Loading...
FINAL - Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report_Appx E SEPACity of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report January 2021 bhp - n►Ic,1r-.- BHC Consultants, LLC 950 Pacific Avenue, Suite 905 Tacoma, WA 98402 (253) 344-5084 www.bhcconsultants.com City of Edmonds WWTP Carbon Recovery Project Engineering Report The project representative contact is: Lonn Inman, Ameresco, 206.708-2947, linman(o)ameresco.com Ameresco has retained BHC Consultants, LLC (BHC) to prepare this Engineering Report. The BHC representative is: Greg Mockos, P.E., 206-357-9949, greg.mockos(a�bhcconsultants.com FSi Consulting Engineers (FSi) will perform plumbing, HVAC, and fire suppression design as a subconsultant to BHC. KPG Architects (KPG) will perform architectural design as a subconsultant to BHC. Process mechanical, structural, civil, erosion control, and electrical engineering disciplines will be performed by BHC. Controls design and integration will be performed by Parametrix. L3 stare Em ronmenral Policy Act (SEPA) Checklist The installation of a new biosolids treatment system at the Edmonds WWTP is considered a new treatment process and therefore requires a full review of the SEPA checklist. The SEPA and Determination of Non - Significance (DNS) checklist is provided in Appendix E. Refer to the City's General Sewer Plan and the NPDES Permit No. WA0024058 Fact Sheet (Appendix A) for a statement regarding compliance with any applicable state or local water quality management plan or any such plan adopted pursuant to the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended. 2. Existing Conditions The existing WWTP solids handling includes the dewatering of a waste activated sludge (WAS) and primary sludge (RAW) sludge blend and comingling the resulting DS with washed and compacted screenings from the headworks. The DS and screenings are stored in the DS storage hopper and then fed to a fluidized bed incinerator for drying and combustion. The solid waste streams collected for dewatering and incineration include the following: ■ Grit — As the WWTP is not equipped with a grit removal system, it can be assumed that grit is present throughout the WWTP system. Typical grit production is approximately 1,300 pounds per day (lb./day). Grit is assumed to be mostly present in the RAW sludge from the primary clarifiers, but it is also likely present in other WWTP processes. RAW and WAS Sludge — RAW and WAS Sludge collected from the primary clarifiers and secondary clarifiers, respectively, is collected in the Blend Tank. The Blend Tank is continually mixed using a side -mounted mechanical mixer. Typical RAW sludge production is approximately 6,000 lb./day. Typical WAS sludge production is approximately 3,360 lb./day. Blended RAW and WAS sludge are then conditioned with polymer in the screw press mixing tanks via mechanical mixing and then dewatered to 26.5% sludge using the two screw presses. DS is discharged to two shaft -less screw conveyors where it is combined with the washed and compacted screenings. The conveyors then discharge the DS and screenings into the DS hopper. ■ Scum — Scum from the primary clarifiers is collected in scum pits and pumped to the blend tank. Typical scum production cannot be estimated, but it is assumed to be minimal. 0 APPENDIX E SEPA Checklist and DNS THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK. 4 of ED,y O� N CITY OF EDMONDS Cst 1890 1215TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 RCW 197-11-965 Adoption Notice ADOPTION OF EXISTING ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT Adoption of (check appropriate box) ® DNS ❑ EIS ❑ Description of current proposal: The WWTP Carbon Recovery Project will replace the sanitary sewage incinerator (SSI) and associated eauipment. The replacement technoloov beino proposed is a aas-fired rotary drum dryer and a gasifier: associated ancillary equipment including live bottom biosolids hoppers, conveyors, piston pump: gasifier odor control system, heat exchanger and pumps, heat recovery system, and WWTP odor control system. The new dryer and gasification equipment would be housed within the existing incinerator room in the WWTP Solids Processing Building. The new odor control system will be installed on slab on grade to the immediate west of the WWTP Headworks Building. All construction will be within the current WWTP footprint. Proponent: City of Edmonds Location of proposal, including street address if any: 200 2"d Avenue South, Edmonds, WA 98020: Tax parcel number 27032300409100 Title of document being adopted: WWTP Carbon Recovery Protect Determination of Nonsignificance Agency that prepared document being adopted: City of Edmonds Date adopted document was prepared: March 1, 2019 Description of document (or portion) being adopted: A DNS issued for the WWTP Carbon Recovery Project. The project has been modified where no new building is required as was proposed earlier in the project. The previous SEPA review is still relevant for the modified project. If the documet being adopted has been challenged (WAC 197-11-630), please describe: N/A The document is available to be read at (place/time): The adopted document may be viewed at 121 5tn Avenue N, between 8 am and 4:30 pm by appointment or online at: https://weblink.edmondswa.gov/WebLink/0/fol/l444065/Row1.aspx We have identified and adopted this document as being appropriate for this proposal after independent review. The document meets our environmental review needs for the current proposal and will accompany the proposal to the decisionmaker. Name of agency adopting document: City of Edmonds Contact person, if other than responsible official: Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Manager Phone: 425.771.0220 WAC (4/15/98) L:\TEMP\Kemen\Permitting\2020\SEPA\WWTP Adoption\SEPA Adoption Notice fmm.doc 12/30/20 Responsible official: Rob Chave Position/Title: Planning Manager Phone: 425.771.0220 Address: 121 5th Ave. N, Edmonds, WA 98020 Date: December 30, 2020 Signature WAC (4/15/98) L.