PSC REF#:231309

~~ALUANT -~ENERGY.

February 6, 2015

Mr. David Siebert Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

Wisconsin Power and Light Company

4902 North Biltmore Lane P.O. Box 77007 Madison, WI 53707-1007

Office: 1.800.862.6222 www.al!iantenergy.com

Phone: 608.458.4478 Fax: 608.458.8145 E-mail: benlipari@a!liantenergy.com

Director-Bureau of Energy, Transportation & Environmental Analysis 101 S. Webster Street P.O. Box 7921 Madison, Wis. 53707-7921

RE: Public Service Commission of Wisconsin Docket No. 6680-CE-176 Riverside Energy Center Expansion Project Engineering Plan

Dear Mr. Siebert:

In November 2014, Wisconsin Power and Light Company ("WPL") announced plans to construct a new, efficient natural gas-fueled generation facility at its existing Riverside Energy Center in the Town of Beloit, Wis. Specifically, the Riverside Energy Center Expansion Project will be a nominal 650 megawatt, 2x 1 natural gas combined cycle generation facility.

WPL intends to file an application for a certificate of public convenience and necessity ("CPCN") for the the Riverside Energy Center Expansion Project with the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin ("PSCW") pursuant to Wis. Stat. § 196.491(3)(a). In advance of filing an application for a CPCN, WPL is required to submit an Engineering Plan to the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. (Wis. Stat. § 196.491(3)(a)3.a.) Consistent with that requirement, WPL is pleased to submit the enclosed Engineering Plan for the Riverside Expansion Project.

WPL looks forward to the Department's response to its Engineering Plan.

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Ben Lipari at 608-458-4478.

Sincerely,

Ben Lipari Senior Manager- Project Development

cc: Sandra Paske, Secretary Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

PSC REF#:231309Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

RECEIVED: 02/06/15, 3:32:48 PM

WISCONSIN POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY RIVERSIDE ENERGY CENTER EXPANSION

PROJECT ENGINEERING PLAN

Report No. 219524-0ZR-P0006

Revision 0

February 3, 2015

HDR Project 219524

Prepared By: HDR

Checked/Approved By: K. Kjellman / R. Nagel

Project Manager:

S. Leigh

Alliant Energy Report No: 219524-0ZR-P0006 WPL Riverside Energy Center Expansion Project Revision 0 Engineering Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose of Engineering Plan

1.2 Overview of the Riverside Energy Center Expansion Project

1.3 Description of the Proposed Technology

2 FACILITY LOCATION

2.1 General

2.2 West Site

2.3 East Site

3 FACILITY DESCRIPTION

3.1 General Description

3.2 Major Equipment

3.2.1 Combustion Turbine Generators

3.2.2 Heat Recovery Steam Generators

3.2.3 Steam Turbine Generator

3.3 Major Systems

3.3.1 Power Cycle Systems

3.3.2 Heat Rejection Systems

3.3.3 Fuel Supply Systems

3.3.4 Water Supply and Wastewater Systems

3.3.5 Fire Protection System

3.3.6 Emissions Control System

3.3.7 Plant Electrical Systems

3.4 Balance of Plant

3.4.1 Plant Buildings

3.4.2 Chemical Feed Systems

3.4.3 Ammonia System

3.4.4 Plant Control System

3.5 Plant Operation

3.6 Solar PV Facility

4 INTERCONNECTION FACILITIES

4.1 Electrical Interconnection

4.2 Natural Gas Interconnection

HDR Engineering Page 2


5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

5.1 Air Quality

5.2 Water Resources

5.3 Land Requirements

5.4 Floodplains

5.5 Threatened and Endangered Species

5.6 Wetlands

5.7 Noise

5.8 Construction Impact

5.9 Chemical Storage

5.10 Permitting Plan

6 PROJECT SCHEDULE

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Title Page No.

5-1 PSD Major Modification Threshold 28

5-2 Preliminary Permit List 33

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure No. Title Page No.

2-1 Site Location Map 9

2-2 Conceptual Site Layout – West Site 11

2-3 Conceptual Site Layout – East Site 13

3-1 Power Cycle Process Diagram 15

3-2 Preliminary Water Balance Diagram 21

6-1 Milestone Schedule 38



ACRONYMS

The following acronyms are listed as reference and are used throughout this Engineering Plan.

Term Definition

AC Alternating current

ANR ANR Pipeline Company

ATC American Transmission Company

BACT Best available control technology

BMP Best Management Practices

BOP Balance of plant

CCCW Closed cycle cooling water

CCR Central control room

CEMS Continuous emissions monitoring System

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CO Carbon monoxide

CO2 Carbon dioxide

CPCN Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity

CTG Combustion turbine generator

CW Circulating water

DCS Distributed control system

DPP Definitive Planning Phase (MISO Interconnection)

EPA Environmental Protection Agency

FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency

FRP Fiberglass reinforced plastic

GPM Gallons per minute

GSU Generator step-up (Transformer)

HCW Horizontal collector well

HP High pressure

HRSG Heat recovery steam generator

Hz Hertz

IP Intermediate pressure

kW Kilowatt

LP Low pressure

MGD Million gallons per day



MISO Midcontinent Independent System Operator

MW Megawatt

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards

NERC North American Reliability Corporation

NFPA National Fire Protection Association

NGCC Natural gas combined cycle

NNG Northern Natural Gas

NOx Oxides of nitrogen

NSR New Source Review

PM Particulate matter

ppm Parts per million

PSCW Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

PSD Prevention of Significant Deterioration

PSIG Pounds per square inch gauge

PV (Solar) Photovoltaic

PVC Polyvinylchloride

SCADA Supervisory control and data acquisition

SER Significant Emissions Rate

SCR Selective catalytic reduction

SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure Plan

STG Steam turbine generator

TEWAC Totally enclosed water-to-air cooled

TMDL Total maximum daily load

UAT Unit auxiliary transformer

UPS Uninterruptable power supply

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency

VOC Volatile organic compounds

WDNR Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources

WPL Wisconsin Power and Light Company



1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 PURPOSE OF ENGINEERING PLAN Wisconsin Power and Light Company (WPL), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alliant Energy Corporation (Alliant), submits this Engineering Plan in support of the development of a new natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) project planned for installation on WPL-owned property near its existing Riverside Energy Center (the proposed project is herein referred to as the “Riverside Energy Center Expansion” project). This Engineering Plan is in support of the application for a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN) to be filed with the Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (PSCW), pursuant to Wisconsin Statute § 196.491 (3). Pursuant to this statute, the Engineering Plan must include “…the location of the facility, a description of the facility, including the major components of the facility that have a significant air, water or solid waste pollution potential, and a brief description of the anticipated effects of the facility on air quality, water quality, wetlands, solid waste disposal capacity, and other natural resources.” The purpose of this Engineering Plan is to provide the PSCW and the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) an overall project description and sufficient information such that the agencies are able to provide a listing of each permit or approval required for the construction and operation of the proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project.

1.2 OVERVIEW OF THE RIVERSIDE ENERGY CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT The Riverside Energy Center Expansion project is proposed to be located in the Town of Beloit, in Rock County, Wisconsin, on one of two potential sites. Pursuant to PSCW CPCN requirements, two alternative sites are contemplated. Both of the sites under consideration are owned entirely by WPL and are part of a contiguous electric generation and transmission campus that includes WPL’s existing Riverside Energy Center, Rock River Generating Station, and the Beloit Operations Center – Southern Area.

The existing Riverside Energy Center is a nominal 600 MW two–on-one (2x1) NGCC facility, similar in configuration to the proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project (the proposed project will be more efficient given technological advancements since the existing Riverside Energy Center came online in 2004). WPL’s Rock River Generating Station consists of retired Units 1 and 2 and active Units 3, 5, and 6 (Unit 4, or “Turtle” is located off-site). Rock River Generating Station Units 1 and 2 began commercial operation in the early 1950s firing coal in its boilers to generate steam for electric production. Units 1 and 2 were converted to fire natural gas in the early 2000s and were retired in 2009. WPL has separate plans to demolish Rock River Generating Station Units 1 and 2, irrespective of the proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project, with planning for demolition and remediation anticipated to begin in 2015. Demolition is expected to take approximately one year to complete. Rock River Generating Station Units 3, 5, and 6 are active combustion turbine peaking units firing natural gas fuel, with Unit 3 in operation since 1967 and Units 5 and 6 in operation since 1972. The Beloit Operations Center – Southern Area is an equipment and maintenance depot that supports WPL’s electric and natural gas distribution businesses.

