DOCSLIB.ORG

Cumberland Fossil Plant to Comply with the CCR Rule Requirements

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Cumberland Fossil Fossil Plant Plant CUMBERLAND CITY,CITY, TENNESSEETENNESSEE QUICKQUICK FACTSFACTS OH IN IL WV KY MO VA TN NC AR SC MS AL GA EPA CCR RULERule Groundwater GROUNDWATER Monitoring MONITORING for 2019 Commissioning Date: 1973 This fact sheet summarizes groundwater monitoring conducted by Commissioning Date: 1973 This fact sheet summarizes groundwater monitoring conducted by TVA for the Output: 2,470 Megawatts TVACumberland as required Fossil Plant,by the as U.S. required Environmental by the U.S. Environmental Protection ProtectionAgency (EPA) Agency (16Output: billion 2,470 kilowatt-hours) Megawatts (16 billion Coal(EPA) CoalCombustion Combustion Residuals Residuals (CCR)(CCR) RuleRule. for The the 2019EPA calendar published year. the The EPA kilowatt-hours) published the CCR Rule on April 17, 2015. It requires companies operating coal- Number of homes powered: CCR Rule on April 17, 2015. It requires companies operating coal- 1.1 MillionNumber of homes powered: fired power plants to study whether constituents in CCR have been released to fired power plants to study whether constituents in CCR have been 1.1 Million groundwater from active, inactive and new CCR impoundments, as well as active Wet to Dry / Dewatered releasedand new CCR to groundwater. landfills. This fact sheet addresses the EPA CCR ConversionWet to Dry /Program: Dewatered Activities Rule groundwater monitoring only. underwayConversion Program: Complete The CCR Rule establishes multiple phases of protective groundwater monitoring for fly ash and gypsum. Bottom ash Inincluding addition baseline to ongoing sampling, groundwater Detection Monitoring monitoring and Assessment required under Monitoring. TVAdewatering Wide CCR tank-based Conversion solution Program Total Spend: Corrective action may be necessary at the completion of this process. For more scheduled for 2019 State regulations, TVA enhanced the monitoring well network at the Approximately $1.3 Billion information on the CCR Rule Groundwater Monitoring requirements, refer to the Cumberland Fossil Plant to comply with the CCR Rule requirements. TVA Wide CCR Conversion AdditionalExecutive Summary wells were that caninstalled be found around by clicking the CCR on the management following hyperlink units Program Total Spend: www.tva.com/ccr. as needed and TVA implemented a baseline sampling program. After Approximately $1.3 Billion completionCumberland of Plantthe baseline CCR Rule sampling, Groundwater the CCR Monitoring Rule requires Network TVA toIn additionbegin monitoringto ongoing groundwater groundwater monitoring in a step required that underis called State “Detection regulations, Monitoring”.TVA established The monitoring constituents well networks specified for the by Bottom the CCRAsh Pond,Rule Dryfor AshDetection Monitoring are boron, calcium, chloride,Stack, and fluoride,Gypsum Storage pH, sulfate, Area and and for totalthe Stilling dissolved Pond (includingsolids (TDS). Retention These seven constituents occur naturally inPond), soils, consisting rock, groundwater of “background,” and or surfaceupgradient, water, wells andin locations they are that also were present in coal and in CCR. They were not expected to be affected by the management of CCR and wells around the selected by EPA because they can indicate groundwater conditions that may require further evaluation. edge of the areas where CCR is managed. These wells are sometimes referred EPAto as “downgradientCCR RULE wells”GROUNDWATER and placed in locations MONITORING to monitor forNETWORK releases to groundwater. These CCR Rule groundwater monitoring well networks are FOR THE CUMBERLAND FOSSIL PLANT monitored in accordance with the CCR Rule during the baseline, Detection TVAMonitoring, installed and “backgroundAssessment Monitoring wells” in phases. locations The locationsthat are ofnot the expected wells are to be affected by the management ofshown CCR. on Otherthe figure wells on thewere next drilled page. around the edge of the areas where CCR is managed or were already existing and being monitored. These wells are sometimes referred to as “downgradient wells” and placed in locations to monitor for releases to groundwater. The locations of the wells are shown below. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY | FACT SHEET CCR GROUNDWATER MONITORING TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY | FACT SHEET MARCH 2, 2020 CCR GROUNDWATER MONITORING ($¯$ ($¯$ CUF-206 CUF-205 (! (! Cumberland River (! CUF-207 " Stilling Pond (!CUF-208 Ash Pond (Retention Pond) CUF-209 CUF-206 CUF-205 (! Dry Ash Stack (! CUF-201 Bottom (! Cumberland River (! Ash Pond (! CUF-207 " CUF-202 (! Stilling Pond CUF-208 (!CUF-211 (! W Ash Pond e (Retention Pond) " l ls Gypsum C 93-2R Storage r Area e (! CUF-209 e k Dry Ash Stack CUF-201 (! Bottom y e l t Ash Pond a (! e h CUF-212 93-3 w s CUF-202 : y B ! (! ( 0 ! 