1. Informational Meeting Status of Glades Power Park Air Construction Permit Application April 24, 2007 Moore Haven, Florida State of Florida Department of Environmental Protection Division of Air Resource Management Bureau of Air Regulation

2. Overview  Who we are, why we are here, what we do, what we don’t do  Overview of the power plant application  Overview of the permitting process  Questions and comments from the public

3. Who we are; why we are here  Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s Division of Air Resource Management  We are here to provide information on this proposed project, the permitting process and answer questions you may have

4. What we do  Evaluate applications for new sources of air pollution to determine if Department rules regarding air pollution would be met –Determine Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for the proposed facility –Ensure any new source of air pollution would not cause or contribute to a violation of air quality standards

5. Important issues that are outside of our authority:  Determining need for power or type of facility  Local zoning decisions  Comprehensive plans  Other state or federal permits (e.g. water, waste, wetlands)  Local ordinances  Sewer hookups, building codes, noise  We are not the Siting Office

6. Overview of the air permitting process  Application is required for a proposed facility that will emit air pollution.  This application is currently incomplete.  Department must determine if the applicant has provided reasonable assurance that the project will not discharge, emit, or cause pollution in contravention of Department air standards or rules.

7. Overview of the air permitting process  Department’s determination timeframe  About 60 days after completeness  Publication of notice in newspaper  14 day timeframe for filing legal challenges  30 day public comment period –Request for public meeting  Department takes final action

8. What is the project?  FPL Glades Power Park  A Pulverized Coal-fueled Power Plant  Nominal Capacity of 1,960 megawatts  Located Northwest of Moore Haven  How Does a Power Plant Work? coal.htmlcoal.html

9. Air Pollution Control  Low NO X burners for Nitrogen Oxides (NO X )  Good Combustion for Carbon Monoxide (CO)  Good Combustion - Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC)  Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) for (NO X )  Lime Injection for Sulfur Trioxide (SO 3 )  Fabric Filter Baghouse for Particulate Matter (PM)  Flue Gas Desulfurization (FGD) for Sulfur Dioxide (SO 2 )  Wet Electrostatic Precipitator (ESP) - Sulfuric Acid Mist  Plus Activated Carbon Injection (ACI) for Mercury (Hg)  All For Control of Fine PM, Visibility, Ozone/Smog

10. Air Pollution Control Equipment >2500 °F Flue Gas Coal & Air Stack SCR (NO X ) Ammonia Fan Lime Reagent SO 3 Boiler Wet FGD (SO 2 ) Wet ESP Fine PM SAMist Fabric Filter (PM) Fly Ash Gypsum Fabric Filter PM NO X VOC SO 2 CO Hg ACI (Hg)  90% Hg Removal  95% Hg Removal Combustion Controls

11. Key Emission Limits Pulverized Coal* * Assuming a new 1,960 megawatts (net) Pulverized Coal Plant. New Plant efficiency = 1.2 x Old Plant ** There were no Hg Standards in 1977 Permits. Actual Control was minimal. Plant Vintage1977 Permits for PC Plant2007 Proposed GPP Limits RuleNew Source Performance StandardBest Available Control Technology ControlsCombustion Controls (CC), ESPCC, SCR, ACI, Fabric, FGD, ESP UnitsLb/MMBtuTons/YearLb/MMBtuTons/Year SO 2 1.20108,0000.043,050 NO X 0.7063,0000.053,830 PM (filterable) 0.1011,8000.0131,285 CONo Limit 0.1511,450 SAMistNo Limit 0.004305 VOCNo Limit 0.0034260 FluoridesNo Limit 0.0002318 Hg**~100x10 -6 lb/MWH ~1,500 pounds9.9x10 -6 lb/MWH 180 pounds Opacity20 Percent

