - analogous signal+/-5V from a Woodward-SPM-synchronizing device Following signals are made available by JES if the synchronizing systems is supplied locally: - operation mode selector switch in position"MANUAL" 1N0 - operation mode selector switch in position"AUTOMATIC" 1N0 - synchronizing release/load release 1N0 - demand for engine start 1N0 - active power>min. 1N0 - speed>360 rpm 1N0 1.20.01 Starting system Starter battery 20 VMC_IS2,LDOC/12/19/95 The jacket water temperature of a stopped engine is maintained between 56°C and 60°C, to allow immediate loading after start-up. 2.1 COMMON SYNCHRONIZING MANUAL-AUTOMATIC with voltage balance For automatic and manual synchronization of 4 (OPTION:5) modules with mains in FP (free programmable)- technology. Totally enclosed floor standing sheet steel cubicle with front door,wired to terminals ready to operate, cable entry at bottom. Protection: IP 40 external IP 10 internal(protection against direct contactwith alive parts) Design according to IEC 439-1 ( EN 60439-1/1990 ) resp. to DIN VDE 0660, part 500 and DIN 6280, part 7. Ambient temperature 41 - 104 °F, relative humidity 70 %: Dimensions: height: 87 inch (incl.8 inch pedestal) width: 32 inch depth: 24 inch standard painting: RAL 7032 consisting of: -lockable synchronizing mode selector switch with positions "MANUAL-O-AUTOMATIC" AUTOMATIC: automatic synchronizing of the module after synchronizing release from the control panel MANUAL: module has to be actuated for synchronization by the synchronization selector push button; speed adjustment by EMS 2000.The orders for the manual • synchronisation come from the SIMATIC S5. 0: synchronization is locked -freely programmable microprocessor SIMATIC S5 - 100U for fully automatic and manual synchronizing demand and synchronization of each module and monitoring of"CIRCUIT BREAKER 0N"signals -synchronyzing lock relay -double voltmeter -zero voltmeter -double frequency meter vrc uze.noc/12/19/95 22 2 pieces Pb-battery with 12 cells, 24 V, 180 Ah(according to DIN 72311), complete with cover plate,, terminals and acid tester Battery charging equipment 'WITH BATTERY VOLTAGE CONTROL as an option For boost and trickle charging of the battery with 12 cells (or a NiCd battery of 19 cells) and for the automatic supply of all connected D.C. consumers with a constant voltage in the load range of 0-100% nominal current, equalising at the same time variations of mains supply voltage and frequency.The ,equipment works according to a I/U characteristic as per DIN 41773.The trickle charging voltage is automatically kept constant up to the point where overload provokes a limitation of current. -mains connection voltage 277 V +/- 10% frequency 60 c/s +/- 5 % -battery connection nominal D.C.voltage 24 V constant voltage for trickle charging 26,8 V +/-1 % constant voltage for boost charging 28.2 V +/- 1 V max. charging voltage for automatic recharging 28,2 V max. charging voltage for manual charging 33 V changing of characteristic automatic nominal current (max.) 32 A +/-2 % output ripple < 1200 mV general data dimensions (hxwxd) 19x24x8 inch ambient temperatur 104 °F protection IP 20 cooling self ventilated colour RAL 7032 essential parts dry type transformer with separate coils rectifier in bridge connection thyristorized actuators transistor controller with pulser 1 ammeter 0-40 A 1 voltmeter 0-40 V different fuses, switches and terminals 1.20.03 Electric water preheating system Installed in the jacket water cooling circuit, consisting of: • heating elements • water circulating