\TEMP\Kemen\Pemitting\2020\SEPA\WWTP Adoption\SEPA Adoption Notice form doc 12/30/20 OV kbAlp � v G CITY OF EDMONDS 121 5TH AVENUE NORTH, EDMONDS, WA 98020 (425) 771-0220 WAC 197-11-970 Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal: The Waste Water Treatment Plant Carbon Recovery Project will replace the sanitary sewage incinerator and associated equipment. The replacement technology being proposed is a gas -fired belt dryer and three pyrolysis units; associated ancillary equipment including a live bottom dewatered sludge hopper, twin-screw feeder and piston pump, a water heater, heat exchanger and pumps, heat recovery system, various conveyors and order control system modifications. The pyrolysis equipment would be housed in a new building constructed with the current WWTP footprint. Proponent: City of Edmonds Location of proposal, including street address if any: 200 — 2"d Avenue S, Edmonds, WA. Tax Parcel Number 27032300409100 Lead agency: City of Edmonds The lead agency has determined that the requirements for environmental analysis and protection have been adequately addressed in the development regulations and comprehensive plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, and in other applicable local, state, or federal laws or rules, as provided by RCW 43.21C.240 and WA 197-11-158 and/or mitigating measures have been applied that ensure no significant adverse impacts will be created. An environmental impact statement is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. There is no comment period for this DNS. XX This DNS is issued under 197-11-340(2); the lead agency will not act on this proposal for 14 days from the date below. Comments must be submitted by March 15, 2019 Project Planner: Kernen Lien, Environmental Programs Manager Responsible Official: Rob Chave, Planning Manager Contact Information: City of Edmonds 1 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020 1 425-771-0220 Date: March 1, 2019 Signature: XX You may appeal this determination to Robert Chave, Planning Manager, at 121 5th Avenue North, Edmonds, WA 98020, by filing a written appeal citing the specific reasons for the appeal with the required appeal fee, adjacent property owners list and notarized affidavit form no later than March 22, 2019 . You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact Rob Chave to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. XX Posted on March 1, 2019 , at the Edmonds Public Library and Edmonds Public Safety Building. Published in the Everett Herald. Emailed to the Department of Ecology SEPA Center (SEPAunit(a-D-ecy.wa.gov). Mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the site. XX Distribute to "Checked" Agencies below. The SEPA Checklist, DNS, and proposed amendments are available at https://Permits.edmonds.wa.us/citizen. Search for file number STF20190003. These materials are also available for viewing at the Planning Division — located on the second floor of City Hall: 121 51h Avenue North, Edmonds WA 98020. Page 1 of 2 SEPA DETERMINATION 2/27/19 SEPA Notice Mailed to the following: XX Washington State Dept. of Commerce 906 Columbia Street SW P.O. Box 48300 Olympia, WA 98504-8300 XX Tulalip Tribal Council 6700 Totem Beach Road Marysville, WA 98270 XX Seattle District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P.O—Box 37-55 Seattle, WA 98124-3755 XX Snohomish County Fire District No. 1 Headquarters Station No. 1 Attn.: Director of Fire Services 12310 Meridian Avenue South Everett, WA 98208-5764 XX City of Mountlake Terrace SEPA Responsible Official 6100 219th St. SW, Suite 200 Mountlake Terrace, WA 98043 XX City of Shoreline Attn.: Permit Services Manager 17500 Midvale Avenue North Shoreline, WA 98133-4905 XX Washington State Department of Health Division of Drinking Water P.O. Box 47822 Olympia, WA 98504-7822 XX Snohomish County Health District 3020 Rocker Ave Everett, WA 98201-3900 Attachments pc: File No. SEPA Notebook XX Town of Woodway Attn.: Clerk -Treasurer 23920 113th Place West Woodway, WA 98020 XX Olympic View Water & Sewer District 8128 228th St. SW Edmonds, WA 98026 XX Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation - - PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 XX Puget Sound Energy Attn: David Matulich PO Box 97034, M/S BOT-1 G Bellevue, WA 98009-9734 david.matulich_@pse:com XX M. L. Wicklund Snohomish Co. PUD PO Box 1107 Everett, WA 98206-1107 XX Snohomish County Health District 3020 Rocker Ave Everett, WA 98201-3900 SEPA DETERMINATION 2/27/19 SEPA Page 2 of 2 SEPA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Purpose of checklist: Governmental agencies use this checklist to help determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant. This information