ML093230799
| ML093230799 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Bellefonte  |
| Issue date: | 11/04/2009 |
| From: | Tennessee Valley Authority |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML093230799 (199) | |
Text
Chapter 4 CHAPTER 4 4.0 TRANSMISSION UPGRADES - AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This chapter includes a description of the affected environment and expected impacts associated with proposed transmission upgrades described in Section 2.6 and shown in Figure 2-6. Transmission infrastructure, including corridors and switchyards, to support operation of a nuclear plant at the BLN site was identified, reviewed, and evaluated in the earlier environmental review documents prepared by TVA and the AEC for the original facility encompassing BLN 1 &2. The AEC subsequently approved and issued a construction license for BLN 1&2 and the supporting transmission infrastructure into and at the site (TVA 2008a). The approved transmission system was constructed before the plant entered deferred status.
The transmission lines that would need to be upgraded to support operation of a single nuclear unit at the BLN site are listed in Table 2-1. Nine of the lines need to be reconductored or uprated. Two of the 500kV lines need to be connected and energized; ROW vegetation management on those de-energized segments will be brought back to current TVA standards. The Widows Creek-Bellefonte and Bellefonte-Scottsboro 161-kV lines would not need to be changed to support operation of a BLN nuclear plant. Additional description of proposed transmission line upgrades is provided in Section 2.6.
The methods used to manage the infrastructure and maintain ROW for the lines would be unchanged. Prior to these activities, technical specialists in the TVA Regional Natural Heritage Project and TVA Cultural Resources group would conduct a Sensitive Area Review (SAR) of the transmission line area (including the ROW) to identify any resource issues that may occur along that transmission line. These reviews are conducted on a recurring basis that coincides with the maintenance cycle, to ensure that the most current information is provided to the organizations conducting maintenance on these transmission lines. A summary of the SAR process is provided in Appendix G.
With the exception of possible effects with respect to floodplains, visual quality, and socioeconomic condtions, no impacts are expected from the refurbishment of the BLN switchyard. Potential impacts to these resources are discussed in their respective sections below.
4.1.
Groundwater 4.1.1. Affected Environment The upgrades to the existing transmission lines proposed under the Action Alternative span several geographical areas. The geology and the groundwater contained within these areas are diverse and, for the purposes of this review, have been broken into geographic sections according to the physiographic province in which the transmission lines occur.
Northeast Alabama, Southeast Tennessee, and Northwest Georgia Sections The six transmission lines proposed for upgrades in this section are Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV (L6068); Widows Creek - Oglethorpe 161 kV #2 (L5614); Widows Creek -
Oglethorpe 161 kV #3 (L5107); Widows Creek - Bellefonte 500-kV #1 (L6100); Widows Creek - Bellefonte 500-kV #2 (L6088); and Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain 161 kV #2 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 209 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 CHAPTER 4 4.0 TRANSMISSION UPGRADES - AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES This chapter includes a description of the affected environment and expected impacts associated with proposed transmission upgrades described in Section 2.6 and shown in Figure 2-6. Transmission infrastructure, including corridors and switchyards, to support operation of a nuclear plant at the BLN site was identified, reviewed, and evaluated in the earlier environmental review documents prepared by TVA and the AEC for the original facility encompassing BLN 1 &2. The AEC subsequently approved and issued a construction license for BLN 1 &2 and the supporting transmission infrastructure into and at the site (TVA 2008a). The approved transmission system was constructed before the plant entered deferred status.
The transmission lines that would need to be upgraded to support operation of a single nuclear unit at the BLN site are listed in Table 2-1. Nine of the lines need to be reconductored or uprated. Two of the SOOkV lines need to be connected and energized; ROW vegetation management on those de-energized segments will be brought back to current TVA standards. The Widows Creek-Bellefonte and Bellefonte-Scottsboro 161-kV lines would not need to be changed to support operation of a BLN nuclear plant. Additional description of proposed transmission line upgrades is provided in Section 2.6.
The methods used to manage the infrastructure and maintain ROW for the lines would be unchanged. Prior to these activities, technical specialists in the TVA Regional Natural Heritage Project and TVA Cultural Resources group would conduct a Sensitive Area Review (SAR) of the transmission line area (including the ROW) to identify any resource issues that may occur along that transmission line. These reviews are conducted on a recurring basis that coincides with the maintenance cycle, to ensure that the most current information is provided to the organizations conducting maintenance on these transmission lines. A summary of the SAR process is provided in Appendix G.
With the exception of possible effects with respect to floodplains, visual quality, and socioeconomic condtions, no impacts are expected from the refurbishment of the BLN switchyard. Potential impacts to these resources are discussed in their respective sections below.
4.1.
Groundwater 4.1.1. Affected Environment The upgrades to the existing transmission lines proposed under the Action Alternative span several geographical areas. The geology and the groundwater contained within these areas are diverse and, for the purposes of this review, have been broken into geographic sections according to the physiographic province in which the transmission lines occur.
Northeast Alabama, Southeast Tennessee, and Northwest Georgia Sections The six transmission lines proposed for upgrades in this section are Sequoyah - Widows Creek SOO-kV (L6068); Widows Creek - Oglethorpe 161kV #2 (LS614); Widows Creek-Oglethorpe 161kV #3 (LS107); Widows Creek - Bellefonte SOO-kV #1 (L6100); Widows Creek - Bellefonte SOO-kV #2 (L6088); and Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain 161 kV #2 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 209
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site (L5613). These transmission lines are located across two physiographic provinces, i.e., the i
Valley and Ridge, and the Appalachian Plateaus.
The Valley and Ridge aquifer consists of folded and faulted carbonate, sandstone, and 3
shale. Soluble carbonate rocks and some easily eroded shales underlie the valleys in the province, and more erosion-resistant siltstone, sandstone, and cherty dolomite underlie ridges. The arrangement of the northeast-trending valleys.and ridges are the result of a combination of folding, thrust faulting, and erosion. Compressive forces from the southeast have caused these rocks to yield, first by folding and subsequently by repeatedly breaking along a series of thrust faults. The result of the faulting is that geologic formations are repeated several times across the region. Carbonate-rock aquifers in the Chickamauga, I
the Knox, and the Conasauga Groups are repeated throughout the Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province (Miller 1990).
