01-000416EPP Orlando Utilities Commission, Curtis H. Stanton Energy Center Combined Cycle Unit A Power Plant Siting Supplemental Application No. Pa 81-14sa2 vs. * Status: Closed Recommended Order on Monday, July 23, 2001.

Summary: Certification of supplemental Power Plant Site including construction of transmission line to reconnect to existing on-site substation; off-cite natural gas pipeline; and expansion of main site.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

IN RE: ORLANDO UTILITIES )

COMMISSION, KISSIMMEE )

UTILITY AUTHORITY, )

FLORIDA MUNICIPAL POWER )

AGENCY, and SOUTHERN )

COMPANY-FLORIDA, L.L.C., )

CURTIS H. STANTON ENERGY ) Case No. 01- 0416EPP

CENTER COMBINED CYCLE )

UNIT A POWER PLANT )

SITING SUPPLEMENTAL )

APPLICATION NO. )

PA 81- 14SA2 )

________________________________)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, the Division of Administrative Hearings,

by its duly-designated Administrative Law Judge, Charles A.

Stampelos, held a final hearing in the above-styled case on

June 26, 2001, in Orlando, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For the Orlando Utilities Commission, Kissimmee Utility

Authority, and Florida Municipal Power Agency:

Tasha O'Dell Buford, Esquire

Young, van Assenderp,

Varnadoe & Anderson, P.A.

225 South Adams Street

P ost Office Box 1833

Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1833

For Orlando Utilities Commission:

Thomas B. Tart, Esquire

Orlando Utilities Commission

500 South Orange Avenue

Orlando, Florida 32801

For Southern-Florida, L.L.C .:

Lawrence N. Curtin, Esquire

Holland & Knight, LLP

315 South Calhoun Street, Suite 600

Tallahassee, FL 32302-0810

For the Department of Environmental Protection:

Scott A. Goorland, Esquire

Department of Environmental Protection

Office of General Counsel

3900 Commonwealth Boulevard

Mail Station 35

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000

For the St. Johns River Water Management District:

Kris H. Davis, Esquire

Charles A. Lobdell, III, Esquire

St. Johns River Management District

Post Office Box 1429

Palatka, Florida 32178-1429

For Orange County:

Anthony J. Cotter, Esquire

Assistant County Attorney

Orange County Attorney’s Office

Post Office Box 1353

Orlando, Florida 32801-1353

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue to be resolved in this proceeding is whether

certification should be granted to the Orlando Utilities

Commission ("OUC"), Kissimmee Utility Authority (" KUA "), Florida

Municipal Power Agency (" FMPA "), and Southern Company – Florida,

LLC ("Southern-Florida") for Curtis H. Stanton Unit A at the

Stanton Energy Center in Orlando, Florida, in accordance with the

pertinent provisions of Sections 403.501 through 403.518, Florida

Statutes.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

This proceeding arose on the application by OUC, KUA, FMPA,

and Southern-Florida ("the Applicants") for a supplemental power

plant site certification for the proposed Stanton Unit A and

associated facilities ("the Stanton Unit A project"). The

Stanton Unit A Project and the application include construction

of a proposed on-site 230 kilovolt ("kV") transmission line to

connect to the existing on-site substation. Substation No. 17

(the Stanton Energy Center main substation) will be expanded to

the west to accommodate the new transmission line. The Stanton

Unit A Project also includes construction of a proposed off-site

natural gas pipeline in the existing Stanton Energy Center

railroad corridor to connect to the existing Florida Gas

Transmission (" FGT") pipeline located approximately two miles

south of the Stanton Energy Center site boundary.

The Florida Public Service Commission (" PSC") issued a

determination of need for Stanton Unit A on May 14, 2001, in

accordance with Section 403.519, Florida Statutes.

The certification hearing was held as noticed on June 26,

2001, in accordance with Section 403.508(3), Florida Statutes.

All notices required by law were timely published in accordance

with Section 405.501 et seq. , Florida Statutes. The final

hearing was conducted for the purpose of receiving evidence

concerning whether the proposed project complies with the

criteria contained in Sections 403.502 and 403.517, Florida

Statutes.

The Applicants presented pre-filed written testimony of

thirteen (13) witnesses and ten (10) exhibits numbered OUC-1

through OUC-10, including the Stanton Energy Center Unit A

Supplemental Site Certification Application (" SSCA"), identified

as OUC-1. A Composite Joint Stipulation between the Parties

stipulating to the pre-filed testimony and exhibits, stipulating

to acceptance of the expert witnesses, stipulating that there

were no facts at issue, and stipulating to the proposed

Conditions of Certification was presented by the Applicants and

was identified as OUC-9. The Joint Stipulation between the

Parties was amended at the hearing, ore tenus , marked as OUC-10

and identified as the Amended Joint Stipulation between the

Parties. The parties have agreed to the modification of the

Conditions of Certification as stated in the Amended Joint

Stipulation between the Parties.