is also helpful to determine if available avoidance, minimization or compensatory mitigation measures will address the probable significant impacts or if an environmental impact statement will be prepared to further analyze the proposal. Instructions for applicants: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Please answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. You may need to consult with an agency specialist or private consultant for some questions. You may use "not applicable" or "does not apply" only when you can explain why it does not apply and not when the answer is unknown. You may also attach or incorporate by reference additional studies reports. Complete and accurate answers to these questions often avoid delays with the SEPA process as well as later in the decision -making process. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. Instructions for Lead Agencies: Please adjust the format of this template as needed. Additional information may be necessary to evaluate the existing environment, all interrelated aspects of the proposal and an analysis of adverse impacts. The checklist is considered the first but not necessarily the only source of information needed to make an adequate threshold determination. Once a threshold determination is made, the lead agency is responsible for the completeness and accuracy of the checklist and other supporting documents. Use of checklist for nonproject proposals: For nonproject proposals (such as ordinances, regulations, plans and programs), complete the applicable parts of sections A and B plus the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS art D . Please completely answer all questions that apply and note that the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proponent," and "affected geographic area," respectively. The lead agency may exclude (for non -projects) questions in Part B - Environmental Elements —that do not contribute meaningfully to the analysis of the proposal. A. Background 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable WWTP Carbon Recovery Project 2. Name of applicant: City of Edmonds 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Pamela Randolph SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 1 of 21 200 Second Ave Edmonds, WA 98020 4. Date checklist prepared: July 20th, 2020 5. Agency requesting checklist: Department of Ecology 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): 2020 - 2021 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The proposed system being installed is being sized to accommodate the 20-year projected flows and loads. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. An environmental impact assessment was performed during the treatment plant construction when the design engineers chose to use incineration for solids disposal, rather than land application of biosolids. A SEPA checklist was performed for the 1998 Biosolids application. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None exist. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Department of Ecology review and approval of Engineering Report and Design Drawings and Puget Sound Clean Air Agency (PSCAA) issuance of Notice of Construction (NOC). 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The WWTP Carbon Recovery Project will replace the sanitary sewage incinerator (SSI) and associated equipment. The replacement technology being proposed is a gas -fired rotary drum dryer and a gasifier; associated ancillary equipment including live bottom biosolids hoppers, conveyors, piston pump; gasifier odor control system, heat exchanger and pumps, heat recovery system, and WWTP odor control system. The new dryer and gasification equipment would be housed within the existing incinerator room in the WWTP Solids Processing Building. The new odor control system will be installed on slab on grade to the immediate west of the WWTP Headworks Building. All construction will be within the current WWTP footprint. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 2 of 21 map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The location is 200 Second Ave S. in Edmonds WA. The existing WWTP site is located in downtown Edmonds, nestled between Edmonds Way and 2nd Ave S south of Dayton Street. Due to site constrains, the only available area for the construction of new facilities is the parking lot area on the north side of the Operations Building. The construction area is contained within the Solids Processing Building onsite and in the parking lot of the facility. Construction staging may take place on City owned property across the street. (see area and site maps below.) SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 3 of 21 Brackett's Daley Landing North P 6e Brackett's Mdn%Pd All' Landing South M r a o DP co q, Edmonds0 i � Ar Puget Sound /QQ' �aF' y 'Lldin yP Edmonds Kingston Q Sj Edmonds fishing pier Ferry Toll Booth w Mai Arne ; aP' o° Q,a IN Dayton St Dayton St Dayton St Dayto m C S' O M n n D rD D n ti N m to Maple imonds ` Edmonds Wastewater Treatment T � .Z tDo Alder St 3 d Beck In r Walnut St Walnut Gke U) w 0 H ry eI rah o Kelso Ct < w Edmonds Shelv� Holly Dr Marsh Cr Creek H Howeil Way I (p C Union Oil Comp,y,y w D 14 Homela 04 Goog I e T Edmonds SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 4 of 21 I r r I • t ' --~ ' r SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 5 of 21 B. Environmental Elements 1. Earth a. General description of the site: (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other slightly sloped b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 1-2% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any agricultural land of long-term commercial significance and whether the proposal results in removing any of these soils. The building site is contained within an existing improved site. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, total area, and approximate quantities and total affected area of any filling, excavation, and grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. No filling is required. Some excavation is required in the footprint of the new odor control system to construct a slab on grade. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? No increase of impervious surfaces planned for the project. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Not applicable to this project. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal during construction, operation, and maintenance when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. The project entails replacement of the existing sludge incinerator with a combination sludge dryer and sludge gasification process. In connection with the project, foul air emissions from the plant headworks, primary clarifiers, and solids handling building that are currently treated in a packed bed chemical scrubber will be treated in a biotower followed by an activated carbon adsorption unit. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 6 of 21 Within the sludge gasification and drying process, dewatered sludge from the Edmonds treatment plant will be routed to a sludge drier. The dried sludge will then be converted to syngas by heating the sludge in the absence of oxygen. The syngas will then be oxidized, with the heat from the oxidation supplying heat for the gasification process. This process will occur in a gasifier/oxidizer unit. Excess heat from the oxidation process will be removed as hot exhaust gas from the gasifier/oxidizer. The hot exhaust gas will be routed to the sludge dryer, to provide heat for sludge drying. There will also be a mix -back loop inside the process, in which dried sludge will be routed back to the start of the process and blended with incoming dewatered to condition the dewatered sludge. A portion of this conditioned sludge will become the feed to the gasifier/oxidizer, with the remainder of this conditioned sludge conveyed to the drier. Emissions to the air from sludge drying and gasification will occur in the exhaust from the sludge dryer. Hot exhaust gas produced from the gasifier/oxidizer will be routed to the sludge dryer to heat and dry the sludge. Syngas combustion products will be discharged in the sludge dryer exhaust. Foul air from the sludge drying/gasification facilities will be included with the foul air collected from the solids handling building. Because the biotower/activated carbon adsorber will replace an existing packed bed chemical scrubber and is equally effective in controlling four air emissions, there is no expected increase in foul air emissions. Small amounts of particulate emissions from handling dried sludge will be controlled with cyclones and fabric filters. Ecoremedy Gasifier/Oxidizer The Ecoremedy gasifier/oxidizer will be a potential sources of air pollutants associated with gasification of sewage sludge and the combustion of the pyrolysis -derived syngas. NG-combustion during start-up will also be a source of emissions. Oxidation of the syngas (and NG) will produce combustion by- products, including carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen oxides (NOx), PM, sulfur dioxide (SO2), volatile organic compounds (VOC), and combustion -related hazardous and toxic air pollutants (HAPs) and (TAPs). Sludge Dryer The sludge dryer will be a rotary dryer, heated by the exhaust gas from the gasifier/oxidizer. The agitation and movement of sludge inside the dryer is expected to generate particulate emissions, as well as emissions of volatile organics that might be contained in the dried sludge. As noted previously, the sludge dryer will be heated using the exhaust gas from the gasifier/oxidizer. After passing exiting the dryer, this gas stream will become the dryer exhaust. A flue - gas recirculation system will route a portion of the dryer exhaust back to the dryer incoming air supply to held reduce nitrogen oxide formation. To reduce pollutant emissions, the exhaust air from the sludge will be treated in a packed bed scrubber for removal of particulates and of acid gases and other water-soluble compounds, followed by an activated carbon absorption unit for removal of organics and other sorptive constituents (such as mercury). SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 7 of 21 Sludge Handling equipment. Sludge handling equipment will include hoppers and conveyors. Ventilation air from this equipment will be a source of foul air odors. Particulates could also be generated due to material abrasion; given the moisture content of the sludge, particulate formation is expected to be negligible. As noted previously, this foul air will be treated in a new biotower/activated carbon adsorption system. Expected project emissions are summarized below: Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Pollutant