1.3 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED TECHNOLOGY The proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project is an efficient 2x1NGCC electric generating facility comprised of two combustion turbine generators (CTGs), two heat recovery steam generators (HRSGs), and a single steam turbine generator (STG). Heat rejection for the proposed project would be provided via a closed cycle cooling system utilizing a mechanical draft cooling tower with plume abatement, which would minimize the potential for visual effects, fogging, and icing impacts on the surrounding area. The proposed project would generate nominally 650 to 680 megawatts (MW) of electricity, with



generation capability ultimately depending on final equipment selection and detailed engineering and design. The proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project would also include a solar photovoltaic (PV) facility that would reduce the amount of auxiliary power consumption when the NGCC facility is operating and result in a reduction in standby loads when the NGCC facility is off-line, reducing the need to backfeed power from the electric grid. Additionally, the solar PV facility would provide invaluable operating data to position WPL and its customers well for making informed decisions on the use of solar technology moving forward.

WPL completed its integrated resource planning process to evaluate various power sourcing alternatives to satisfy future customer capacity and energy needs. WPL evaluated various generation technologies to determine a safe, reliable, and cost effective power sourcing solution for its customers, resulting in efficient and flexible NGCC technology serving as the primary future power generation sourcing alternative to be added to its generation portfolio. An NGCC siting study was then completed and such considered numerous existing power generation sites owned by WPL, as well as greenfield sites, throughout the State of Wisconsin. WPL’s existing Riverside Energy Center site proved to provide the most benefit to customers based on natural gas supply availability, anticipated electrical interconnection and system upgrade requirements, water supply and wastewater discharge capability, anticipated environmental footprint, community relations, and other pertinent siting considerations in-line with PSCW CPCN filing requirements. The proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project, to be located on an existing WPL-owned generation site, provides a state-of-the-art, long term power sourcing solution to satisfy future capacity and energy needs for WPL’s customers.

This Engineering Plan provides an overview of the two sites under consideration (Section 2), an overall description of the proposed project (Section 3), anticipated electric transmission and natural gas interconnection facilities (Section 4), and potential effects on the surrounding environment (Section 5). Additionally, a preliminary list of permits and regulatory approvals anticipated for the proposed project is provided in Section 5 and a milestone schedule for the proposed project is included in Section 6. Wisconsin Statute § 196.491 (3)(a)3.a provides that, within 30 days of receipt of this Engineering Plan, the WDNR will provide a listing of each federal, state, and local department permit or approval that is anticipated to be required for the construction and operation of the proposed project.



2 FACILITY LOCATION 2.1 GENERAL The proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project would be located on an existing power generation site owned by WPL, either adjacent to (west of) the existing Riverside Energy Center or to the east of the Riverside Energy Center on the existing Rock River Generating Station site. Both contemplated sites reside on a contiguous existing power generation campus owned by WPL, also inclusive of other facilities (most notably, the Beloit Operations Center – Southern Area, which includes maintenance and storage facilities for WPL’s electric and natural gas distribution businesses). The sites under consideration are located approximately five miles north of the City of Beloit, Wisconsin in Rock County. Refer to Figure 2-1 for a map showing the proposed site location options.

Since both of the alternative sites would use the same facility equipment and a similar configuration, the discussion in the remaining Sections (3 through 6) applies to both of the site options described below. In addition to the two site options for the NGCC power generation facility, the solar PV facility is also discussed. The solar PV facility is anticipated to be located in the same location, regardless of where the NGCC facility is sited.


%,%,

?JQ

?JD

?JS

?JG

£¤51

§̈¦39

Crist Rd

Gale Dr

Butlin

Dr Sarah

LnEHolly Rd

Wood

Dr

Barte

lls D

r

E Hart Rd

Briar Ln

W Hart Rd

Suns

hine L

n

W Sunny Ln

W Walters Rd

Huebbe Pkwy

W Eau Claire Rd SRi

verR

d

W Noss Rd

W Finley Rd

E Sunny Lane Rd

S Patr

ick R

d

W Creedy Rd

E Inman Pkwy

SPr

airie

Ave

SWa

lters

Rd

E L T Townline Rd

Elmwood Ave

S Nye

Scho

ol Rd

Shopi

ere R

dPrair

ie Av

e

Newark Rd

W B R Townline Rd

W

Happy Hollow Rd

E Philhower Rd

S Rea

d Rd

Prair

ieSt

IvaCt

SOak

ley

Rd

W

Airport Rd

Afton Rd

Park

Ave

SCre

ekRd

NRiverside Dr

S Dug

gan R

d

S Riversid

e Dr

Beloit

Figure 2-1Site Location

F 0 4,000 Feet !

!

!

! !

!

Eau Claire

Superior

Wausau

MadisonMilwaukee

Green Bay

%, West Site%, East Site

Property BoundaryMunicipal Boundary

Document Path: \\mspe-gis-file\GISProj\173_Ann_Arbor\219524_Alliant_Generation\map_docs\Engineering_Plan\SiteLocation_8x11p.mxd

Riverside Energy Center Expansion


2.2 WEST SITE Figure 2-2 shows the proposed location, construction site, and facility layout for the West Site. The West Site is located on WPL-owned property directly west and adjacent to WPL’s existing Riverside Energy Center, in the northeast quarter of Section 2, Township 1N, Range 12E. The West Site is comprised of approximately 82 acres and is the location of the groundwater well pump house and wastewater discharge wet well that currently serve the existing Riverside Energy Center. The land not occupied by existing infrastructure is currently leased to a third party and was previously used for row crop production. The West Site also previously served as the construction laydown area during the installation of the existing Riverside Energy Center in the early 2000’s.

The West Site is zoned I-1, Light Industrial District, by the Town of Beloit. The West Site is bounded by W-B-R Townline Road to the north, the Iowa, Chicago and Eastern railroad right of way to the east, undeveloped wooded land, the Rock River, residential property to the south, and South Walters Road to the west. The residential area south of the West Site is the Heron Bay Subdivision development, which is currently comprised of three residences. The Linde industrial air separation plant is located directly across South Walters Road from the West Site and has been in operation since 2008. A double circuit 138 kV transmission line runs east to west across the center of the property, extending from the existing Townline Road Substation located to the south of the existing Riverside Energy Center and is owned and operated by the American Transmission Company, LLC (ATC).

A solar PV facility is proposed to be constructed on the southern portion of the West Site. As indicated on Figure 2-2, the solar PV facility would be located in a portion of the construction laydown area planned for the West Site. The solar PV facility footprint would be comprised of approximately 20 acres, with the final location and size of the solar PV facility to be determined when additional detailed solar PV facility design is completed.


!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!!

!!

Water Supply Line (existing)

New WaterSupply Line

Construction Laydown / Solar Facility Area

Wastewater DischargeLine (existing)

New WastewaterDischarge Line

Craft Parking

Construction Office Areaand Parking

New NaturalGas Line

NGCC Facility

Construction / Laydown Area 3

Existing 20"Gas Main

StormwaterPond

2 S1T1N-R12E

US Hw

y 51

W Bay Dr

W Heron Dr

Town Line Rd

S Walt

ers R

d

S Riversid

e Dr

W B R Townline Rd

Figure 2-2 - West Site

F 0 500 Feet !

!

!

! !

!

Eau Claire

Superior

Wausau

MadisonMilwaukee

Green Bay

New PipelineExisting PipelineNew Water SupplyExisting Water Supply

! New Wastewater Discharge! Existing Wastewater Discharge

Construction Laydown AreaParking and TrailersCurrent Site Property

Permanent ImpactTemporary Impact

Document Path: \\mspe-gis-file\gisproj\173_Ann_Arbor\219524_Alliant_Generation\map_docs\Engineering_Plan\Impacts_West_Option_1_11x17L.mxd

Riverside Energy Center Expansion


2.3 EAST SITE Figure 2-3 shows the proposed location, construction site, and facility layout for the East Site. The East Site is located on the existing WPL-owned Rock River Generating Station and Beloit Operations Center – Southern Area sites, east of the existing Riverside Energy Center. Additionally, the vacant property to the west of the existing Riverside Energy Center is proposed to be used for construction laydown and the solar PV facility. The East Site is located in the northwest quarter of Section 1, Township 1N, Range 12E and in Section 2, Township 1N, Range 12E. The East Site totals approximately 137 acres, all of which WPL owns, including land currently occupied by WPL’s retired Rock River Generating Station Units 1 and 2, the Beloit Operations Center – Southern Area, and the vacant land to the west of the existing Riverside Energy Center (same land that is considered for the West Site).