The Applicants' witnesses were accepted as proffered, as

were the Applicants' pre-filed testimony, exhibits, and Joint

Stipulation between the Parties, all without objection. The

Applicants' fact witnesses and the subjects of their testimony

included : Frederick F. Haddad, Jr., Orlando Utilities

Commission; Thomas O. Anderson, Southern Company; and J. Michael

Soltys, SSCA preparation. The Applicants' expert witnesses and

the subjects of their testimony included : Girma Mergia,

Groundwater Analysis/Impacts; Andrew P. Dicke, Noise

Analysis/Impacts; Tammy Wang, Socioeconomics Analysis/Impacts;

Kyle Lucas, Air Quality Analysis/Impacts; Andrew Burr, Ecological

Impacts; Kenneth R. Weiss, Water Use & Wastewater

Treatment/Impacts; Gregory A. Holscher, Air Pollution

Control/ SCR; Michael Serafin, Natural Gas Line Site Development;

Morris Stover, Transmission Site Development; and Michelle R.

French, Stormwater Analysis/Impacts.

The Department of Environmental Protection presented the

testimony of Hamilton S. Oven, Jr., Administrator of the Siting

Coordination Office of the Department of Environmental Protection

("DEP") and a licensed professional engineer. He was admitted as

an expert in electrical power plant siting and the power plant

siting process. DEP had two (2) exhibits admitted into evidence,

DEP-1, which is Mr. Oven's résumé, and DEP-2, which is the

May 25, 2001, Department's Staff Analysis Report.

The St. Johns River Water Management District ("SJRWMD")

presented the testimony of James Hollingshead, a hydrologist in

charge of water use permitting in central Florida for the SJRWMD.

He was admitted as an expert in the fields of hydrogeology and

the SJRWMD's Regulatory Permitting Program for Consumptive Use.

The SJRWMD had one exhibit admitted into evidence, SJRWMD-1,

which was Mr. Hollingshead's résumé.

Opportunity was afforded for members of the general public

to appear; however, no members of the public appeared.

Upon concluding the taking of evidence, OUC, KUA, FMPA and

Southern-Florida elected to order a Transcript of the proceedings

which was filed with the Division on July 9, 2001. A Jointly

Filed Proposed Recommended Order was timely submitted and has

been considered in the rendition of this Recommended Order.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. OUC is a 28 percent owner of Unit A of the Curtis H.

Stanton Energy Center. FMPA is a 3.5 percent owner of Unit A of

the Curtis H. Stanton Energy Center. KUA is a 3.5 percent owner

of Unit A of the Curtis H. Stanton Energy Center. Southern-

Florida is a 65 percent owner of Unit A of the Curtis H. Stanton

Energy Center.

2. Stanton Unit 1 (net rating of 440 MW) and Unit 2 (net

rating of 446 MW), and associated facilities, are existing

certified coal-fired units at the site. Stanton Units 1 and 2

operate under Certification Order PA 81-14, originally issued on

December 15, 1982, and supplemented on December 17, 1991, for the

addition of Stanton Unit 2. The Certification Order has been

subsequently modified in April 1993, July 1995, December 1997,

and August 1998. These units went into commercial operation in

1987 and 1996, respectively. The Stanton Energy Center site is

certified for ultimate certification of 2,000 MW of coal or

natural gas-fired capacity.

3. The Stanton Energy Center site, which is located

approximately 10 miles southeast of Orlando, encompasses

approximately 3,280 acres in eastern Orange County. Of the 3,280

acres, 1,100 acres have been allocated for development of power

generation and support facilities. The proposed Stanton Unit A

will be constructed on approximately 60 acres of that 1,100

acres.

4. DEP is an agency of the State of Florida designated as

the lead agency for the review and evaluation of site

certification applications, in accordance with the various

provisions of the Florida Electrical Power Plant Siting Act,

Sections 403.501-403.518, Florida Statutes, and related rules

cited and discussed elsewhere herein.

5. Notice of the certification hearing was accorded to all

parties entitled thereto as well as to the general public.

6. The existing Stanton Energy Center began commercial

operation in 1987. It currently consists of two coal-fired units

known as Units 1 and 2, two natural draft cooling towers, a

cooling water supply pond, a solid waste disposal area, an

electrical switchyard, transmission lines, a railroad spur,

access roads, and a reclaimed water pipeline.

7. The on-site facilities of the Stanton Unit A project

will consist of a General Electric 7FA combined cycle unit

consisting of two combustion turbines, two heat recovery steam

generators (" HRSGs "), a steam turbine generator, cooling tower,

wastewater treatment facilities, fuel oil and water storage

tanks, and natural gas delivery and metering facilities.

Additionally, a new 230 kV transmission line will be constructed

to connect Stanton Unit A with OUC’s existing on-site Stanton

Energy Center Substation No. 17. The connecting line will be

totally within the certified site. Stanton Unit A will have a

total nameplate rating of 791 mega volt amperes (" MVA") and a

nominal rating of approximately 633 MW.

PSC Need Determination

8. On May 14, 2001, the Public Service Commission issued

Order No. PSC-01-1103-FOF-EM determining the need for the

proposed combined cycle Stanton Unit A to be constructed at

Stanton Energy Center.

Scheduling

9. Mobilization and physical construction of Stanton Unit A

are scheduled to begin the fourth quarter of 2001, with

commercial operation commencing October 2003.

Generating Units

10. Stanton Unit A will be a General Electric 7FA combined

cycle unit consisting of two combustion turbines, two HRSGs, and

a steam turbine generator. The unit will burn natural gas as a

primary fuel and will be capable of burning low sulfur No. 2 oil

as backup fuel.

