CjLJ! 

~ Progress Energy 

Mrs. Geneva S. Thigpen 

Chief Clerk 

North Carolina Utilities Commission 

4325 Mail Service Center 

Raleigh, NC 27699-4325 

March 30, 2006 

Re: Annual NC Clean Smokestacks Act Compliance Report 

Docket No. E-2, Sub 815 

Dear Mrs. Thigpen: 

ProgreSs Energy Carolinas, Inc. submits the attached report for calendar year 

2005 regarding the status of compliance with the provisions of the North Carolina Clean 

Smokestacks Act. Section 9(i) of the Act requires that an annual report of compliance 

progress be submitted to the Commission by April I of each year for the previous 

cal en dar year. 

LSA:mhm 

Attachment 

232822 

Progress Energy Service Company, LLC 

P.O. Box 1551 

R<:Jieigh. NC 27602 

Very truly yours, 

~~ J. ~tt"' LenS. Anthony 

Deputy General Counsel-Regulatory Affairs 

AIR OUAUTY DI'!ISION 

Olf!ECTORS O'flef 
~Progress Energy 

March 30, 2006 

Mr. William G. Ross, Jr. 

Secretary 

North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources 

160 I Mail Service Center 

Raleigh, NC 27699-1601 

Dear Secretary Ross: 

('"_ 

''"'' -' ·-~ "" '"""·:,_· .. 

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. (PEC) submits the attached report for calendar year 2005 

regarding the status of compliance with the provisions of the North Carolina Clean 

Smokestacks Act. Section 9(i) of the Act requires that an annual compliance progress report 

be submitted by April I of each year for the previous calendar year. PEC appreciates the 

efforts of your staff to work with us and looks forward to continuing our positive working 

relationship to facilitate fulfillment ofPEC's obligations with this important Jaw. 

Please don't hesitate to contact me at (919) 546-3775 if you have any questions. 

Sincerely, 

Director, Environmental Services 

c: North Carolina Utilities Commission 

Keith Overcash, DAQ 

Progren Energy Service Company, LLC 

P-0. fle»: 1551 

Ra!Clgh, NC Z !602 

1 
Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. 

North Carolina Clean Smokestacks Act 

Calendar Year 2005 Progress Report 

On June 20, 2002, North Carolina Senate Bill I 078, also known as the "Clean 

Smokestacks Act," was signed into effect. This law requires significant reductions in the 

emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (S02) from utility owned coalfired power plants located in North Carolina. Section 9(i) of the bill, which is now 

incorporated as Section 62-!33.6(i) of the North Carolina General Statutes, requires that 

an annual progress report regarding compliance with the Clean Smokestacks Law be 

submitted on or before April I of each year. The report must contain the following 

elements, taken verbatim from the statute: 

I. A detailed report on the investor-owned public utility's plans for meeting the 

emissions limitations set out in G.S. 143-215.!07D. 

2. The actual environmental compliance costs incurred by the investor-owned public 

utility in the previous calendar year, including a description of the construction 

undertaken and completed that year. 

3. The amount of the investor-owned public utility's environmental compliance 

costs amortized in the previous calendar year. 

4. An estimate of the investor-owned public utility's environmental compliance 

costs and the basis for any revisions of those estimates when compared to the 

estimates submitted during the previous year. 

5. A description of all permits required in order to comply with the provisions of 

G.S. 143-2!5.!07D for which the investor-owned public utility has applied and 

the status of those permits or permit applications. 

6. A description of the construction related to compliance with the provisions of 

G.S. 143-215.1070 that is anticipated during the following year. 

7. A description of the applications for permits required in order to comply with the 

provisions ofG.S. 143-215.1070 that are anticipated during the following year. 

8. The results of equipment testing related to compliance with G.S. 143-2!5.107D. 

9. The number of tons of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (S02) emitted 

during the previous calendar year from the coal-fired generating units that are 

subject to the emissions limitations set out in G.S. 143-2!5.107D. 

10. The emissions allowances described in G.S. 143-215.107D(i) that are acquired by 

the investor-owned public utility that result from compliance with the emissions 

limitations set out in G.S. 143-215.1070. 

II. Any other information requested by the Commission or the Department of 

Environment and Natural Resources. 

Information responsive to each of these report elements follows. The responses are given 

by item number in the order in which they are presented above. 

