P.1 

OAR Box 1778 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

18) ll-A-2 

Docket Number: 

A-90-06 

Printed 10/28/2008 9:50:52 AM Sheet 18 of 276 
T — : P.2 

S 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

REGION V 

DATE: DEC 0 5 19W 

SUBJECT: Inspection Report - Wisconsin Electric Power - Port Washington Station 

TA/ Port Washington, Wisconsin 

FROM: David Scholz, Power Plant Expert 

Air Compliance Section I 

TO: Files 

Inspection Date: 

November 23, 1988 

Personnel Participating: 

•David Schulz - U.S". EPA •••-.. 

Kent Walden - WEPCO 

Mark Steinberg - WEPCO 

Neil Childress - WEPCO 

Paul Schumaker - WEPCO 

Plant Description: 

WEPCO's - Port Washington Generating Station contains five Combustion 

Engineering pulverized coal-fired units, with design generating 

capacities of 80 Mtf each. The units were constructed between 1935-

1950. Each unit is equipped with a 3-field cold-side Research -

Cottrell electrostatic precipitator (ESP), which were installed during 

the mid-1960's. Units 1-3 vent through a OJUHUII 505'stack, with Units 

4 & 5 venting through another 505' stack. Stack testing ports are 

located in the outlet breeching from each unit leading to the stack. 

The plant currently has no opacity or SO? CEM's, but has started 

construction of an elevator and scaffolding an each stack to install 

opacity CEM's. An automatic coal sampler was installed an the belt 

feeding the green coal bunkers in 1987 in order to sample and analyze 

coal burned to assess S02 compliance. Unit specific daily composite 

samples are taken and analyzed at WEPGO's central laboratory 

facilities. The station receives coal by ship (5-10 shiploads per 

year), naintaining a large stockpile to allow operation through the 

winter months when shipping is stopped. The station operates in a 

cycling mode, with units normally operated for several days or a week 

at a time as system load requires. 

EPA FORM 1320-t (REV. S-TV) 
P.3 

-2-

Following is a summary of plant parameters: 

1987 

Boiler Design Rated Year Control stack 

__£ Type Capacity Capacity §____ Equipment Q_ qejght 

1 C-E, P-C 80MW 45MW 1935 R-C, ESP None 505' 

(1-3 combined) 

2 C-E , P- C 80Mtf 651VW 1943 R-C, ESP None 505' 

(1-3 combined) 

3 C-E, P-C 80M<J 75MW 1948 R-C- ESP None 505' 

(1-3 combined) 

4 C-E, P-C 80I-W 55IW 1949 R-C, ESP None 505' 

(4-5 combined) 

5 C-E, P-C 80I-W Ot-W 1950 R-C, ESP None 505' 

(4-5 combined) 

Background: 

WEPCO has proposed an extensive rehabilitation and life extension 

program for these units to return them to their original design 

capacities. This program consists in part of: steam drum replacements, air heater replacements, economizer replacement, main steam & 

reheat piping upgrades, modification of fan controls, repair of 

turbine cylinder cracks, modification of turbine spindles, turbine 

blade replacements, replacement of boiler vater treatment systems, 

chimney liner repairs and ESP repairs. U.S. EPA has determined that 

the modifications as proposed will subject these units to NSPS and 

PSD. WEPCO has initiated a test program to demonstrate current unit 

capacities and emission rates to allow for a reevaluation of NSPS 

applicability. 

During the time of inspection only unit 1 was in service. Unit 1 

operating conditions during the inspection were as follows: 

Generating Load Feedwater flow steam flow Excess Oxygen Steam drum pressure 

591W 526,000 Ib/hr 440,000 lb/hr 3.6% l,320psi 

Plant personnel indicated that they did not consider the steam flow 

readings as an accurate indication of boiler capacity due to steam off 

takes prior to the point of measurement. They instead rely on the 

feedwater flow measurements to determine boiler operating capacity. 
P.4 

« '» • " v- "4 

- 3-

A review of Unit 1 ESP readings showed the following: 

Primary voltage Primary current Secondary current 

Field Volts l___l (ma) 

inlet 370 120 760 

center 340 80 540 

outlet 330 118 880 

Observation of the stack for Unit 1 showed opacity values of 5-10% 

during the inspection, although no formal observations were recorded. 

Plant personnel indicated that Unit 1 had started operation on 

November 17th. It was indicated that the unit initially experienced 

opacity problems, at which time WEPCO reduced load to the point at 

which the unit just met the opacity limit. WEPCO then conducted a 

particulate enission test run which indicated a violation of the 

particulate standard. Unit load was then reduced further and another 

particulate test run conducted. When this particulate test again 

showed violation unit load was reduced further, and a third test run 

conducted. When this third test run showed compliance WEPCO' conducted 

two additional test runs at that operating load. It was indicated 

that the unit had been operated for at least 10 hours per day at that 

load since then, except for one day of only 8 hours operation. 

Plant personnel indicated that Unit 4 had started operation on 

November 17th. Due to preliminary particulate test results indicating 

violations, particulate testing was not completed on Unit 4. It was 

indicated that Unit 4 had been operated until November 22nd when the 

unit was taken off-line due to shorted ESP fields caused by a broken 

wire, resulting in high opacity values. 

It was indicated that units 3 & 4 would be tested the following week, 

starting November 27th. During a followup telephone call on November 

29th it was indicated that Unit 4 had experienced another ESP short, 

requiring that unit to be brought down. Unit 3 & 4 testing was still 

scheduled to be completed during the week of November 28th. 

Discussions were held with WEPCO personnel concerning the format and 

types of information to be included in the test reports, using the 

Unit 2 preliminary testing and operational data as an example. 

cc: Walt Stevenson, ESD (MD-13) 

Sally Farrell, SSCD (EN-341) 

Bob Martineau, CGC (LE-132A) 

Lydia Wegman, (A-101) 

Kee 

Kertcher 

Spyropoulos 

Paisie 

Van Mersbergen 

Skoulikas, CRC