The East Site is zoned a combination of I-1, Light Industrial District, and I-2 Heavy Industrial District, by the Town of Beloit. As shown in Figure 2-3, the portion of the East Site occupied by the NGCC facility (zoned Heavy Industrial District) is bounded by W-B-R Townline Road to the north, the Beloit Operations Center – Southern Area to the west, and the Rock River on the eastern and southern property borders. In addition to the existing power generation facilities and associated auxiliary equipment, the East Site also contains several transmission lines (owned by ATC). The Edgewater residential neighborhood, which is comprised of approximately 50 residences, is located across W-B-R Townline Road north of the existing Rock River Generating Station. The portion of the East Site to the west of the existing Riverside Energy Center is bounded by W-B-R Townline Road to the north, the Iowa, Chicago and Eastern railroad right of way to the east, undeveloped wooded land, the Rock River, residential property to the south, and South Walters Road to the west. This portion of the East Site is zoned Light Industrial District. The residential area to the south of this portion of the East Site is the Heron Bay Subdivision development, which is currently comprised of three residences. The Linde industrial air separation plant is located directly across South Walters Road from this portion of the East Site. A double circuit 138 kV transmission line runs east to west across the center of this portion of the East Site, extending from the existing Townline Road Substation located to the south of the existing Riverside Energy Center and is owned and operated by ATC.

The location and design of the proposed solar PV facility would be the same as described in Section 2.2 for the West Site should the Riverside Energy Center Expansion project be sited on the East Site.


!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!!

!

!

!

!

!

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

!

New WaterSupply Line

Wastewater DischargeLine (existing)

Craft Parking


StormwaterPond


NGCC FacilityConstruction Facilities

New NaturalGas Line



New WastewaterDischarge Line

ConstructionManagement Parking

Existing WaterSupply Line

Existing RiversideCombined Cycle Plant

Solar Facility Area

2 S1T1N-R12E

US Hwy 51

W Bay Dr

W Heron Dr

Town Line Rd

S Walt

ers R

d

S Riversid

e Dr

W B R Townline Rd

F 0 500 Feet !

!

!

! !

!

Eau Claire

Superior

Wausau

MadisonMilwaukee

Green Bay

New PipelineExisting PipelineNew Water SupplyExisting Water Supply

! New Wastewater Discharge! Existing Wastewater Discharge

Construction Laydown AreaParking and TrailersCurrent Site PropertyPermanent ImpactTemporary Impact

Document Path: \\mspe-gis-file\gisproj\173_Ann_Arbor\219524_Alliant_Generation\map_docs\Engineering_Plan\Impacts_East_Option_2_11x17L.mxd

Figure 2-3 - East SiteRiverside Energy Center Expansion


3 FACILITY DESCRIPTION 3.1 GENERAL DESCRIPTION The proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project would be a 2x1 “F-class” NGCC facility with two CTGs, each exhausting to an HRSG producing steam for a single STG. The proposed project would only fire natural gas fuel. Heat rejection for the proposed project would be a closed cycle cooling system utilizing a mechanical draft cooling tower with plume abatement. Figure 3-1 illustrates an overall flow diagram of a typical 2x1 combined cycle configuration. A combined cycle configuration utilizes the Brayton (gas turbine) and Rankine (steam) cycles, resulting in an efficient power generation process. Power is first produced via the combustion of natural gas fuel in the CTGs (Brayton cycle). The exhaust, or waste heat, from the CTGs is then recovered in the HRSGs to produce steam, which is then sent to the STG for additional power generation (Rankine cycle). The proposed project would be capable of generating nominally 650 to 680 MW of net power output, dependent on final equipment selection and facility design.

The drum-type, triple pressure HRSGs would utilize selective catalytic reduction (SCR) to reduce the emission of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and oxidation catalysts to reduce the emission of carbon monoxide (CO) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Steam would be produced at three pressure levels in the HRSGs, and then sent to the single STG to generate electricity.

The STG would be a two casing downward exhaust, condensing turbine. A wet surface condenser cools and condenses the turbine exhaust steam.

Heat rejection for the proposed project would be provided using a wet-type mechanical draft, plume-abated cooling tower. A plume-abated cooling tower would reduce visual effects, fogging, and icing impacts on the surrounding area, and potentially reduce makeup water requirements (as compared to a standard tower). Circulating water from the cooling tower would be pumped to the condenser to condense the steam turbine exhaust. Condensate pumps would forward the condensate to the HRSGs.

The proposed project would be designed with the CTGs, HRSGs, STG, and associated balance of plant (BOP) equipment located indoors for safety and operations and maintenance purposes. Other BOP equipment such as the cooling tower, water tanks, and transformers would be located outdoors.

Each CTG and the STG would have a dedicated main generator step-up (GSU) transformer with a nominal output voltage of 138 kV to supply power to the bulk electric system. In addition, two unit auxiliary transformers (UATs) fed from a tap on the bus between the CTG circuit breakers and the GSU transformers would be provided and would each be capable of providing the entire auxiliary power requirements of the proposed project.

The proposed project would include an auxiliary steam boiler to promote quicker startups and reduce thermal stresses on facility equipment. The auxiliary steam boiler would 1) provide warming steam to the HRSGs and the condenser hotwell, and 2) provide gland steam to the STG steam seals. This steam would be utilized during outages and plant startup when condenser vacuum is desired to be maintained in order to keep the facility in a “warm” condition to promote quicker startups, and consequently lower startup emissions, and to reduce thermal fatigue on the equipment.



Figure 3-1



3.2 MAJOR EQUIPMENT 3.2.1 Combustion Turbine Generators

Each of the two CTGs would be a large frame industrial combustion turbine in the 200 MW to 250 MW range, commonly referred to as “F-class” combustion turbine technology. The CTG would operate on natural gas fuel only. Ambient air passes through an inlet filter and is drawn into the compressor section of the combustion turbine, compressed, and delivered to the combustor. In the combustor, natural gas fuel is added to the compressed air and combustion occurs. The combusted fuel and air moves to the turbine section and drives the compressor and generator.

The main features of each combustion turbine would be:

• Single fuel (natural gas);

• Fuel gas performance heating via intermediate pressure (IP) feedwater;

• Dry low-NOx combustors;

• Inlet air filtration;

• Inlet air evaporative cooling;

• Inlet air anti-icing heating system, as required for cold day operation; and

• Fire protection system.

The main features of the generator would be:

• Synchronous, three-phase, 60 Hz;

• Two pole field (3,600 rpm);

• 0.85 power factor;

• Hydrogen or totally enclosed water-to-air (TEWAC) cooled rotor and stator (dependent on equipment selection); and

• Output voltage will be the manufacturer’s standard for this size machine.

3.2.2 Heat Recovery Steam Generators

Exhaust gas exits each CTG and flows through exhaust ducting into separate HRSGs. The hot exhaust gas passes over tubes inside each HRSG and heats water to produce steam. Each HRSG would be of a triple pressure, reheat design for optimum efficiency.

The HRSGs would include emission control systems to reduce NOx, CO and VOC emissions from the turbine exhaust gas. The SCR system would use 19 percent aqueous ammonia injected into the HRSG and a catalyst to reduce NOx emissions. In addition, an oxidation catalyst would be used to reduce the emission of CO and VOC.

The exhaust gas then passes to an exhaust stack approximately 150 ft to 200 ft high. The two stacks would include sampling ports to measure emissions in accordance with United States Environmental Protection agency (USEPA) and WDNR standards. A continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) would be provided to measure emissions.

The main features of each HRSG would be:



• Triple pressure, reheat steam circuits;

• Natural circulation;

• Horizontal gas flow;

• Cold casing design with internal liner plates and insulation;

• Low pressure (LP) economizer recirculation;

• Steel stack with silencer, stack damper, and CEMS platform;

• HRSG blowdown tank; and

• Steam exhaust silencers for safety valve and operational vent discharges.

3.2.3 Steam Turbine Generator

Steam generated from the HRSGs would be combined and supplied to a single STG. Steam is admitted to the steam turbine at three pressure levels. Steam exhausting from the STG would enter a steam surface condenser.

The main features of the steam turbine would be:

• Tandem-compound, double flow LP section, reheat turbine with LP steam induction;

• HP, IP, and LP steam stop and control valves;

• Sliding steam pressure operation at part load;

• LP turbine downward flow exhaust configuration;

• Lube oil system and hydraulic systems ;

• Turning gear with auto and manual operation;

• Steam seal system; and

• Turbine controls.

The main features of the generator would be:

• Synchronous, three-phase, 60 Hz;

• Two pole field (3,600 rpm);

• 0.85 power factor;

• Hydrogen or TEWAC cooled rotor and stator; and

• Output voltage will be the manufacturer’s standard for this size machine.



