Aviation Biofuels Infrastructure Final Report Prepared for: Prepared by: TABLE OF CONTENTS Background erms Used in This Report y Process tion Criteria tion Results Conceptual Infrastructure -Term/Small Volume Supply Transitioning to Long-Term/Large Volume Supply Infrastructure Needs and Conceptual Designs s Estimate of Probable Cost for All Sites and Options ted Timelines for All Sites and Options tegories and Scoring erm and Long-Term Options tegory 1: Multi-Modal Delivery Point Access (Long-Term Only) tegory 2: Environmental Constraints tegory 3: Permitting and Planning tegory 4: Site Development and Costs tegory 5: Community Acceptance tegory 6: Contingency and Other Scorecard Weightings Seattle-Tacoma International (Sea-Tac) Airport is an industry leader in reducing aircraft-related emissions. The Port of Seattle, Alaska Study Approach A multi-phase screening process consisting of the following steps was used to create and rene Screen to eliminate those candidate properties Evaluate a short list of six properties to identify existing infrastructure connections, current and future capacity requirements, and property The following three sites (and six options) were Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm 1A. Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm Small Volume 1B. Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm Small Volume (Future Infrastructure) Terminal 2A. Renton Terminal Small Volume – Receive Offsite-Blended Aviation Biofuel via Truck 2B. Renton Terminal – Receive Neat Biofuel Tesoro Anacortes Renery A small biofuel receiving and blending facility at the Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm is the most cost- effective solution in the short term and would local fuel receipt and storage capacity that is Tesoro Anacortes was used as a proxy for any of the three reneries that currently produce accommodate receipt and blending facilities for moderate-to-large biofuel volumes over the on smaller scale facilities that are exible and due to the lack of long-term supply source for source was not a part of this study. Facilities that rely on ofoading fuel via rail and marine modes are only cost-effective for large high infrastructure costs. and transport organizations could work cooperatively toward the ultimate goal of delivery system at Sea-Tac Airport. on a feasibility study to identify the best approach to deliver aviation biofuel to the Seattle-Tacoma (Sea-Tac) International Airport aircraft supply chain, Sea-Tac aims to become one of the rst airports in the world to offer a reliable supply of aviation biofuels to its passenger and receipt, blending, storage, and delivery infrastructure required to supply Sea-Tac with up to 50 million gallons per year of sustainable alternative aviation fuel (also referred to as aviation biofuel). Potential sites were evaluated both for the ability to accommodate near-term (12 to 18 months) supplies of 5 million gallons per year of per year. Sites were selected based on the capacity to accommodate and were evaluated based on land use, zoning, and environmental considerations. Site footprints were required to accommodate the Terms Used in This Report are used throughout this report: Study Process Screen to eliminate those candidate properties Evaluate a short list of six properties to identify existing infrastructure connections, current and future capacity requirements, and property ownership and zoning Aviation following criteria: Site size: 2 acres or more Site requirements: Load/ofoad rack, storage tanks, blending system, testing facility, administration, and parking Site use/zoning: Compatible with biofuel infrastructure Proximity to: Sea-Tac Airport, Olympic Pipeline or one of its When evaluating the proximity to the pipeline, it is important to note that the directional ow of the Olympic Pipeline is north-to- south. Two parallel main pipelines originate at the Allen pump station in Renton. The pipelines ow southward and carry gasoline, Table 1: Screening Results Sea-Tac International Airport Fuel Farm Yes Port-owned; direct delivery to aircraft after blending. Olympic Pipeline Renton Terminal Yes Combine two parcels into one site for consideration. Pipeline terminal parcel provides direct connection to Sea-Tac Airport delivery pipeline. Could be considered Screening the Initial Sites The screening criteria listed below were used as a framework to rene the initial list of 29 potential sites down to six. To assist with the evaluation, specic locations were identied for Proximity to Olympic Pipeline or Harbor Island Proximity to Sea-Tac Airport delivery line (directly serves Sea-Tac Airport) (pipe, rail, barge, truck) Existing zoning (i.e., is biofuel infrastructure a Presence of existing structures on the site (particularly those requiring