FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT RUSH ISLAND POWER PLANT - UNITS 1 & 2 UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY BASIC DATA SUBMITTED BY UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY IN CONSULTATION WITH BECHTEL CORPORATION, WESTINGHOUSE ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS, SMITH - SINGER METEOROLOGISTS, AND HARLAN BARTHOLOMEW AND ASSOCIATES PREPARED BY U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 24 NOVEMBER 1972 o / FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT PROPOSED FOSSIL-FUEL POKER PLANT AT RUSH ISLAND JEFFERSON COUNTY, MISSOURI Prepared By U. S. ARMY ENGINEER DISTRICT, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 24 NOVEMBER 1972 PROPOSED FOSSIL-FUEL POWER PLANT RUSH ISLAND, JEFFERSON COUNTY, MISSOURI ( ) Draft (X) Final Environmental Statement Responsible Office; U. S. Army Engineer District, St. Louis, Missouri 1. Nare of Action: (X) Administrative ( ) Legislative 2. Description of Action; Processing of Department of the Army permit under 33 USC 403 for construction of a fossil-fuel power plant and appurtenant structures in and along the Mississippi River. 3a. Environmental Impacts: Conversion of approximately 150 acres o f flood plain land to industrial use, loss of public access route, release of products o f combustion and waste heat to the environment, consumption of approximately 2.5 million tons of coal per year. b. Adverse Environmental E ffects: Increase in concentrations of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides and particulate matter in the atmosphere, loss of some fish on plant Intake screens, loss of fish eggs and larvae carried through cooling system. 4. Alternatives: No project, purchasing power, alternate sites, alternate fuels, other cooling systems. 5. Comments Requested: Region VII, EPA, Kansas City, Mo. Mo. Water Resources Board Dept, of Interior, Washington, D.C. Mo. Clean Water Commission Dept, of Health, Education & Welfare, Mo. Dept, of Conservation Washington, D.C. Mo. Dept, of Community A ffairs, Dept, of Housing & Urban Development Jefferson City, Mo. Kansas City, Mo. 111. Dept, o f Business & Economic Federal Highway Administration, Development, Springfield, 111. Kansas City, Mo. 111. Dept, of Conservation Dept, of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 111. EPA, Springfield, 111. Dept, of Commerce, Washington, D.C. Coalition for the Environment, Office of Economic Opportunity, St. Louis, Mo. Kansas City, Mo. League of Women Voters, Dept, of Interior, Field Rep., St. Louis, Mo. Denver, Colorado East-West Gateway Coordinating US Fish & Wildlife Service, Twin Cities Council, St. Louis, Mo. Minnesota Jefferson County Environmental US Forest Service, Rolla, Mo. Committee UMRCC, Davenport, Iowa Second Coast Guard D istrict, St. Louis, Mo. 6. Draft Statement to CEQ 10 August 1972 Final Statement to CEQ 9 MAR W71 TAbLli OF CONTENTS FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT RUSH ISLAND POWER PLANT Page 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION .......................................................................... 1-1 1.1 General Description L oca tion ......................................................................................1-1 Purpose......................................................................................1 1 Determination of project necessity ................................... 1-1 1.2 General System Description Existing and planned generating capacity ........................ 1-2 Predicted demands ................................................................... 1-3 System reserve capacity ....................................................... 1-3 1.3 Project Physical Description Plant s i t e ..............................................................................1-6 Plant generation p roce s s ...................................................1-7 Physical interfaces with the environment .................... 1-7 2. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING WITHOUT THE PROJECT ....................... ... 2-1 2.1 The Rush Island Plant Site and Surrounding Area . 2-1 2.2 Local and Regional Setting of Project Site Land use trends and p la n n in g ...........................................2-2 Hydrological .......................................................................... 2-5 Climatological ...................................................................... 2-6 Ambient air quality .............................................................. 2-7 Inversions ..............................................................................2-9 Historical features .............................................................. 2-11 Archeological features ....................................................... 2-13 Topography and geology ....................................................... 2-14 Present level of economic development ........................... 2-16 Social and cultural customs ............................................... 2-19 Population trends.......................................................................2-22 Agricultural and industrial trends ............................... 2-23 Transportation ...................................................................... 2-25 Public access to the Mississippi River ........................ 2-28 Transmission line rights-of-way ....................................... 2-28 2.3 Ecological Setting of Project Site Animal life and v e g e t a t io n ........................................... 2-29 Aquatic setting ...................................................................... 2-51 2.4 Interrelation of Projects in Operation by Others . 2-41 2.5 Future Environmental Setting in Absence o f Project . 2-41 i i Page 3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................... 3-1 3.1 Air Quality Considerations ................................................... 3-1 3.2 Land Loss and Land Use Changes At or Near the Project S i t e ......................................................................3-4 3.3 Impact on Economic and Social Conditions ........................ 3-4 3.4 Transportation.......................................................................... 3-5 3.5 Impact of the Plant on W ild life .......................................3-8 3.6 Water Quality Consideration Thermal effects ...................................................................... 3-12 Biological effects .................................................................. 3-14 Chemical parameters .............................................................. 3-24 Summary........................................................................................ 3-26 3.7 N o i s e ............................................................................................ 3-27 3.8' Scenic and Aesthetic Impact .............................................. 3-28 3.9 Hydrological Impact .............................................................. 3-29 3.10 Impact on Projects in Operation by O th ers ...................... 3-29 3.11 Site Preparation and Landscaping........................................ .3-30 3.12 Public Access to the Mississippi River ............................ 3-30 3.13 Transmission Lines .............................................................. 3-31 4. ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS MUCH CANNOT BE AVOIDED . 4-1 5. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION ........................................... 5-1 5.1 Not Building the P la n t.......................................................... 5-1 5.2 Purchase Power......................................................................... 5-3 5.3 Alternate Means o f Generation Natural g a s ..............................................................................5-4 Synthetic natural gas .......................................................... 5-4 Fuel o i l ..................................................................................... 5-4 Nuclear fueled u n it .............................................................. 5-5 Combustion turbines .............................................................. 5-5 Hydroelectric facility .......................................................... 5-6 5.4 Alternate Sites ......................................................................5-6 5.5 Alternate Cooling Methods Cooling pond ..............................................................................5-8 Spray c a n a ..............................................................................5-8 Topping tower .......................................................................... 5-8 Closed cycle cooling tower .................................................. 5-9 Dry cooling tow e r .................................................................... 5-10 5.6 Alternate Air Quality Controls ........................................... 5-10 5.7 Alternate Circulating Water Intake Arrangements . 5-10 Intake canal .............................................................................. 5-11 Offshore intake ...................................................................... 5-11 Fish s cr e e n s ............................................................................... 5-11 6. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN LOCAL SHORT TERM USES OF MAN'S ENVIRONMENT AND THE MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY .................................................................. 6-1 i i i Page 6.1 Cumulative and Long-Term e f f e c t s ....................................... 6.2 Short-Term Effects .................................................................. 7. IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES WHICH WOULD BE INVOLVED IN THE PROPOSED ACTION SHOULD IT BE IMPLEMENTED................................................................................