3 
1. A detailed report on the investor-owned public utility's plans for meeting the 

emissions limitations set out in G.S. 143-215.107D. 

The plan for Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. was originally submitted on July 29, 2002. 

Appendix A contains an updated version of this plan, effective April 1, 2006. We 

continue to evaluate various design, technology and generation options that could affect 

our future compliance plans. 

2. The actual environmental compliance costs incurred by the investor-owned 

public utility in the previous calendar year, including a description ofthe 

construction undertaken and completed that year. 

The actual capital costs incurred by Progress Energy in 2005 were $181,274,000. 

We successfully placed in service our first wet scrubber on Asheville Unit 1 in November 

2005. A significant amount of work was performed at the Asheville plant in 2005 in order 

to place the Unit 1 scrubber in service. This work included the installation of electrical 

power and control cables and circuits, piping, pumps, valves, oxidation air compressors, 

instruments and controls (including the scrubber distributed control system), agitators, 

absorber tower outlet hood, spray headers, trays and other tower internals, limestone and 

gypsum handling equipment, and gypsum dewatering equipment. Work efforts also 

included constructing the wetlands and industrial wastewater treatment system for 

treating scrubber blowdown wastewater, completing ductwork from the precipitator to 

the scrubber tower and from the scrubber tower to the stack, and installing new induced 

draft fans and various other process equipment. Much of the equipment noted above was 

also installed for the Asheville Unit 2 scrubber, which will be placed in service in 2006. 

In addition to the scrubber projects at Asheville, detailed design, engineering and 

procurement activities began for the Asheville Unit 1 SCR, which will be installed and 

operational in late 2007. Based on the changes in forecasted energy demand, the inservice date for these NOx controls was accelerated from 2008 to ensure compliance with 

tbe Act's annual tonnage cap. Detailed design and engineering activities included 

preparation of various specifications and bill of materials, civil engineering of foundation 

systems, structural engineering of flue gas path components and associated structural 

steel, and mechanical engineering for various piping systems. Work on the Asheville 

Unit 1 SCR also included issuing purchase orders for the SCR catalyst, ammonia 

injection grids, static mixers, urea to ammonia system equipment, ash handling system 

changes, and sonic horns. 

At the Roxboro plant, environmental projects work increased si&'Ilificantly in 2005. 

Engineering, procurement and construction began or continued for each oftbe four units. 

The new electrical switchgear building that will provide power for much of the common 

4 
scrubber equipment was completed. Various power distribution panels and load centers 

located in the electrical switchgear building were placed into service. Purchase orders 

were issued for most of the major equipment. Structural steel was erected, along with 

various floor elevations for the new limestone preparation/gypsum dewatering building. 

Erection began on the limestone ball mills and the limestone storage silos. Two new 

concrete chimney shells (one for Units 1 and 2 and one for Units 3 and 4) were 

constructed. Many of the fiberglass reinforced plastic sections that make up the flue gas 

liners were fabricated off site to be ready for installation beginning in early 2006. 

Foundations were completed for all four absorber towers and their adjacent pump 

buildings. The ceramic tile-lined concrete absorber tower for the Unit 2 scrubber was 

built. Excavation began for the limestone storage pile and conveying equipment. 

Erection also started on the pipe bridge between the absorber towers and the limestone 

preparation/ gypsum dewatering building. 

At the Mayo plant, initial general arrangement drawings for the wet scrubber were 

developed. Engineering studies were completed for the scrubber distributed controls 

system, electrical power distribution, and induced draft fans options. Work began on the 

water supply, scrubber blowdown wastewater treatment, and boiler/ductwork transient 

analysis studies. Engineering was also performed to support the modeling required to 

determine the height of the new chimney. A purchase order was issued for the absorber 

recycle pumps. The procurement of these pumps requires a long lead time; they were 

purchased in 2005 to ensure availability and minimize cost increases. A milestone project 

schedule was developed. There were no construction activities in 2005. 

At the Lee plant, preliminary engineering, design, and procurement activities were 

initiated for the installation oflow-NOx burners in 2006. The PSD permit application was 

prepared and submitted to the Division of Air Quality for review and approval. There 

were no construction activities in 2005. 

