Final Environmental Statement Related to the Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2,” Dated April 1995 (1995 SFES-OL-1)
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Site Characteristics
Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report SECTION 2.2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 2.2 Nearby Industrial, Transportation, and Military Facilities .............................. 2.2-1 2.2.1 Locations and Routes ................................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.2 Descriptions .................................................................................. 2.2-3 2.2.2.1 Descriptions of Facilities ............................................ 2.2-3 2.2.2.2 Description of Products and Materials ....................... 2.2-3 2.2.2.3 Description of Pipelines ............................................. 2.2-6 2.2.2.4 Description of Waterways .......................................... 2.2-6 2.2.2.5 Description of Highways ............................................ 2.2-7 2.2.2.6 Description of Railroads ............................................. 2.2-8 2.2.2.7 Description of Airports, Aircraft, and Airway Hazards ..................................................................... 2.2-8 2.2.2.8 Projections of Industrial Growth .............................. 2.2-11 2.2.3 Evaluation of Potential Accidents ............................................... 2.2-12 2.2.3.1 Determination of Potential Accidents ....................... 2.2-12 2.2.3.2 Effects of Design-Basis Events ................................ 2.2-29 2.2.4 References ................................................................................. 2.2-29 2.2-i Revision 0 Clinch River Nuclear Site -
Tennessee River and Tributaries Commerical River Terminals
TENNESSEE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES COMMERICAL RIVER TERMINALS MILES OWNER OR TYPE OF MECHANICAL RAIL ABOVE LOCATION SHELTER REMARKS OPERATOR FREIGHT APPLIANCES CONNECTIONS MOUTH TENNESSEE RIVER Permanently moored Office 0.1 L Paducah, KY Ingram Barge Co. None dock barge and marine None Towing Company Building ways 0.2 L Paducah, KY Paducah Scrap Inactive None Floating portable crane CSX James Marine Shopboat; 0.5 L Paducah, KY Fuel Incline ramp to dock None Service to floating craft Midstream Service Warehouse Boat office and storage 0.5 L Paducah, KY MG Transport Service None None None barge Shopboat; 0.8 L Paducah, KY Paducah River Service Fuel Dry Dock None Midstream fueling service Warehouse Petroleum Storage CSX & IC 1.1 L Paducah, KY Trans-Montaigne, Inc Pipelines with boom One steel dolphin Products tanks Railroad Petroleum CSX & IC 1.1 L Paducah, KY Gulf Oil Co (ITAPCO) Pipelines Two cell & one cell dolphin Products Railroad 1.2 L Paducah, KY James Diesel Service None Shopboat Dry Dock None Barge and towboat repair Lone Star Industries, 1.3 L Paducah, KY Bulk cement Silos Pipeline & crane CSX Four mooring cells Inc Paducah McCracken Boat office and storage 1.4 L Paducah, KY Misc. freight Shopboat None County River Port barge Petroleum 1.5 L Paducah, KY Trans-Montaigne, Inc Pipelines Two dolphins Products Boat office and storage 1.8 L Paducah, KY Bluegrass Marine None None None Towing Company barge Paducah McCracken 2.1 L Paducah, KY Sand & gravel Warehouse Conveyor & crane IC Railroad County River Port R: Right Decending Bank L: Left Decending Bank SHEET A-1 TENNESSEE RIVER AND TRIBUTARIES COMMERICAL RIVER TERMINALS MILES ABOVE OWNER OR TYPE OF MECHANICAL RAIL LOCATION SHELTER REMARKS MOUTH OPERATOR FREIGHT APPLIANCES CONNECTIONS Consolidated Grain 2.4 L Paducah, KY Grain None Cover Conveyor P&L & Barge Co. -
Reporting Requirements Under the Inspector General Act
1 TVA Power Generation and Purchased Power Six Months Ended March 31, 2017 (in millions of kilowatt hours) Purchased power Natural gas (non-renewable) and/or oil-fired • Coal-fired - 18,264 Purchased power 1 Hydroelectric (renewable) • Nuclear - 30,185 • Hydroelectric - 4,780 Coal-fired • Natural gas and/or oil-fired - 11,220 • Purchased power (non-renewable) - 5,8672 Nuclear • Purchased power (renewable) - 3,6243 1 The nuclear amount for the six months ended March 31, 2017, includes approximately 799 million kWh of pre-commercial generation at Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2 and Paradise Combined Cycle Plant. 2 Purchased power (non-renewable) includes generation from Caledonia Combined Cycle Plant, which is currently a leased facility operated by TVA. 3 Purchased power (renewable) includes power purchased from the following renewable sources: hydroelectric, solar, wind, and cogenerations. 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Message from the Inspector General. .....................................................4 Noteworthy Undertaking...............................................................7 Executive Overview ...................................................................9 Organization ....................................................................... 13 Audits ............................................................................ 17 Evaluations ........................................................................23 Investigations ...................................................................... 27 Legislation and Regulations -
Take It to the Bank: Tennessee Bank Fishing Opportunities Was Licenses and Regulations