3.3 MAJOR SYSTEMS 3.3.1 Power Cycle Systems

3.3.1.1 Main Steam Systems

Steam would be generated by the HRSGs and piped to the steam turbine. The HRSGs would provide superheated steam at three pressure levels: HP, IP and LP. The HP steam lines from each HRSG would be combined and piped to the steam turbine valves. The IP steam lines from each HRSG would be combined with cold reheat steam exiting the HP section of the steam turbine, reheated in each HRSG, and routed back to the steam turbine as hot reheat steam. The LP steam lines from each HRSG would be combined and piped to the inlet of the LP section of the steam turbine.

The HP, IP and LP steam systems would be provided with a steam turbine bypass system for use during plant start-up and shut-down.

3.3.1.2 Auxiliary Steam System

The auxiliary steam system would provide steam for the steam turbine seals, feedwater system warming through HRSG evaporator steam sparging and condensate system warming through condenser hotwell sparging. The normal source of auxiliary steam would be steam from the cold reheat system (steam exiting the high pressure section of the steam turbine). A common auxiliary boiler would deliver superheated steam to meet the steam demands from the steam turbine and HRSGs when normal sources are unavailable, such as during a cold startup (when the generation equipment is at ambient pressure and temperature conditions). During facility trips, or during start-up and low load operation if the auxiliary boiler is not available, HP steam would be delivered into the auxiliary steam system.

The auxiliary boiler would be a natural gas-fired pressurized unit with emissions controls (including low NOx burners), self supporting steel stack, deaerator and feedwater pumps.

3.3.1.3 Condensate System

The condensate system condenses the steam turbine exhaust steam in a wet surface condenser and transfers the condensate to the HRSG low temperature economizers as a source of LP feedwater. The condensate system would also provide cooling water to the steam turbine gland steam condenser and turbine hood sprays, attemperation water to the turbine bypass systems and steam letdown stations, and makeup water to the auxiliary boiler.

The condensate system would consist of the surface condenser, condensate pumps, condensate expansion tank and a condensate polisher.

The condenser would be a two-pass, single shell, deaerating wet surface type. The condenser air evacuation system would use two liquid ring vacuum pump skids. Condensate would be extracted from the condenser hotwell by vertical can-type condensate pumps. A full-flow pre-coat condensate polisher would be provided to remove contamination in the condensate system.

3.3.1.4 Feedwater System

The feedwater system accepts pre-heated condensate and pumps the feedwater to the HP and IP economizers in each HRSG. The feedwater system also provides water for HRSG steam attemperation. The feedwater pumps would be centrifugal, multi-stage pumps. A separate boiler feed pump recirculation line with control valve would be provided for each of the HRSG feed pumps.



3.3.2 Heat Rejection Systems

The heat rejection systems are comprised of the circulating water (CW) and closed cycle cooling water (CCCW) systems.

3.3.2.1 Circulating Water System

The CW system transfers waste heat energy from the steam turbine surface condenser and closed cooling water heat exchangers to a wet mechanical draft cooling tower. The CW system consists of the following major equipment:

• Surface condenser (described in the condensate system);

• Plume-abated cooling tower;

• Circulating water pumps;

• Auxiliary cooling water pump; and

• Side-stream softening circulating water treatment system.

The cooling tower would be a wet, multi-cell, induced mechanical draft, counter flow type cooling tower with plume abatement. The circulating water and auxiliary cooling water pumps would be vertical, wet pit pumps driven by direct drive, constant speed electric motors.

The side-stream softening circulating water treatment system would consist of physical-chemical treatment equipment and would treat a portion of the circulating water pump discharge flow to remove calcium and magnesium hardness. The treatment system would produce a non-hazardous solid waste product that would be dewatered into a solid product suitable for disposal in an off-site landfill.

3.3.2.2 Closed Cycle Cooling Water System

The CCCW system would provide clean cooling water to equipment coolers and reject the waste heat to the CW system via closed cooling water heat exchangers. The closed cycle cooling water would be demineralized water mixed with a corrosion inhibitor. The CCCW system provides cooling water for the CTG and STG lube oil and generator coolers and other BOP cooling systems.

The CCCW system consists of the CCCW heat exchangers, CCCW pumps, an expansion head tank and chemical feeder.

3.3.3 Fuel Supply System

The proposed project would utilize natural gas fuel only. Natural gas fuel for the proposed project would be supplied by interconnecting to the WPL-owned pipeline at the existing Riverside Energy Center site. Refer to Section 4.2 for additional discussion related to the natural gas supply source for the proposed project.

Fuel gas conditioning equipment would be located on-site, adjacent to the gas receiving yard. A natural gas-fired dew point heater(s) would be provided to raise the fuel gas superheat value to meet the CTG supplier’s requirements. Natural gas heaters for combined cycle efficiency optimization would be integrated with the HRSG IP feedwater cycle and would be provided in each combustion turbine gas supply header.

Natural gas filter separators would be provided to meet the cleanliness requirements of the CTG manufacturer. Pressure reducing stations and two fuel gas compressors would be provided to meet CTG manufacturer pressure supply requirements. The gas supply pressure



would normally meet the pressure required by the CTGs, but is expected to drop below the minimum requirements during certain periods.

Natural gas metering equipment would be provided for revenue metering, plant control and testing. A gas chromatograph would be provided to monitor gas supply quality.

Letdown stations would be provided for delivery of natural gas to the auxiliary boiler and potentially to the emergency generator. The emergency generator would utilize either natural gas or ultra low sulfur diesel fuel.

The emergency diesel fire pump would use nominal amounts of ultra low sulfur (less than or equal to 15 parts per million (ppm) sulfur) diesel fuel for testing and in cases of emergency.

3.3.4 Water Supply and Wastewater Systems

3.3.4.1 Water Supply

The proposed project would use water for cooling tower make-up, steam cycle make-up, evaporative cooling make-up and service water. Make-up water would be supplied from rehabilitation and expansion of the existing horizontal collector well (HCW) that supplies the neighboring Riverside Energy Center or from two or more vertical wells installed on the site (could also be a combination of these two configurations).

Make-up water supply would be pumped to a service and fire water storage tank and the cooling tower. The service water system distributes low-pressure water throughout the facility for the following uses:

• Hose stations for maintenance washdown;

• Quench water for HRSG and auxiliary boiler blowdown;

• CTG evaporative cooling system makeup;

• Fire protection system supply; and

• Cycle makeup treatment (demineralized water treatment) system supply.

The facility water system would be designed to minimize water consumption with reuse and recycling of water. Additionally, WPL continues to investigate alternate means and methods to reduce the quantity of water consumed and wastewater discharged for the proposed project. A preliminary water balance of the proposed facility is shown in Figure 3-2 below.

Domestic water for lavatories and other users would be supplied either from an existing domestic well or tie into a nearby township potable water supply.


Notes:

1. All flow rates depicted are based on conceptual design

3,100 gpm and assumed water quality data.

2. Assumed raw well water will not require pre-treatment.

3. Effluent limits from the Wastewater Treatment System

shall be in accordance with EPA Title 40, Chapter 1,

Subchapter N, Part 423 - Steam Electric Power

Generating Point Source Category.

4. Flows are in gallons per minute (gpm).

5. Approximated flow rates are shown and

do not represent instantaneous maximum demand.

6. It is assumed that the cooling tower will operate

at 6 cycles of concentration.

50 gpm

2,500 gpm

Domestic Water Supply

1 gpm

20 gpm

1 gpm

1 gpm

30 gpm

500 gpm

Project Drawing

219524 M1102A

Eng: JRP Dwg: JRP Rev

Check: CML 2/3/2015 SH 1/1 ASummer Ambient Conditions

Site Conditions 89°F / 48% RH WATER MASS BALANCE

Demin Water Makeup 2% of Main Steam Flow

Domestic Water Supply 21 personnel, 50 gal per day, 3 shifts

WPL Riverside Energy Center Expansion

Well Water Supply

Misc. Plant Services

Oil/Water Separator

Oily Waste(offsite disposal)

Demin Water Storage Tank

Steam / Water Cycle

Evaporative Coolers

Cooling Tower

Evaporationand Drift

Non-recoverable Losses

Side-Stream Flow

Flow A Quench Water

Quench Water to HRSG Blowdown Flow A

Evaporation

RO Reject

Cooling Tower Makeup

Oil-Bearing EquipmentContainment AreasPrecipitation

Service/Fire WaterStorage Tank

Wastewater Treatment

System (Filters)

Wastewater Storage Tank

Side-Stream Softening/

Dewatering System

Outfall

Note 3

Cooling Tower Blowdown

Sludge Cake Moisture toLandfill

Sanitary Drain

Municipal Treatment System

Domestic Water

System

Demineralized Water Treatment System

UF Backwash


3.3.4.2 Wastewater

A wastewater collection, treatment, and transfer system would be provided to collect, treat, and dispose of the facility process wastewater streams. Treatment would include processing of wastewater streams that have the potential for oil contamination through an oil-water separator and additional treatment of all process wastewater streams for phosphorous and suspended solids reduction to comply with applicable wastewater discharge water quality standards. Following treatment, the process wastewater would be discharged through the existing Riverside Energy Center outfall to the Rock River.