At the Sutton Plant, preliminary engineering, design, and procurement activities were 

initiated for the installation of low-NOx burners in 2006. There were no construction 

activities in 2005. 

3. The amount of the investor-owned public utility's environmental compliance 

costs amortized in the previous calendar year. 

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc. amortized $147 million in 2005. 

4. An estimate ofthe investor-owned public utility's environmental compliance 

costs and the basis for any revisions of those estimates when compared to the 

estimates submitted during the previous year. 

Appendix B contains the capital costs incurred toward compliance with G.S. 143-

215.107D in 2005 and the projected costs for future years through 2013, which show the 

net cost to PEC excluding the portion for which the Power Agency is responsible. The 

5 
estimated total capital costs, including escalation, are currently projected to be between 

$l.lB and $1.4B, with the current point estimate being $1.36B. This represents an 

increase of 52% from the 2005 cost estimate of $895 million. Prior reports have 

discussed the cost impact of project scope changes such as the use of a wet scrubber at 

Asheville in lieu of a dry scrubber, the capability to burn higher sulfur coals, and 

increased sulfur removal efficiency; all of which provide increased fuel flexibility for the 

Asheville, Roxboro, and Mayo plants. These additional cost increases reflect I) 

increased costs for materials of construction, such as steel, concrete, and electrical power 

and control cables; 2) the need for a greater volume of these materials than originally 

forecast; 3) increased costs for equipment, such as pumps, fans, and electrical 

transformers; 4) the addition of wastewater treatment facilities, which were not included 

in the original program estimate; and 5) adjusting future project costs based on the actual 

project costs for our first completed scrubber and the current detailed cost estimates for 

the scrubbers under construction. It should be noted that significant design work remains 

to be completed, especially for the S02 controls at Mayo, Cape Fear, and Sutton. Our 

current estimates are subject to further adjustment as the engineering for these projects is 

completed. 

The cost increases that we are experiencing are not unique to PEC. Other utilities with 

major construction projects for environmental controls are experiencing similar increases. 

Significant cost increases are also being experienced on other, non-utility, large 

construction projects in North Carolina, especially in the Raleigh area. For example, the 

project costs for the expansion of Terminal C at the Raleigh Durham International 

Airport were recently reported to have increased by 23% over the last 3 years due to 

inflation and rising building costs; projected costs for new Wake County schools were 

recently reported to have increased by 18-20% a year compared with an overall inflation 

rate of2.7 to 3.4% due to higher prices for construction materials; the project costs for 

the planned commuter rail service from Raleigh to Durham were recently reported to 

have increased by 9% since 2004 (not adjusted for inflation); and the costs for the new 

Raleigh convention center currently under construction were recently reported to have 

increased by 12% due to the volatility of equipment and material prices in the 

construction market. 

Independent cost indices, such as the Chemical Engineering Plant Cost Index, also show 

that the costs for construction labor and materials have increased sharply. The net overall 

plant escalation from December 2002 through November 2005 was 19%, which is 

substantially higher than the 2.0 to 2.5% per year (7.7% over the same December 2002-

November 2005 period) escalation rates used for the original program cost estimates. 

5. A description of all permits required in order to comply with the provisions of 

G.S. 143-215.1070 for which the investor-owned public utility has applied and the 

status ofthose permits or permit applications. 

Progress Energy applied for the following permits in 2005: 

6 
Asheville Plant 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan 

Several updates were submitted for the erosion and sedimentation control plan: 

• Rev H for the wastewater treatment discharge pipeline, truck scale, truck wash 

· station was approved April 6, 2005. 

• Rev 1 for the river pumps conduit was approved June 2, 2005. 

• Rev I for the Unit I SCR was approved November 14,2005. 

NPDES Permit 

An Authorization to Construct (ATC) the wastewater treatment system for the 

pretreatment of flue gas desulfurization wastewater was approved March 29, 2005 -A TC 

No. 0000396A03. 

The A TC engineer's certifications for pretreatment and constructed wetlands were 

submitted November 8, 2005. 

Roxboro Plant 

AitPermit 

An update to the air permit for coal handling and limestone handling was submitted on 

August 25, 2005. This permit was issued on February 9, 2006. 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan 

Several updates were submitted for the erosion and sedimentation control plan: 

• Rev G for the gypsum storage area was approved January 21, 2005 

• Rev H was rolled in with Rev G (revision H was a response to questions on 

revision G) and so was also approved January 21,2005. 