Illustrations by Duane Raver/USFWS Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency ke2it2to2the2nkke2it2to2the2nk TennesseeTennessee bankbank fishingfishing opportunitiesopportunities Inside this guide Go fish!.......................................................................................1 Additional fishing opportunities and information..........6 Take it to the Bank: Tennessee Bank Fishing Opportunities was Licenses and regulations........................................................1 Additional contact agencies and facilities.....................6 produced by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency and Tennes- Bank fishing tips........................................................................2 Water release schedules..........................................................6 see Technological University’s Center for the Management, Utilization Black bass..................................................................................2 Fishing-related Web sites.................................................... ....6 and Protection of Water Resources under project 7304. Development Sunfish (bream).........................................................................2 How to read the access tables.................................................7 of this guide was financed in part by funds from the Federal Aid in Sportfish Restoration Crappie..................................................................3 Access table key........................................................................7 (Public Law 91-503) as documented -
TVA 2011 Environmental Assessment
Document Type: EA-Administrative Record Index Field: Final Environmental Document Project Name: Watts Bar Fossil Plant Deconstruction Project Number: 2011-16 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WATTS BAR FOSSIL PLANT DECONSTRUCTION Rhea County, Tennessee PREPARED BY: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY JUNE 2011 Direct comments to: Amy B. Henry NEPA Compliance Tennessee Valley Authority 400 West Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, Tennessee Phone: 865-632-4045 Fax: 865-632-3451 E-mail: [email protected] Page intentionally blank Final Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION .............................................................................. 1 1.1. The Decision ............................................................................................................................ 1 1.2. Background .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.3. Other Pertinent Environmental Reviews or Documentation ..................................................... 3 1.4. Project Scoping ........................................................................................................................ 4 1.5. Necessary Federal Permits or Licenses .................................................................................. 5 2.0 ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION .................................................... 7 2.1. Alternatives .............................................................................................................................. -
The Financing of Tva
THE FINANCING OF TVA ARNOLD R. JoNEs* INTRODUCTION The Tennessee Valley Authority's (TVA) investment in power, flood control, navigation, chemical, and other fixed assets exceeds two and a half billion dollars. Capital expenditures are expected to reach $i6o million in the current fiscal year -i 9 6i-and will probably exceed $200 million next year. Capital expenditures of about the same range are expected during each year for the foreseeable future. Power revenue in fiscal 196o was $242 million; fertilizer revenue was $17 million. Expendi- tures for operation and maintenance of all programs were $i7o million last year but will increase steadily as the power system and other activities grow. These figures offer a glimpse of the size of TVA's financing responsibility. Large as the expenditures are, they are dwarfed by those of many government agencies. It is not, however, the size of TVA's expenditures that is of most interest. The interest in TVA's financing centers on its methods and policies; for a government agency, they have been unique. TVA now has three sources of funds: (i) appropri- ations, (2) revenues, and (3) electric power bonds. Each source will be discussed in this paper. The fact that TVA may use its revenues and bond proceeds without an- nual appropriation by Congress is of great importance in the stability of its self- financed activities. It is the purpose of this article to review these methods and policies, past and future, identifying the important ways in which they are unique and have contributed to effective management. I SCOPE OF OPFAATIONS I. -
FUKUSHIMA RESPONSE STRATEGY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Hamilton and Rhea Counties, Tennessee and Limestone County, Alabama
Document Type: EA-Administrative Record Index Field: Draft Environmental Assessment Project Name: Fukushima Response Strategy Project Number: 2012-12 FUKUSHIMA RESPONSE STRATEGY ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Hamilton and Rhea Counties, Tennessee and Limestone County, Alabama Prepared by: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Knoxville, Tennessee March 2013 This page intentionally left blank Symbols, Acronyms, and Abbreviations Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ......................................................................... 1 1.1 Background .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Decision to be Made ................................................................................................................ 5 1.3 Related Environmental Reviews .............................................................................................. 5 1.4 Scope of the Environmental Assessment ................................................................................ 6 1.5 Necessary Permits or Licenses ............................................................................................... 7 CHAPTER 2 - ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................... 9 2.1 Description of Alternatives ....................................................................................................... 9 2.1.1 The No Action Alternative ................................................................................................. -
Tva-Final-Integrated-Resource-Plan-Eis-Volume-1.Pdf