Sanitary drains would be sent to a nearby municipal treatment plant for processing.

3.3.5 Fire Protection System

Fire water would be drawn from the combined fire water and service water storage tank. The tank would maintain a reserve of water meeting National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) storage requirements. The cooling tower basin would be a back-up source of water from which a fire truck could take suction.

A motor-driven fire pump, a redundant diesel-driven fire pump, and a motor driven jockey (pressure maintenance) pump would be provided in accordance with NFPA. The fire pumps would take suction from the combined fire water and service water tank and discharge to the fire main (yard loop). The pumps would supply the design maximum water demand for any automatic suppression system plus flow for fire hydrants and hose stations per NFPA requirements.

The main fire header would loop around the power block with service main branch lines to buildings, auxiliary structures, enclosures, yard fire hydrants and wet suppression systems. The fire service main would be designed to NFPA standards.

The central control room (CCR) would have a main fire protection panel, with alarm annunciation for the entire facility. Local fire control panels would be distributed around the facility to support fire suppression systems. Local panels would be connected to the main fire protection panel.

3.3.6 Emissions Control System

Air emissions from the facility would be controlled through a combination of low NOx combustors, post combustion catalyst systems, and through the utilization of only pipeline quality natural gas for the main power generation processes. The CTGs would be employed with dry low-NOx combustors to minimize formation of NOx. Each HRSG would include SCR to reduce NOx emissions. Each SCR system would use a 19 percent aqueous ammonia solution that would be vaporized and injected into the HRSG upstream of the SCR catalyst to reduce NOx emissions. In addition, each HRSG would include an oxidation catalyst to reduce CO emissions and VOC emissions.

3.3.7 Plant Electrical Systems

Electric power from each CTG and the STG would be generated at the supplier’s standard voltage at the generator terminals. The output of each generator would be connected to a dedicated GSU transformer to step-up the voltage to the grid interconnection voltage (138 kV). A generator circuit breaker would also be included for protection for each generator.

The auxiliary power supply equipment would distribute electrical power at lower voltages to the facility auxiliary equipment. The auxiliary power supply would be fed through UATs fed from a tap on the bus between the CTG circuit breakers and the GSU transformers.



Electrical equipment, with the exception of transformers, would be installed in rooms with a conditioned environment.

In case of total loss of auxiliary power, a small engine generator would be utilized to allow the plant to maintain a safe shutdown, cool down, and to charge the uninterruptible power supply (UPS) and battery banks on the emergency motor controls centers. This emergency generator would either fire natural gas or ultra low sulfur diesel fuel. Batteries would provide emergency power for emergency lighting and critical process systems. The batteries would be sized to allow orderly shut down and cool down of the facility under emergency conditions without the need for auxiliary power and without damage to equipment. The facility UPS would be sourced from the facility battery and would provide AC power to essential facility control, safety, and information systems.

3.4 BALANCE OF PLANT 3.4.1 Plant Buildings

The proposed project would include the following buildings to provide for safe and reliable operation and maintenance of the equipment:

• Combined CTG, HRSG, and STG Building;

• Control and Administration Building;

• Water Treatment Building;

• Combined Warehouse and Maintenance Shop;

• Auxiliary Boiler Building; and

• Miscellaneous buildings, including, but not limited to, the fire pump building and gas compressor building.

In general, the structures in the power block area would consist of enclosed steel framing with grating platforms, ladders and stairways for personnel access. Structures and equipment components would be supported by suitable concrete foundations such as mat, spread footing, etc., bearing on existing soils or supported on deep foundations such as piles or caissons.

3.4.2 Cycle Chemical Feed System

The cycle chemical feed system would be provided to maintain proper feedwater-steam-condensate cycle water chemistry by injecting chemicals into the condensate and feedwater systems.

The facility would use an all-volatile treatment program in a slightly oxidizing environment. Aqueous ammonia (19 percent) would be injected downstream of the condensate polisher to maintain the feedwater pH. Provisions would be provided for supplemental injection of aqueous ammonia into the HP feedwater system, if required, to maintain pH in the cycle.

The circulating water chemical feed equipment would be furnished to inhibit scaling and corrosion of components in the circulating water circuit and to control biological growth in the cooling tower.

3.4.3 Ammonia System

A 19 percent aqueous ammonia solution would be required for the SCR NOx emissions control system and for the cycle chemical feed system. The aqueous ammonia system would receive, store, and forward ammonia to each HRSG SCR ammonia flow control skid and the cycle chemical feed system. The aqueous ammonia system would be common to



both HRSGs and consist of an ammonia storage tank, forwarding pumps and a dedicated vaporizer skid for each HRSG.

The ammonia storage tank would be of all-welded carbon steel construction and have a containment system. Ammonia leak detection instrumentation would be provided with an alarm and interface with the CCR.

3.4.4 Plant Control System

The instrumentation and control equipment would be designed such that the performance of systems and equipment would enable facility operations to be carried out in a safe, effective and reliable manner. The overall design of control systems and equipment would be based on a philosophy of centralized operation from the distributed control system (DCS) operator stations located in the CCR. The DCS system would provide operator controls, alarm data, and plant coordination functions necessary to achieve safe and effective remote control of systems and equipment from the CCR.

3.5 PLANT OPERATION The proposed facility would be designed and constructed to allow safe operation from the CCR. The facility would be controlled and monitored from the DCS in the CCR to permit safe and efficient operation in all modes and configurations. Fully automatic sequence and modulating control systems would be provided. Manual operation from the CCR would also be possible.

Safe and convenient permanent access, including sufficient clearance, would be provided to all valves, instruments, test ports, and equipment for normal operation, testing, and maintenance. Any elevated location that requires access would be accessible by using permanent platforms and stairways or ladders.

The proposed facility would be capable of steady state part load operation, transient operation, frequency response, isochronous operation, load cycling, load rejection, and short-term overload operation. The proposed facility would be capable of starting from a cold, warm, or hot state.

The proposed facility would be capable of automatic generation control with continuous load changes while maintaining plant emissions. The proposed facility would include emergency systems necessary to ensure safe shutdown and to safeguard equipment and systems in the event of unscheduled isolation from the transmission grid.

3.6 SOLAR PV FACILITY The proposed project would also integrate a solar PV facility located adjacent to the new NGCC facility. The solar PV facility would be designed with approximately 2 MW of nameplate capacity. It would be designed such that operating data would contribute to internal (WPL) and external (customer) solar generation education. The educational component is intended to support analysis of future renewable development opportunities in WPL’s service territory. The solar PV facility would likely consist of ground-mount PV panels.

The solar PV facility would be integrated into the auxiliary power system of the new NGCC facility. The solar power generated from the solar PV facility would offset a portion of the NGCC facility auxiliary power needs. When the new NGCC facility is not in operation, it is anticipated that energy generated by the solar PV facility would be used to offset NGCC facility standby electrical loads and any excess energy would be delivered to the electrical grid, likely through the same interconnection point as the new natural gas facility.



4 INTERCONNECTION FACILITIES 4.1 ELECTRICAL INTERCONNECTION The proposed project would interconnect to ATC’s existing 138 kV transmission system via one or two short radial transmission lines less than one-half mile in length connecting to the existing 138 kV Townline Road Substation. The Townline Road Substation is designed for three future transmission bays. One or two of these would be built-out to support the interconnection of the proposed project to the electric grid.

Due to the short distance between the facility and the Townline Road Substation, protection would be implemented using the generator breakers, the low-voltage breaker on the auxiliary transformer, and the breakers at Townline Road Substation. A collector bus switchyard is planned for the proposed project but the final arrangement would depend on input from ATC. The transmission line(s) to the Townline Road Substation would include fiber optic connections to allow data transfer to the SCADA at the NGCC facility.

The Midcontinent Independent System Operator, Inc. (MISO) has conducted a Feasibility Study for the proposed interconnection location, and additional system impact and facilities studies are planned to be conducted during the Definitive Planning Phase (DPP) of the MISO generator interconnect agreement (GIA) process. The proposed project is part of the February 2015 DPP study group. Some transmission system and substation upgrades would likely be required to deliver the facility output to the bulk electric system.