11. With the addition of Stanton Unit A, the generating

capacity at the Stanton Energy Center will be a nominal 1,519 MW.

Transmission Facilities

12. OUC’s existing transmission system consists of 26

substations interconnected through approximately 302 miles of 230

kV and 115 kV lines and cables. The addition of Stanton Unit A

will require the construction of a new, on-site, 230kV

transmission line to connect Stanton Unit A with the existing on-

site Stanton Energy Center Substation No. 17. The total length

of the transmission line will be approximately 3,000 feet. The

transmission line will be a single-circuit, heavy-duty, single-

pole transmission line. The transmission line structures will be

steel poles with drilled concrete pier foundations or self-

supporting concrete poles. Both structure types will be capable

of supporting a double-circuit configuration. In conjunction

with the proposed transmission line, the existing OUC Substation

No. 17 will be expanded to the west to accommodate the new 230 kV

transmission line. The proposed transmission line route will be

located entirely within the existing Stanton Energy Center

property. Construction of a portion of the line will require

clearing approximately 0.4 acres of cypress strand and

permanently filling 0.57 acres of herbaceous wetlands. Overall,

adverse environmental impacts from the construction of the new

transmission line are expected to be minimal. The proposed

transmission line has been routed to minimize impacts on wetlands

as much as possible. Orange County and OUC have determined that

mitigation for such impacts consists of the granting of a

conservation easement of in-kind wetlands to offset the wetland

impacts.

Natural Gas Pipeline Lateral

13. A 4-1/2 mile long, 16-inch lateral to a FGT line in

Orange County will provide the natural gas to fuel Stanton Unit

A. The pipeline lateral will originate at the crossing of the

26-inch FGT gas supply line and OUC's railroad corridor, which is

2-1/2 miles south of the Stanton Energy Center, and will

terminate at Stanton Unit A. OUC owns a 300-foot wide corridor

that contains a railroad spur, unimproved maintenance road, and a

230 kV transmission line. The gas pipeline will be installed

within this existing corridor. All fuel handling and metering

facilities will meet the applicable requirements as specified in

Chapter 25-12, Florida Administrative Code, and will meet all

applicable requirements of the United States Department of

Transportation ("DOT") (49 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 192)

as amended by the Materials Transportation Bureau.

Wastewater Treatment

14. Process wastewaters consist of oil/water separator

effluent, chemical wastes, steam cycle (boiler) blowdown, and

evaporative cooling tower blowdown. Oil/water separator effluent

will be routed to the existing Stanton Energy Center recycle

basin where it will be reused in Stanton Units 1 and 2 flue gas

desulfurization and ash systems. Cooling tower and evaporative

cooler blowdown will be treated in a new brine concentrator

system. The brine concentrator system recovers a large amount of

the water in the blowdown and recycles it to the cooling towers.

Boiler blowdown from the HRSGs will be routed to the Stanton Unit

A cooling tower for reuse.

15. Sanitary wastewater produced during normal plant

operations will be collected and routed to a new septic system

and tile field. The 30 new employees expected to be associated

with Stanton Unit A will increase sanitary wastes by

approximately 900 gallons per day (" gpd").

Well Field

16. Groundwater withdrawals are currently taken from the

two existing on-site, deep wells that serve the Stanton Energy

Center. The Stanton Energy Center site is currently authorized

to pump up to two million gallons per day (" mgd") for plant

service water, demineralization, drinking and sanitary water.

This allocation will also supply Stanton Unit A service water,

potable water, and demineralization demands.

17. In lieu of using additional groundwater, the Applicants

have agreed to diligently and in good faith pursue an agreement

with Orange County to transfer up to 8.0 mgd of surface water

(including stormwater/surficial groundwater) from the adjacent

Orange County Landfill property for use at the Stanton Energy

Center facility.

Fuel Supply and Storage

18. A new 1.68 million gallon, above-ground fuel oil

(No. 2) storage tank will be added at the Stanton Energy Center

for Stanton Unit A.

19. The construction, materials, installation, and use of

the bulk storage tank will conform to American Petroleum Industry

("API") Standard 650, American Institute of Steel Construction

(" AISC"), American Society for Testing and Materials (" ASTM"),

National Electric Code ("NEC"), and Occupational Safety and

Health Administration (" OSHA") standards. The location of the

storage tank is indicated on the Site Arrangement, Figure 2.1-3

of the Supplemental Site Certification Application, Volume 2.

20. Fuel will be delivered to the vertical oil storage

tanks by tanker truck and/or rail. The containment area for each

fuel oil tank is provided by an earthen berm. The berm is

designed to meet the DEP requirements to provide containment for

both 110 percent of the storage capacity of the largest tank

within the impoundment and a sufficient allowance for the design

(10 year, 24 hour) rainfall storm event (approximately 7 inches).

In addition, the containment area is constructed with a synthetic

liner. The liner is sufficiently impermeable to ensure that no

oil can escape by infiltrating through the liner and soil and

into surface or groundwaters, as required by DEP regulation.

21. The fuel oil truck unloading station is located

northwest of the existing coal units, as indicated on the Site

Arrangement. The station spill containment consists of above-

ground and double-walled below grade piping running to the

storage tanks outside and inside the earthen berm area. The

station also includes a manually operated isolation valve and a

check valve immediately adjacent to the unloading station. This

allows immediate isolation of the piping system from a spill at

the delivery truck and prevents backflow spillage of oil from the

system.