pump 21 VMC.ISZA.DOC/12/19/95 -automatic synchronizing device with analogous outputs for electronic speed governor adjustment -automatic voltage balance by electronic balance circuit -voltage relay for monitoring of busbar voltage -luminous headed push button for synchronizing selection (one per module) * to indicate the synchronizing selection with synchronizing mode selector switch in position AUTOMATIC * to select synchronization with synchronizing mode selector switch in position MANUAL -control switch for manual operation of generator circuit breaker with synchronizing mode selector switch in position MANUAL -required relays for control and monitoring Operational indications for: -generator circuit breaker ON (one per module) -synchronizing selection (one per module) -mains circuit breaker ON -mains in order Fault indications for: -mains failure -circuit breaker failure, i.e. switching ON/.switching OFF problem Remote signals (max. contact load: 3 A at 24 V DC) -generator circuit breaker ON(one per module) 1 NO Following signals must be made available by the supplier of the generator switch gear: -generator circuit breaker ON 1 NO -generator circuit breaker OFF 1 NC -generator protection switch ON 1 NO -mains circuit breaker...ON 1 NO -mains voltage 3 x 480/277 V -busbar voltage 3 x 480/277 V -generator voltage 3 x 480/277 V Following signals are wired potential free to terminals by JFS for the supplier of the generator switch gear: -closing command for generator circuit breaker(permanent contact) (one per module) 1 NO 23 vMc-ltli Ter/12/19/95 • -drive of the undervoltage circuit breaker 1 NO 2.3.1 Power control Mains supply control -Function: With this control unit a delivery of electric power to the mains is prevented and the consumption from the mains is reduced to a minimum. The module is controlled by a rating switch in dependance on the consumers power. The client provides the following signals for our control: 0(4) -20 mA for mains supply 0(4) -20 mA for consumer's input 2.10 STATION CONTROL FOR 4 GAS ENGINE UNITS (OPION:5 UNITS) Base procedure PRIORITY CURRENT-MAINS REFERENCE CONTROL Allround closed steelsheet stand-alone-cabinet, with front door equipped with profile rubber sealing, ready for operation wired on terminals for the installation via an on-site available cable duct(double bottom). Roof for ventilation on distance. Enclosure: external IP 40 internal IP 10 (protection against direct contact with active parts) Design according to EEC 439-1/1985 (2nd edition, modified), DIN VDE 0660, part 500 and DIN 6280,part 7. Ambient temperature 41 -104 °F, relative humidity 70%: Dimensions: Height 87 inch(incl. 8 inch foundation) Width 47 inch(two doors) Depth 24 inch Standard painting: RAL 7032 Control power supply(by supplier of the control power supply unit): from the battery 24 V DC, 16 A(tolerance:min. 22 V, max. 30 V,Incl.ripple,ripple Upp 3.6 V). Auxiliary power supply(by the supplier of the auxiliary power supply unit): 277 V, 60, 16 A. Purpose: 24 V}1C_LS2,LDOC/12/19/95 o The"Station control"is assigned for adding/ shutdown the individual gas engine units and the nominal power default for the unit controls in accordance with the plant mains reference. Scope of delivery: The following essential components are included: -Programmable controller SIMATIC S5-115U -Graphical operating and display area for the display of messages and measured data of the station control and for the display and input of adjust parameters for the station control as well as the PLC-diagnosis. Hardware: 9"monochrome