German Companies in the Valley Region Map 69
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
GAO-17-343, Accessible Version, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters March 2017 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Actions Needed to Better Communicate Debt Reduction Plans and Address Billions in Unfunded Pension Liabilities Accessible Version GAO-17-343 March 2017 TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Actions Needed to Better Communicate Debt Reduction Plans and Address Billions in Unfunded Pension Liabilities Highlights of GAO-17-343, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found To meet its goal to reduce debt by about $4 billion—from about $26 billion in TVA, the nation's largest public power fiscal year 2016 to about $22 billion by fiscal year 2023—the Tennessee Valley provider, is a federal electric utility with revenues of about $10.6 billion in fiscal Authority (TVA) plans to increase rates, limit the growth of operating expenses, year 2016. TVA’s mission is to provide and reduce capital expenditures. For example, TVA increased rates each fiscal affordable electricity, manage river year from 2014 through 2017 and was able to reduce operating and maintenance systems, and promote economic costs by about 18 percent from fiscal year 2013 to 2016. TVA’s plans depend on development. TVA provides electricity assumptions that future capital projects will be completed on time and within to more than 9 million customers in the budget, but TVA’s estimated capital costs may be optimistic and could increase. southeastern United States. TVA must TVA’s debt reduction plans and performance information are not reported in a finance its assets with debt and manner consistent with the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010. -
A Letter from Our President
2020 Annual Edition 2020 Board of Directors A Letter from Our President Sally Barr, President In 2009, I was asked to run leaking pits at the Gallatin Fossil Plant Jessie Beckett, Vice President TSRA’s Canoe and Kayak School. I marked a huge win in the protection of Vincent Finamore, Secretary was completely unaware of the huge our waterways. task ahead of me. I vividly remember The TSRA family lost long time Deborah Gilbertson, Treasurer my first visit to a board meeting to member, kayak instructor and good Melissa Boaz share how the school was shaping up. friend Craig Burr in 2019. Those of us Daniel Boone I found myself surrounded by amazing who knew Craig will never forget this man people who were carrying on the long of few words and will always remember David Cole history of addressing environmental his ability to instruct and guide someone Vinson Dill issues, leading conservation efforts and down the river with the simplest of Jon Doliana, Sr. volunteering many hours to instruct in directions. You knew you were in good Katherine Fulk paddling skills and rescue techniques. hands when you paddled with Craig. Little did I know I was embarking on such I am excited about working with Stacee Irwin a rewarding personal venture. the 2020 Board of Directors, TSRA Steve Morris I find myself, again, in a situation in members, volunteers and sponsors Ginger Royster which I have agreed to take on a huge to keep TSRA moving forward and task. But this time, I am aware of the work maintaining our mission to preserve, Donnie Safer ahead of me. -
Seismic Response Report. All of the Walkdown Team Members Successfully Completed the EPRI Developed Training on NTTF Recommendation 2.3 - Seismic Walkdown Guidance
ENCLOSURE 2 SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT 2 FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC RESPONSE REPORT SEQUOYAH NUCLEAR PLANT - UNIT 1 FUKUSHIMA NEAR-TERM TASK FORCE RECOMMENDATION 2.3: SEISMIC RESPONSE REPORT 12-November-2012 WorleyParsons 633 Chestnut St. Suite 400 Chattanooga TN, 37450 Tel: 423-757-8020 Fax: 423-757-5869 www.worleyparsons.com WorleyParsons Services Pty Ltd ABN 61 001 279 812 © Copyright 2012 WorleyParsons Services Pty Ltd NTTF Recommendation 2.3: Seismic Response Report Sequoyah Unit 1 REV DESCRIPTION ORIG REVIEW WORLEY- DATE CLIENT DATE PARSONS APPROVAL APPROVAL O SQN Unit 1 Seismic 12-Nov-12 ii12 12. Walkdown Report TSimmersSP.ork E/J.Edgar Page 2 of 438 Ei I NTTF Recommendation 2.3: Seismic Response Report Sequoyah Unit 1 Table of Contents 1. Executive Sum m ary ............................................................................................................ 4 2. Seism ic Licensing Basis ..................................................................................................... 5 2.1. General Plant Description ............................................................................................ 5 2.2. G round Response Spectra ............................................................................................. 5 2.3. Structures ............................................................................................................................ 7 2.4. Equipm ent ......................................................................................................................... -
Gallatin Fossil Plant Bottom Ash Process Dewatering Facility Permanent Flow Management System Final Supplemental Environmental Assessment