Integrated Resource Plan 2015 FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT VOLUME 1 - MAIN TEXT TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Integrated Resource Plan Document Type: EIS – Administrative Record Index Field: Final Environmental Impact Statement Project Name: Integrated Resource Plan Project Number: 2014-2 Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement July 2015 Proposed action: Integrated Resource Plan Lead agency: Tennessee Valley Authority For further information on the EIS, For further information on the project, contact: contact: Charles P. Nicholson Gary S. Brinkworth NEPA Compliance Integrated Resource Plan Project Manager Tennessee Valley Authority Tennessee Valley Authority 400 W. Summit Hill Drive, WT 11D 1101 Market St., MR 3K-C Knoxville, Tennessee 37902 Chattanooga, TN 47402 Phone: 865-632-3582 Phone: 423-751-2193 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Abstract: The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) proposes to update its 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) to determine how it will meet the electrical needs of its customers over the next 20 years and fulfill its mission of low-cost, reliable power, environmental stewardship and economic development. Planning process steps included: 1) determining the future need for power; 2) identifying potential supply-side options for generating power and demand- side options for reducing the need for power; 3) developing a range of planning strategies encompassing different approaches, targets and emphasized resources; and 4) identifying a range of future conditions (scenarios) used -
The Role of Ferry Crossings in the Development of the Transportation Network in East Tennessee, 1790-1974
University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 12-1975 The Role of Ferry Crossings in the Development of the Transportation Network in East Tennessee, 1790-1974 Tyrel Gilce Moore Jr. University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Geography Commons Recommended Citation Moore, Tyrel Gilce Jr., "The Role of Ferry Crossings in the Development of the Transportation Network in East Tennessee, 1790-1974. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 1975. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/934 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Tyrel Gilce Moore Jr. entitled "The Role of Ferry Crossings in the Development of the Transportation Network in East Tennessee, 1790-1974." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Geography. John B. Rehder, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Leonard W. Brinkman Jr., Edwin H. Hammond Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by Tyre1 Gi1ce Moore, Jr •• entitled tiThe Role of Ferry Crossings in the Development of the Transportation Network in East Tennessee, 1790-1974. -
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. -
Bank Fishing
Bank Fishing The following bank fishing locations were compiled by 4. Fish are very sensitive to sounds and shadows and can TWRA staff to inform anglers of areas where you can fish see and hear an angler standing on the bank. It is good without a boat. The types of waters vary from small ponds to fish several feet back from the water’s edge instead and streams to large reservoirs. You might catch bluegill, of on the shoreline and move quietly, staying 20 to 30 bass, crappie, trout, catfish, or striped bass depending on feet away from the shoreline as you walk (no running) the location, time of year, and your skill or luck. from one area to the other. Point your rod towards the All waters are open to the public. Some locations are sky when walking. Wearing clothing that blends in privately owned and operated, and in these areas a fee is re- with the surroundings may also make it less likely for quired for fishing. It is recommended that you call ahead if fish to be spooked. you are interested in visiting these areas. We have included 5. Begin fishing (casting) close and parallel to the bank these fee areas, because many of them they are regularly and then work out (fan-casting) toward deeper water. stocked and are great places to take kids fishing. If you’re fishing for catfish, keep your bait near the bottom. Look around for people and obstructions Bank Fishing Tips before you cast. 1. Fish are often near the shore in the spring and fall. -
Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country
September 2005 Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country NCPIRG Education Fund Made in the U.S.A. Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country September 2005 NCPIRG Education Fund Acknowledgements Written by Supryia Ray, Clean Air Advocate with NCPIRG Education Fund. © 2005, NCPIRG Education Fund The author would like to thank Alison Cassady, Research Director at NCPIRG Education Fund, and Emily Figdor, Clean Air Advocate at NCPIRG Education Fund, for their assistance with this report. To obtain a copy of this report, visit our website or contact us at: NCPIRG Education Fund 112 S. Blount St, Ste 102 Raleigh, NC 27601 (919) 833-2070 www.ncpirg.org Made in the U.S.A. 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary...............................................................................................................4 Background: Toxic Mercury Emissions from Power Plants ..................................................... 6 The Bush Administration’s Mercury Regulations ................................................................... 8 Findings: Power Plant Mercury Emissions ........................................................................... 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by State........................................................................ 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by County and Zip Code ............................................... 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by Facility.................................................................... 15 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by Company