I Groundwater in the Valley and Ridge aquifers primarily is stored in and moves through fractures, bedding planes, and solution openings in the rocks. These aquifers are typically present in valleys and rarely present on the ridges. Most of the carbonate-rock aquifers are I
directly connected to sources of recharge, such as rivers or lakes, and solution activity has enlarged the original openings in the carbonate rocks. In the carbonate rocks, the fractures and bedding planes have been enlarged by dissolution of part of the rocks. Slightly acidic water dissolves some of the calcite and dolomite that compose the principal aquifers. Most of this dissolution takes place along fractures and bedding planes where the largest volumes of acidic groundwater flow.
Groundwater movement in the Valley and Ridge Province is localized, restricted by the repeating lithology created by thrust faulting. Older rocks primarily the Conasauga Group and the Rome Formation have been displaced upward over the top of younger rocks (the U
Chickamauga and the Knox Groups) along thrust fault planes thus forming a repeating sequence of permeable and less permeable hydrogeologic units. The repeating sequence, coupled with the stream network, divides the area into a series of adjacent, isolated, I
shallow groundwater flow systems. The water moves from the ridges where the water levels are high toward lower water levels adjacent to major streams that flow parallel to the long axes of the valleys. Most of the groundwater is discharged directly to local springs or I
streams (Miller 1990).
Aquifers of the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province consist of permeable stratigraphic units of Paleozoic sedimentary rocks. Major aquifers in the Appalachian i
Plateaus province are in limestone units of Mississippian age covered by sandstone of the Pennsylvanian Pottsville Formation. Flow in the Appalachian Plateaus aquifers is affected primarily by topography, structure, and the development of solution openings in the rocks.
i A thick sequence of shale, sandstone, and coal overlies Mississippian limestone. Recharge to the aquifers is by precipitation on the flat, mesa-like plateau tops. Water then percolates downward through the Pennsylvanian sandstone (Pottsville Formation), primarily along I
steeply inclined joints and fractures. Some water leaks downward across the interbedded shale into the underlying limestone aquifer. Sandstone of the Pottsville Formation varies greatly in its water-producing capabilities. A thick black shale (the Chattanooga Shale) i forms a confining unit for the Appalachian Plateaus aquifer (Miller 1990).
Public drinking water is supplied by both groundwater and surface water sources for the counties in which the ROWs are located (EPA 2009). Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV (L6068) intersects a State Designated Source Water Protection Area, which is the recharge I
210 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site (L5613). These transmission lines are located across two physiographic provinces, i.e., the Valley and Ridge, and the Appalachian Plateaus.
The Valley and Ridge aquifer consists of folded and faulted carbonate, sandstone, and shale. Soluble carbonate rocks and some easily eroded shales underlie the valleys in the province, and more erosion-resistant siltstone, sandstone, and cherty dolomite underlie ridges. The arrangement of the northeast-trending valleys and ridges are the result of a combination of folding, thrust faulting, and erosion. Compressive forces from the southeast have caused these rocks to yield, first by folding and subsequently by repeatedly breaking along a series of thrust faults. The result of the faulting is that geologic formations are repeated several times across the region. Carbonate-rock aquifers in the Chickamauga, the Knox, and the Conasauga Groups are repeated throughout the Valley and Ridge Physiographic Province (Miller 1990).
Groundwater in the Valley and Ridge aquifers primarily is stored in and moves through fractures, bedding planes, and solution openings in the rocks. These aquifers are typically present in valleys and rarely present on the ridges. Most of the carbonate-rock aquifers are directly connected to sources of recharge, such as rivers or lakes, and solution activity has enlarged the original openings in the carbonate rocks. In the carbonate rocks, the fractures and bedding planes have been enlarged by dissolution of part of the rocks. Slightly acidic water dissolves some of the calcite and dolomite that compose the principal aquifers. Most of this dissolution takes place along fractures and bedding planes where the largest volumes of acidic groundwater flow.
Groundwater movement in the Valley and Ridge Province is localized, restricted by the repeating lithology created by thrust faulting. Older rocks primarily the Conasauga Group and the Rome Formation have been displaced upward over the top of younger rocks (the Chickamauga and the Knox Groups) along thrust fault planes thus forming a repeating sequence of permeable and less permeable hydrogeologic units. The repeating sequence, coupled with the stream network, divides the area into a series of adjacent, isolated, shallow groundwater flow systems. The water moves from the ridges where the water levels are high toward lower water levels adjacent to major streams that flow parallel to the long axes of the valleys. Most of the groundwater is discharged directly to local springs or streams (Miller 1990).
Aquifers of the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province consist of permeable stratigraphic units of Paleozoic sedimentary rocks. Major aquifers in the Appalachian Plateaus province are in limestone units of Mississippian age covered by sandstone of the Pennsylvanian Pottsville Formation. Flow in the Appalachian Plateaus aquifers is affected primarily by topography, structure, and the development of solution openings in the rocks.
A thick sequence of shale, sandstone, and coal overlies Mississippian limestone. Recharge to the aquifers is by precipitation on the flat, mesa-like plateau tops. Water then percolates downward through the Pennsylvanian sandstone (Pottsville Formation), primarily along steeply inclined joints and fractures. Some water leaks downward across the interbedded shale into the underlying limestone aquifer. Sandstone of the Pottsville Formation varies greatly in its water-producing capabilities. A thick black shale (the Chattanooga Shale) forms a confining unit for the Appalachian Plateaus aquifer (Miller 1990).
Public drinking water is supplied by both groundwater and surface water sources for the counties in which the ROWs are located (EPA 2009). Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV (L6068) intersects a State Designated Source Water Protection Area, which is the recharge 210 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Chapter 4 area for the Hixson, Tennessee utility district in Hamilton County; other State Designated Source Water Protection Areas may occur. Private wells occur throughout the area.
Middle Tennessee Section The ROW of the STR 49 - N. Tullahoma Tap 161-kV (L5829) transmission line proposed for upgrading in this section is underlain by aquifers, from the Ordovician and Mississippian Periods, in the Interior Low Plateaus Physiographic Province. These aquifers are separated by a confining unit. These carbonate rocks are the principal aquifers in large areas of central Tennessee and are part of the Central Basin aquifer system. The carbonate rock aquifers consist of almost pure limestone and minor dolostone, and are interlayered with confining units of shale and shaly limestone. Limestone is susceptible to erosion which produces fissures, sinkholes, underground streams, and caverns forming vast karst areas.