Ib/hr ton/yr PM2.5 0.21 0.91 PM10 0.21 0.91 NOx 1.49 6.55 SO2 0.04 0.18 CO 3.38 14.83 VOC 0.02 0.08 Pb 1.60E-06 7.02E-06 Toxic Air Pollutant Emissions Pollutant Ib/hr Ib/yr Arsenic & Inorganic Arsenic Compounds 1.6E-05 1.4E-01 Cadmium & Compounds 2.0E-08 1.8E-04 Chromium(VI) 2.9E-07 2.6E-03 Lead and compounds (NOS) 1.5E-06 1.3E-02 Manganese & Compounds 1.6E-06 1.4E-02 Mercury, Elemental 1.3E-06 1.1 E-02 Nitrogen dioxide 4.5E+00 3.9E+04 Polychlorinated Biphenyls, NOS 3.3E-10 2.9E-06 2,3,7,8-Tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin & Related Compounds, NOS <1.9E-11 <1.6E-07 Vanadium 2.5E-07 2.2E-03 Hydrogen chloride 2.3E-04 2.0E+00 Hydrogen Fluoride 2.6E-04 2.3E+00 Sulfur dioxide 4.2E-02 3.6E+02 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 8 of 21 In addition to these project emissions, there will be reductions in emissions resulting from retirement of the existing incinerator. Reductions in potential criteria pollutant emissions are summarized below: Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Reductions from Retiring Existing Sludge Incinerator Air Pollutant Lb/hr Ton/yr Carbon Monoxide -0.373 -1.63 Nitrogen Oxides -0.603 -2.64 Particulate Matter (PM, PM10, PM2.5) -0.076 -0.33 Sulfur Dioxide -0.133 -0.58 Volatile Organic Compounds -0.15 -0.66 The existing incinerator emits many of the same air toxics as the proposed pyrolysis units. Emission reductions for arsenic and chromium, two toxic air pollutants of particular significance for this project, are summarized below: Arsenic and Chromium Emissions Reductions from Retiring Existing Sludge Incinerator Air Pollutant Lb/hr Lb/yr Arsenic -0.0000245 -0.2146 Chromium -0.0000146 -0.1279 Hexavalent Chromium -0.0000015 -0.0128 In addition to these project emissions, there will be reductions in emissions resulting from retirement of the existing incinerator. Reductions in potential criteria pollutant emissions are summarized below: Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions Reductions from Retiring Existing Sludge Incinerator Air Pollutant Lb/hr Ton/yr Carbon Monoxide -0.373 -1.63 Nitrogen Oxides -0.603 -2.64 Particulate Matter (PM, PM10, PM2.5) -0.076 -0.33 Sulfur Dioxide -0.133 -0.58 Volatile Organic Compounds -0.15 -0.66 SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 9 of 21 Emission reductions for arsenic and chromium, two toxic air pollutants of particular significance for this project, are summarized below: Arsenic and Chromium Emissions Reductions from Retiring Existing Sludge Incinerator Air Pollutant Lb/hr Lb/yr Arsenic -0.0000245 -0.2146 Chromium -0.0000146 -0.1279 Hexavalent Chromium -0.0000015 -0.0128 b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: The existing chemical odor control system will be removed and replaced in its entirety with a new biological odor control system. Any temporary handling of sludge onsite will be performed with connections to the existing odor control system. 3. Water a. Surface Water: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. To the south of the plant is an existing wetland. The project will not affect the wetland. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The project will require work within the existing treatment plant site and within existing treatment plant building footprint. Both the site and the existing buildings are within 100 ft of the wetland to the south. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. Not applicable to this project. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100-year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. See below figure for the 100-year floodplain extents (purple) and the relative location of the site (existing WWTP). SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 10 of 21 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No. b. Ground Water: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn from a well for drinking water or other purposes? If so, give a general description of the well, proposed uses and approximate quantities withdrawn from the well. Will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not applicable to this project. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 11 of 21 c. Water runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. All stormwater flow onsite during and after construction will be contained onsite and directed to the in -plant pump station and treated with the treatment plant flows. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. 3) Does the proposal alter or otherwise affect drainage patterns in the vicinity of the site? If so, describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water, and drainage pattern impacts, if any: Surface, ground, and runoff water will be captured within the existing WWTP site and treated onsite. The project will not affect drainage patterns. 4. Plants a. Check the types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture crop or grain Orchards, vineyards or other permanent crops. wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other ✓ other types of vegetation — general landscape vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. c. List threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. Unknown. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. e. List all noxious weeds and invasive species known to be on or near the site. None expected as this is an existing improved site. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 12 of 21 5. Animals a. List any birds and other animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site. Examples include: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Mammal: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: ass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other Crows and other various types of birds, squirrels, hummingbirds, rabbits, rats and anything native to a wetland. b. List any threatened and endangered species known to be on or near the site. Unknown. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Unknown. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. e. List any invasive animal species known to be on or near the site. Unknown. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. This is a significant energy reduction project however the finished project will use electrical energy and natural gas to power and heat the proposed system. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Reduction of electrical usage, reduction of chemical use, reduction of diesel fuel, reduction of truck traffic and reduction of material disposed of in the landfill. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. As there would be site construction with heavy machinery and equipment, there would be some level of risk associated with damaged machinery causing spills of oil, coolant or other fluids. That would also involve some small risk of fire or explosion due to the use of combustible fuels. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 13 of 21 1) Describe any known or possible contamination at the site from present or past uses. None known. 2) Describe existing hazardous chemicals/conditions that might affect project development and design. This includes underground hazardous liquid and gas transmission pipelines located within the project area and in the vicinity. There is an existing underground diesel fuel storage tank in the parking lot. There is a buried natural gas service line to the site. 3) Describe any toxic or hazardous chemicals that might be stored, used, or produced during the project's development or construction, or at any time during the operating life of the project. None known. 4) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None known. 5) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None expected. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Automobile traffic and ferry terminal traffic. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Typical construction noise from heavy equipment including potentially excavators, bulldozers, backhoe-loaders, or cranes. Dump trucks will haul material, including rock riprap and excess soil materials, to and from the site. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. All construction will occur in accordance with the City of Edmonds code. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Will the proposal affect current land uses on nearby or adjacent properties? If so, describe. The current use of the site is a wastewater treatment plant and this will not change. No, the proposal will not affect nearby properties. b. Has the project site been used as working farmlands or working forest lands? If so, describe. How much agricultural or forest land of long-term commercial significance will be converted to other uses as a result of the proposal, if any? If resource lands have not been designated, how many acres in farmland or forest land tax status will be converted to nonfarm or non -forest use? No. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 14 of 21 1) Will the proposal affect or be affected by surrounding working farm or forest land normal business operations, such as oversize equipment access, the application of pesticides, tilling, and harvesting? If so, how: No. c. Describe any structures on the site. A new concrete slab on grade housing the new odor control system will be installed west of the Headworks Building. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Minimal modifications to existing structures will be made for the relocation of doors and access. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The WWTP is zoned as Public Use. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? WWTP (wastewater treatment plant). g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Unknown. h. Has any part of the site been classified as a critical area by the city or county? If so, specify. Unknown. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? 16. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not applicable. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Not applicable. m. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts to agricultural and forest lands of long- term commercial significance, if any: Not applicable. 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. Not applicable. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 15 of 21 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? No new structures are proposed. New equipment and modifications will either be within the existing buildings or shorter than the existing buildings which are 20.00 feet. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views will not be altered. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Not applicable. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Not applicable. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12. Recreation a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Shopping, diving, tours, boating and parks. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable. 13. Historic and cultural preservation a. Are there any buildings, structures, or sites, located on or near the site that are over 45 years old listed in or eligible for listing in national, state, or local preservation registers? If so, specifically describe. No. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 16 of 21 b. Are there any landmarks, features, or other evidence of Indian or historic use or occupation? This may include human burials or old cemeteries. Are there any material evidence, artifacts, or areas of cultural importance on or near the site? Please list any professional studies conducted at the site to identify such resources. No. c. Describe the methods used to assess the potential impacts to cultural and historic resources on or near the project site. Examples include consultation with tribes and the department of archeology and historic preservation, archaeological surveys, historic maps, GIS data, etc. Not applicable. d. Proposed measures to avoid, minimize, or compensate for loss, changes to, and disturbance to resources. Please include plans for the above and any permits that may be required. Not applicable. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site or affected geographic area and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Vicinity and site maps of the proposed project are provided. Access to the site would be primarily from SR-104 traveling north and west from either SR-99 or Interstate 5, then from SR-104 onto Dayton eastbound and 2nd avenue S. going southbound. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 17 of 21 NTS A" fted PROJECT LOCATION SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 18 of 21 Brackett's 04 Landing North r\ Brackett's Md%n Si �CbP 0 Landing South ,P h r JP,C /C01 a�n SI c o DP co Edmonds0 Puget Sound M Edmonds fishin ler Edmonds Kingston g P Ferry Toll Booth e Arne -, aP' o° Q,a w Dayton St Dayton St Dayton St m S w n n 3 n D o CL ti o N to Edmonds Wastewater nds ` Treatment T N 1 3 d r � Walnut St Gee U' w ^P� o. Kelso Ct < Edmonds Marsh Shelleberger v� Creek Hoy 0 VJ,-,y I w UOil Compa,,y D n Edmonds G0•'91¢ Daley S Fad on ySSr 2 aP r P j e Mai m N Maple S < Alder St m fn Beck In A Walnut O to 3 Holly Dr H (p a D b. Is the site or affected geographic area currently served by public transit? If so, generally describe. If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes — the nearest bus is 1 block away. c. How many additional parking spaces would the completed project or non -project proposal have? How many would the project or proposal eliminate? The project will not impact onsite WWTP property parking spaces. d. Will the proposal require any new or improvements to existing roads, streets, pedestrian, bicycle or state transportation facilities, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 19 of 21 e. Will the project or proposal use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project or proposal? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur and what percentage of the volume would be trucks (such as commercial and non -passenger vehicles). What data or transportation models were used to make these estimates? Regarding temporary biosolids disposal during project construction which will affect truck traffic in the vicinity. For approximately 6-months the plant will not have the ability to process biosolids. A study and analysis were performed by BHC Consultants entitled "TEMPORARY BIOSOLIDS DISPOSAL OPTIONS ANALYSIS TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM" dated 7-14-2020. The purpose of the technical memorandum is to evaluate temporary biosolids disposal options to be implemented at the WWTP during construction of the Carbon Recovery Project. The evaluation is intended to outline which temporary biosolids disposal options are available to the City and then assess their feasibility and preliminary costs. The study determined the most practical option is landfilling dewatered sludge. Landfilling dewatered sludge will result in approximately one truck per day leaving the WWTP (containers can accommodate 27 tons and WWTP is expected to produce up to 21 tons of wet sludge per day). g. Will the proposal interfere with, affect or be affected by the movement of agricultural and forest products on roads or streets in the area? If so, generally describe. See narrative in item F above. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None expected. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, public transit, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Not applicable. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The existing natural gas service meter by Puget Sound Energy would likely either be modified or a new natural gas service and meter will be installed to provide a higher volume of natural gas as the primary fuel is being converted from fuel oil to natural gas. SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 20 of 21 C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Name of signee Position and Agency/Organization Date Submitted: SEPA Environmental checklist (WAC 197-11-960) July 2016 Page 21 of 21