semi-graphic monitor arid integrated keyboard(numerical keys, cursor control keys, 16 function keys) for the installation in the switch cabinet. -Neccessary coupling relays -Terminal strip for incoming and outgoing cables (limit of delivery) Assumptions: -The hydraulic integration of the units,the bypass of the surplus heat as well as the complete heater control must be realized on-site according to JES-hydraulic diagram E 9684. Function: -Adding and shutdown of the units Adding and shutdown of the units is performed in accordance with the current demandof the plant with the MAINS REFERENCE POWER and the UNITS TOTAL POWER as switching criteria. The measured value acquisition of the mains reference power is performed by an on-site measuring transducer (0/4-20 mA,potential free measured signal). -Power adjustment The power adjustment of the units is performed in that way that the mains reference power is used on a constant adjustable set value.The requested units are working in the load range 50 - 100%nominal load with equal load distribution to the units. -Time intervals Between two adjacent addings and shutdowns of units adjustable minimum dead time is observed. -Unit sequence The unit sequence is performed according to operating hours and availability. Monitoring/fault messages, displays/ operational messages: 25 VXC_1S21LDOC/12/19/95 -Monitoring/ fault messages Units return temperature max. (on-site sensor with potential free contact) PLC-buffer battery voltage nun. *) SINEC L1-bus system failure *) Message printer failure Emergency trip/ safety loop Collect fault synchronization (if common synchronization) CPU fault station control -Displays/ operational messages for each unit: Operational hours (with possibility of correction of the counter quantity) Ready for automatic request *) Operation (engine runs) *) Generator switch OFF/ON *) Generator switch fault *) Mode select switch OFF/MANUAL/AUTOMATIC *) Collect fault warning *) Collect fault shutdown *) Engine-cooling water temperature *) Engine-cooling water pressure *) Engine-lubrication oil temperature *) Engine-lubrication oil pressure *) Cylinder-exhaust gas temperature (only for.series 6) Generator effective power Operational condition of the plant: Mains reference power(with adjustment possibilities for the set value) The above mentioned displays/ messages are output functionally coordinated via the screen.The succeeding images are callable menu-controlled via function keys: *) Plant general diagram"Electrical system"with auxiliary diagram for symbol explanation Diagram for thermal accumulator Diagram"Fault plant" General diagram"Counter-units" *) Diagrams for individual units Diagrams for adjustment and control parameters System diagrams for the explanation of input of variables, symbol explanations, diagnosis PLC-status. *) System diagrams for date/ time,printer control. Remote control messages (potential free contacts): CPU-fault station control Collect fault station control *) Only with option"Protocol printer and data bus SINEC Ll" ! Vxc_IszA.noc/iz/is/ss 26 I • ..c 2.21 PLANT MONITORING SYSTEM(OPTION) For keeping track of the plant operation(electricity consumption/generation, steam consumption/ generation,hot water supply, etc.);for real time survey and historical trends;based on the MICROSOFT WINDOWS shell. Siemens PLC software and hardware CP 525 communication card CP 525 software - CP 524 data blocks for CP 525 EPROM chip Cables, hardware interface for analog alarms OPERATOR INTERFACE SYSTEM-WONDERWARE AND SIEMENS - WONDERWARE