The middle Ordovician, Stones River Group contains the most important carbonate-rock aquifers in the project area. The calcareous siltstones of the middle Ordovician Nashville Group yield small volumes of water, but these units are not considered to be principal aquifers. The lower Ordovician Knox Group is a major aquifer where dolostone contains freshwater (Lloyd and Lyke 1995).
Highland Rim aquifer system from the Mississippian Period consists of flat lying carbonate rocks. The formations that make up the Highland Rim aquifer within this his section of the project area are the Monteagle Limestone, the St. Genevieve Limestone, the St. Louis Limestone, the Warsaw Limestone, and the Fort Payne Formation (Lloyd and Lyke 1995).
The bedrock formations weather to form a thick chert regolith, which stores and releases groundwater into fractures and solution openings in the bedrock (TDEC 2002).
Precipitation is the primary source of recharge in the Interior Low Plateaus Province. Most of the precipitation becomes overland runoff to streams, but some percolates downward through soil to the underlying bedrock. In the consolidated rocks, however, most of the water moves through and is discharged from secondary openings, such as joints, fractures, bedding planes, and solution openings. As a result, groundwater discharge from springs is common throughout the Interior Low Plateaus Province (Lloyd and Lyke 1995).
The carbonate rocks that form the Highland Rim aquifer are typical of karst systems. The term karst refers to carbonate rocks (limestone and dolostone) in which ground water flows through solution-enlarged channels and bedding planes within the rock. Karst topography is characterized by sinkholes, springs, disappearing streams, and caves, as well as by rapid, highly directional groundwater flow in discrete channels or conduits. Because of the connections between surface and underground features, water in karst areas is not distinctly surface water or groundwater.
Karst systems are readily susceptible to contamination, as the waters can travel long distances through conduits with no chance for natural filtering processes of soil or bacterial action to diminish the contamination. Consequently, the groundwater sources in karst aquifers considered most vulnerable to contamination are those that are under the direct influence of surface water.
Public drinking water for Coffee and Bedford counties in Tennessee is supplied by both surface water and groundwater sources (EPA 2009). Privately owned wells supply water to Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 211 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 area for the Hixson, Tennessee utility district in Hamilton County; other State Designated Source Water Protection Areas may occur. Private wells occur throughout the area.
Middle Tennessee Section The ROW of the STR 49 - N. Tullahoma Tap 161-kV (L5829) transmission line proposed for upgrading in this section is underlain by aquifers, from the Ordovician and Mississippian Periods, in the Interior Low Plateaus Physiographic Province. These aquifers are separated by a confining unit. These carbonate rocks are the principal aquifers in large areas of central Tennessee and are part of the Central Basin aquifer system. The carbonate rock aquifers consist of almost pure limestone and minor dolostone, and are interlayered with confining units of shale and shaly limestone. Limestone is susceptible to erosion which produces fissures, sinkholes, underground streams, and caverns forming vast karst areas.
The middle Ordovician, Stones River Group contains the most important carbonate-rock aquifers in the project area. The calcareous siltstones of the middle Ordovician Nashville Group yield small volumes of water, but these units are not considered to be principal aquifers. The lower Ordovician Knox Group is a major aquifer where dolostone contains freshwater (Lloyd and Lyke 1995).
Highland Rim aquifer system from the Mississippian Period consists of flat lying carbonate rocks. The formations that make up the Highland Rim aquifer within this his section of the project area are the Monteagle Limestone, the St. Genevieve Limestone, the St. Louis Limestone, the Warsaw Limestone, and the Fort Payne Formation (Lloyd and Lyke 1995).
The bedrock formations weather to form a thick chert regolith, which stores and releases groundwater into fractures and solution openings in the bedrock (TDEC 2002).
Precipitation is the primary source of recharge in the Interior Low Plateaus Province. Most of the precipitation becomes overland runoff to streams, but some percolates downward through soil to the underlying bedrock. In the consolidated rocks, however, most of the water moves through and is discharged from secondary openings, such as joints, fractures, bedding planes, and solution openings. As a result, groundwater discharge from springs is common throughout the Interior Low Plateaus Province (Lloyd and Lyke 1995).
The carbonate rocks that form the Highland Rim aquifer are typical of karst systems. The term karst refers to carbonate rocks (limestone and dolostone) in which ground water flows through solution-enlarged channels and bedding planes within the rock. Karst topography is characterized by sinkholes, springs, disappearing streams, and caves, as well as by rapid, highly directional groundwater flow in discrete channels or conduits. Because of the connections between surface and underground features, water in karst areas is not distinctly surface water or groundwater.
Karst systems are readily susceptible to contamination, as the waters can travel long distances through conduits with no chance for natural filtering processes of soil or bacterial action to diminish the contamination. Consequently, the groundwater sources in karst aquifers considered most vulnerable to contamination are those that are under the direct influence of surface water.
Public drinking water for Coffee and Bedford counties in Tennessee is supplied by both surface water and groundwater sources (EPA 2009). Privately owned wells supply water to Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 211
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site area restaurants, schools, and marinas in the county. Residential wells are likely to occur I
near the subject ROWs.
North Alabama Section The Browns Ferry - Trinity 161-kV (L5054) and Browns Ferry - Athens AL 161-kV (L5055) transmission lines proposed for upgrading are also underlain by the Highland Rim aquifer system which is part of the Interior Low Plateaus Physiographic Province. However, the aquifer is known locally as the Tuscumbia-Fort Payne aquifer. The formations that make up this aquifer are the Fort Payne Chert, the Tuscumbia Limestone, and the Monteagle Limestone. The Chattanooga Shale is at the base of the Tuscumbia-Fort Payne aquifer and acts as a confining unit. The upper bedrock formations weather to form a thick regolith that covers the surface of the Fort Payne. The regolith may be as thick as 100 feet thick and is mostly clay but may contain significant layers of chert rubble.
3 Like the rest of the Mississippian Highland Rim aquifer, fractures and solution openings have formed a network of interconnected caves, sinkholes and springs throughout these formations.