• Rev I for the emergency access road, fire protection piping, conduit, temporary 

haul road was approved May 17, 2005. 

• Rev J for the makeup water pipeline, gypsum conveyor foundations, settling pond 

and bioreactor site was approved September 13, 2005 

Wetlands Permitting 

An Army Corps of Engineers permit and water quality certification to fill wetlands for 

gypsum storage area was received September 6, 2005. 

NPDES permit 

7 
An NPDES permit for the wastewater treatment system was received August 10, 2005. 

Submissions were made for the Authorization to Construct (ATC) the wastewater 

treatment system on October 3, November 1 and December 2, 2005. Approval for 

construction of the settling basin is expected in March 2006. Approval for the 

construction of the bioreactor is expected in the second quarter of2006. 

Damllmpoundment Safety 

Progress Energy's letter to the NCUC identifying work in the ash pond was approved 

December 5, 2005. 

Lee Plant 

Air Permit 

A prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permit application for the installation of 

low NOx burners was submitted on December 7, 2005. A draft permit was received 

February 13, 2006 and is expected to be final in March 2006. 

Sutton Plant 

Air Permit 

Air permit 0 1318T18 for the installation of Low NOx Burners was received February 21, 

2005. 

6. A description of the construction related to compliance with the provisions of 

G.S. 143-215.107D that is anticipated during the following year. 

Appendix C presents the planned construction schedule for compliance with G.S. 143-

215.1 07D. Please note that this is a projected schedule of construction activity through 

2013 that is subject to modification. The schedule will be updated as part of this report 

each year. 

The planned construction activities at Asheville in 2006 include the completion of the 

mechanical, electrical and controls systems for the Unit 2 scrubber. 1bis includes 

completion of the flue gas ductwork from the precipitator to the absorber tower, and 

installation, checkout and commissioning of the m~or equipment including the 

distributed controls system and absorber recycle pumps. Systems common to both Units 

1 and 2 were commissioned during the checkout and startup activities for the Unit I 

scrubber. The unit 2 scrubber is expected to be placed into service at the end of May 

Construction activities will also begin for the Asheville Unit 1 SCR project. These 

activities include installation of foundations for the new SCR structural steel; fabrication, 

8 
delivery and erection of the SCR support steel; fabrication and delivery of the inlet and 

outlet ducts for the SCR and the SCR reactor modules; and various mechanical and 

electrical activities to support placing this SCR in service in 2007. 

At Roxboro, the significant construction activities for the Unit 2 scrubber include 

installation of the absorber recycle pumps, hydroclones, oxidation air compressors, 

absorber tower outlet hood, flue gas ductwork from the precipitator to the absorber tower 

and from the absorber tower to the chimney, spray headers, trays and other tower 

internals, agitators, and various process piping and tanks. Flue liners for each boiler will 

be installed in the chimney. The structural steel for the absorber recycle pump building 

will be erected. Systems common to the scrubbers for all units such as the gypsum 

handling conveyors, limestone handling and preparation equipment (conveyors, feeders, 

silos, and ball mills), dewatering equipment (belt filters), wastewater treatment settling 

ponds and hie-reactor will be installed. Various mechanical, electrical and controls 

equipment that support the scrubber process will also be installed. Installation of the 

gypsum conveyor from the dewatering building to the storage pile will begin. 

Construction activities for the Unit 3 and Unit 4 scrubbers will include the erection of the 

absorber tower for each unit and installation of the flue gas liners in the Units 3 and 4 

chimneys. Installation will begin for various electrical power and control cables and 

circuits along with the installation of various process equipment and piping. Minimal 

construction activities for Unit I will be performed. Construction of these systems and 

the scrubber blowdown wastewater treatment system will continue through 2008. 

7. ·A description of the applications for permits required in order to comply with 

the provisions of G.S. 143-215.107D that are anticipated during the following 

year. 

Several recent changes to permitting processes in the state have dramatically increased 

the lead time to prepare and review environmental permits necessary for Clean 

Smokestacks projects. A recent court decision [D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals Decision 

in New York v. EPA, No. 02-1387 (JWle 24, 2005)] eliminated the provision exempting 

pollution control equipment from new source review. For Progress Energy Carolinas, 

this results in increased costs for consultants and modeling. For the NC Division of Air 

Quality (DAQ), this results in longer permit application processing times. For example, 

the application for the installation of a low-NOx burner, which formerly took 3-4 months, 

now requires review Wider the PSD program, a process typically lasting a year or more. 