4.2 NATURAL GAS INTERCONNECTION Natural gas fuel would be delivered to the site through an existing 20-inch pipeline currently serving the existing Riverside Energy Center. This pipeline runs from the Tiffany/Tiffany East Gate Station, which is located approximately five miles east of the site. This 20-inch pipeline would be extended from the existing Riverside Energy Center gas yard to the new facility gas yard. Natural gas would be delivered by ANR at the Tiffany/Tiffany East Gate Station at a pressure ranging from approximately 550 to 800 psig. WPL submitted an open season capacity request to ANR in the “Wisconsin 2017/2018 Expansion Project.” WPL received confirmation of sufficient capacity to support the new and existing combined cycle facilities with minimal system upgrades anticipated.

Additionally, a 20 inch radial pipeline connecting into the NNG natural gas system is being evaluated as an alternative natural gas supply source for the proposed facility, which would provide additional optionality and reliability in terms of natural gas fuel supply. This radial pipeline would extend north from WPL’s Tiffany/Tiffany East Gate Station for approximately five miles before interconnecting to an existing WPL pipeline. This existing WPL pipeline is connected to the NNG system.



5 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 5.1 AIR QUALITY The primary sources of air emissions for the proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project would be the two CTGs. Additional emissions would result from the operation of the natural gas-fired auxiliary boiler, natural gas-fired dew point heater(s), natural gas-fired or diesel-fired emergency generator, emergency diesel fire pump, and evaporative cooling tower. Air emissions from the combustion of natural gas would consist mainly of NOx, CO, VOC, particulate matter (PM), and carbon dioxide (CO2). All combustion units except the fire pump and potentially the emergency generator would use only pipeline quality natural gas as fuel. The fire pump would use ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel (less than or equal to 15 ppm sulfur by weight), such that sulfur dioxide (SO2) emissions from the facility would be minimal (the emergency generator would use ultra-low sulfur diesel fuel if the generator uses diesel fuel).

NOx is formed in the combustion turbine combustors primarily as a result of the high temperatures experienced during the combustion process. In order to limit the formation of NOx, dry low-NOx combustors would be utilized to reduce the temperatures experienced in the combustion zone. SCR systems would treat the CTG exhaust in the HRSGs to further reduce NOx emissions. Additionally, the CTG exhaust would pass through oxidation catalysts that would reduce CO and VOC emissions.

SO2 emissions are a direct result of sulfur in the fuel. Pipeline quality natural gas would be used, which contains very little sulfur. This small amount of sulfur could be a remnant of the hydrogen sulfide, which is mostly removed from the gas when it is initially processed, and could also be from sulfur introduced into the natural gas as a mercaptan to make the gas odorous for safety purposes. The SO2 emissions while combusting natural gas would be minimal. In order to minimize the emissions of SO2 when combusting diesel fuel, ultra low sulfur diesel (less than 15 ppm sulfur) fuel would be utilized in the fire pump (and potentially the emergency generator).

Potential emissions from the proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project would be reviewed under various state and federal programs including:

• National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS); • New Source Review (NSR) requirements for major sources and modifications,

including Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) review; • New Source Performance Standards (NSPS); • National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs); • Acid Rain Provisions of 40 CFR Parts 72-75 and Wisconsin Administrative Code

Chapter NR 409; • State Hazardous Air Pollutant Regulations of NR 445; and • Various other state regulations within NR 400 – 499.

The proposed project location is designated as an attainment area for all pollutants with a corresponding NAAQS, which are known as criteria air pollutants. Given the attainment status for all criteria air pollutants, the review and permitting of these emissions would be done under the PSD program, rather than the nonattainment NSR program. Also, because the proposed project would be located on or adjacent to land that currently contains a major emissions source owned by WPL (the existing Riverside Energy Center and adjacent Rock River Generating Station units that are still active), the facility would be considered a modification of an existing major emissions source. A modification is “major” for PSD



purposes if the emissions increase is greater than the significant emissions rate (SER) for one or more pollutants, as shown in Table 5-1.

Under PSD rules, each pollutant with an emissions increase at or above the SER level must undergo an analysis to determine Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for each new or modified emission unit, and must be assessed for its impact on ambient air quality. The BACT determination for each pollutant and emission unit is a case-by-case analysis that considers the technical feasibility as well as the energy, environmental, and economic impacts of various emission reduction options.

Air dispersion modeling, performed as part of the construction permit application, would be used to predict the ambient air quality changes from planned additions at the site. Predicted ambient air quality would be compared to, and must comply with, NAAQS and the PSD allowable concentration increments under WDNR and federal regulations.

As WPL has not yet selected a turbine manufacturer, there are multiple potential combustion turbine vendors that may provide the combustion turbine for the new facility. However, based on generic manufacturer emissions data, and considering expected BACT emissions limits, Table 5-1 lists the pollutants and potential emissions amounts from the new equipment as compared to the PSD major modification (SER) thresholds. The proposed project would meet the criteria for a PSD permit regardless of the turbine vendor selected.



Table 5-1 PSD MAJOR MODIFICATION THRESHOLD

Pollutant Maximum Emissions SER for Triggering PSD Review (tons/yr)

Expected to Exceed

Not Expected to Exceed

NOx

X 40

CO

X 100

PM

X 25

PM10

Particulate matter less than 10 micrometers in diameter

X 15

PM2.5

Particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers in diameter

X 10

SO2

X 40

VOC

X 40

CO2e

Equivalent Carbon Dioxide

X 75,000

Sulfuric Acid Mist

X 7

Lead X 0.6

Fluorides X 3.0

Total Reduced Sulfur X 10



NSPS would be applicable on the proposed project for the following emission unit types:

• Combustion turbines, under 40 CFR 60, Subpart KKKK; • Spark-ignition internal combustion engines (for the emergency generator),

under 40 CFR 60, Subpart JJJJ; • Compression-ignition internal combustion engines (for the fire pump), under

40 CFR 60, Subpart IIII; and • Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the proposed NSPS for Electric

Generating Units (EGUs), to be published in 40 CFR 60, Subpart TTTT.

The applicable combustion turbine NSPS limits under Subpart KKKK are much less stringent than the anticipated BACT emission limits to be imposed under PSD permitting rules. The spark and compression-ignition engine NSPS limits under Subparts JJJJ and IIII are typically met by the manufacturers of such engines. WPL would procure engines for this project with manufacturer certifications of compliance with the applicable limits. For the emergency engines as proposed for this project, WPL’s obligations under the engine NSPS would primarily be to make required notifications to regulatory agencies and to keep appropriate compliance records. Finally, the proposed GHG limits under Subpart TTTT would be easily met by a natural gas-fired combined cycle facility.

NESHAPS would be applicable on the proposed project for the following emission unit types:

• Combustion turbines, under 40 CFR 63, Subpart YYYY; and • Stationary Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engines (RICE), under 40 CFR

63, Subpart ZZZZ.

The Subpart YYYY emissions standard for combustion turbines would limit formaldehyde emissions to 91 parts per billion by volume on a dry basis, corrected to 15 percent O2. However, EPA has included an indefinite stay of this standard’s effectiveness as follows:

“If you start up a new or reconstructed stationary combustion turbine that is a lean premix gas-fired stationary combustion turbine or diffusion flame gas-fired stationary combustion turbine as defined by this subpart, you must comply with the Initial Notification requirements set forth in § 63.6145 but need not comply with any other requirement of this subpart until EPA takes final action to require compliance and publishes a document in the Federal Register.” (40 CFR 63.6095).

If EPA eliminated the stay on the formaldehyde limit at some point, the proposed combustion turbines would be expected to meet this limit. The oxidation catalysts that would be included in each HRSG to control CO emissions would also control VOC emissions, including formaldehyde.

For the emergency engines for the proposed facility, the Subpart ZZZZ requirements would be met by complying with the NSPS requirements under 40 CR 60, Subparts IIII and JJJJ as cited above.

Under the Wisconsin Administrative Code, NR 445, there are requirements for the control and/or ambient air limitation of various Hazardous Air Contaminants (HACs). One HAC that would be evaluated for this facility is ammonia, due to its release from the SCR system proposed for controlling NOx emissions from the combustion turbines. The portion of ammonia not consumed by the chemical reaction in the SCR system that destroys NOx is known as ammonia “slip” and this portion would be released to the atmosphere. Emissions of other HACs from combustion processes, such as formaldehyde, would be estimated and assessed to demonstrate compliance with NR 445 requirements.



5.2 WATER RESOURCES 5.2.1 Water Supply

The proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project is estimated to utilize approximately 3,100 gallons per minute (gpm) of water (up to nominally 4.5 million gallons per day (MGD)) at maximum load. Of this amount, approximately 2,950 gpm would be used for makeup for the cooling tower, and 150 gpm would be used by other plant processes. WPL continues to analyze means and methods to reduce water consumption and wastewater discharge from the proposed facility, including alternate heat rejection system configurations and cycle configurations to increase water recycling.