22. The existing Spill Prevention, Control and

Countermeasures Plan and Facility Response Plan will be modified

as required to include Stanton Unit A facilities.

Foundation Stability

23. The strata beneath the Stanton Energy Center site to a

depth of about 200 feet are divided into five stratigraphic

layers: a surficial sand layer, an intermediate cohesive layer,

a lower sand layer, a lower cohesive layer, and limestone

bedrock. The surficial sand layer consists of 32 to 71 feet of

heterogeneous arrangement of loose to dense, gray to brown sand,

silty sand, and clayey sand, with an intermittent thin clay

layer. Underlying the surficial layer is 4 to 15 feet of soft to

stiff, gray to brown highly plastic clay, sandy clay, and silty

clay, with occasional shell fragments. The intermediate cohesive

layer varies in thickness from 78 to 81 feet.

24. Foundations for Stanton Unit A are to be similar to the

foundation types utilized for Stanton Units 1 and 2. Heavily

loaded, settlement sensitive structures within the existing

Stanton Energy Center are supported on deep foundations

consisting of friction piling. More lightly loaded structures

are anticipated to be supported on shallow footings or mats. The

existing Stanton Units 1 and 2 foundations have been performing

very satisfactorily since installation.

Archeological and Historic Sites

25. In March 1981, the Florida Department of State,

Division of Archives, History, and Records Management determined

that the existing site did not contain significant archaeological

or historical resources. Construction of Stanton Unit A is

unlikely to affect any properties listed, or eligible for

listing, in the National Register.

Land-Use Compatibility

26. The new construction at Stanton Energy Center will not

generate sufficient noise to negatively affect any local

residents. Construction noise levels for foundation construction

and equipment erection are estimated to be approximately 55

decibels (" dBA") at the north property boundary and approximately

45 dBA at the nearest residence. The site clearing stage noise

emissions are anticipated to be 5 dBA less than the equipment

erection noise emissions. Noise levels during operation will

decrease from that which is expected during site clearing and

construction.

27. The construction noise associated with Stanton Unit A

is not anticipated to be significant. The undeveloped

surrounding area, as well as the vegetative buffer and physical

distance to the nearest residences, will all mitigate the

intermittent disturbance.

affic impacts of Stanton Unit A construction are

expected to have a slight impact on area roadways. However, this

temporary impact will not have any lasting, significant adverse

impact on the roadways and intersections in the vicinity of the

Stanton Energy Center. During operation of Stanton Unit A, no

significant impacts on area traffic are expected and no new off-

site roads or road improvements will be required.

Socioeconomic Impacts

29. The construction of Stanton Unit A will have a positive

impact on the local economy, providing approximately 300 jobs at

the peak of construction during the 24-month construction period.

The vast majority of the construction work force is expected to

be filled by workers already residing in the study area, which

consists of Brevard, Osceola, Orange, Lake, and Seminole

Counties. The estimated construction payroll is $28 million (in

2001 dollars).

30. There will be no significant, long-term increase in

demand by the Stanton Energy Center for public services, either

directly or indirectly, through an increase in population

attributable to increased staffing. While the influx of the

construction work force may increase the demand for services from

local governments and nearby service providers, representatives

of these entities have indicated that they have more than enough

service capacity to accommodate the construction work force.

Air Quality

31. The Stanton Unit A combustion turbine is subject to

pre-construction review requirements under the provisions of

Chapter 62-212.400, Florida Administrative Code.

32. The Stanton Energy Center is located in Orange County,

an area designated as an attainment area for all criteria

pollutants in accordance with Rule 62-204.360, Florida

Administrative Code.

33. The Stanton Unit A combustion turbine is subject to

review under Rule 62-212.400, Florida Administrative Code,

Prevention of Significant Deterioration (" PSD "), because the

potential emission increases for particulate matter/particulate

matter less than 10 microns ("PM/ PM 10 "), carbon monoxide ("CO"),

volatile organic compounds (" VOC "), sulfur dioxides (" SO 2 "), and

nitrogen oxides (" NO X ") exceed the significant emission rates

given in Chapter 62-212, Table 62-212.400-2, Florida

Administrative Code. The PSD review consists of a determination

of Best Available Control Technology (" BACT") for PM/ PM 10 , CO,

VOC, SO 2 and NO X , an air quality impact analysis, and an

assessment of the Stanton Unit A Project’s impact on general

commercial and residential growth, soils, vegetation, and

visibility.

34. The Stanton Unit A combustion turbine will increase

emissions of six pollutants at levels in excess of PSD

significant amounts: PM 10 , CO, SO 2 , NO X , VOC, and sulfuric acid

mist ("SAM"). PM 10 , SO 2 , and NO X are criteria pollutants and have

defined national and state ambient air quality standards

(" AAQS"), PSD increments, and significant impact levels. CO and

VOC are criteria pollutants and have only AAQS and significant

impact levels defined.

35. The only Class I area near the Stanton Energy Center is

the Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge, located

approximately 140 km west-northwest of the site.

36. An air quality analysis, undertaken in accordance with

computer modeling procedures approved in advance with the DEP,

demonstrated that the Stanton Unit A Project resulted in no

significant air quality impacts in the area surrounding the

proposed facility. Therefore, further air quality impact

studies, which would include AAQS and PSD increment impact

analyses for these pollutants, were not required.