3 ( - 1 0 - 8 1 0 CUF-211 2 : d e s i (! v e W R e d x " l m l . Gypsum s s l l e C Storage W t 93-2R n e r i e Area d a (! r e g n k w o D y e d l t n a a _ e h d CUF-212 93-3 n w s u Project Location 182603174 : o r 0 1,000 2,000 IN y ! g ( B Background Well ! (! ( Cumberland City Prepared by WSW on 2018-01-30 k IL W0 V c Feet 3 - a Stewart County, Technical Review by MD on 2018-01-30 1 B _ 0 - t i Tennessee Independent Review by JK on 2018-01-30 KY 8 1:24,000 (At original document size of 8.5x11) n ! 1 ( Downgradient Well U 0 R 2 MO : Client/Project C VA d Notes C e s w i Tennessee Valley Authority _ 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Tennessee FIPS 4100 Feet !( v 1 e g i R CCR Unit Subject to CCR Rule 2. Imagery Source: Tucker Mapping Solutions, INC (Flown April 8, 2017) F Cumberland Fossil Plant _ 1 F d U AR TN x CCR Rule C NC m . \ s l 1 l F Figure No. e TVA Property Boundary U W C t \ n s 1 e i d x d a m Title r \ g s SC i n g AL w \ MS GA o 4 Map with CCR Unit Background 7 D 1 d 3 n 0 a 6 _ 2 and Downgradient Wells 8 d 1 n \ u Project Location 182603174 : Disc laimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electo ronic format. The recipient acc epts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its of ficers, em ployees, c onsultants and agents, from any and all claim s arising in any way from the c ontent or provision of the data. U r IN ! 0 1,000 2,000 g ( Background Well Cumberland City Prepared by WSW on 2018-01-30 k IL WV c Feet a Stewart County, Technical Review by MD on 2018-01-30 B _ 2019 Cumberland Fossil Plant CCR Rule Assessment Monitoring Results t i KY 1:24,000 (At original document size of 8.5x11) Tennessee Independent Review by JK on 2018-01-30 n (! Downgradient Well U R MO Client/Project C VA Notes C w Tennessee Valley Authority _ !( 1. Coordinate System: NAD 1983 StatePlane Tennessee FIPS 4100 Feet 1 g i CCR Unit Subject to CCR Rule 2. Imagery Source: Tucker Mapping Solutions, INC (Flown April 8, 2017) F Cumberland Fossil Plant _ 1 The Assessment Monitoring results are contained in the 2019 Annual Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective Action F U AR TN CCR Rule C NC \ 1 F TVA Property Boundary Figure No. U C \ s Reports*. The reports can be found on the CCR Rule website at www.tva.com/ccr. 1 d x m Title \ s SC i g AL \ MS GA 4 Map with CCR Unit Background 7 1 3 0 6 2 For the 2019 assessment monitoring, the statistically significant levels (SSLs) above the groundwatera ndprotection Downgradie ntstandard Wells 8 1 \ : Disc laimer: Stantec assumes no responsibility for data supplied in electronic format. The recipient acc epts full responsibility for verifying the accuracy and completeness of the data. The recipient releases Stantec, its of ficers, em ployees, c onsultants and agents, from any and all claim s arising in any way from the c ontent or provision of the data. U (GWPS) for lithium in well 93-3, for arsenic at well CUF-206 and for cobalt in well CUF-212 are the same as identified for the 2018 assessment monitoring sampling, and a new SSL for cobalt in well CUF-211 has been identified. * The results in this report reflect quality of groundwater beneath the CCR units and are not necessarily an indication of impacts beyond TVA property. Local utilities are required to test public drinking water supplies to ensure that they are safe for consumption. Monitoring data consistently shows that surface water quality is not being adversely impacted by TVA’s operations of its coal plants, including ash management practices. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY | FACT SHEET MARCH 2, 2020 CCR GROUNDWATER MONITORING The following table shows the reported statistical exceedances of GWPS, as reflected by the red dots. Out of the 11 wells sampled, four wells contain SSLs for a single constituent (arsenic, cobalt or lithium). Refer to Appendix A – Statistical Analysis Report of the 2019 Annual Groundwater Monitoring and Corrective Actions Reports for more information. GROUNDWATER QUALITY MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS 2019 Background Dry Ash Stack and Gypsum Storage Area Stilling and Retention Pond Wells GWPS CUF- CUF- CUF- CUF- CUF- CUF- CUF- CUF- CUF- 93-2R 93-3 Constituent mg/L 201 202 209 211 212 205 206 207 208 Antimony 0.006 Arsenic 0.01 Barium 2 Beryllium 0.004 Cadmium 0.005 Chromium 0.1 Cobalt 0.006 Fluoride 4 Lead 0.015 Lithium 0.04 Mercury 0.002 Molybdenum 0.1 Rad226+228 5 pCi/L Selenium 0.05 Thallium 0.002 Color Coding Key Monitoring data results are below groundwater protection standards (GWPS) Monitoring data results are below GWPS, but results are 65% or more of the GWPS Monitoring data results exceed GWPS (TVA has initiated and completed assessment of corrective measures report) Next Steps for Cumberland Fossil Plant CCR Rule Groundwater Monitoring TVA will continue to monitor and evaluate the groundwater at the Cumberland Fossil Plant site.
Recommended publications
  • POTENTIAL PARADISE FOSSIL PLANT RETIREMENT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Muhlenberg County, Kentucky