As previously discussed, process water is expected to be derived from one of the following sources:

• Rehabilitation and expansion of the existing HCW that currently supplies the existing Riverside Energy Center; or

• Two or more vertical wells installed on-site.

Approximately 2,500 gpm of the water utilized for the proposed project would be lost from the cooling tower through evaporation and drift, and another 100 gpm of water would be expected to be lost through other plant processes, for a total water loss of approximately 2,600 gpm (up to 3.74 MGD). The remaining amount, approximately 500 gpm (up to 0.72 MGD), would be treated by the wastewater treatment system for final discharge to the Rock River, as described in the following section.

Currently, the maximum approved withdrawal from the HCW is 6.08 MGD, and approximately 1.81 MGD is returned to the Rock River via wastewater discharge. The total water withdrawal for the property, inclusive of the proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project and the existing Riverside Energy Center, would be approximately 10.6 MGD, with 2.5 MGD discharged to the Rock River. Water loss restrictions begin when the flow in the river falls below the Q7,10 flow (7-day average low flow that occurs every 10 years), which is 219 cubic feet per second (cfs) (141.5 MGD) in the existing Riverside Energy Center water loss permit. Water loss is limited to one percent of the river flow during a low flow condition. Potential water loss restrictions would depend on the final combined water loss permit conditions.

Domestic water for lavatories and other users would be supplied either from an existing domestic well or tie into a nearby township potable water supply.

5.2.2 Wastewater and Solid Waste

A wastewater collection, treatment, and transfer system would collect the process wastewaters from the plant and treat those wastewaters to meet applicable discharge water quality standards. The proposed project would be designed to recycle and reutilize wastewaters produced by its processes, creating a wastewater discharge stream of approximately 500 gpm (0.72 MGD) at peak conditions that would require treatment prior to discharge. Based on the predicted quality of the wastewater, the wastewater treatment system would include equipment and processes to reduce the total phosphorous and total suspended solids to meet the Total Maximum Daily Load (TMDL) limits established by the WDNR Rock River TMDL. The treatment system would ensure compliance with the WPDES permit, which could include technology based or water quality based effluent limits.

Facility sanitary drains would be sent to a nearby municipal treatment plant for processing.



The cooling tower side stream treatment system produces a non-hazardous solid waste product that would be dewatered into a solid product for disposal to an off-site landfill.

5.3 LAND REQUIREMENTS The proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project would use up to approximately 50 acres for either site option, inclusive of the proposed solar PV facility. Both site options are on land currently owned by WPL.

5.4 FLOODPLAINS Potential hazards associated with flooding would be reviewed under various state and local programs including necessary state standards and local reviews as listed in the permitting plan (Section 5.10).

Based on Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain data, 100 and 500 year floodplains are present along the Rock River. For both site options, the proposed project likely would not impact the identified floodplains. Best management practices (BMPs) would be used during construction to minimize potential effects on adjacent floodplains.

5.5 THREATENED AND ENDANGERED SPECIES On-site habitat reviews of the two site options were conducted and an analysis of impacts to state listed species was conducted by a Certified Endangered Resources Reviewer. The results of this analysis determined that potentially suitable habitat for listed plant species is absent from both of the site options. The review was submitted to the Wisconsin DNR Bureau of Natural Heritage Conservation for approval. On January 14, 2015, WPL received an approval of the review from the WDNR. It states that no additional measures need to be taken to comply with state and or federal endangered species laws.

Federally listed species in Rock County are Eastern prairie fringed orchid (Platanthera leucophaea), prairie-bush clover (Lespedeza leptostachya) and northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis). Northern long-eared bat is currently under consideration for an endangered listing with a decision date of April 2, 2015. Native grasslands capable of supporting the listed plant species are absent from the two site options. The forests present within the site options are not large enough to support northern long-eared bat and, therefore, impacts to this species are not anticipated. WPL expects to coordinate with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) about potential effects to federally listed species prior to CPCN submittal.

5.6 WETLANDS Onsite wetland delineations were conducted August 26 – 27, 2014 for the West Site and October 7 – 8, 2014 for the East Site. Two wetlands were located near the West Site along the Rock River in areas mapped as floodplains. Five wetlands were located adjacent to the East Site near the Rock River, and are mapped as floodplains. Two additional wetlands were identified within or adjacent to the East Site, which occupy a stormwater basin and graded ditch (the wetland that occupies a stormwater basin is partially within the East site). For both site options, sufficient area is available such that it is not expected that the proposed project would impact the identified wetlands. BMPs would be used during construction to minimize potential affects on adjacent wetlands.

5.7 NOISE The proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project would comply with codes and ordinances related to noise levels caused by construction or operational activities at either



site option. A detailed noise assessment would be completed as part of the CPCN application process.

5.8 CONSTRUCTION IMPACT Initial work for the proposed project would include site development activities, including preparation of equipment laydown areas, construction worker parking and other site preparation activities. After these activities are underway or completed, construction of the facility would begin.

During construction, steps would be taken to prevent excessive emissions of particulate matter related to vehicular traffic and construction activities. These activities would include seeding, paving, covering, wetting, or otherwise controlling particulate matter emissions. Materials suitable for backfill would be stored outside of floodplain areas or other regulated areas. Proper stormwater erosion control, pollution prevention methods and BMPs would be implemented as required by WDNR and local codes and applied as necessary.

Major equipment and other materials needed for construction would be delivered by rail or trucked to either proposed site. Additional information about anticipated construction related transportation would be provided in the CPCN application.

5.9 CHEMICAL STORAGE Depending on the type of chemical used, its composition and quantity stored on site, notification under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act may be required. Any possible chemical emissions would be fully described in the CPCN application and various permit applications. The proposed project would also include a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan, a Risk Management Plan (if necessary), as well as any other procedures for dealing with chemical deliveries and maintaining onsite storage (see Table 5-2). Appropriate secondary containment measures would be installed for all storage tanks and facilities based upon the manufacturer’s spill prevention standards.

5.10 PERMITTING PLAN Table 5-2 provides a preliminary list of the permits and regulatory approvals anticipated for the proposed Riverside Energy Center Expansion project including federal, state, local, and other approval processes.



Table 5-2 PRELIMINARY PERMIT LIST

Permit/Issue Agency Approval Process and Notes

Federal

Obstruction Evaluation, Airport Airspace Analysis (OE, AAA)

FAA Great Lakes Region

Required for construction of structures >200 feet tall or possibly for shorter structures within 5 miles of airport runways greater than 3,200 feet in length. See 14 CFR Part 77.

Notify FAA 30 days prior to beginning construction or filing for construction permit. Can begin review and correspondences earlier.

Approvals are anticipated for the HRSG stacks as well as temporary cranes during construction for the proposed facility. Submittal to FAA for approval anticipated during the construction phase of the proposed project.

Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

The same chemical storage thresholds that apply to ammonia for RMP purposes also trigger applicability of CFATS. Standards are published in 6 CFR Part 27.

Federal Threatened and Endangered Species Review

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

Prior to CPCN submittal, applicant will coordinate with USFWS and WDNR.

USFWS informal consultations precede formal consultation. Discussions during this phase may include whether and which species may occur in the proposed project area and what effect the project may have on listed species or critical habitats.

USFWS formal consultation is conducted if and when the Federal agency determines if the project may affect a listed species or its critical habitat and submits a written request to initiate formal consultation. These consultations result in a written biological opinion of whether the proposed project is likely to jeopardize a listed species or adversely modify designated critical habitat. An incidental take statement is also provided.

Section 404 Permit US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)

Individual permit may be required for construction in or disturbance of a wetland or water body (Section 404).

If a Section 404 permit is needed, apply for Section 401 certification before selecting site.

Risk Management Plan RMP)

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)

Submission of RMPs is required by new plants on the date on which a regulated substance first becomes present above a threshold quantity in a process.

Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasures (SPCC) Plan

USEPA Must prepare within 6 months after commencement of facility operations; must implement plan within 12 months.

No approval required. Plan must be made available and able to be implemented.

Facility Response Plan USEPA Submit with the SPCC Plan.

Must be submitted to Regional Administrator prior to the start of operations and changes to plant operations that require modification to the plan must be reported within 60 days for review.

Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Reporting

USEPA Approval not required. Submittal required by July 1 following construction.

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) 311, 312

USEPA

Submitted to State Emergency Response Commission (SERC) Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) and local fire department

No approval required.

Material safety data sheets (MSDSs) or a list of any hazardous chemicals used or stored must be submitted to the State Emergency Response Commission (SERC), Local Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) and the local fire department. Facilities must also report an annual inventory of these chemicals by March 1 of each year to their SERC, LEPC and local fire department.




