Laserfiche WebLink
5.1 AIR QUALITY <br /> TABLE 5.1-25 <br /> BACT Determinations for LEC <br /> Pollutant Gas Turbine/HRSG Auxiliary Boiler <br /> NO. Dry low-NO,,combustor and selective catalytic Ultra-low NO,,burner: 7 ppmcb <br /> reduction: 2.0 ppmC,a 1-hour average <br /> CO Oxidation catalyst: Good combustion practices <br /> 3.0 ppmc, 3-hour average <br /> VOC 1.4 ppmc, no duct firing Good combustion practices <br /> 2.0 ppm,with duct firing <br /> 3-hour average <br /> SO2 and PM,o Natural gas fuel and good combustion Natural gas fuel and good combustion <br /> practices; inlet air filter; lube oil vent coalescer practices <br /> appmc: parts per million by volume, dry. Gas Turbine/HRSG concentrations are corrected to 15%02. <br /> bBoiler concentrations are corrected to 3%02. <br /> 5.1.5 Air Quality Impact Analysis <br /> SJVAPCD Rule 2201 requires the Applicant to provide ambient air quality modeling analyses <br /> and other impact assessments. An ambient air quality impact assessment is also required by <br /> EPA for PSD review and by the CEC for CEQA review. These analyses are presented in this <br /> section. The air quality impact analyses have been prepared in accordance with modeling <br /> protocols submitted to and reviewed by the SJVAPCD and CEC staffs.The protocols and the <br /> comments provided are included in Appendix 5.113. <br /> 5.1.5.1 Dispersion Modeling <br /> An assessment of impacts from the LEC on ambient air quality has been conducted using <br /> EPA-approved air quality dispersion models. These models are based on various <br /> mathematical descriptions of atmospheric diffusion and dispersion processes in which a <br /> pollutant source impact can be calculated over a given area. <br /> Figure 5.113-1 in Appendix 5.113 shows the building layout used in the modeling analysis. <br /> Since the new equipment will operate alongside the existing plant,the modeling analysis <br /> included the existing STIG plant structures to account for any potential influences from those <br /> structures. The impact analysis was used to determine the worst-case ground-level impacts <br /> of the new equipment. The results were compared with established state and federal ambient <br /> air quality standards and PSD significance levels. If the standards are not exceeded then it is <br /> assumed that,in the operation of the facility,no exceedances are expected under any <br /> conditions. In accordance with the air quality impact analysis guidelines developed by EPA <br /> (40 CFR Part 51,Appendix W: Guideline on Air Quality Models) and CARB (Reference <br /> Document for California Statewide Modeling Guideline,April 1989),the ground-level impact <br /> analysis includes the following assessments: <br /> • Impacts in simple,intermediate,and complex terrain; <br /> • Aerodynamic effects (downwash) due to nearby building(s) and structures; and <br /> • Impacts from inversion breakup (fumigation). <br /> Simple,intermediate, and complex terrain impacts were assessed for all meteorological <br /> conditions that would limit the amount of final plume rise. Plume impaction on elevated <br /> 5.1-32 SAC/371322/082410013(LEC_5.1_AIR_QUALITY.DOC) <br />