    POTENTIAL PARADISE FOSSIL PLANT RETIREMENT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Muhlenberg County, Kentucky

    Document Type: EA-Administrative Record Index Field: Final EA Project Name: Potential Paradise Plant Retirement Project Number: 2018-34 POTENTIAL PARADISE FOSSIL PLANT RETIREMENT FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Muhlenberg County, Kentucky Prepared by: TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY Knoxville, Tennessee FEBRUARY 2019 To request further information, contact: Ashley Pilakowski NEPA Compliance Tennessee Valley Authority 400 W. Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, TN 37902 Phone: 865-632-2256 E-mail: [email protected] This page intentionally left blank Contents Table of Contents CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION ......................................................................... 1 1.1 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Purpose and Need ................................................................................................................... 2 1.3 Related Environmental Reviews .............................................................................................. 4 1.4 Scope of the Environmental Assessment ................................................................................ 5 1.5 Public and Agency Involvement ............................................................................................... 5 1.6 Necessary Permits or Licenses and Consultation Requirements ............................................ 6 CHAPTER 2 - ALTERNATIVES ..........................................................................................................
  • (2019) EPA's Final

    (2019) EPA's Final

    Attachment to Part B Comments of Earthjustice et al., EPA-HQ-OLEM-2019-0173 Assessment Monitoring Outcomes (2019) EPA’s Final Coal Ash Rule, 40 C.F.R. § 257.94(e)(3), requires the owners or operators of existing Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) units to prepare a notification stating that an assessment monitoring program has been established if it is determined that a statistically significant increase over background levels for one or more of the constituents listed in appendix III of the CCR Rule has occurred, without an alleged alternate source demonstration. This table identifies the CCR surface impoundments known to be in assessment monitoring and required to identify any constituent(s) in appendix IV detected at statistically significant levels (SSL) above groundwater protection standards and post notice of the assessment monitoring outcome per 40 C.F.R. § 257.95. The table includes the surface impoundments that were required to post notice of appendix IV exceedance(s), as applicable, or elected to do so as of the time of this assessment monitoring outcomes review (summer 2019). To the best of our knowledge, neither EPA nor any other entity has attempted to assemble this information and make it public. Note that this document is not confirming that the industry notifications or assessments were compliant with the CCR Rule or that additional units may not belong on this list. Assessment Monitoring Outcome # of Surface Impoundments Appendix IV Exceedance(s) 214 Appendix IV Exceedance(s), alleged Alternate Source Demonstration 16 No Appendix IV Exceedance Reported 64 Total 294 Name of Plant Appendix IV Operator CCR Unit or Site Exceedance(s) Healy Power Plant GVEA AK Unit 1 Ash Pond Yes Healy Power Plant GVEA AK Unit 1 Emergency Overflow Pond Yes Healy Power Plant GVEA AK Unit 1 Recirculating Pond Yes Charles R.
  • EMISSIONS of MERCURY by PLANT (Based Upon Plant Reported Fuel Use and Mercury Tests)