37. Under the Clean Air Act, the Stanton Unit A project

would be classified as a "process unit" of hazardous air

pollutants ("HAP"), thereby requiring an analysis to determine if

the Stanton Unit A Project would have a potential to emit 10 tpy

of any one HAP or 25 tpy of any combination of HAPs . Maximum

Achievable Control Technology (" MACT") applicability calculations

were performed and revealed that no individual HAP has a

potential to be emitted in excess of 10 tpy and no combination of

HAPs has a potential to be emitted in excess of 25 tpy from

operation of the Stanton Unit A Project. It was determined that

the need to apply MACT is therefore not required pursuant to

Section 112 of the Clean Air Act.

38. The Stanton Unit A combustion turbine’s air emissions

are expected to cause only minimal or insignificant impacts on

vegetation, soil, or wildlife.

39. A regional haze analysis was performed which showed

that operation of the Stanton Unit A combustion turbine will not

result in adverse impacts on visibility in the vicinity of the

Chassahowitzka National Wildlife Refuge.

40. Short-term increases in the labor force during the

construction phase will not result in permanent or significant

commercial and residential growth in the vicinity of the Stanton

Unit A Project. Any resulting air emissions from residual growth

will not be significant because the increase in population due to

the operation of the Stanton Unit A Project will be very small.

BACT and Emission Rates

41. A BACT analysis was required as part of the PSD review.

The BACT review for the Stanton Unit A combustion turbine was

conducted for PM/ PM 10 , CO, NO X , SO 2 , and VOC.

42. DEP determined that BACT for the Stanton Unit A

combustion turbine particulate matter (PM/ PM 10 ) emissions was good

combustion controls during natural gas and fuel oil firing. The

BACT for the particulate emissions from the Stanton Unit A

cooling tower is determined to be the use of drift eliminators

with a control efficiency of 0.002 percent.

43. DEP determined that BACT for the Stanton Unit A

combustion turbine for CO emissions was good combustion controls

to achieve an emission limit of 17 ppmvd at 15 percent O 2 on a 24-

hour average for normal operation on natural gas and 14 ppmvd at

15 percent O 2 for normal operation on fuel oil. An oxidation

catalyst will be installed, if necessary, to meet these emission

limits.

44. DEP determined that BACT for the Stanton Unit A

combustion turbine for NOx emissions consists of using dry low NO X

burners with selective catalytic reduction (" SCR") to achieve an

emission limit of 3.5 ppmvd at 15 percent O 2 when burning natural

gas. This limit shall apply whether or not the unit is operating

with its duct burner on and/or in power augmentation mode. The

emissions of NO X with the combustion turbine operating on fuel oil

shall not exceed 10.0 ppmvd at 15 percent O 2 .

45. DEP determined that BACT for the Stanton Unit A

combustion turbine for VOC emissions is good combustion controls

to achieve an emission limit of 2.7 ppmvd at 15 percent O 2 with

the CT firing fuel oil. The emission limit is 3.6 ppmvd at 15

percent O 2 with the CT firing natural gas (without power

augmentation) and 6.3 ppmvd at 15 percent O 2 (with power

augmentation).

46. DEP determined that BACT for the Stanton Unit A

combustion turbine for SO 2 consists of firing natural gas and up

to 1,000 hours per consecutive 12-month period of 0.05 percent

sulfur fuel oil.

47. DEP determined preliminarily that the Stanton Unit A

Project will comply with all applicable state and federal air

pollution regulations provided that the BACT determination is

implemented.

Industrial Wastewater

48. The Stanton Energy Center has five major sources of

wastewater. These are sanitary wastes, oil/water separator

effluent, cooling tower blowdown, chemical wastes and boiler

blowdown. Oil/water separator effluent will be routed to the

existing Stanton Energy Center recycle basin where it will be

reused in Stanton Units 1 and 2 flue gas desulfurization and ash

systems. Cooling tower and evaporative cooler blowdown will be

treated in a new brine concentrator system. Sanitary wastes will

be routed to a new septic tank/tile field system. Boiler

blowdown from the HRSGs will be routed to the Stanton Unit A

cooling tower for reuse. See also Findings of Fact 14 and 15.

49. It is estimated that 0.4 mgd of cooling tower blowdown,

resulting from operation of Stanton Unit A, will be returned to

the cooling tower as makeup water. Remaining wastewater streams

will be reused or recycled at the Stanton site.

50. The HRSGs and pre-boiler piping will be chemically

cleaned during commissioning. The steam generators will also be

periodically cleaned during the life of the unit. The acid and

alkaline cleaning wastes resulting from this process will be

immediately neutralized on-site. The treated cleaning wastes

will be disposed of off-site by a licensed contractor.

Waste Disposal

51. Stanton Unit A will generate no solid waste from the

energy generation process. Stanton Unit A will generate solid

waste associated with the brine concentrator treatment of the

cooling tower blowdown. This waste is combined with the solid

discharge waste produced by the treatment of the blowdown from

Stanton Units 1 and 2. Therefore, the addition of Stanton Unit A

will require no new landfills or solid waste disposal areas.