Software (Intouch full development and runtime system) - Siemens server SICOMP PC Desktop colour monitor Software configuration according to plant requirements 3.21 LURE OIL SYSTEM (OPTION) consisting of: two 200 gal fresh oil tank -level switches • 3.23 SILENCER (OPTION) in connection with one unit: 60 dBA in 33 feet -carbon steel -Weight: 743 lbs -Length: 132" -diameter: 30" • -flange: 14" 3.30 RADIATOR SYSTEM FOR HOT WATER LOOP (OPTION) The heat generated by the engine (jacket water, tube oil, intercooler) is dumped through an outside installed radiator if not utilized. The radiator is integrated in a glycol circuit which itself is integrated in the warm water circuit by means of a plate type heat exchanger. Sound pressure level 60 dB(A) in 33' 27 VXC_LSUA.DOC/12/19/95 consisting of: heat exchanger warm water/glycol circuit(plate type) -stainless steel plates -industrial frame -plate sealing system -4.0" 150#ANSI RF flanged at primary and secondary side -liquid volume 39 gallons -weight: 2620 lbs radiator -two radiators in parallel - 1,900 lbs each(3,800 lbs) -length 101.1 " -width 90 " each (180 ") -max. pressure 250 PSI -four 1.0 hp motors each (8hp) -max. ambient temp. 104°F -sound: 60 dBA in 33 feet pump electrical control(valves, temperature sensors and transmitters, etc.) • 5.VARIOUS 5.1 LIMITS OF THE SCOPE OF SUPPLY-INTERFCES Electrical • Module: at terminals of module interface panel at terminals of generator terminal box (screwed glands to be provided locally) • Module-control panel: at terminal strips • Auxiliaries: at terminals of equipment which is supplied separately Warm water • at inlet and outlet flanges on module* • at inlet and outlet flanges of the exhaust gas heat recovery system * Exhaust gas • at outlet flange of exhaust gas connection * • at inlet and outlet flanges of the exhaust gas heat recovery system * Combustion air • The air filters are set mounted,no external ductwork is necessary. Fuel gas • at inlet and outlet flange of gas train* • at inlet flange of gas pipe work on module * • at connection for pressure compensation on air filter manifold • at connection for pressure compensation on gas pressure regulator Lube oil 28 1.7XC_LS2J_DOC/12/19/95 • at lube oil connections on module and tank Draining connections and pressure relief • at module Condensate • at condensate drain on exhaust gas heat exchanger Insulation • Insulation of heat exchangers and pipe work is not included in our scope of supply and must be provided locally. First filling • The first filling of module, excepted for lube oil(i.e. engine jacket water, anti-freeze-, anti-corrosive agent and battery acid) is not included in our scope of supply. The composition and quality of the used consumables to be strictly monitored in line with the"Technical Instructions"of JENBACHER ENERGIESYSTEME AG. Suitable bellows and flexible connections must be provided locally for all connections. Cables from the module must be flexible. * without bolts, nuts and washers .5.2 FACTORY TESTS AND INSPECTIONS The individual module components:undergo the following tests and inspections: 5.2.1 Engine tests: Carried out according to DIN 1941 at JES-test bed.The following tests are made at 100%, 75 %and 50% load and the results are shown in a test certificate: • engine output • fuel consumption • jacket water temperatures • lube oil pressure • lube oil temperatures • boost pressure • exhaust gas temperature per cylinder 5.2.2 Generator tests: Carried out at the premises of the generator supplier. 