    EMISSIONS of MERCURY by PLANT (Based Upon Plant Reported Fuel Use and Mercury Tests)

    EMISSIONS OF MERCURY BY PLANT (Based upon plant reported fuel use and mercury tests) PLANT STATE PLANT TONS STATE TONS Monticello TX 1.04870 5.023 Martin Lake TX 0.68280 5.023 Limestone TX 0.48300 5.023 Big Brown TX 0.43450 5.023 Pirkey TX 0.40620 5.023 Sam Seymour TX 0.38640 5.023 J.T. Deely TX 0.25090 5.023 W A Parish TX 0.25080 5.023 Welsh TX 0.21940 5.023 Sandow TX 0.14470 5.023 Harrington Station TX 0.14190 5.023 Gibbons Creek TX 0.13210 5.023 J.K. Spruce TX 0.12040 5.023 Oklaunion TX 0.08839 5.023 Tolk Station TX 0.08001 5.023 Coleto Creek TX 0.07194 5.023 San Miguel TX 0.06693 5.023 TNP-One TX 0.01329 5.023 Hom er City PA 0.92600 4.979 Keystone PA 0.92570 4.979 Montour PA 0.60930 4.979 Bruce Mansfield PA 0.50400 4.979 Shawville PA 0.46400 4.979 Conemaugh PA 0.24730 4.979 Brunner Island PA 0.21820 4.979 Hatfield's Ferry PA 0.20700 4.979 1 EMISSIONS OF MERCURY BY PLANT (Based upon plant reported fuel use and mercury tests) PLANT STATE PLANT TONS STATE TONS Armstrong PA 0.15340 4.979 Cheswick PA 0.11860 4.979 Sunbury PA 0.11810 4.979 New Castle PA 0.10430 4.979 Portland PA 0.06577 4.979 Johnsonburg Mill PA 0.04678 4.979 Titus PA 0.03822 4.979 Cambria CoGen PA 0.03499 4.979 Colver Power Project PA 0.03459 4.979 Elrama PA 0.02900 4.979 Seward PA 0.02633 4.979 Martins Creek PA 0.02603 4.979 Hunlock Power Station PA 0.02580 4.979 Eddystone PA 0.02231 4.979 Mitchell (PA) PA 0.01515 4.979 AES BV Partners Beaver Valley PA 0.01497 4.979 Cromby Generating Station PA 0.00086 4.979 Northampton Generating Company L.P.
  • Return Receipt Requested the Hon. Regina Mccarthy, Administrator US

    Return Receipt Requested the Hon. Regina Mccarthy, Administrator US

    January 14, 2016 Via Certified Mail - Return Receipt Requested The Hon. Regina McCarthy, Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Ariel Rios Building 1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. Mail Code: 1101A Washington, DC 20460 Via Certified Mail - Return Receipt Requested Heather McTeer Toney, Regional Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 61 Forsyth Street, SW Atlanta, GA 30303-3104 Via Certified Mail - Return Receipt Requested Mr. Robert J. Martineau, Jr., Commissioner Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation William R. Snodgrass Tennessee Tower 312 Rosa L. Parks Avenue, 2nd Floor Nashville, TN 37243 Via Certified Mail - Return Receipt Requested Mr. Bill Johnson, President and Chief Executive Officer Tennessee Valley Authority 400 West Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, TN 37902-1499 RE: 60-Day Notice of Intent to Sue, 33 U.S.C. § 1365, for Violations of the Clean Water Act by Tennessee Valley Authority–TVA Cumberland Fossil Plant (CUF), NPDES No. TN0005789 To Whom It May Concern: This letter is to notify the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (“TDEC”), and the Tennessee Valley Authority (“TVA”) of ongoing violations of the Clean Water Act (“CWA”) at the Cumberland Fossil Plant (“the Cumberland Plant”) in Cumberland City, Tennessee, owned and operated by 1371158_2 TVA-Cumberland Fossil Plant January 14, 2016 Page 2 of 35 TVA. The Sierra Club (“the Conservation Group”) and its members have identified serious and ongoing unpermitted violations of the CWA at the Cumberland Plant. TVA has caused and continues to cause unauthorized point source discharges to Tennessee waters and navigable waters of the U.S., and to cause unpermitted pollutant discharges to flow from the coal ash disposal areas at the Cumberland Plant directly into the Cumberland River, as well as into groundwater that is hydrologically connected to the Cumberland River.
  • Facts and Figures on a Fossil Fuel 2015