52. Waste oil will be generated by Stanton Unit A

operation. Three processes generate waste oil: combustion

turbine cleaning, false starts of the combustion turbines, and

oil/water separator operation. This waste oil is hauled off-site

as needed by a licensed contractor for ultimate disposal.

Surface Water Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts

53. The Stanton Unit A project is designed to be a zero

discharge facility for industrial wastes. Stanton Unit A will

use a mechanical draft cooling tower; makeup water will come from

the existing Makeup Water Supply Storage Pond, which receives

treated effluent from the Orange County Easterly Water

Reclamation Facility. Stanton Unit A will require an additional

2.91 million gallons of treated wastewater per day for water lost

due to evaporation and drift and for blowdown. Cooling tower

blowdown will be directed to and treated in a cooling tower

blowdown treatment system.

54. There are no sizeable surface water bodies on the

Stanton Energy Center site. Small segments of the Cowpen Branch

and the Hart Branch extend into the site; however, these small

streams are within the buffer zone on the site that will not be

affected by construction activities. Runoff from the

construction area will be contained in a collection basin.

55. Construction of Stanton Unit A will have no significant

impact on the Cowpen Branch, the Hart Branch, or on-site

wetlands. Site preparation for construction of the proposed Unit

A facilities will occur in an area that was used for construction

laydown for Stanton Unit 2 construction.

56. The Stanton Unit A storm water drainage system was

designed to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local

regulations regarding discharge into surface waters. Runoff from

areas not disturbed by construction or operations will be

directed to natural drainage systems within the area. Runoff

from disturbed areas will be directed to a drainage system and

then routed to the stormwater pond north of the Stanton Unit A

location.

Groundwater Hydrology and Impacts from Water Withdrawal

57. During construction, dewatering will be necessary for

construction of heavy equipment foundations, underground

utilities, circulating water lines, and miscellaneous pits and

sumps. Dewatering activity is expected to last no more than 120

days with total withdrawal of less than 1 mgd. Discharge from

dewatering activities will be sent to the Stanton Unit A storm

water pond. The dewatering effects will be temporary and limited

to the power block area. The groundwater system will return to

its original state after completion of the dewatering. The

proposed Stanton Unit A Project will not cause any saltwater

intrusion in the area.

58. The Stanton Energy Center currently uses groundwater

withdrawn from two 850 gallon per minute (" gpm") Floridan Aquifer

wells. Stanton Units 1 and 2 are currently authorized to use

approximately 2 million gpd of groundwater.

59. In lieu of using additional groundwater for Stanton

Unit A, the Applicants have agreed to diligently and in good

faith pursue an agreement with Orange County to transfer up to

8.0 million gallons per day of surface water (including

stormwater /surficial groundwater) from the adjacent Orange County

Landfill property for use at the Stanton Energy Center facility.

Ecological Resources

60. The Stanton Energy Center occupies 3,280 acres.

Stanton Units 1 and 2 currently occupy approximately 310 acres of

land and approximately 1,100 acres have been scheduled for power

development.

61. The Stanton Unit A facilities will be constructed on

the same area used for construction equipment/materials laydown

during construction of Stanton Units 1 and 2; the area was, thus,

previously disturbed. This 60-acre area is generally maintained

grassland, but will be cleared and grubbed for construction of

Stanton Unit A.

62. The proposed new transmission line will connect Stanton

Unit A with OUC’s existing Stanton Energy Center Substation

No. 17. The land between Stanton Unit A and Sub station No. 17 is

mostly undeveloped/native area dominated by pine flatwoods and

cypress wetland vegetative communities. In addition to the

undeveloped/native area, there is an access road that was once

used as an alternative route to the Stanton Energy Center. The

surface water bodies crossed by the transmission line corridor

are limited to an artificial surface water (borrow ditch) and

isolated cypress strand and herbaceous wetland. The anticipated

impacts on these water bodies were minimized to the extent

practicable by the siting of the corridor. Approximately 0.57

acres of jurisdictional wetlands will be impacted. An

Environmental Resource Permit application has been submitted to

the United States Army Corps of Engineers for construction of the

transmission line.

63. The Stanton Energy Center, including the proposed

Stanton Unit A, will not discharge effluent from the site into

surface waters; no impacts to aquatic life from such discharge

are, therefore, expected.

64. A review of potential impacts to threatened and

endangered species was conducted based on habitat types that

occur at the Stanton Energy Center. Lists of threatened and

endangered species obtained from the United States Fish and

Wildlife Service and from the Florida Fish and Wildlife

Conservation Commission (" FFWCC") were reviewed and field surveys

were conducted. No critical habitat for federally listed species

occurs on Stanton Energy Center property. Protected species that

are known to occur on Stanton Energy Center property include the

eastern indigo snake, the gopher tortoise, the Florida pine

snake, the Florida scrub jay, the Kirtland's warbler, the

American kestrel, the bald eagle, the fox squirrel, the black

bear, and the red- cockaded woodpecker. Monitoring of the red-

cockaded woodpecker is required by the Conditions of

Certification for Stanton Units 1 and 2 and will also be

performed for Stanton Unit A.

65. Site preparation will not permanently impact wildlife

habitat. However, wildlife species may be temporarily displaced

from adjacent communities by the noise, fugitive dust, and

activity associated with construction.