5.2.3 Module tests: ( Carried out commonly with module control panel and switch gear(if in JES scope of supply) at JES test 4 bench according to DIN 6280.The following tests are made and the results are shown in a test certificate: 1. Visual inspection of scope of supply according to specification. 2. Functional tests according to technical specification of control system. • starting in manual and automatic mode of operation • • power control in manual and automatic mode of operation • function of all safety systems on module 3. Measurements at 100%, 75 %and 50%load: 29 VMC_IC,A T T/12/19/95 • frequency • voltage • current • generator output • power factor • fuel consumption • lube oil pressure • jacket water temperature • boost pressure • mixture temperature • exhaust emission(N0x) 5.3 DOCUMENTATION 1. 30 days after receipt of technically and commercially clarified order: • module drawing • technical diagram • drawing of control panel • list of electrical interfaces • technical specification of control system • assembly drawings for auxiliaries 2. 60 days after receipt of technically and commercially clarified order: • cable list 3. at delivery: • wiring diagrams • operating and maintenance manual • spare parts manual • operation report log 5.4 ENCLOSURES Module drawing E 11516 -2 Technical diagram E 11516 - 3 30 1Y.C_LS2A.DOC/12/19/95 APPENDIX C .. •• .�F . 0 - Q 5 1 0 0 I � 4 N t QZ MAX ® _ I I 2"INSUL&TION 4f H !' VAI_YE(S)LIEF I I I 7—ALUMINUM WRAP -- I I � �__ r j (OPTIONAL) o a i rr-. I d EXHAUST OUT I ' UUU I CONTROL (��7� STEAM OUTLET�'� I . ►' t C.cEN ALATIER i ,e yOK I © I t INSPECTION t , G ism i � :5° '�•' OPENING I �) HAHOLE- - I SLOWDOWN „ [Ht_1�11 CAI. SURFACE a : as ` °� I � � o e u FFED GO►1W. ilriN rI � t - li 0 J- L- WA-rE . SAMPLE ---�' I - • 1/4, 1 of 4" 30 {I K______ U CO►.IN . ED CONTROL IiPIPING i: I IINSULATED �� LEXHAUST IN © COVER I, • I! , t . - © I 0 .. I. 0 I SLOWDOWN I DA.1.N L' _— = ====-i 4.9 I I • GAS SIDE •,a -ice ttOLES "" it i �� I DRAIN I �.I II ' ® © 0 0 II 11 cm.....,„,....-- ` FEE= :::-As'Av1R FRESSU RE GUAGE 0 V1-,I - ! Th. I= Ii IImo-eiFlt-t(1 w /-VENT VALVE '- I CU=TONER ( . I 3 ECXSH-MODEL NO. A B CDEFGHJKLM N P i L S _ S T U W XIY Z --rRY COCKS ECX6H-4S10 I.4oI1So-►4- 14 1 1Y211 3 1 , 1 1 i 1 SO 32 I9L IGO 30 32 48 21 20 i20142) , — I>a ECXSH -52 10 Stra 52 150 14 14- 1 IYzl 1 3 1 1 1 1 80 32 194o '60 32 34- 52 23 20112.0150 HIGH WATER SIGHT I LEVEL ALARM GLASS I I - I _ _ _ I I _ IC WATER LEVEL 3>4 I CONTROLLER , . W• PROPORTIONAL NOTES: LEGEND , LOW WATER LEVEL M4•1IIa 0 VARIABLE NOZZLE SIZE SHUT DOWN r 1. ASME CODE CONSTRUCTED & STAMPED 0 VARIABLE DIMENSION - I NwL ISOBLIG. 0 CONSTANT NOZZLE SIZE I 2. SUITABLE FOR WET OPERATION ONLY. ' =><-1: i--` � 3. PAINT EXTERIOR ONE COAT HI HEAT 4- GRAY PRIMER AND ONE COAT HI HEAT -- - --- --- ALUMINUM.i -- . VESSEL ,,m 3- - - -- 4, DIMENSION S SUBJECT TO CHANGE - CONTROL PIPIN - - —UNLESS-CERTIFIED. FELIiNA RY SLOW DOWN 5. MANUAL OR AUTOMATIC EXHAUST BY- -- - - VALVES - B Y PASS VALVE AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. CONTROL PIPING OTHER S SCALE: NONE MODEL ECXSH — EXHAUST - WASTE HEAT VAPORPHASE DRAWNDATES 11 J-07-95 . V ENGINEERING CONTROLS INC_ RECOVERY SILENCER FOR STEAM Bampl.. 3072 _ ,A E SAINT LOUIS. MISSOURI CHKD: R.E.H . _ SERVICE AT 90 _ PSIG _ r.sssn • a . . 4 4 f\ 1 I l . 1 ICY ii 11 1 9I \ JLGP tt 1 Ni,. (I l.1 •+ Y.II • ,• Y fa L r'� it t °' • �L'� � + .t.i: v r ■ fS l ( �•�': �1 1 �-} •1,1�a..�N,,• �v rX ;wal a; y�f 1:,J:S t; �:.jFS* ''�• - I'drr1111114' 1� , '•4 t, ;,'•:�'5: ,+::, �, E �, A'rl:sF,, . �:5r ., 4r1. ' ,. % •1{ {vn i • t r'- 3, ul'''''''''''''...''''''''