demolition) Parcels/assembly requirements Other (e.g., security concerns, community perceptions, other notable facts) Not adjacent to rail line. Direct connection to Sea-Tac delivery pipeline would require infrastructure crossing other parcels. As described above, the six properties that were recommended to be carried forward into site evaluation are as follows: Sea-Tac International Airport Fuel Farm Terminal Boeing Renton Longacres Tukwila Longacres be selected from one of the following: BP Cherry Point Renery (Whatcom Tesoro Anacortes Renery (Skagit County) ultimately be selected from one of the following and/or nearby properties: Equiva/Shell Tank Farm (Site 16) BP Tank Farm (Site 17) Kinder Morgan (Site 18) * This site was added as an alternative to the Boeing Renton Longacres site Originally, two sites for a marine access location were considered for the sixth option: Harbor Island and the Port of Tacoma. For the selection Harbor Island terminal was deemed preferable to the Port of Tacoma alternatives due to the Port of Seattle’s greater inuence over and ownership of Additionally, sites located to the south of Sea- Tac Airport are downstream of the Olympic biofuel site with existing infrastructure and close proximity to the pipeline. The Harbor Island site also has the potential to add fuel supply resilience and provide a contingency supply if pipeline operations were disrupted north of Seattle. 101 405 90 90 SEATTLE-TACOMA INT'L AIRPORT BOEING FIELD/KING COUNTY INT'L AIRPORT AUBURN MUNICIPAL AIRPORT PAINE FIELD-SNOHOMISH COUNTY AIRPORT HARVEY AIRFIELD FRIDAY HARBOR AIRPORT BELLINGHAM INT'L AIRPORT Potential sites 2 through 15 PORT OF BELLINGHAM PORT OF ANACORTES PORT OF EVERETT PORT OF TACOMA PORT OF SEATTLE mi DRAFT Date: 8/26/2016 Puget Sound Lake Washington Strait of Juan de Fuca Strait of Georgia USA CANADA CANADA USA * Barge terminals are located at all deep water marine ports shown on this map (WSDOT, http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/Freight/Marine.htm). Aviation Biofuels Infrastructure Feasibility Study Base Map Potential Sites Incorporated Cities (Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, King and Pierce Counties) Industrial Areas Major Roads (National) Major Roads (State) Deep Water Marine Port* Airport (FAA Class Primary or Reliever) Active Rail Olympic Pipeline Olympic Pipeline, Delivery Line Additional potential site (29) in Tri-Cities Additional potential site (28) in Grey's Harbor ¨ FRIDAY HARBOR AIRPORT BELLINGHAM INT'L AIRPORT 26 24 23 25 27 PORT OF BELLINGHAM PORT OF ANACORTES 03.57 1.75 mi USA CANADA * Barge terminals are located at all deep water marine ports on these maps (WSDOT, http://www.wsdot.wa. gov/Freight/Marine.htm). Sources: Port of Seattle, 2016 (Pipeline); WA UTC, 2016 (Pipeline); WSDOT, 2012 (Rail), 2015 (State Routes) & 2016 (Deep Water Marine Ports & City Boundaries). Industrial areas include PSRC MICs (2005); WA State Dept. of Ecology 2010 existing state-wide airc raft transportation uses (land use code 43) & manufacturing uses in Skagit & Whatcom Counties (land use codes 20-36, 39); the South Tacoma MIC (Tacoma, 2015); King County Industrial/Mfg. Consolidated Zoning in the cities of Auburn, Renton, Kent, Tukwila, Algona & Pacific (2014); & industrial zoning in Everett (2015; M-1, M-2, M-S, C-2), Snohomish County (2016; HI, IP, LI), Skagit County (2016; AVR, AVR-L, BR-HI, BR-LI), Whatcom County (2016; HII, LII, GM, GI, RIM, AO) & Bellingham (2012; AO, C/I, C/I/RM, GI, HII, I, I/RM, LII). DRAFT Date: 9/13/2016 Aviation Biofuels Infrastructure Feasibility Study Base Map Details Potential Sites Incorporated Cities (Whatcom, Skagit, Snohomish, King and Pierce Counties) Industrial Areas Major Roads (National) Major Roads (State) Deep Water Marine Port* Airport (FAA Class Primary or Reliever) Active Rail Olympic Pipeline Olympic Pipeline, Delivery Line 101 405 90 SW GRADY WAY ST ANDOVER PARK E SW 16TH ST LIND AVE SW OAKESDALE 405 15 10 11 12 13 14 06501,300 325 Feet 705 19 20 22 21 PORT OF TACOMA 00.51 0.25 mi 13TH AVE SW UTAH AVE S COLORADO AVE S ALASKAN WAY VIADUCT 16TH AVE SW E MARGINAL WAY S 18 PORT OF SEATTLE 16 17 06501,300 325 Feet Commencement Bay Puget Sound Strait of Georgia North-end Detail Port of Tacoma Detail Renton-Tukwila Detail Harbor Island Detail North-end Harbor Island Renton-Tukwila Port of Tacoma The six most feasible properties identied in Section 2.1 were further The following additional criteria were used to Availability to lease or purchase site based on communications with property owners Land use regulations affecting the property Permitting and development requirements Long-range plans for the site (if different from current land use regulations) Legal constraints related to adding additional fueling infrastructure Site suitability for desired infrastructure