The regolith11 and underlying bedrock are hydrologically connected. Recharge to the aquifer is largely from precipitation infiltrating and moving through the regolith. Focused recharge also occurs from surface drainage into sinkholes or losing stream reaches that intersect the aquifer (Kingsbury 2003). Like the rest of the Highland Rim aquifer system, the aquifer is readily susceptible to contamination and is considered vulnerable to contamination.
Public drinking water for Limestone County, Alabama, is supplied by both surface water and groundwater sources. Public water for Morgan County, Alabama, is supplied by surface water (EPA 2009). Privately owned wells supply water to area restaurants, schools, and marinas in the county. Residential wells likely occur near the subject ROW.
4.1.2. Environmental Consequences Nb-Action Alternative Under the No Action alternative, vegetative maintenance would occur periodically, including the use of herbicides which could possibly have an impact on groundwater resources.
During future revegetation and maintenance activities, application of herbicides and fertilizers would be avoided in the areas along the ROWs where sinkholes, caves, and State Designated Source Water Protection Areas occur to prevent groundwater contamination. Any herbicides applied to the ROWs during periodic maintenance would be applied according to the manufacturer's label. During ROW maintenance, the vegetation management guidelines and procedures as described in Appendix D would be followed.
With the implementation of BMPs (Muncy 1999) and routine precautionary measures, potential impacts to groundwater under the No Action Alternative would be insignificant.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, anticipated impacts on existing ROWs from maintenance would be similar to those occurring under the No Action Alternative. Potential impacts to groundwater from upgrades of the transmission lines could result if sediments from disturbed soil enter or clog karst features or from the transport of herbicides and fertilizers or other contaminants into sinkholes and caves. BMPs and routine precautionary 11 Regolith refers to the layer of loose rock resting on bedrock, constituting the surface of most land.
212 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site area restaurants, schools, and marinas in the county. Residential wells are likely to occur near the subject ROWs.
North Alabama Section The Browns Ferry - Trinity 161-kV (LSOS4) and Browns Ferry - Athens AL 161-kV (LSOSS) transmission lines proposed for upgrading are also underlain by the Highland Rim aquifer system which is part of the Interior Low Plateaus Physiographic Province. However, the aquifer is known locally as the Tuscumbia-Fort Payne aquifer. The formations that make up this aquifer are the Fort Payne Chert, the Tuscumbia Limestone, and the Monteagle Limestone. The Chattanooga Shale is at the base of the Tuscumbia-Fort Payne aquifer and acts as a confining unit. The upper bedrock formations weather to form a thick regolith that covers the surface of the Fort Payne. The regolith may be as thick as 100 feet thick and is mostly clay but may contain significant layers of chert rubble.
Like the rest of the Mississippian Highland Rim aquifer, fractures and solution openings have formed a network of interconnected caves, sinkholes and springs throughout these formations.
The regolith 11 and underlying bedrock are hydrologically connected. Recharge to the aquifer is largely from precipitation infiltrating and moving through the regolith. Focused recharge also occurs from surface drainage into sinkholes or losing stream reaches that intersect the aquifer (Kingsbury 2003). Like the rest of the Highland Rim aquifer system, the aquifer is readily susceptible to contamination and is considered vulnerable to contamination.
Public drinking water for Limestone County, Alabama, is supplied by both surface water and groundwater sources. Public water for Morgan County, Alabama, is supplied by surface water (EPA 2009). Privately owned wells supply water to area restaurants, schools, and marinas in the county. Residential wells likely occur near the subject ROW.
4.1.2. Environmental Consequences No-Action Alternative Under the No Action alternative, vegetative maintenance would occur periodically, including the use of herbicides which could possibly have an impact on groundwater resources.
During future revegetation and maintenance activities, application of herbicides and fertilizers would be avoided in the areas along the ROWs where sinkholes, caves, and State Designated Source Water Protection Areas occur to prevent groundwater contamination. Any herbicides applied to the ROWs during periodic maintenance would be applied according to the manufacturer's label. During ROW maintenance, the vegetation management guidelines and procedures as described in Appendix D would be followed.
With the implementation of BMPs (Muncy 1999) and routine precautionary measures, potential impacts to groundwater under the No Action Alternative would be insignificant.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, anticipated impacts on existing ROWs from maintenance would be similar to those occurring under the No Action Alternative. Potential impacts to groundwater from upgrades of the transmission lines could result if sediments from disturbed soil enter or clog karst features or from the transport of herbicides and fertilizers or other contaminants into sinkholes and caves. BMPs and routine precautionary 11 Regolith refers to the layer of loose rock resting on bedrock, constituting the surface of most land.
212 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Chapter 4 measures, as described in the No Action Altenative, would be used during ROW maintenance and transmission line upgrades to control sediment infiltration from storm water runoff and to avoid contamination of groundwater in the project areas. Therefore, potential impacts to groundwater from the Action Alternative would be insignificant.
4.2.
Surface Water 4.2.1. Affected Environment The project areas of the proposed transmission line improvements drain to the Tennessee River and its tributaries at the following locations: (1) Guntersville and Wheeler Reservoirs in Alabama, (2) at Nickajack and Chickamauga Reservoirs in southeast Tennessee and northwest Georgia, and (3) upstream and downstream of Normandy Dam on the Duck River in central Tennessee. Table 4-1 identifies the major streams within the project area and their state designated use classification and 303(d) use impairment listing. Streams on a state 303(d) list do not fully support one or more of their designated uses and are included in a state program to eliminate the water quality impairment.
Table 4-1.
State Classification and 303(d) Listing of Major Streams Crossed Line/Stream-Reservoir State Classificationi 303(d) Listed/Reason Browns Ferry-Trinity 161-kV (L5054)
Ala.
Tennessee River-Wheeler Ala.
S, F&W No Bakers Creek Ala.
F&W No Browns Ferry-Athens 161-kV (L5055)
Ala.
Tennessee River-Wheeler Ala.
S, F&W No Round Island Creek Ala.
F&W No Swan Creek Ala.
F&W, A&I Yes - nutrients Town Creek Ala.
F&W No Widows Creek-Bellefonte 500-kV #1 (L61 00);
Bellefonte-Madison 500-kV (L6055)
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Town Creek Ala.
F&W No Mud Creek Ala.
F&W No Crow Creek Ala.
F&W No Big Coon Creek Ala.
F&W No Little Coon Creek Ala.
F&W No Widows Creek Ala.
S, F&W No Widows Creek-Bellefonte 500-kV #2 (L6088);
Ala.