State

Engineering Plan WDNR, PSCW Applicant must submit an engineering plan at least 60 days before submitting an application for a CPCN.

Within 30 days after submission, WDNR issues list of permits requires for project.

Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity (CPCN)

PSCW For any new electric generating facility over 100 MW, developer must be issued a CPCN from PSCW. Includes PSCW review of environmental and socio-economic impacts of the proposed facility. Must consider two or more facility sites and alternative routes and designs for related power lines and natural gas pipelines. Fees based on staff time.

PSCW holds public meeting and prepares an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) before issuing final decision.

Air Pollution Control Construction Permit (NR-406)

WDNR Submitted at least 6-12 months prior to start of construction. Permit must be issued before construction can commence.

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Permit

WDNR Submitted and reviewed with the Air Pollution Control Construction Permit

Title V Air Permit WDNR Air Operation permit application to be submitted with the construction permit application. Application is reviewed concurrently with the construction permit however the operation permit is issued after construction is completed.

Title IV Acid Rain Permit USEPA, WDNR Submit with Title V air permit application.

Environmental Assessment (EA), Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)

WDNR, PSCW To be completed after submittal of CPCN application and applicable WDNR permits. Completion necessary for air permit issuance.

Utility Permit Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WISDOT)

If required, Utility crossing permits to construct, operate or maintain a utility facility. Use Form DT1553.

Oversize Overweight Equipment

WISDOT Moving of oversized or heavy equipment to be coordinated with state agencies.

State Threatened and Endangered Species Review

WDNR Review of state-listed species and habitats is expected to occur before CPCN submittal and be ongoing while the EA or EIS is being developed.

Storage Tank Permit, form ERS-7658

Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade, and Consumer Protection (ATCP)

Required for all flammable, combustible, and hazardous liquids.

The tank owner shall apply for a permit for each tank after all requirements for plan approval under s. ATCP 93.100 and registration under s. ATCP 93.140 are completed and the tank is installed, but before the tank is placed into service.

Cultural and Archaeological Resources Review

Wisconsin Historical Society (WHS) State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)

Coordination with SHPO and PSCW is required during the CPCN process.

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 requires a Section 106 review for any construction project in which any federal government agency plays a role such as project review, funding, oversight, etc.

Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 103, Water Quality Compliance

WDNR 401 and 404 permit will meet standards set by state.

If a 404 permit is needed, apply for 401 water qualifications for impacts to wetlands, or a Chapter 30 permit (under Section 401) for navigable waters. This will require a detailed alternatives analysis to prove compliance with Wisconsin Administrative Code NR 103.




Wisconsin Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (WPDES) General Permit

WDNR Within 100 business day of receiving permit application, WDNR will publish a notice and a final decision will be made within 50 business days after the hearing process

WPDES Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit

WDNR A general permit for stormwater discharge is required for construction projects that disturb more than 5 acres of land. Must also prepare erosion control plan. A soil erosion control and stormwater management plan development in accordance with the Wisconsin Construction Site Best Management Practices Handbook must be on site during construction activities and be completed before submitting a Notice of Intent (NOI).

This information must also be submitted locally to the Town of Beloit (see Local section).

WPDES Chapter 30 Stormwater Pond Construction Permit

WDNR Required specifically for the construction of a stormwater pond if one is proposed with the site.

Included with stormwater discharge permit.

Capacity Evaluation Form

WDNR Submitted before the High Capacity Well Application.

Capacity evaluations for new non-transient, non-community systems pumping greater than 70 gallons per minute require WDNR review, form 3300-246.

High Capacity Well Permit

WDNR Required if all wells on the property have a combined capacity of greater than 70 gallons per minute.

Submit application form once the need for new wells or modification to existing wells is determined. Must have permit before well construction.

Water Loss Approval WDNR Required if a new or increased withdrawal will result in a water loss averaging greater than 2,000,000 gallons per day in any 30-day period. Approval can only be granted by WDNR after high capacity well permits are granted.

Submit application information required by Wisconsin Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter NR 142.06 concurrently with high capacity well permit application.

Water Use Registration WDNR Required if new or increased water withdrawal from surface water or groundwater is 100,000 gallons per day or more in any 30-day period.

Submit registration form prior to beginning water withdrawal.

Construction of all Buildings and Structures

Wisconsin Department of Safety and Professional Services

Required approval of plans and specifications under Wisconsin Statute §101.02

Installation of Fuel or Lubricating Oil Storage Tanks



Installation of Dust Filtering and HVAC Equipment



Boiler and Unfired Pressure Vessel Registration


Requires an initial inspection after construction, annual thereafter.

State of Wisconsin statutes s 101.17.




Local

Rock County Planning and Zoning Review and Approval Process

Process is handled as a single approval process and includes review of the following permits:

A) Rock County Building Site Permit

B) Rock County Shoreland Zoning Permit

C) Rock County Conditional Use Permit

D) Rock County Airport Overlay Zoning Permit

Rock County Planning, Economic and Community Development Agency

All permits and supplemental materials must be submitted to the commission for approval and is recommended to be done during the same time.

A) Building Permit: Required if a building or accessory building is being proposed for construction or location on a lot adjacent to a County road or within the Rock County Floodplain, Shoreland Overlay, or Airport Overlay Zoning Districts, in accordance with Chapter 44- Zoning, Code of Ordinances, Rock County.

B) Shoreland Permit: Applicable if project is located within the shoreland boundaries of Rock River (exact boundaries yet to be determined) as established in Rock County Ordinances Part 2, Subpart 1, Section 4.202(1).

C) Conditional Use Permit: Required in addition to the Shoreland Zoning Permit if over 1,000 feet squared or 40 cubic feet of soil will be disturbed.

D) Airport Overlay Permit: Project is within 3 miles of an airport, certain height restrictions will vary depending on where project is located within the 3 mile buffer.

Sanitary Permit Rock County Health Department

If not serviced by public sewer system then sanitary permit is needed before building permit is granted (Wisconsin Statute 66.036).

Conditional Use Permit Town of Beloit Application submittal triggers notice of public hearing and is reviewed by the Planning Commission.

Erosion and Sediment Control Plan Site Permit and Post-Construction Runoff Permit

Town of Beloit WPDES Stormwater Permit – additionally sent to the Town of Beloit.

Must be in hand at least 14 days prior to construction.

Same permit as the state WPDES Construction Stormwater Discharge Permit – must also be submitted to the Town of Beloit.

Meets Town of Beloit Ch. 10 Section 15-10-8 and Ch. 2 Section 15-2-8 permitting requirements.

Noise Emission Limitations Town of Beloit Noise analysis to be conducted at the site and submitted to the appropriate agencies for approval before construction, including the Town of Beloit.

Driveway Permit Town of Beloit Site plan for project must be submitted for review by Town of Beloit Planning Commission (Zoning Regulations 2.11 C).

Will need waiver of certified survey map requirement from Town of Beloit to construct across parcel boundary.

Plan of Operations and Site Plan Review Application

Town of Beloit Submit with Town of Beloit Conditional Use Permit.

Purpose is to review development proposals for larger projects that have the potential to create more impacts on areas surrounding the site or in the community.

Other

Railroad Crossing Permit Iowa, Central and Eastern Railroad (ICE)

Notification and communication with ICE prior to construction is necessary. Crossing may be gas, water and/or transmission.

Railroad Crossing Permit Union Pacific (UP) Notification and communication with UP prior to construction is necessary. Crossing in question is associated with a natural gas pipeline.



6 PROJECT SCHEDULE WPL is planning for a commercial operation date for the proposed project in January 2019. Currently, WPL is preparing the CPCN application and permitting documents. The CPCN application submittal is planned for April 2015, with anticipated approval in 12 months. The permitting process would be completed concurrently with the CPCN approval timeline.

An EPC Contractor limited notice to proceed would be planned for February 2016 to release engineering work. A full notice to proceed would be planned for May 2016, soon after the anticipated CPCN approval. Site construction would begin in the second half 2016. A preliminary schedule with key project milestones is shown in Figure 6-1.


ID Task Name

1 Submit CPCN Application

2 Limitied Notice to Proceed

3 PSCW CPCN and WDNR Permit Approval

4 Full Notice to Proceed

5 Major Equipment Procurement

6 Field Mobilization

7 Start Construction

8 Major Equipment Delivered

9 Back Energization

10 Natural Gas Fuel Available

11 First Fire

12 Commercial Operation Date

M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M A M J2015 2016 2017 2018 20

Figure 6‐1Wisconsin Power and Light CompanyRiverside Energy Center Expansion

Milestone Schedule

Page 1

Date post:	04-Oct-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

PSC REF#:231309

Documents