for Existing infrastructure Infrastructure changes required (including access infrastructure) The six sites were evaluated using the criteria ndings is presented in Table 2. layouts and concepts for improvements at each Table 2: Summary of Findings Availability to Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm Currently owned by Port of Seattle; leased to Sea-Tac Fuel, LLC Zoned for Aviation Operations; limited land available Needs, Design and Cost As a result of the site evaluation described in Section 3, the following three sites were selected for conceptual design and cost estimating: (1) Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm (2) Phillips 66/Olympic Pipeline Renton Terminal (3) Tesoro Anacortes Renery (as a proxy for any of three reneries) solutions were developed at those sites where feasible, resulting in (1A) Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm Small Volume – Existing Roadway (1B) Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm Small Volume – SR 509 Connector (Future Infrastructure) (2A) Renton Terminal Small Volume – Receive Offsite-Blended Aviation Biofuel via Truck Near-Term/Small Volume Supply Transitioning to Long-Term/Large Volume Options were identied that could feasibly provide the ground for the development of a larger facility to support future, long-term, large volume supply Table 3 summarizes the maximum capacity (i.e., annual throughput in gallons/year), of neat (i.e., 100 percent) biofuel for the three identied sites proposed infrastructure can support. The volume the blend of biofuel that can be delivered to the as the truck or rail ofoading capacity, receiving and blending tank capacity, and the amount of Sea-Tac Fuel Farm Small Volume – Existing Roadway Sea-Tac Fuel Farm Small Volume – SR 509 Connector Renton – Receive aviation biofuel via truck Infrastructure Needs and Site 1: Sea-Tac Airport Fuel Farm Site Option 1A – Integrate Infrastructure with Existing Tanks and Roadways The proposed facility at Sea-Tac Airport would serve as a near-term facility to support up to would be delivered to the facility via truck and Marine Port Delivery Line not by the project. The site improvements that fuel trucks to enter and exit the facility from the proposed connector road with limited roadway modications. If the connector road is constructed rst, the costs presented for Option 1B include biofuel receipt and storage system. Infrastructure Requirements to Support Near-Term On-Site Blending Initial calculations show one new dual-arm ofoad (14,000 gallon capacity). It is recommended to install a second ofoad rack for redundancy. The biofuel ofoad rack could also provide Sea-Tac Required infrastructure: Civil roadwork for site access separator ofoading skids (1) 100,000 gallon vertical aboveground storage tank – eld erected (1) 500,000 gallon vertical aboveground storage tank – eld erected Earthen berm surrounding the two new tanks to provide containment controls system Property already owned by the Port of Seattle Provides direct access to airport hydrant Lower capital costs would be required for this improvement Sea-Tac Airport has very limited land for Plan is currently being developed and identies The desire to limit the number of fuel transport trucks on the roadways around the airport minimize the environmental impact of the truck trafc and truck emissions, but the property gallons annually. The future South Access Expressway impacts a portion of the site currently available for expansion. There are likely to be grade changes with the development of the connector road nor will it likely be available in the future. recongured to support the truck ofoading Marine Port Delivery Line Renton Terminal Site Terminal sites are immediately adjacent to each parcels is considered Site 2. The Olympic Pipeline passes through the northern portion of the site and serves the Phillips 66 tanks at the southern As a single tank, Tank 3 is used for both receipt conformance, it would be quarantined from future receipt until the fuel could be transferred through the delivery pipeline to Sea-Tac Airport. This ofoading skid at existing truck ofoading controls system The site provides direct access to the Sea-Tac Aviation biofuel storage could be managed by Phillips 66, reducing ownership and operational risk for the Port of Seattle or external parties. Phillips 66 has an existing ofoad position day. have expressed positive interest during initial Requires aviation biofuel be delivered to site via truck and blending to occur offsite by others, which shifts the cost burden to the fuel contractor. These costs are not reected in the cost estimate as they are unknown, but could Requires modications to the existing pipeline Requires ownership and/or long-term lease pad to transfer fuel from tank to tank controls