Bellefonte-East Point 500-kV (L6079)
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Coon Creek Ala.
S, F&W No Widows Creek-Oglethorpe 161 -kV #2 (L5614)
Ala.
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Widows Creek Ala.
S, F&W No Long Island Creek A a.
PWS, S, F&W No Widows Creek-Oglethorpe 161-kV#3 (L5107)
Ala.
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 213 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 measures, as described in the No Action Altenative, would be used during ROW maintenance and transmission line upgrades to control sediment infiltration from storm water runoff and to avoid contamination of groundwater in the project areas. Therefore, potential impacts to groundwater from the Action Alternative would be insignificant.
4.2.
Surface Water 4.2.1. Affected Environment The project areas of the proposed transmission line improvements drain to the Tennessee River and its tributaries at the following locations: (1) Guntersville and Wheeler Reservoirs in Alabama, (2) at Nickajack and Chickamauga Reservoirs in southeast Tennessee and northwest Georgia, and (3) upstream and downstream of Normandy Dam on the Duck River in central Tennessee. Table 4-1 identifies the major streams within the project area and their state designated use classification and 303(d) use impairment listing. Streams on a state 303(d) list do not fully support one or more of their designated uses and are included in a state program to eliminate the water quality impairment.
Table 4-1.
State Classification and 303(d) Listing of Major Streams Crossed IJ ne/Stream-Reservoi r State Classification1 303(d) Listed/Reason Browns Ferry-Trinity 161-kV (L5054)
Tennessee River-Wheeler Ala.
S, F&W No Bakers Creek Ala.
F&W No Browns Ferry-Athens 161-kV (L5055)
Ala.
Tennessee River-Wheeler Ala.
S, F&W No Round Island Creek Ala.
F&W No Swan Creek Ala.
F&W, A&I Yes - nutrients Town Creek Ala.
F&W No Widows Creek-Bellefonte 500-kV #1 (L6100);
Bellefonte-Madison 500-kV (L6055)
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Town Creek Ala.
F&W No Mud Creek Ala.
F&W No Crow Creek Ala.
F&W No BiQ Coon Creek Ala.
F&W No Little Coon Creek Ala.
F&W No Widows Creek Ala.
S, F&W No Widows Creek-Bellefonte 500-kV #2 (L6088);
Ala.
Bellefonte-East Point 500-kV (L6079)
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Coon Creek Ala.
S, F&W No Widows Creek-Oglethorpe 161-kV #2 (L5614)
Ala.
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Widows Creek Ala.
S, F&W No Long Island Creek Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Widows Creek-Oglethorpe 161-kV #3 (L5107)
Ala.
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 213
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Line/Stream-Reservoir State Classification1 303(d) Listed/Reason Long Island Creek Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Guest Creek Ala.
F&W No DWS, IWS, Tennessee River-Nickajack Tenn.
FAL, REC, Yes - dioxins, PCBs LWW, IRR, NAV Cole City Creek Ga.
Fishing No Yes - non-point source Lookout Creek Ga.
Fishing pollution Yes - non-point source Chattanooga Creek Ga.
Fishing pollution Rock Creek Ga.
Fishing, Trout No Stream Yes - non-point source Dry Creek Ga.
Fishing pollution IWS, FAL, Yes - E. coli, nutrients, S. Chickamauga Creek Tenn.
REC, LWW, other anthropogenic IRR habitat loss W.Chickamauga Creek Ga.
Fishing Yes Widows Creek-Raccoon Mtn. 161-kV (L5613)
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Long Island Creek Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No Guest Creek Ala.
F&W No DWS, IWS, Tennessee River-Nickajack Tenn.
FAL, REC, Yes - dioxins, PCBs LWW, IRR, NAV Cole City Creek Ga.
Fishing No IWS, FAL, Lookout Creek Tenn.
REC, LWW, No IRR Sequoyah-Widows Creek 500-kV (L6068)
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W No DWS, IWS, Sequatchie River Tenn.
FAL, REC, No LWW, IRR DWS, IWS, FAL, REC, e
ixnP~
Tennessee River-Nickajack Tenn.
L, Yes - dioxins, PCBs LWW, IRR, NAV Suck Creek Tenn.
FAL, REC, No LWW, IRR South Suck Creek Tenn.
FAL, REC, Yes - loss of biological LWW, IRR integrity FAL, REC, North Suck Creek Tenn.
LWW, IRR Yes - pH FAL, REC, Yes - pH, physical N. Chickamauga Creek Tenn.
LWW, IRR, TS substrate habitat I
IR problems I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 214 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Classification 1 Li ne/Stream-Reservoi r State Long Island Creek Ala.
PWS, S, F&W Guest Creek Ala.
F&W DWS,IWS, Tennessee River-Nickajack Tenn.
FAL, REC, LWW,IRR, NAV Cole City Creek Ga.
Fishinq Lookout Creek Ga.
Fishing Chattanooga Creek Ga.
Fishing Rock Creek Ga.
Fishing, Trout Stream Dry Creek Ga.
Fishing IWS, FAL, S. Chickamauga Creek Tenn.
REC, LWW, IRR W.Chickamauga Creek Ga.
Fishinq Widows Creek-Raccoon Mtn. 161-kV (L5613)
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W Long Island Creek Ala.
PWS, S, F&W Guest Creek Ala.
F&W DWS,IWS, Tennessee River-Nickajack Tenn.
FAL, REC, LWW,IRR, NAV Cole City Creek Ga.
Fishing IWS, FAL, Lookout Creek Tenn.
REC, LWW, IRR Sequoyah-Widows Creek 500-kV (L6068)
Tennessee River-Guntersville Ala.
PWS, S, F&W DWS,IWS, Sequatchie River Tenn.
FAL, REC, LWW,IRR DWS,IWS, Tennessee River-Nickajack Tenn.
FAL, REC, LWW,IRR, NAV Suck Creek Tenn.
FAL, REC, LWW,IRR South Suck Creek Tenn.
FAL, REC, LWW,IRR North Suck Creek Tenn.
FAL, REC, LWW,IRR FAL, REC, N. Chickamauga Creek Tenn.