Impacts from Flooding and Hurricanes

66. The 100-year flood elevations on the Stanton Energy

Center property vary from approximately 60 feet mean sea level

(" MSL") at the northeast corner of the property to approximately

90 feet MSL at the southwest corner. All Stanton Unit A

facilities will be located above the 100-year flood elevation.

Noise Impacts

67. Noise emissions attributable to constructio n activities

are highly variable, depending upon the location and operating

load of the construction equipment. Noise emissions during site

clearing and preparation will be dominated by diesel engine

noise. Site clearing and facility start-up will generally result

in minimal noise emissions. The one significant noise emission

associated with facility start-up will be steam blowout of the

HRSG and steam lines. Construction activities will be scheduled

during daytime and evening periods (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) to

the fullest extent possible. Any nighttime construction will be

limited to low noise activities as much as possible.

68. Noise emissions are regulated under Chapter 15, Article

V, of the Orange County Code. The predicted A-weighted noise

emissions will satisfy the code criteria at the nearest

residential locations.

Traffic

69. All roadways serving the construction and operational

traffic of Stanton Energy Center have adequate capacity to handle

the increase in traffic generated by construction and operation

of Stanton Unit A. A new paved "loop" road will be constructed

around the Stanton Unit A generation building and connected to

the Stanton Energy Center road system. During Stanton Unit A

construction, there will be some traffic congestion. However,

this impact will be temporary and will not have a lasting,

significant adverse impact on the existing levels of service on

affected local roads or highways. To lessen the impact of the

construction traffic congestion, OUC will encourage

transportation demand management techniques to reduce the number

of temporary, construction-related vehicle trips on the road

networks.

70. Since construction of Stanton Unit A is expected to

have no greater impacts than those resulting from construction of

Stanton Units 1 or 2, no additional improvements to roadways or

traffic control systems are deemed necessary.

Consistency with the Local Comprehensive Plans

and Land Development Codes

71. The Stanton Energy Center was initially certified by

the Siting Board on December 15, 1982 for an ultimate site

capacity of 2,000 MW. Stanton Unit A is consistent with the

ultimate certification and the applicable zoning and land use

plans of Orange County. As a result, no land use hearing was

required for the Stanton Unit A Project because the previously

certified ultimate site capacity will not be exceeded and the

land required for the construction and operation of Stanton Unit

A is within the boundaries of the previously certified site.

Therefore, t he Stanton Energy Center is consistent and in

compliance with the applicable sections of the Orange County

Comprehensive Plan, the East Central Florida Regional Planning

Council Interim Strategic Regional Policy Plan, the State

Comprehensive Plan , and the applicable local land use and zoning

ordinances.

Solid Waste

72. Solid waste collection and disposal services at the

Stanton Energy Center will be coordinated with the appropriate

contractors to assure that all applicable regulations are met.

Public Services

73. Public services such as police, fire, and emergency

medical services are available and sufficient to meet the needs

of Stanton Energy Center.

Variances

74. Orange County will require no variances for operation

of the Stanton Unit A and its associated facilities.

Agency Positions and Stipulations

75. In testimony entered at the certification hearing, the

DEP, through its expert witness, Hamilton S. Oven, rendered an

opinion that the Stanton Unit A Project would comply with all

applicable DEP statutes, rules, policies and criteria including,

but not limited to, those concerning air quality, water quality,

stormwater, wetlands, solid waste, industrial wastewater and

domestic wastewater, if the facility is built and operated in

accordance with the Department's Conditions of Certification

contained in DEP-2. Furthermore, Mr. Oven rendered an opinion

that the Stanton Unit A Project can comply with the Conditions of

Certification in DEP-2 and recommended that the Stanton Unit A

Project be approved.

76. In testimony entered at the certification hearing, the

SJRWMD, through its expert witness, James J. Hollingshead,

rendered an opinion that the Stanton Unit A Project meets all the

standards, rules, and policies of SJRWMD applicable to the

Stanton Unit A Project, including compliance with the SJRWMD's

reasonable, beneficial use criteria. Accordingly, SJRWMD's staff

and the governing board of the SJRWMD recommend certification and

approval of the Stanton Unit A Project.

77. The DEP, DOT, Department of Community Affairs (" DCA"),

FFWCC, Orange County, and the SJRWMD have recommended

certification of the proposed Stanton Unit A Project, including

its associated facilities, subject to recommended Conditions of

Certification. Those recommended Conditions of Certification are

attached to the DEP Staff Analysis Report as Appendix 1.

78. The East Central Florida Regional Planning Council

(" ECFRPC") determined that use of the site for this industrial

use is consistent with the ECFRPC's Strategic Regional Policy

Plan. No state, regional, or local agency recommended denial of

certification.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

79. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties to, and the subject matter of, this

proceeding. The proceeding was conducted in accordance with

Chapter 403.501-518, Part II, Florida Statutes, the "Florida

Electrical Power Plant Siting Act," and Chapter 62-17, Florida

Administrative Code.

80. In accordance with Chapters 120 and 403, Florida

Statutes, and Chapter 62-17, Florida Administrative Code, proper

notice was accorded to all persons, entities, and parties

entitled thereto; notice also was provided to the general public.

All necessary and required governmental agencies participated in

the certification process. Reports and studies were issued by

the DEP, DCA , DOT, SJRWMD, South Florida Water Management

District (" SFWMD "), ECFRPC , FFWCC , and Orange County, in

accordance with their various statutory charges.