‘'''''''''''''' r +•41 "•6 �4 to • .p n , 1 � ''- I +I lei K', It'fl :, y� S° �1 � r �Yn ,,t Ii ;�ai y .Yv. :::::' c `K�R�t I + �� j S 1 :'.i.;,':r' �..... 6'�-• t' uf. 7t+ C-C 11 • 1 •�.1 ° - Mp t;•,.I,� I. ,\t�, ..t,.5y.i 't ,I 3-J. Y Z ,1 �'` I i J J gal d.. ' f. ' a J4 iYf 1 • , - _ Zaw'rn1: rI I - ��! 'I +rPl� i1 °Qdi� 4�. ..�— . 'c':..r_. f'', .1 ,I III r ,n `u I 1. r4 U.r4 • �1 I j ,� � �5 I _ ti , �. Mal �I r - "nIli F, �' -„ t , , N1 `, `9 tf r ', @ a. . „ MI ._.:: :4;. E t \ • .111 1:•41; r i mi. Ci, ,`Nh„,,,,4�` :� . .•• pN,61,,,' f1 r{+?•,e ,:k; .+1.A ie 7.. 6. `� J .: . r.tw.�.." ...-v t�. V A ', M1i I r fit �•�•-:(,v-+ . d' jl Y> t ?{.l'r•r i • r t'{ Itr '' I 1� .r t 1 1 ..: t :E i�;i.. .fir:. - r.1_ �S�.EI , �:r ' b d is 1Y 1 u'' r , _f+ Y•,•t 1.� ° �` ':•I::i: � .� � It- � imp�bl I �; 'LfF , h '1 2�t I �; ,' ��� I �'' �SE'� • ,.,,,,,,,,,,I,,,: ,ti p,r t• t jy Cz A,ya n• ,.; '/ ° , l j Otg% ,:L ..',Wi.'4': ., "tl i ,Ir. _ �;- , .. X.,.. I f;1, f` ,li.l, �V4 ,14) n`.' Ott' ii 4YR ! ° f C•a ,G'� :, l`,� .• ,�ilrffi �' lr� • 1 A4 • •�i• Itif :f' �� �Il,yl I�'11I+ d .i ir ! , �j .i} g � it:'; �t• {•. • '; _,'... ��d,�q t S� 41 j�F % F i ;IY l!1jI 1 ,. I t I. \ / t II I t .1;'. . ........• .•; •• t '1 1I . ',` tl 1. I C Y .-. 4 fr IG i P nl'i$ -.`� t,� ' 12 • . .,......,„,,, . ./ . ... .c.„,„., ,,,, ..J. ,.... \... , ' I• ' �{ ",, `xY V r,`�.I I y.• • y y ,5}z ttin 33 {� .•I TS h:11 l• 6' ''.','T.''''...' �, e�,,l�Yw dp I • Y z ' G,; %, t 7:,: • /� ... .? �i, �..r i!r1 E31, ;1`I �` v, 414f ', ,! e t , • !\ :°Iry'+IYIR-,4`,Y `.t,"w�t, Ir'rfiA a •• I • M : m r l g v t .r4� IM 0( • �� o- :a > 2 { �,� 1 i. d t• • {7. Fri 5 �. 'c S:`)' + f.. Irk I10ifx,Tl/ ;1. }1)�• r Ix1 i .:y'"IYf . La'�r r+. z 1 �} f, fr f,„0, !r>;s j5 , < roe{•� 9 1 .,•y ' I :t a t�. xv i'^,4. .,_. ,{ 1 ' S•„11 .ro I r L1 t > irtN f .''r u^ l �;. ..--, m • . . . . --,:^ •1 ..ll, r_.I 1. l-.( ..f )ti4 ! rl,. • ttt a w O I i , W`I,,,, a �',,,,)1G",,y 1 114 1 \ !t..,!. r, 0 • I,c:r. i 11� C� t . .. i Yl4n'.' (_ c;L"Y D7CI. T t4 f!f Sc is•y+�%:( ( 1, ,r'3 •, 4 • •n• • is 0 CIS • a.1 . _ 2 wo .. k . ,.. 11,''•....• .:.•.: ..1 .,,,..„„. 4.1 331 21 i I -�pI T ` 1 ' IM!/ 2 f, t,°t1 }. �.; • o! 1! 'I r� +1 �ul+ upu;mfTi�!ti:Sst 1 y r•, ,, i.Sf + ":Y' %,2,, tar 's�:r.!.`i,;n` .N '.•1 • �$..,'" of .t t+iY 7 to : — " t;�r ,1•41: v 1 i3O) 11144 '�.•..s1 a II u rn memo CD r- cn 0- In r!' C A mz . �� i�.I . JJ 4 t , n' r.a"i.Z;'_W"y. -:.. , • L5TEA , ,, ,-",--TERVICE ..t. - v.,.\\„ • ...- / I-,,,,-- z,-;..:ii, ) :,_.�7. 4 ?WECXSH EXHAUSTRECOVERY SILENCE 44,. ,/ ���-'; , �' • The ECXS series features bare fire tube constructic ,; / ;::, • �., with access covers or manways at each end to facility •'�' /, o y..)'- `' '' f� "'access to the tube bundle for ease of cleaning and maintenanc ; • 1 r" • The ECXS series is used for steam generation and is availab •? 1 '.': k-' ^I ' t. for 20 50 150 and 250 PSIG design pressures. ' ; \� �'z �\`�., -` • Integral Steam separation eliminates the inconvenience of finding spac _,• `' '‘ % and the cost of piping to an external separator. • �� '��•',� ,- - � `� �.t • The three chambered gas side design provides high quality engine silencin • �` % -4 i' ii • The ECXS series is available in either vertical or horizontal configuration with vario! -!t L II exhaust sizes and nozzle arrangements for ease of installation. �",� • The ECXS units are fabricated to ASME Code Section I or Section VIII Division I for 20, 51 150, or 250 PSIG design pressure. ----. ECXS units are also availab for marine applications (series ECXMS) \with USCG and ABS approve wo.; CSCEXHAUST HEAT '' �' RECOVERY SILENCER M _. led. . The ECXS series is offered with optional blanket type �,--. • cl- insulatiorn,which flexes with the thermal expansion and '. _:: contraction of the unit and an aluminum jacket to pro- `" . r. .1 "''. ct the blanket insulation. °'�01 -• The bare fire tube construction permits easy cleaning `` .