The staff at the DAQ has expedited this process for the recent permit submission for the 

Lee plant. We appreciate the collaborative efforts the DAQ staff has made to assure our 

construction and installation schedules remain on track. However, the longer permit 

processing times continue to be a serious concern for future projects as not every permit 

can reasonably be expedited. PEC wishes to work collaboratively with the DAQ to 

prevent such delays from occurring. 

The following permit applications and permit approvals are anticipated for 2006: 

9 
Asheville Plant 

Air Permit 

Revisions to the air permit may be necessary to test and, if necessary, install technology 

to reduce emissions of so3. 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan 

Revision J for the construction of the demineralizer pipe, pump and ductbank was 

approved in January 2006. 

Roxboro Plant 

Air Permit 

Revisions to the air permit will be necessary to address fugitive emissions of hydrogen 

sulfide from the wastewater treatment system. 

NPDES Permit 

The ATC for the gypsum settling pond was received March 3, 2006. 

Receipt of the ATC for the bioreactor is anticipated in the second quarter 2006. 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan 

• Rev K for the haul road, transformers, main plant area wastewater pipe trench and 

gypsum conveyor foundations was approved in February 2006 

• Rev L for burying the wastewater pipeline - approval is anticipated second 

quarter 2006 

Additional revisions to the plan may be necessary. 

Mavo Plant 

Air Permit 

A construction permit will be required for the flue gas desulfurization system -

anticipated submission Spring 2005. 

NPDES Permit 

NPDES permit modification application for wastewater treatment system submitted 

February 23, 2006. 

10 
A request for authorization to construct the wastewater treatment system is expected to be 

submitted in the fourth quarter 2006. 

Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan 

The first of the erosion and sedimentation plans for the main construction area and 

laydown yards will be submitted during the second quarter, 2006. Additional plan 

revisions will be necessary as construction plans are developed. 

Cape Fear Plant 

Air Permit 

A construction permit may be required to conduct a trial of an air pollution control 

technology. If required, this permit application will be submitted during the second 

quarter of2006. 

Lee Plant 

Air Permit 

A construction permit will be required for the installation of the Rotamix system for NOx 

control. This permit application will be submitted during the second quarter 2006. 

8. The results of equipment testing related to compliance with G.S. 143-215.107». 

No equipment testing related to compliance with G.S. 143-215.107D occurred in 2005. 

9. The number of tons of oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (SOz) emitted 

during the previous calendar year from the coal-fired generating units that are 

subject to the emissions limitations set out in G.S. 143-215.107». 

The total calendar year 2005 emissions from the affected coal-fired Progress Energy 

Carolinas units are: 

NOx 49,621 tons 

SOz 202,041 tons 

10. The emissions allowances described in G.S. 143-215.107D(i) that are acquired by 

the investor-owned public utility that result from compliance with the emissions 

limitations set out in G.S.I43-215.107D. 

During 2005, PEC did not acquire any allowances as a result of compliance with the 

emission limitations set out in N.C. General Statute 143-215.1070. 

11 
11. Any other information requested by the Commission or the Department of 

Environment and Natural Resources. 

NC Clean Smokestacks Audit Public Staff Data Request No. 5 was issued to Progress 

Energy Carolinas in February of2005, and a response was provided on March 4, 2005. 

NC Clean Smokestacks Commission staff request was issued to Progress Energy 

Carolinas in April of2005, and a response was provided on May 2, 2005 with revisions 

filed on May 6, 2005. NC Clean Smokestacks Audit Public StaffDataRequestNo. 6 

was issued to Progress Energy Carolinas in February of2006, and a response was 

provided on March 24, 2006. 