81. The PSC has certified the need for the electrical

generating capacity, nominally 633 MW, to be supplied by Stanton

Unit A as required by Sections 403.508 and 403.519, Florida

Statutes.

82. Preponderant evidence produced by OUC, KUA , FMPA , and

Southern-Florida in their SSCA , in their pre-filed testimony, in

the Joint Stipulation Between the Parties, in the Amended Joint

Stipulation Between the Parties, and at the certification hearing

demonstrates that the Applicants have met their burden of proving

that the proposed Stanton Unit A and its associated facilities

should be granted certification as described more particularly

herein.

83. Preponderant evidence produced in their SSCA , in their

pre-filed testimony, in the Joint Stipulation Between the

Parties, in the Amended Joint Stipulation Between the Parties,

and at the hearing demonstrates that the construction and

operational safeguards for Stanton Unit A are technically

sufficient for the welfare and protection of citizens and are

reasonable and available methods to achieve that protection.

Stanton Unit A and associated facilities, if constructed,

maintained, and operated in accordance with the conditions and

parameters recommended and found herein and in the attached

Conditions of Certification, will result in minimal environmental

impacts compared to the benefits of the new combined cycle unit.

Such measures will minimize adverse effects on human health, the

environment, the ecology of the land and its wildlife, and the

ecology of state waters and their aquatic wildlife through the

use of reasonable and available methods. Certification of the

construction and operation of Stanton Unit A is consistent with

the goal of abundant, low-cost energy and will effect a

reasonable balance between minimal environmental impacts and an

already determined need for Unit A at the Stanton Energy Center.

84. The proposed Stanton Unit A and its associated

facilities, if constructed and operated in accordance with the

findings and conclusions herein and in the recommended Conditions

of Certification, will be consistent and in compliance with the

State Comprehensive Plan and the Orange County Comprehensive

Plan.

RECOMMENDATION

Having considered the foregoing, it is, therefore,

RECOMMENDED that the Orlando Utilities Commission, Kissimmee

Utility Authority, Florida Municipal Power Agency, and Southern-

Florida, LLC , be granted certification, pursuant to Chapter 403,

Part II, Florida Statutes, for the location, construction, and

operation of proposed Stanton Unit A and its associated

facilities, as described in the Supplemental Site Certification

Application and as modified by the preponderant evidence of

record supportive of the above findings of fact and conclusions

of law, and in accordance with the Conditions of Certification,

which are incorporated herein and made a part hereof by

reference.

DONE AND ENTERED this 23rd day of July, 2001, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

___________________________________

CHARLES A. STAMPELOS

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

[phone] SUNCOM 278-9675

Fax Filing [phone]

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 23rd day of July, 2001.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Tasha O'Dell Buford, Esquire

Young, van Assenderp,

Varnadoe & Anderson, P.A.

225 South Adams Street, Suite 200

Post Office Box 1833

Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1833

Preston T. Robertson, Esquire

Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission

620 South Meridian Street, Room 108

Bryant Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1600

Cathy Beddell, Esquire

Public Service Commission

2540 Shumard Oak Boulevard

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Lawrence N. Curtin, Esquire

Holland & Knight, LLP

315 South Calhoun Street

Post Office Box 810

Tallahassee, Florida 32302-0810

Ruth A. Holmes, Esquire

South Florida Water Management District

3301 Gun Club Road

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

Scott A. Goorland, Esquire

Department of Environmental Protection

3900 Commonwealth Boulevard

The Douglas Building, Mail Station 35

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000

Charles Lee, Sr., Vice President

Florida Audubon Society

1331 Palmetto Avenue, Suite 110

Winter Park, Florida 32789

Kris H. Davis, Esquire

Charles A. Lobdell, III, Esquire

St. Johns River Water Management District

Post Office Box 1429

Palatka, Florida 32178-1429

Andrew S. Grayson, Esquire

Department of Community Affairs

2555 Shumard Oak Boulevard

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2100

Thomas B. Tart, Esquire

Orlando Utilities Commission

500 South Orange Avenue

Orlando, Florida 32801

Anthony J. Cotter, Esquire

Orange County Attorney's Office

201 South Rosalind Avenue, Third Floor

Post Office Box 1353

Orlando, Florida 32801

Sheauching Yu, Esquire

Department of Transportation

605 Suwannee Street

Hayden Burns Building, Mail Station 58

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0458

Greg Golgowski, Acting Executive Director

East Central Florida Regional

Planning Council

631 North Wymore Road, Suite 100

Maitland, Florida 32751

Frederick M. Bryant, Esquire

Florida Municipal Power Agency

2061-2 Delta Way

Tallahassee, Florida 32303

John J. Fumero, Esquire

South Florida Water Management District

3301 Gun Club Road

West Palm Beach, Florida 33416

Katherine Manella, Esquire

St. Johns River Water Management District

Post Office Box 1429

Palatka, Florida 32178-1429

Hamilton S. Oven

Department of Environmental Protection

2600 Blair Stone Road, Mail Station 48

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

Kathy C. Carter, Agency Clerk

Department of Environmental Protection

3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000

Teri L. Donaldson, General Counsel

Department of Environmental Protection

3900 Commonwealth Boulevard, Mail Station 35

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3000

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15

days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to

this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will

issue the Final Order in this case.