12. Compliance Monitoring  Continuous Emissions Monitoring Systems (CEMS)  Hg-CEMS with Speciation to Determine Type of Hg  CEMS for NO X, CO and SO 2  Continuous Opacity Monitoring System (COMS)  Posting of CEMS/COMS Data on Public Access Site  Stack Testing for SAMist, VOC, Fluorides, PM  PM Surrogate for PM smaller than 10 microns (PM 10 ) Hg-CEMSMulti-pollutant Readout

13.  Includes, but not limited to: - Analysis of current air quality and an analysis of future air quality if facility is built. - In vicinity of the area and any National Parks, sensitive areas within about 180 miles.  Analysis must conclude that no National or State Ambient Air Quality Standards will be violated as a result of the proposed project. Ambient Air Quality Analysis

14. Existing Air Quality  The State of Florida is in attainment for all criteria pollutants including SO 2, Ozone, NO X, PM/PM 10 and CO.  Existing air quality determined by monitors.  Located to characterize: - Background ambient air quality - Air quality in populated areas - Air quality at areas of greatest impact from industrial activities.

15. Monitoring Network  The State has an extensive monitoring network which includes over 200 monitors, 34 counties.  Exceeds number of monitors required by the EPA  Not all towns or communities have ambient monitors; however, because ambient air quality is monitored throughout the State and represent air quality on urban, micro, middle, neighborhood and regional scales, monitors located in similar areas can be used to predict ambient impacts.

16. What about Cane Burning?  Sugar Cane Burning produces Particulate Matter.  PM Standards are based on 24-hour average, in place to protect public health.  Fields that burn in 15-20 minutes have minimal effect on 24-hour average concentrations.  The closest PM 10 monitor is in Belle Glade.  Belle Glade is in county with most burning and is in compliance with Standards.  PM monitor in Moore Haven (2003-04) met Air Quality Standards as well.

17. How Will the Air I Breathe Change if Glades Power Plant is Constructed?  Air Quality Computer Modeling is used to predict Glades Power Park worst-case impacts for SO 2, NOx, PM/PM 10 and CO.  These results, or pollutant concentrations, are compared to thresholds or levels for which either more modeling is required and/or monitoring is required upon construction.  If more modeling is required, other stationary sources of pollution are included in the model.

18. Modeling Results for Plant Vicinity  CO, 3-hour and Annual SO2, Annual PM 10 and NOx modeled concentrations were low and did not require additional modeling for the vicinity of the proposed project.  Additional modeling was required for 24-hour SO2 and 24-hour PM 10.  Emissions from other sources were then compared to the background air quality and air quality standards. To ensure SO2 background data is most conservative – all state monitors were used for the background. Highest 24-hour State-wide SO 2 2004 – 30% below 2005 – 60% below 2006 - 30% below

19. Modeling Results - Plant Vicinity PollutantModel Results BackgroundTotalAmbient Air Standard Sulfur Dioxide 24 hour 16.526 (Close Monitor) 166 (Highest 2006) 41 183 260 PM 10 24 Hour 5.8736 Moore Haven 38 Belle Glade 42 44 150 *All values in units of micrograms per cubic meter

20. National Parks, Sensitive Areas  The National Park Service is currently reviewing predicted worst-case impacts to the Everglades, Chassahowitzka, Big Cypress and Biscayne.  This includes a review of mercury, deposition and visibility impacts.  The National Park Service will determine whether the Glades Power Park will have an adverse impact on the Everglades and Chassahowitzka.

21. Monitoring  If Glades Power Park is permitted: –an ambient monitor within 1.5 miles from stack will be required measuring Ozone, PM/PM 10, SO 2, NO 2 and Mercury; –an ambient monitor in Moore Haven will be required measuring Fine Particulate; –continuous emissions monitoring at the stack will be required measuring Mercury (including all forms), Opacity, NO X, CO, SO 2

22. Conclusion  The application is still under review for completeness and a final conclusion has not been reached at this time.  The Department continues to review the application in accordance with its rules.