LWW, IRR, TS 214 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 303(d) Listed/Reason No No Yes - dioxins, PCBs No Yes - non-point source pollution Yes - non-point source pollution No Yes - non-point source pollution Yes - E. coli, nutrients, other anthropogenic habitat loss Yes No No No Yes - dioxins, PCBs No No No No Yes - dioxins, PCBs No Yes -loss of biological integrity Yes - pH Yes - pH, physical substrate habitat problems I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 Line/Stream-Reservoir State Classification1 303(d) Listed/Reason DWS, IWS, Tennessee River-Chickamauga Tenn.
FAL, REC, No LWW, IRR, NAV STR 49-N. Tullahoma Tap 161-kV (L5829)
DWS, IWS, Tennessee River-Kentucky Tenn.
FAL, REC, No LWW, IRR, NAV DWS, IWS, Duck River-Normandy Tenn.
FAL, REC, No LWW, IRR Carroll Creek Tenn.
FAL, REC, No LWW, IRR DWS, FAL, Duck River-Below Normandy REC, LWW, Yes - E. coli IRR, TS Doddy Creek Tenn.
FAL, REC, Yes - habitat loss from LWW, IRR erosion, flow alteration DWS, IWS, Garrison Fork Tenn.
FAL, REC, No LWW, IRR Wartrace Creek Tenn.
FAL, REC Yes - E. coil LWW, IRR Abbreviations for designated use classifications for Alabama: PWS--Public Water Supply, S-Swimming and Other Whole Body Water-Contact Sports, F&W-Fish and Wildlife. For Tennessee: DWS-Domestic Water Supply, IWS-Industrial Water Supply, FAL-Fish and Aquatic Life, REC--Recreation, LWW-Livestock Watering and Wildlife, IRR--Irrigation, NAV--Navigation, TS-Trout Stream 4.2.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, because much of the subject lines are located on existing ROW, vegetation maintenance would continue to occur periodically, including the use of herbicides which could possibly have an impact on groundwater resources. During ROW maintenance, the vegetation management guidelines and procedures as described in Appendix D would be followed. With the implementation of BMPs and routine precautionary measures, no additional impacts to surface water would likely occur related to the ongoing maintenance activities under the No Action Alternative.
Action Alternative Soil disturbances associated with the use of or maintenance of access roads or transmission line upgrading activities could potentially result in adverse water quality impacts. Soil erosion and sedimentation can clog small streams and threaten aquatic life.
Continued removal of the tree canopy along stream crossings can increase water temperatures and algal growth, decrease dissolved oxygen levels, and cause adverse impacts to aquatic biota. However, TVA routinely includes precautions in the design of its transmission line projects to minimize these potential impacts (see Appendices D and E(SOPs)). In the unlikely event that any new permanent stream crossings are necessary, Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 215 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
~":,
Line/Stream-Reservoir Tennessee River-Chickamauga STR 49-N. Tullahoma Tap 161-kV (L5829)
Tennessee River-Kentucky Duck River-Normandy Carroll Creek Duck River-Below Normandy Doddy Creek Garrison Fork Wartrace Creek State
- Classification 1
Tenn.
Tenn.
Tenn.
Tenn.
Tenn.
Tenn.
Tenn.
DWS,IWS, FAL, REC, LWW,IRR, NAV DWS,IWS, FAL, REC, LWW,IRR, NAV DWS,IWS, FAL, REC, LWW,IRR FAL, REC, LWW,IRR DWS, FAL, REC, LWW, IRR, TS FAL, REC, LWW,IRR DWS,IWS, FAL, REC, LWW,IRR FAL, REC, LWW,IRR Chapter 4
. ~ + " --
3~3(d~ ListedlReasOrl
,- *'j4,'
~+~,
No No No No Yes - E. coli Yes - habitat loss from erosion, flow alteration No Yes - E. coli 1 Abbreviations for designated use classifications for Alabama: PWS--Public Water Supply, S-Swimming and Other Whole Body Water-Contact Sports, F&W-Fish and Wildlife. For Tennessee: DWS-Domestic Water Supply, IWS-Industrial Water Supply, FAL-Fish and Aquatic Life, REC--Recreation, LWW-Livestock Watering and Wildlife, IRR--Irrigation, NAV--Navigation, TS-Trout Stream 4.2.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, because much of the subject lines are located on existing ROW, vegetation maintenance would continue to occur periodically, including the use of herbicides which cou.ld possibly have an impact on groundwater resources. During ROW maintenance, the vegetation management guidelines and procedures as described in Appendix D would be followed. With the implementation of BMPs and routine precautionary measures, no additional impacts to surface water would likely occur related to the ongoing maintenance activities under the No Action Alternative.
Action Alternative Soil disturbances associated with the use of or maintenance of access roads or transmission line upgrading activities could potentially result in adverse water quality impacts. Soil erosion and sedimentation can clog small streams and threaten aquatic life.
Continued removal of the tree canopy along stream crossings can increase water temperatures and algal growth, decrease dissolved oxygen levels, and cause adverse impacts to aquatic biota. However, TVA routinely includes precautions in the design of its transmission line projects to minimize these potential impacts (see Appendices D and E(SOPs)). In the unlikely event that any new permanent stream crossings are necessary, Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 215
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site these crossings would be designed to avoid impeding runoff patterns and the natural I
movement of aquatic fauna. Temporary stream crossings and other upgrading and maintenance activities would comply with appropriate state permit requirements and TVA requirements as described in Muncy (1999). Canopies in all streamside management I
zones (SMZs) would be left undisturbed unless there were no practicable alternative (see Appendix H). Proper implementation of these controls is expected to result in only minor temporary impacts to surface waters. Any cumulative impacts to surface water quality are anticipated to be minor and insignificant.
4.3.
Aquatic Ecology 3
4.3.1. Affected Environment As described in Section 4.2 (Surface Water) above, the surface water drainage from the proposed transmission line improvements drain to the Tennessee River and its tributaries at I
the following locations: (1) Guntersville and Wheeler Reservoirs (Jackson, Limestone, and Morgan counties in Alabama); (2) at Nickajack and Chickamauga Reservoirs in southeast Tennessee (Hamilton, Marion, and Sequatchie counties) and northwest Georgia (Catoosa, Dade, and Walker counties); and (3) upstream and downstream of Normandy Dam on the Duck River in central Tennessee (Bedford and Coffee counties).