    Facts and Figures on a Fossil Fuel 2015

    1 COAL ATLAS Facts and figures on a fossil fuel 2015 HOW WE ARE COOKING THE CLIMATE 2 IMPRINT The COAL ATLAS 2015 is jointly published by the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Berlin, Germany, and Friends of the Earth International, London, UK Chief executive editor: Dr. Stefanie Groll, Heinrich Böll Foundation Executive editor: Lili Fuhr, Heinrich Böll Foundation Executive editor: Tina Löffelsend, Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland Managing editor: Dietmar Bartz Art director: Ellen Stockmar English editor: Paul Mundy Research editors: Ludger Booms, Heinrich Dubel Proofreader: Maria Lanman Contributors: Cindy Baxter, Benjamin von Brackel, Heidi Feldt, Markus Franken, Lili Fuhr, Stefanie Groll, Axel Harneit-Sievers, Heike Holdinghausen, Arne Jungjohann, Eva Mahnke, Tim McDonnell, Vladimir Slivyak Editorial responsibility (V. i. S. d. P.): Annette Maennel, Heinrich Böll Foundation This publication is written in International English. First English edition, November 2015 Production manager: Elke Paul, Heinrich Böll Foundation Printed by Phoenix Print GmbH, Würzburg, Germany Climate-neutral printing on 100 percent recycled paper for the block and 60 percent for the wrapper. This material is licensed under Creative Commons “Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported“ (CC BY-SA 3.0). For the licence agreement, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode, and a summary (not a substitute) at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en. FOR ORDERS AND DOWNLOAD Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, Schumannstraße 8, 10117 Berlin, Germany, www.boell.de/coalatlas Friends of the Earth International, Nieuwe Looiersstraat 31, 1017 VA Amsterdam, The Netherlands, www.foei.org Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland, Versand, Am Köllnischen Park 1, 10179 Berlin, www.bund.net/coalatlas INNENTITEL 3 COAL ATLAS Facts and figures on a fossil fuel 2015 4 INHALT TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 IMPRINT 18 HEALTH FINE DUST, FAT PRICE 6 INTRODUCTION Smoke and fumes from coal-fired power plants make us ill.
  • Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country

    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
  • Tri-2008.By-State.Pdf

    Tri-2008.By-State.Pdf

    Fluoride Action Network Hydrogen Fluoride Information from the Toxic Release Inventory – 2008 Available in html at http://fluoridealert.org/tri-2008.html It’s important to note that not all industries or sources that release fluoride or fluorine into the environment are included in the U.S. EPA’s Toxic Release Inventory (TRI). For example, the toxic fluoridating agents used in public drinking water fluoridation schemes, hexafluorosilicic acid (H2SiF6) and silicofluoride (Na2SiF6), (or their various other names, fluosilicic acid, sodium fluosilicate, etc.), are not listed. These are toxic wastes captured in the ‘pollution controls’ from the mining of phosphate rock. The major use of the mined phosphate is for agricultural fertilizer. Also not listed in TRI are uranium and radionuclides, which are also in phosphate rock and their mined products. The 2008 TRI data for releases for hydrogen fluoride was 64,972,078 pounds, and for fluorine it was 91,874 pounds. The releases are generally self-reported, not measured, by industry. 2008 is the latest year with all data (the 2009 database is not complete). Below are the 2008 TRI data for Hydrogen Fluoride sorted by: Table 1. Industry category for releases Table 2. State ranking for releases Table 3. State releases (including Fluorine releases) by industry/town/county TABLE 1: Hydrogen Fluoride releases in 2008 as reported by the Toxic Release Inventory Category Pounds Released Coal-fired electric utilities (TRI code 221112) 50,917,693 Hazardous Waste/Solvent Recovery 5,303,483 Primary Metals 3,470,571
  • Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Key Messages, August 2017

    Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Key Messages, August 2017

    Description of document: Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Key Messages, August 2017 Requested date: 31-July-2017 Released date: 14-August-2017 Posted date: 21-August-2017 Source of document: FOIA Officer Tennessee Valley Authority 400 W. Summit Hill Drive WT 7D Knoxville, TN 37902-1401 (865) 632-6945 The governmentattic.org web site (“the site”) is noncommercial and free to the public. The site and materials made available on the site, such as this file, are for reference only. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals have made every effort to make this information as complete and as accurate as possible, however, there may be mistakes and omissions, both typographical and in content. The governmentattic.org web site and its principals shall have neither liability nor responsibility to any person or entity with respect to any loss or damage caused, or alleged to have been caused, directly or indirectly, by the information provided on the governmentattic.org web site or in this file. The public records published on the site were obtained from government agencies using proper legal channels. Each document is identified as to the source. Any concerns about the contents of the site should be directed to the agency originating the document in question. GovernmentAttic.org is not responsible for the contents of documents published on the website. Key Messages August 2017 Updated August 10, 2017 Key Messages for August 2017 Contents Allen Combined Cycle Plant Water Energy Efficiency, Renewable and Source ....................................................... 4 Distributed Generation ............................. 19 Allen Combined Cycle Plant Solar Grid Stability ......................................... 20 Generation ................................................. 5 Renewable Energy ..............................
  • DRR Source List June 23, 2016

    DRR Source List June 23, 2016

    DRR Source List June 23, 2016 State Facility Name County/Parish Alabama Tennessee Valley Authority- Colbert Fossil Plant Colbert Alabama Alabama Power - Gadsden Electric Generating Plant Etowah Alabama Alabama Power - Greene County Electric Generating Plant Greene Alabama Tennessee Valley Authority - Widows Creek Fossil Plant Jackson Alabama Alabama Power - William Crawford Gorgas Electric Generating Plant Walker Alabama International Paper Company - Prattville Mill Autauga Alabama Escambia Operating Company Big Escambia Creek Plant Escambia Alabama Azko Nobel Functional Chemicals - LeMoyne Site Mobile Alabama Alabama Power Company- James M. Barry Electric Generating Plant Mobile Alabama Ascend Performance Materials -Decatur Plant Morgan Alabama Sanders Lead Company Pike Alabama Continental Carbon Company- Phenix City Plant Russell Alabama Alabama Power Company - Ernest C. Gaston Electric Generating Plant Shelby Alabama Lhoist North America of Alabama - Montevallo Plant Shelby Alabama PowerSouth Energy Cooperative - Charles R. Lowman Power Plant Washington Arizona Tucson Electric Power Company - Springerville Generating Station Apache Arizona Arizona Electric Power Cooperative - Apache Generating Station Cochise Arizona Arizona Public Service Electric Company - Cholla Navajo Arkansas Flint Creek Power Plant (SWEPCO) Benton Arkansas Entergy Arkansas - Independence Independence Arkansas Futurefuel Chemical Company Independence Arkansas Entergy Arkansas - White Bluff Jefferson Arkansas Plum Point Energy Station Mississippi California Shell Martinez Refinery (Part of cluster) Contra Costa California Solvay USA Incorporated (Part of cluster) Contra Costa California Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company (Part of cluster) Contra Costa Colorado Public Service Company of Colorado (PSCO) - Cherokee Power Plant Adams Colorado Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) - Martin Drake Power Plant El Paso Colorado CSU - Ray D Nixon El Paso Colorado Colorado Energy Nations Company (CENC) - Golden Jefferson Colorado Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, Inc.
  • Steam Electric Reconsideration Rule, Which Was Published in the Federal Register at 85

    Steam Electric Reconsideration Rule, Which Was Published in the Federal Register at 85

    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT CLEAN WATER ACTION, ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY PROJECT, SIERRA CLUB, WATERKEEPER ALLIANCE, INC., NATURAL RESOURCES DEFENSE COUNCIL, INC., CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY, PENNENVIRONMENT, INC., CHESAPEAKE CLIMATE ACTION NETWORK, and PRAIRIE RIVERS NETWORK Case No. _______________ Petitioners, v. ANDREW WHEELER, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Respondents. PETITION FOR REVIEW Pursuant to Section 509(b)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1369(b)(1), and Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 15(a), Clean Water Action, Environmental Integrity Project, Sierra Club, Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc., Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., Center for Biological Diversity, PennEnvironment, Inc., Chesapeake Climate Action Network, and Prairie Rivers Network hereby petition this Court for review of the final action of the United States Environmental Protection Agency and Andrew Wheeler entitled Steam Electric Reconsideration Rule, which was published in the Federal Register at 85 Fed. Reg. 64,650 on October 13, 2020 (Attachment 1). The agency docket number for the rule is EPA-HQ-OW-2009-0819. In accordance with the Federal Register notice and 40 C.F.R. part 23, the rule was issued for purposes of judicial review on October 27, 2020. Dated: November 2, 2020 Respectfully submitted, _/s Thomas Cmar__________________________ Thomas Cmar Earthjustice 311 S. Wacker Dr., Ste. 1400 Chicago, IL 60606 T: (312) 257-9338 E: [email protected]
  • COAL ATLAS Facts and Figures on a Fossil Fuel 2015