12 
Appendix A 

Progress Energy Carolinas, Inc's (PEC) Air Quality Improvement Plan Supplement 

April!, 2006 

On June 20, 2002, Governor Easley signed into law SBl 078, which caps emissions of 

nitrogen oxides (NOx) and sulfur dioxide (S02) from utility owned coal-fired power 

plants located in North Carolina. PEC's annual NOx emissions must be less than 25,000 

tons beginning in 2007 and annual so2 emissions must be less than 100,000 tons 

beginning in 2009 and less than 50,000 tons beginning in 2013. These caps represent a 

56% reduction in NOx emissions from 2001 levels and a 74% reduction in S02 from 

200 !levels for PEC. 

PEC owns and operates 18 coal-fired units at seven plants in North Carolina. The 

locations of these plants are shown on Attachment 1. 

Nitrogen Oxides Emissions Control Plan 

PEC has been evaluating and installing NOx emissions controls on its coal-fired power 

plants since 1995 in order to comply with Title· IV of the Clean Air Act and the NOx SIP 

Call rule adopted by the Environmental Management Commission (EMC). Substantial 

NOx emissions reductions have already been achieved (50,000 tons ofNOx in 2004 

compared with 112,000 tons in 1997) and further reductions will ensure compliance with 

the Clean Smokestacks Act 25,000 ton cap in calendar year 2007. This target will be 

achieved with a mix of combustion controls (which minimize the formation ofNOx) such 

as low-NOx burners and over-fire air technologies, and post-combustion controls (which 

reduce NOx produced during the combustion offossil fuel to molecular nitrogen) such as 

selective catalytic reduction (SCR) and selective non-catalytic reduction (SNCR) 

technologies. 

Attachment 2 details PEC's North Carolina coal-fired electric generating units, their 

name plate generation capacity, the control technologies already installed, and those 

planned for installation. As technologies evolve or other circumstances change, a 

different mix of controls may be selected. Attachment 2 also projects the NOx emissions 

on a unit-by-unit basis based on the energy demand forecast and expected efficiencies of 

the NOx emissions controls employed. This information is provided only to show how 

compliance may be achieved and is not intended in any way to suggest unit-specific 

emission limits. Actual emissions for each unit may be substantially different in 2007. 

Sulfur Dioxide Emissions Control Plan 

PEC will be installing wet flue gas desulfurization systems (FGD or "scrubbers") to 

remove 97% of the S02 from the flue gas of its Asheville, Roxboro and Mayo boilers. 

Screening studies will be conducted for the Cape Fear 5 and 6 and Sutton 3 units to select 

the most appropriate technology for these plants. Wet scrubbers produce unique waste 

13 
and by-product streams. Issues related to wastewater permitting and solid waste disposal 

are being addressed for each site. PEC plans to treat the scrubber wastewater stream at 

the Asheville Plant using an innovative constructed wetlands treatment system to ensure 

compliance with discharge limits. A bioreactor technology is being evaluated for the 

Roxboro Plant. A contract has been executed with a gypsum product end-user that will 

construct a wallboard facility near the Roxboro plant to use the synthetic gypsum 

produced by the Roxboro and Mayo plants for the manufacture of drywall products. PEC 

is also negotiating with another gypsum company for the use of the synthetic gypsum that 

will be produced at the Asheville plant 

Specific units are listed in Attachment 3 with data on projected schedules and projected 

annual emissions in 2009 and 2013. These projections assume a 97% S02 removal 

efficiency, forecasted energy demand, 3.3 lbs S~/Mbtu coal on scrubbed units, and 1.2 

lbs S021Mbtu coal on the other units. Please note that these are projected schedules and 

are subject to revision. 

Particular units controlled and control technologies utilized are subject to change 

depending on future developments in S02 removal technologies, energy demand, sulfur 

content of coal, and other circumstances which may produce a more optimal plan for 

meeting the S02 emissions limits in 2009 and 2013. DENR will be advised as changing 

circumstances dictate. 

14 

.• 
Attachment 1: Location of PEC's Coal-Fired 

Power Plants in North Carolina 

Roxboro 

Cape Fear 

Weatherspoon 

• I 
Attachment 2: PEC NOx Control Plan for North Carolina Coal-fired Units 

Projected 

Unit MWRating Control Technology Operation Date 1 NOx Tons, 20072 

Asheville I 

Asheville 2 . ·~·---------------· 

Cape fear 5 .. 