`11; 1;. ,i'I _ ,- ;k, .Illilii 11 d` 7 r,f the tubes when used with a fouling gas stream such ='`lii i: „1:; dual fuel, diesel, or two-cycle engines. i;,iiiiliiiiii;';,l'i c • Tubes that become damaged from inadequate water I : ii ;: 1 i i ,atment (scaling or oxygen pitting), can be easily i , `!Itili " I' placed by any local boiler repair shop. 1. . ;i!i ;;t • The ECXS series is available with internal manual or f it;„11,ill' --itomatic�exhaust gas bypass valves to trim the steam :Tilt, I itput during periods of low steam demand. . ';i,� il; 1 • Tubes are rolled in low pressure steam applications 'ii il'i I,elded on high pressure installations. In either case 1�\ ii1,<1divid;ual tube can be removed and replaced. ;. �.0 (ii, 1 , r , , EXHAUST HEAT . ��� RECOVERY SILENCEF - M_. - ACTUATOR FOR CONTROL OPTIONAL EXHAUST ?F TE .A_EXHAUST DIVERSION DIVERSION VALVE VA WE::.'ANUAL OR AUTO. !~�1 _ _ _-- PIPING _... .__ ACTI:A S=(OPTIONAL) r - , - e �E SAFETY 1 -REMOVABLE INSULATED O �•STEAM • RELIEF' _ COVER(TY=BOTH ENDS) �— 0° —STEAM OUTLET INSPECTION- -- OUTLET • . -1 ro I_. — ..i -- - - --�--7 COVER DAVIT li!_- t.-'•-I I I OD N.S. :/HEt:r E0'D) .1 -FEED WATEn (T••'BCTH ENDS) li '- - ❑A O.D. _ ( O F.S. �i� ,i © �� i i '�1 EXI-AUST -� _.i_, , i_ \c ��1// - INLE- O le,t° • 511o. D iii SURFACE- � ! OUTLET )1i SLOWDOWN i ';"i l I ❑M f. .u:AO.._�uluuu��� _.....Jr . 2"INSULATION W/ I 1r uU��uuu:`y1 _ '-'°1i ALUMINUM WRAP GAS SIDE ` DRAIN DOWN ` � (OPTIC`:AU ,J I 1 i80° • DRAIN �\ ' `� 4-10/e- . •/"SLOTTED i -� HOLES FOR MTG. I , ECXSV EXHAUST HEAT RECOVERY SILENCER ' d(:•n • r_:.-4.-7,.w .....K n,,y;x _.. ,..14.,-+.'�s ,�y'J•,.:d..,- ,r." , • 2�-� ,-_:._..- ..'� m..:�a".-. �.,+�� -- . `"`.veil: 7 Y"r,`J> . ..s, ...1 - .:.4 ..r.4.71.5i. w.,,-.44.fxiy s isr r..:E,�:' A,.... ...- . f5 ..ej l t `^.a"L`.+ .,. MODELINTERNAL EXHAUST - I j L& DIVERSION VALVE W -STEAM No. A I BR ? By C/Di E , F 1 HH Hv JH Jv K M N 1 P R MANUAL OR AUTO. 0° CUTLET ACTUATOR(OPTIONAL) • 3010 30 i 156 1921 81 3 ; 18 ` 42 I 1711 1441 181 21 23 24 1 12 1 120 A ' n 8 - SAFETY' — 3610 36 1 156 192! 101 3 18 1 42 1711 1441 181 24 261 30 j 12 1 120 1 <` '�,. 0..W���- RELIEF : 4010 401168 2001 121 4 1 20145117211521187 26 28 34 1 161120 ,� , 4410 44 1 17< 2041 141 4 1 20 4811741156 190 28 301 38 1 18 1 120 EXHAUST-i \1 A EXHAUST I .-k.r_ 90°OUTLET 4610 46 ; 174 2041I 16 I 1 4 ; 201; =8 1751 156 192 29 31 40 181120 120 INLET 270° 405 481240 2681 181 61 22 ! 65 1239i 220i 2551 30 32 42 ; 201180 5415 54 1252:2761 201 61 221 681243 228 262 33 35 148 241180 q-,�/i6- HOLES— • `� ,Axt%�,Z 5615 56 1258:2801 22 61 241 71 12451232 264 341 361 50 261180 EC.SPCD.ON - I FEEDWATER - 7"B.C. v , . 6015 60 258 2801 24 61 241 71 124512321264 36 38 54 261180 — !�0 ALTERNATE LOC. 6615 66 1 I 1264:2841 26 8 1 251 731245 236 266 39 41 60 28 1 180 -MANWAY /EXHAUST OUTLET COVER DAVIT 7215 721270 2881 28 81 271 751247 240 269 42 441 66 301180 (OPTIONAL) \ I / REMOVABLE 7615 761270.2901 308 1 27 1 15 12471240 2701 44 46 70 30 1 180 =__��' / INSULATED COVEF I I , 7815 78 1 270!2921 321 8 1 27 1 75124712401271 45 47 721 301180 EXHAUST I i EXHAUST 8015 80 270'2941 34 1 10 1 27 ! 