Document Type: Supplemental EA- Administrative Record Index Field: Environmental Assessment Project Name: Bottom Ash Process Dewatering Facility SEA – Permanent Flow Management System Project Number: 2018-25 GALLATIN FOSSIL PLANT BOTTOM ASH PROCESS DEWATERING FACILITY PERMANENT FLOW MANAGEMENT SYSTEM FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Sumner County, Tennessee Prepared by: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Chattanooga, Tennessee December 2019 To request further information, contact: Ashley R. Farless, PE, AICP NEPA Compliance Tennessee Valley Authority 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402 E-mail: [email protected] This page intentionally left blank Table of Contents Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 - PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ......................................................... 1-1 1.1 Introduction and Background ......................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 Purpose and Need ......................................................................................................... 1-4 1.3 Decision to be Made ...................................................................................................... 1-4 1.4 Related Environmental Reviews and Consultation Requirements ................................. 1-4 1.5 Scope of this Analysis .................................................................................................... 1-4 1.6 Public and Agency Involvement ..................................................................................... 1-5 1.7 Necessary -
TVA Labor Relation Supplements
Revised 01-31-2013 PROJECT AGREEMENT LABOR RELATIONS SUPPLEMENTS (LRSs not listed have been deleted) Number Subject Page LRS-2 Arbitrator Limitation Relative to Jurisdictional Issues ................................................................ 1 LRS-3 Call-By-Name ............................................................................................................................. 2 LRS-4 Staffing - Contractor vs. TVA ..................................................................................................... 3 LRS-5 Wage Determination .................................................................................................................. 4 LRS-16 Apprenticeship Programs ........................................................................................................... 5 LRS-17 Defined Incidental Work, Maintenance, & Office Work .............................................................. 8 LRS-21 Certified Apprenticeship Programs Approved to Receive Contributions From Contractors .... 11 LRS-24 Project Agreement Rates of Pay .............................................................................................. 13 LRS-25 Foremen Rates of Pay (Supervising Other Crafts) .................................................................. 14 LRS-26 Definition of First, Second, and Third Shifts (replaced 8/3/99 with Interpretation No. 21) ....... 15 LRS-27 Payroll Deductions for Political Action Committees ................................................................. 16 LRS-32 Injury - Pay -
Paddler's Guide to Civil War Sites on the Water
Southeast Tennessee Paddler’s Guide to Civil War Sites on the Water If Rivers Could Speak... Chattanooga: Gateway to the Deep South nion and Confederate troops moved into Southeast Tennessee and North Georgia in the fall of 1863 after the Uinconclusive Battle of Stones River in Murfreesboro, Tenn. Both armies sought to capture Chattanooga, a city known as “The Gateway to the Deep South” due to its location along the he Tennessee River – one of North America’s great rivers – Tennessee River and its railroad access. President Abraham winds for miles through Southeast Tennessee, its volume Lincoln compared the importance of a Union victory in Tfortified by gushing creeks that tumble down the mountains Chattanooga to Richmond, Virginia - the capital of the into the Tennessee Valley. Throughout time, this river has Confederacy - because of its strategic location on the banks of witnessed humanity at its best and worst. the river. The name “Tennessee” comes from the Native American word There was a serious drought taking place in Southeast Tennessee “Tanasi,” and native people paddled the Tennessee River and in 1863, so water was a precious resource for soldiers. As troops its tributaries in dugout canoes for thousands of years. They strategized and moved through the region, the Tennessee River fished, bathed, drank and traveled these waters, which held and its tributaries served critical roles as both protective barriers dangers like whirlpools, rapids and eddies. Later, the river was and transportation routes for attacks. a thrilling danger for early settlers who launched out for a fresh The two most notorious battles that took place in the region start in flatboats. -
Guntersville Reservoir