Cape Fear 6 -· 

Lee I 

Lee 2 

Lee 3 

-~!IY.(l 1__ 

Roxboro I !-=-"-

Roxboro 2 

Roxboro 3 

Roxboro 4 

Sutton I ----

Sutton 2 

Sutton 3 

Wspn I 

Wspn2 

Wspn 3 

--------- Total 

AEFLGR -- Amine-Enhanced Fh1e Lean Gas Rcbum 

LND- Low SOx Bumer 

SNCR -- Selccth·c Non-Catalytic Reduction 

OFA = Q\·cl'lhe Air 

ROF A = Rotating Opposed-tired Air 

198 LNB/AEFLGR/SCR -- 194 LNB/OFA/SCR 

143 ROFA'ROTAMIX 

173 ROFA/ROTAMIX 

79 WIR 

76 LNB .... 

252 LNB/OFA/ROTAMIX 

745 LNB/OFA/SCR 

385 LNB/OFA/SCR 

670 TFS2000/SCR 

707 LNB/OFA/SCR 

700 LNB/OFA/SCR 

97 SAS 

106 LNB --------------. 

410 LNB/ROF A/ROTAMIX 

49 

49 

78 WIR 

5, Ill 

ROT AM IX;, Injection of Ammonia to further reduce ~Ox (used ill combination with ROFA} 

WJH. ~ Umk:rlin: Air 

TFS2600 -Combination Low-NOx RumeriOverfire Air 

SAS = Separated Air Staging 

2009 

- ---

2006 

2010 

----

' ' -----

2006 

1 Note: This is the operation date for the control technology installed to comply with the North Carolina Improve Air Quality/Electric Utilities Act only (shown in bold). 

l Unit by unit emissions are illustrative onl)' tmd specific emissions limits should not be inferred Actual emissions in 2007 may be different from unit to unit 

2 

2,625 -- 432 

580 

770 -- 928 

493 

1,689 

I ,741 

1,084 

1,292 

2,036 

1,938 

I 008 

I, 116 

3,716 

879 

915 

1,028 

24,271 
Attachment 3: PEC S02 Control Plan for North Carolina Coal-Fired Units 

-

Projected S02 Pt·ojected S02 

Unit MW Rating Technology Operation Date •Tons, 20091 Tons, 20131 

Asheville 1 198 Scrubber 2005 864 818 

Asheville 2 194 Scrubber 2006 886 960 --·-· +- ---- ----- ----- --- ---.--·-

Cape Fear 5 143 Scrubber 2012 6,249 656 

Cape Fear 6 173 Scrubber 2011 7,725 787 

Lee I 79 2,940 2,660 ·-··---· - Lee 2 76 2,637 2,756 

Lee 3 252 10,078 7,493 

Mayo I 745 Scrubber 2009 14,361 3,203 

Roxboro I 385 Scrubber 2008 1,741 1,700 

Roxboro2 670 Scrubber 2007 2,853 2,577 

Roxboro 3 707 Scrubber 2008 2,928 3,005 

Roxboro4 700 Scrubber 2007 2,363 2,902 

Sulton I 97 4,402 3,217 

Su!ton2 106 4,052 ?,768 

Sutton 3 410 Scrubber 2012 16,269 1,823 

Wspn I 49 1,458 ·- ____ _j ,2~----· 

Wspn2 49 1,587 1,286 

Wspn 3 78 3,301 3,480 

Total ~---·--· 5,111 86,692 44,485 

1 Unit by unit emissions are illuslralive only and specific emissions limits should not be inferred. Actual emissions in 2009 and 2013 may be different from unit to unit. 

2 

Projections are based on 97% S02 rcmo\'BI d11cicncy. forecasted energy demand, 3.3 lbs S021Mbtu coal on scrubbed units, and 1.21bs S02/Mbtu coal on others 

3 
Appendix B 

PEC's Actual Costs Through 2005 and Projected Costs Through 2013 

for Clean Smokestacks Compliance (thousands) 

Note: Excludes ]'ower Agency ownership: 16.17% of Mayo, 3.77% of Roxboro Common, and 12.94% of Roxboro 4 

4 
Appendix C 

PEC Clean Smokestacks Compliance Plan 

Schedule as of 4/1/2006 

5 

lll!!lllllfll!!i~iJ!ljill!llli 

:1111111111111111111111111111111 

Scrubber Design and Construction 

Scrubber in senAce 

NOx Controls Design and Construction 

NOx Controls in sen.ice