75 2461240 272 46 48 j 74 1 30 1 180 INLET j OUTLET 8215 82 1 270!2961 361 101 271 75 12461240 273 47 491 761 301180 I 1_In:Inv-CONTROL illl I - i_P;PING 8415 1 84127613041 36 110 1 341 7712531240 2531240 280 48 501 781 321180 = 1 SURFACE 8815 1 88127613051 38 12 1 33 j i l 1252 2441 280 50 52 82 1 32 j 180 \�r i.' i/ SLOWDOWN 1} • 9215 1 92 1 276.3071 401 121 311 7 12521 2441 2811 52 541 861 321180 1:16;t STEAM j OUTLET _ - NOTES: � 1. ASME CODE CONSTRUCTED & STAMPED. INSPECTION�, PIPINGR L _\ _ y��PIPING 2. SUITABLE FOR WET OR DRY OPERATION WHEN UNIT IS EQUIPPED WITH ❑ ' <<?J z" INSULATIOn INTERNAL EXHAUST GAS DIVERSION VALVE- E ' ALUMINUM WF 3. NOZ. SIZES 21/2" & BELOW, NPT. NOZ. SIZES 3"& ABOVE, PROPERLY ! 0 = i (OPTIONAL) I _ RATED ANSI FLG'S. EXHAUST NOZ'S, 125#DRILLED FLG'S. .• 4. CONTROL PIPING SHOWN FOR 50 PSI DESIGN &ABOVE ONLY. ' /i FEEDWATER r s. 2 SAFETY RELIEF VALVES REQ'D. FOR 50 PSI DESIGN & ABOVE. SLOWDOWN"— ,VA - 6. INTERNAL EXHAUST DIVERSION VALVE w/MANUAL OR AUTOMATIC DRAIN ` !_ ACTUATOR AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. • _ ,L —_ INSPECTION 7. 2" INSULATION w/ALUMINUM WRAP AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST. = (--= `j i DRAIN 8. EXTERIOR PAINTED w/ONE COAT HI-TEMP.ALUMINUM. i ! ,'`--� iln 9. MFGR. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO CHANGE UNITS DUE TO INDIVIDUAL MANWAY'- 'N --BASE R DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS. �, 0 CONTROL COLUMN !. `" Standard steam trim for the ECXS series includes: J in 1. r, I r ism Water level controller _ Steam pressure gauge O ._ �✓ li.,, Air vent valve Safety valve(s) MI - High water level switch ='�f -. Low water level switch l • Water level gauge glass Bottom blowdown and drain „_.,.., Surface blowoff 1 - _ .e.,,;' y 4 \\\\ Additional controls are available upon request: ,r'�r-,I ram\ 1 r ,r• {7n • • • ''iit( INTERNAL EXHAUST OPTIONAL .: DIVERSION VALVE , \.,,, --,.,;..„ i: 1 ..,„..,.._ , - !: - v• 1 jr lI � •;:b ; .-- NA , l ,,`, = - I 'EXHAUST GAS 1 I€ N. DIVERSION VALVE 7 t oo.o� , 0 l (OPTIONAL) - ! ,00coo©-- •• cc000 AlitagmEmmo.L - --J- i-c . 'CROSS SECTION ECONOMIZER �u , I �' -' (OPTIONAL) Iu u, , u , V , ', SUPERHEATER I (OPTIONAL) 1 I VERTICAL — UNIT , - io #• HORIZONTAL I°o Ili•I'i :I !o°° • .r- g I z � I j : I •i �^ lllll ;, -a , . .7-.7.- . - .,.. :-,-,--,:-..:,--„-.,:.,--:,-,,,,I;i::k.' ...' ., : '''.;17:: :: i 4i—it ,V 1 Il: Q ' , I u l d Q TYPICAL ATTENUATION CURVE I i .1230 I I • I:3i • I- 20 � • W / l Octave Bands in Hz. 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 GENERAL PERFORMANCE DIAGRAMS: 7 I I I ECXVS c""�� .. 1 o STEAM PRESSURE FORIINLET EXHAUST ECXVS 721 „o :F,Z,o as\ • 6 ' TEMPERATURES OF 700 900° + 1100°F.I '-, o- .-N3 I I I ECXVS / I = ?5' 5 ECXVS •F , . 5L O.F,250 P% ECXVS 5615 1N0 c,,5 PS tl • 4 �� ?p0�• Ii ECXVS 1a �� �—I _2E"S1 r I4815 1700 150 P51 ECXVS I . _ 3 ECXVS 4610 v_��� —� ' ECXVS ������ 2 ECXVS 4010 %_ 71 01' I i C°,' 3610 r 1 3010 �� 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 m 20 I ! I i I 19 • ECAVS • Q 18 ! ! I 9215 I • LU 17 • • ! E• 8815S I ! I I 16 Pc'\ I I 16 -.I15 — FCXVS ,,0°0 !c't�PG m I ! 18415 �,o" I S` Q 14 - .- 5° . • CC W 13 8215 ��°°�,F;,�PS` I . 12 I ECXVS - . :� V I -aidei ,25 PSG LIJ 11 ,o'r' I �� ' 7815i �.l I 1 ^�r250 pS1 10 7615 i 9 9 I 7p0,F 15 r 1 110 I I l&lk —.di 4111111 I. 76W — 00F.r,250 PS lr 5vellgiws11111101.--- 4 • i 1 I I 1111111 I I I I I I I I 3 _ 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 120 EXHAUST GAS FLOW in LRSJHrilflo0's