GUNTERSVILLE RESERVOIR Final Environmental Impact Statement and Reservoir Land Management Plan Volume I SEPTEMBER 2001 This page intentionally left blank Document Type: EA-Administrative Record Index Field: White Paper Project Name: Deeded Land Use Rights Project Number: 2009-57 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT RECOGNITION OF DEEDED ACCESS RIGHTS IN THREE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY RESERVOIR LAND MANAGEMENT PLANS Guntersville Reservoir, Alabama; Norris Reservoir, Tennessee; and Pickwick Reservoir, Alabama PREPARED BY: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY MARCH 2010 Prepared by: Richard L. Toennisson NEPA Compliance Tennessee Valley Authority 400 West Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Phone: 865-632-8517 Fax: 865-632-3451 E-mail: [email protected] Page intentionally blank ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT RECOGNITION OF DEEDED ACCESS RIGHTS IN THREE TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY RESERVOIR LAND MANANAGEMENT PLANS GUNTERSVILLE RESERVOIR, ALABAMA; NORRIS RESERVOIR, TENNESSEE; AND PICKWICK RESERVOIR, ALABAMA TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY MARCH 2010 Issue The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) uses a land planning process to allocate individual parcels on its reservoir lands to one of six land use zones. After approval of a reservoir land management plan (LMP) by the TVA Board of Directors (TVA Board), all future uses of TVA lands on that reservoir must then be consistent with the allocations within that LMP. TVA’s Land Policy (TVA 2006) states that TVA may consider changing a land use designation outside of the normal planning process only for the purposes of providing water access for industrial or commercial recreation operations on privately owned back-lying land or to implement TVA’s Shoreline Management Policy (SMP). A change in allocation of any parcel is subject to approval by the TVA Board or its designee. -
Tennessee River Blueway Information
About the Tennessee River Blueway Formed by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in the 1930’s, and designated as a river trail in 2002, the Tennessee River Blueway flows through Chattanooga and the Tennessee River Gorge for 50 miles, from Chickamauga Dam to Nickajack Dam. It provides opportunities for canoeists and kayakers to take day trips, or camp overnight in marinas, parks, or in one of five designated primitive sites. Just a few miles downstream from Chickamauga Dam, downtown Chattanooga offers accessible riverfront amenities on both shores. Paddlers can visit public parks and plazas, restaurants and coffee shops, galleries and museums, and attractions. Natural and man made features to be seen from the water include the restored 19th century Walnut Street Pedestrian Bridge, the Chief John Ross (Market Street) Bridge, Maclellan Island, the Museum Bluffs, and the Passage at Ross’ Landing. From Chattanooga, the Blueway winds around the Moccasin Bend National Archaeological District and historic Williams Island, then past Suck Creek to the Tennessee River Gorge Trust’s Pot Point House. The 1835 hand- hewed log cabin was restored in 1993. It was originally built with recycled logs taken from a flat boat that wrecked at the "The Boiling Pot,” formerly the most treacherous rapids in the Gorge. Nearby are Prentice Cooper State Forest and the TVA Raccoon Mountain Pump Storage Facility, which holds water for hydro-electric power generation. Atop the mountain is a man-made reservoir created by an impressive 230-foot-high, 8,500 foot-long dam. A visitors center, picnic facilities, and a network of trails around the reservoir offer recreation for hikers and mountain bikers. -
TVA's Toxic Legacy
TVA’s Toxic Legacy: Groundwater Contaminated by Tennessee Valley Authority Coal Ash November 2013 About the Environmental Integrity Project The Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to the enforcement of the nation’s anti-pollution laws and to the prevention of political interference with those laws. EIP provides objective analysis of how the failure to enforce or implement environmental laws increases pollution and harms public health, and helps local communities obtain the protection of environmental laws. Data Limitations EIP based its analysis of groundwater quality on publicly available data retrieved from the Tennessee Valley Authority through Freedom of Information Act Requests. The amount of information available, and the date of the most recent information available, varies by site. The range of dates for which we had information on file is described in each site-specific section of the report. EIP is committed to ensuring that the data we present are as accurate as possible. We will correct any errors that are verifiable. Questions and comments can be directed to Abel Russ at [email protected] Environmental Integrity Project – DC Office 1000 Vermont Avenue NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20005 Phone (202) 296-8800 • Fax (202) 296-8822 2 Executive Summary The billion-gallon spill at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s (TVA’s) Kingston plant in 2008 reminded us that unregulated and poorly maintained coal ash ponds are an invitation to disaster. Although less visible, contamination below the surface of TVA’s power plants may be the more serious, long-lasting legacy from decades of mismanagement. Based on a review of documents obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests, this report shows that TVA’s ponds and landfills have contaminated groundwater under and around all eleven of the utility’s fleet of coal-fired power plants. -
Gallatin Fossil Plant