TVA routinely monitors streams and reservoirs in the Tennessee River drainage as part of I
its Reservoir Vital Signs monitoring program, and various water quality initiatives. While not all streams potentially affected by transmission line activities have been assessed, those that have contain diverse aquatic communities (i.e., fish and invertebrates) representative I
of streams and reservoirs in the Cumberland Plateau, Eastern Highland Rim, Outer Nashville Basin, Plateau Escarpment, Sequatchie Valley, Southern Table Plateaus and Southern Limestone/Dolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills ecoregions.
4.3.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Routine maintenance (including vegetative maintenance) is ongoing on the ROWs of the transmission lines currently in service. Maintenance of access roads and transmission facilities can potentially expose soil and increase erosion that can lead to adverse impacts I
to water quality and aquatic biota. Improper use of herbicides to control vegetation could result in runoff to streams and subsequent aquatic impacts. TVA routinely includes precautions in maintenance of its transmission line projects to minimize these potential I
impacts (Muncy 1999).
ROW maintenance employs manual and low impact methods within (SMZs wherever possible, and these practices would continue (see Appendix H). In areas requiring chemical treatment, only EPA-registered herbicides would be used in accordance with label directions designed in part to restrict applications in the vicinity of receiving waters and to prevent unacceptable aquatic impacts. Proper implementation of these controls is expected to result in only minor direct and indirect impacts to surface waters or aquatic habitats and the aquatic communities they support. No cumulative impacts are expected.
3 Action Alternative The current inactive 500-kV transmission lines would be upgraded as described in Section 2.6, and routine vegetation and access maintance would be re-establisted for their ROWs.
I The other transmission lines that would be upgraded are already in service. These lines undergo environmental review as part of TVA's vegetation maintenance program. Because 216 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site these crossings would be designed to avoid impeding runoff patterns and the natural movement of aquatic fauna. Temporary stream crossings and other upgrading and maintenance activities would comply with appropriate state permit requirements and TVA requirements as described in Muncy (1999). Canopies in all streamside management zones (SMZs) would be left undisturbed unless there were no practicable alternative (see Appendix H). Proper implementation of these controls is expected to result in only minor temporary impacts to surface waters. Any cumulative impacts to surface water quality are anticipated to be minor and insignificant.
4.3.
Aquatic Ecology 4.3.1. Affected Environment As described in Section 4.2 (Surface Water) above, the surface water drainage from the proposed transmission line improvements drain to the Tennessee River and its tributaries at the following locations: (1) Guntersville and Wheeler Reservoirs (Jackson, Limestone, and Morgan counties in Alabama); (2) at Nickajack and Chickamauga Reservoirs in southeast Tennessee (Hamilton, Marion, and Sequatchie counties) and northwest Georgia (Catoosa, Dade, and Walker counties); and (3) upstream and downstream of Normandy Dam on the Duck River in central Tennessee (Bedford and Coffee counties).
TVA routinely monitors streams and reservoirs in the Tennessee River drainage as part of its Reservoir Vital Signs monitoring program, and various water quality initiatives. While not all streams potentially affected by transmission line activities have been assessed, those that have contain diverse aquatic communities (Le., fish and invertebrates) representative of streams and reservoirs in the Cumberland Plateau, Eastern Highland Rim, Outer Nashville Basin, Plateau Escarpment, Sequatchie Valley, Southern Table Plateaus and Southern Limestone/Dolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills ecoregions.
4.3.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Routine maintenance (including vegetative maintenance) is ongoing on the ROWs of the transmission lines currently in service. Maintenance of access roads and transmission facilities can potentially expose soil and increase erosion that can lead to adverse impacts to water quality and aquatic biota. Improper use of herbicides to control vegetation could result in runoff to streams and subsequent aquatic impacts. TVA routinely includes precautions in maintenance of its transmission line projects to minimize these potential impacts (Muncy 1999).
ROW maintenance employs manual and low impact methods within (SMZs wherever possible, and these practices would continue (see Appendix H). In areas requiring chemical treatment, only EPA-registered herbicides would be used in accordance with label directions designed in part to restrict applications in the vicinity of receiving waters and to prevent unacceptable aquatic impacts. Proper implementation of these controls is expected to result in only minor direct and indirect impacts to surface waters oraquatic habitats and the aquatic communities they support. No cumulative impacts are expected.
Action Alternative The current inactive 500-kV transmission lines would be upgraded as described in Section 2.6, and routine vegetation and access maintance would be re-establisted for their ROWs.
The other transmission lines that would be upgraded are already in service. These lines undergo environmental review as part of TVA's vegetation maintenance program. Because 216 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 these transmission lines are already in service and being maintained, upgrades associated with operation of a single unit at BLN would have no additional effects above those presently seen on these transmission ROWs. Existing data indicates that no important aquatic resources would be affected by reestablishing maintenance activities of the 500-kV lines or upgrading the other transmission lines currently in service. Field reviews will be conducted prior to vegetation clearing or line upgrade activities to confirm these findings.
Appropriate SMZs would be established and maintained per TVA guidelines (Muncy, 1999)
(also see Appendices D, E, and H). Proper implementation of these controls is expected to result in only minor temporary impacts to surface waters. No direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to aquatic communities or instream habitat are anticipated.
4.4.
Vegetation 4.4.1. Affected Environment The proposed transmission line upgrades would occur across seven Level IV Ecoregions including the Cumberland Plateau, Eastern Highland Rim, Outer Nashville Basin, Plateau Escarpment, Sequatchie Valley, Southern Table Plateaus and Southern Limestone/Dolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills (Figure 4-1). The natural vegetation, along with geologic strata and predominant land use, varies considerably across the project area (Griffith et al. 1998, Griffith et al. 2001,). Vegetation in the subject transmission line ROWs included in proposed project is characterized by two main types: herbaceous vegetation (greater than 95 percent) and forest (less than 5 percent).
Herbaceous vegetation occurs on about 95 percent of the subject transmission line ROWs.
Herbaceous vegetation is characterized by greater than 75 percent cover of forbs and grasses and less than 25 percent cover of other types of vegetation, is typical of existing transmission line ROWs due to the repeated treatment of woody vegetation to maintain reliability of the transmission system. The type of herbaceous vegetation found in transmission line ROWs can vary, ranging from heavily disturbed areas with high cover of non-native plants to dry sites dominated by native species that resemble prairie remnants.