    COAL ATLAS Facts and Figures on a Fossil Fuel 2015

    1 COAL ATLAS Facts and figures on a fossil fuel 2015 HOW WE ARE Second Edition COOKING THE CLIMATE 2 IMPRINT The COAL ATLAS 2015 is jointly published by the Heinrich Böll Foundation, Berlin, Germany, and Friends of the Earth International, London, UK Chief executive editor: Dr. Stefanie Groll, Heinrich Böll Foundation Executive editor: Lili Fuhr, Heinrich Böll Foundation Executive editor: Tina Löffelsend, Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland Managing editor: Dietmar Bartz Art director: Ellen Stockmar English editor: Paul Mundy Research editors: Ludger Booms, Heinrich Dubel Proofreader: Maria Lanman Contributors: Cindy Baxter, Benjamin von Brackel, Heidi Feldt, Markus Franken, Lili Fuhr, Stefanie Groll, Axel Harneit-Sievers, Heike Holdinghausen, Arne Jungjohann, Eva Mahnke, Tim McDonnell, Vladimir Slivyak Editorial responsibility (V. i. S. d. P.): Annette Maennel, Heinrich Böll Foundation This publication is written in International English. Second English edition, March 2017 Production manager: Elke Paul, Heinrich Böll Foundation Printed by Bonifatius GmbH Druck – Buch – Verlag, Paderborn, Germany Climate-neutral printing on 100 percent recycled paper. This material is licensed under Creative Commons “Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported“ (CC BY-SA 3.0). For the licence agreement, see http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/legalcode, and a summary (not a substitute) at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en. FOR ORDERS AND DOWNLOAD Heinrich-Böll-Stiftung, Schumannstraße 8, 10117 Berlin, Germany, www.boell.de/coalatlas Friends of the Earth International, Nieuwe Looiersstraat 31, 1017 VA Amsterdam, The Netherlands, www.foei.org Bund für Umwelt und Naturschutz Deutschland, Versand, Am Köllnischen Park 1, 10179 Berlin, www.bund.net/coalatlas INNENTITEL 3 COAL ATLAS Facts and figures on a fossil fuel SECOND EDITION 2017 4 INHALT TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 IMPRINT 18 HEALTH FINE DUST, FAT PRICE 6 INTRODUCTION Smoke and fumes from coal-fired power plants make us ill.
  • Outside the Law Restoring Accountability to the Tennessee Valley Authority

    Outside the Law Restoring Accountability to the Tennessee Valley Authority

    Outside the Law RestoRing AccountAbility to the tennessee VAlley AuthoRity Outside the Law RestoRing AccountAbility to the tennessee VAlley AuthoRity enViRonmentAl integRity PRoject December 2009 This report was made possible through a grant from Our Children’s Earth Foundation, www.ocefoundation.org © December 2009, Environmental Integrity Project The environmenTal inTegriTy ProjecT is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization established in March of 2002 by former EPA enforcement attorneys to advocate for more effective enforcement of environmental laws. The Environmental Integrity Project has three objectives: To analyze how the failure to enforce or imple- ment environmental laws increases pollution and affects the public’s health; to hold federal and state agencies, as well as individual corporations, accountable for failing to enforce or comply with environmental laws; and to help local communities in key states obtain the protection of environmental laws. For more information about Environmental Integrity Project or for additional copies of this report, please visit: www.environmentalintegrity.org. cover PhoTos: Cumberland Fossil Plant, Aerial photo of Kingston Fossil Plant ash spill, and Ash and Water Discharge Pipe, available at TVA.gov and in the public domain under 17 U.S.C. § 105. Photo of home buried in coal ash from the Kingston Fossil Plant ash spill was taken by J. Miles Cary of the Knoxville News Sentinel and used with permission. Layout: www.cuttingedgedc.com contents Executive Summary v Summary v Recommendations vii Introduction