Memorandum from the Office of the Inspector General October 15, 2018 William G. Maiden, GFP 1A-GLT REQUEST FOR FINAL ACTION – EVALUATION 2018-15535 – ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS – GALLATIN FOSSIL PLANT Attached is the subject final report for your review and final action. Your written comments, which addressed your management decision and actions planned or taken, have been included in the report. Please notify us when final action is complete. In accordance with the Inspector General Act of 1978, as amended, the Office of the Inspector General is required to report to Congress semiannually regarding evaluations that remain unresolved after 6 months from the date of report issuance. If you have any questions or wish to discuss our findings, please contact Jamie M. Wykle, Senior Auditor, at (865) 633-7382 or Lisa H. Hammer, Director, Evaluations – Organizational Effectiveness, at (865) 633-7342. We appreciate the courtesy and cooperation received from your staff during the evaluation. David P. Wheeler Assistant Inspector General (Audits and Evaluations) WT 2C-K JMW:KDS Attachment cc (Attachment): TVA Board of Directors Janet J. Brewer, WT 7C-K Susan E. Collins, LP 6A-C Sean M. Connors, LP 2K-C Robertson D. Dickens, WT 9C-K Megan T. Flynn, LP 3A-C William D. Johnson, WT 7B-K Dwain K. Lanier, MR 6D-C Justin C. Maierhofer, WT 7B-K Jill M. Matthews, WT 2C-K Sherry A. Quirk, WT 7C-K Curtis G. Rodenhaber, CUF- 1A-CCT Wilson Taylor III, WT 7D-K Jacinda B. Woodward, BR 4D-C OIG File No. 2018-15535 Office of the Inspector General Evaluation Report To the Plant Manager, Gallatin Fossil Plant ORGANIZATIONAL EFFECTIVENESS – GALLATIN FOSSIL PLANT Evaluation Team Evaluation 2018-15535 Jamie M. -
Djvu Document
IIYDROMETEOROLOGICAL REPORT NO •. 47·· Meteorological Criteria For Extreme Floods For Four Basins in the Tennessee and Cumberland River Watersheds U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NATIONAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Silver Spring, Md. May 1978 HYDROMETEOROLOGICAL REPORTS *No. 1. Maximum po>~sible precipitation over the Ompompanoosuc Basin above Union Village, Vt. 1943. *No. 2. Maximum pos."'ible precipitation over the Ohio River B&~~in above Pittsburgh, Pa. 1942. *No. 3. Maximum pos>~iblc precipitation over the Sacramento Basin of California. 1943. *No. 4. Maximum possible p~cipitation over the Panama Canal Basin. 1943. *No. 5. Thunderstorm rainfall. 1947. *No. 6. A preliminar~· report on the probable occurrence of excessive precipitation over Fort Supply Basin, Okla. 1938. *No. 7. Worst probable meteorological condition on Mill Creek, Butler and Hamilton Counties, Ohio. 1937. (Unpub- li>~hcd.) Supplement, 1938. *No. H. A h~·dromctcorological anal~·>~is of possible maximum precipitation over St. Francis River Basin above Wappa pello, Mo. 1938. *No. 9. A report on the p011sible occurrence of maximum precipitation over White River Basin above Mud Mountain Dam site, Wash. 1939. *No. 10. :\laximum pos>~ible rainfall over the Arkansas River H&~~in above Caddoa, Colo. 1939. Supplement, 1939. *No. 11. A preliminary report on the maximum pos>~ible precipitation over the Dorena,.Cottage Grove, and Fern Ridge Basins in the Willamette Basin, Oreg. 1939. *No. 12. Maximum possible precipitation over the Red River Basin above Denison, Tex. 1939. *No. 13. A report on the maximum possible precipitation over Cherry Creek Basin in Colorado. 1940. · *No. 14. The frequency of flood-producing rainfall over the Pajaro River Basin in California. -
Tennessee Estimated Mercury Emissions from Coal-Burning Power Plants
Tennessee estimated mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants. Estimated* Estimated** Total Mercury Mercury Released Air Pollution Plant Parent Company City 1998 (pounds) 1998 (pounds) Kingston Fossil Plant Tennessee Valley Authority Harriman, TN 840 525 Johnsonville Fossil Plant Tennessee Valley Authority New Johnsonville, 801 506 Cumberland Fossil Plant‡ Tennessee Valley Authority Cumberland City, TN 1,352 491 Gallatin Fossil Plant Tennessee Valley Authority Gallatin, TN 634 396 Bull Run Fossil Plant‡ Tennessee Valley Authority Clinton, TN 496 310 John Sevier Fossil Plant‡ Tennessee Valley Authority Rogersville, TN 300 187 Allen Fossil Plant‡ Tennessee Valley Authority Memphis, TN 204 129 State Total 4,630 2,548 * Estimated coal in mercury is calculated using plant specific coal contamination and coal consumption data. Release includes disposal in ponds and landfills as well as reuse applications such as fertilizer. ** Total stack emissions are calculated by applying total mercury released to plant specific emission modification factors. See Appendix A. ‡ Indicates plants that are under investigation by either U.S. EPA/Department of Justice or the State of New York Attorney General's Office for violations of the Clean Air Act. NRDC and a coalition of midwest groups have also served notice on many of these plants. N/A - Plants listed with N/A released mercury into the environment, however, insufficient data precludes estimation of mercury emissions from these plants. Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from U.S. Department of Energy and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency databases. Plant ownership is attributed to the parent company of the plant operator as of January 1, 1999. The Environmental Working Group is a non-profit environmental research organization based in Washington, D.C.