system The site provides direct access to the Sea-Tac Aviation biofuel storage could be managed by Phillips 66, reducing ownership and operational risk for the Port of Seattle or external parties. Phillips 66 is not directly associated with any of the three companies currently supplying The site provides space for installation of pipeline infrastructure. Phillips 66 has an existing ofoad position day or 196,000 gallons of neat biofuel per day. would require API gravity tests prior to use for have expressed positive interest during initial Requires modications to the existing Olympic A source of aviation biofuel would be required annually into the facility. The fuel could be delivered via rail or barge to an alternate facility pipeline transfer to occur from this site. The cost of this additional infrastructure has not Western (undeveloped) portion of the site is Requires ownership and/or long-term lease of neat biofuel could be supplied annually. This could be increased if the turnaround time of the rail deliveries could be reduced. The constraint would then be the ability to receive enough (16) 400 gpm ofoading pump skids at each rail controls system The site provides direct access to the Sea-Tac Phillips 66 is not directly associated with any of the three companies currently supplying The site provides space for installation of pipeline infrastructure. Rail spur (approximately 0.8 mile) from BNSF mainline allows delivery direct to site without having to receive elsewhere via rail or barge have expressed positive interest during initial Western (undeveloped) portion of the site is Requires ownership and/or long-term lease Marine Port Delivery Line Site 3: Tesoro Renery Site (proxy for any of three reneries) The third site reviewed would consolidate the blending process upstream at the renery. This analysis examined the available infrastructure at the Tesoro Renery located in Anacortes on the Olympic Pipeline. This renery is one of three, in addition to BP and Shell, that currently Upgrades to marine facility to allow for barge ofoading of neat biofuel Upgrades to rail ofoading facility to allow for ofoading of neat biofuel (1) 90,000 bbl API 650 storage tank for receipt controls system Although the focus is on the Tesoro renery for this analysis, in theory multiple reneries, or all three reneries, could develop similar infrastructure allowing multiple receipt options Although there is uncertainty over ownership and operational structure, the current assumption is that Tesoro would continue to own and operate the facility where the additional infrastructure is constructed with Tesoro (along with the other two reners) have There is a direct link to the BNSF mainline with crude ofoading facilities. Current capacity modication would be required to add a neat biofuel ofoad facility. There is a direct link to marine ofoading Tesoro Anacortes Wharf has one 16-inch Truck ofoad and rack facilities are available at all three reneries. The reneries are the current producers of The site provides direct access to the Olympic Pipeline through the main 20-inch product all rened products and a parallel 16-inch product pipeline that provides rened products Sea-Tac Airport. No downstream infrastructure modications would be required. The potential exists for Portland International Airport to benet from this investment and receive aviation biofuel from the Olympic Approval is required to feed a new product (aviation biofuel) directly into the main Olympic Selecting a single renery for storage and blending could result in much higher blends of rener(s) could result in high cost escalation rener(s) to stop storing and blending aviation biofuel if appropriate restrictions are not Leaving ownership to the rener results in no control of the operations or availability of the fuel and blending process. Co-locating the biofuel storage at the reneries and using the pipeline as the sole source of delivery does not alleviate concerns related to Engineer’s Estimate of Probable Cost for All Sites Table 4 summarizes the engineer’s estimate of probable cost for infrastructure for each of Sea-Tac Airport Small Volume – Existing Roadway Sea-Tac Airport Small Volume – SR 509 Connector Renton – Receive aviation Renton – Receive neat Note: the costs for Options 2A, 2B, and 2C build on top of each other (i.e., Option 2B assumes 2A is already in place, and Option 2C assumes that 2A and 2B are already in place). Aviation Biofuels Infrastructure Feasibility Study Table 5: Estimated Timeline Estimated Time Until Sea-Tac Fuel Farm Small Volume – Existing Roadway Sea-Tac Fuel Farm Small Volume – SR 509 Connector Renton – Receive aviation biofuel via truck Table 5 provides the estimated time required infrastructure to allow for operation of the site for Aviation Biofuel Feasibility Study