Some sections of transmission line occurring in areas with low relief likely contain wetland vegetation. Although the percent cover of native species varies considerably across the project area, the high level of disturbance typical of ROWs suggests many areas likely contain a large proportion of non-native, invasive species.
Forest cover, which occupies 5 percent or less of the subject ROWs is likely deciduous in composition. Deciduous forest is characterized by trees with overlapping crowns where deciduous species account for more than 75 percent of the canopy cover. Deciduous forest occurs only in areas of ROW where the transmission line crosses very steep terrain and in areas where vegetation on existing, de-energized lines has not been maintained for some years. In forested areas with steep terrain the conductor is sometimes high enough above canopy trees that regular removal of woody species is not necessary to maintain reliability of the transmission system. Because these spanned areas (i.e. those areas of high relief where the transmission is high above the canopy such that ROW clearing is not necessary) often contain relatively undisturbed forest, they are typically dominated by native species indicative of the region. Conversely, those forested areas within unmaintained ROWs along de-energized transmission lines are typically early successional and usually contain a greater proportion of non-native, invasive species. These areas are typically dominated by saplings and/or small pole-sized trees.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 217 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 these transmission lines are already in service and being maintained, upgrades associated with operation of a single unit at BLN would have no additional effects above those presently seen on these transmission ROWs. Existing data indicates that no important aquatic resources would be affected by reestablishing maintenance activities of the 500-kV lines or upgrading the other transmission lines currently in service. Field reviews will be conducted prior to vegetation clearing or line upgrade activities to confirm these findings.
Appropriate SMZs would be established and maintained per TVA guidelines (Muncy, 1999)
(also see Appendices D, E, and H). Proper implementation of these controls is expected to result in only minor temporary impacts to surface waters. No direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to aquatic communities or instream habitat are anticipated.
4.4.
Vegetation 4.4.1. Affected Environment The proposed transmission line upgrades would occur across seven Level IV Ecoregions including the Cumberland Plateau, Eastern Highland Rim, Outer Nashville Basin, Plateau Escarpment, Sequatchie Valley, Southern Table Plateaus and Southern LimestonelDolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills (Figure 4-1). The natural vegetation, along with geologic strata and predominant land use, varies considerably across the project area (Griffith et al. 1998, Griffith et al. 2001,). Vegetation in the subject transmission line ROWs included in proposed project is characterized by two main types: herbaceous vegetation (greater than 95 percent) and forest (less than 5 percent).
Herbaceous vegetation occurs on about 95 percent of the subject transmission line ROWs.
Herbaceous vegetation is characterized by greater than 75 percent cover of forbs and grasses and less than 25 percent cover of other types of vegetation, is typical of existing transmission line ROWs due to the repeated treatment of woody vegetation to maintain reliability of the transmission system. The type of herbaceous vegetation found in transmission line ROWs can vary, ranging from heavily disturbed areas with high cover of non-native plants to dry sites dominated by native species that resemble prairie remnants.
Some sections of transmission line occurring in areas with low relief likely contain wetland vegetation. Although the percent cover of native species varies considerably across the project area, the high level of disturbance typical of ROWs suggests many areas likely contain a large proportion of non-native, invasive species.
Forest cover, which occupies 5 percent or less of the subject ROWs is likely deciduous in composition. Deciduous forest is characterized by trees with overlapping crowns where deciduous species account for more than 75 percent of the canopy cover. Deciduous forest occurs only in areas of ROW where the transmission line crosses very steep terrain and in areas where vegetation on existing, de-energized lines has not been maintained for some years. In forested areas with steep terrain the conductor is sometimes high enough above canopy trees that regular removal of woody species is not necessary to maintain reliability of the transmission system. Because these spanned areas (i.e. those areas of high relief where the transmission is high above the canopy such that ROW clearing is not necessary) often contain relatively undisturbed forest, they are typically dominated by native species indicative of the region. Conversely, those forested areas within unmaintained ROWs along de-energized transmission lines are typically early successional and usually contain a greater proportion of non-native, invasive species. These areas are typically dominated by saplings and/or small pole-sized trees.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 217
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Legend Transmission Lines in EIS ECOLV4 Cumberland Plateau Dissected Plateau Eastern Highland Rim Inner Nashville Basin Little Mountain Southeem Inner Piedmont Outer Nashville Basin Southern Limestone/Dolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills Plateau Escarpment Southern Sandstone Ridges Sequatchie Valley Southern Shale Valleys N
Shale Hills Southern Table Plateaus Southern Dissected Ridges and Knobs Talladega Upland W
E S
C IC
Ž7 M
Figure 4-1.
Level IV Ecoregions Crossed by Transmission Lines Requiring Upgrades to Support Operation of a Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 218 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Legend
-- Transmission Lin es in EIS little Mountain ECO_LV4 CAlterNashvilie Basin Cumberland Plateau Dissected Plateau Eastern Highland Rim Inner Nashville Basin Plateau Escarpment Sequatchie Valley Shale Hills Soull1em Dissected Ridges and Knobs o
10 20 jI""'II
' MIles Sou thern Inner Piedmont Soull1em LimestoneiDoIom~e Valleys and Low Rolling Hills Soull1em Sandstone Ridges Southern Shale Valleys Soull1em Table Plateaus Talladega Upland Figure 4-1.
Level IV Ecoregions Crossed by Transmission Lines Requiring Upgrades to Support Operation of a Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 218 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 4.4.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under this alternative, the existing transmission lines would not be upgraded and the area within the ROWs would remain in its current condition. Methods used to manage vegetation along the ROW and maintain transmission infrastructure would be unchanged. Vegetation maintenance of the ROWs would continue, and portions of the ROW could be periodically disturbed by minor activities related to maintaining transmission infrastructure. TVA standard operating procedure of revegetating any disturbed areas with non-invasive species would help prevent introduction and spread of invasive species in the project area (Muncy 1999). Thus, adoption of the No Action Alternative would not affect plant life in the area of the proposed ROW. The structure and composition of the vegetation would not be appreciably altered, under the No Action Alternative.
Action Alternative Under this alternative, the existing transmission lines would be upgraded, and the methods used to manage vegetation along the ROW and to maintain transmission infrastructure would be comparable to what currently occurs. However, botanical surveys of the ROWs that would occur as part of the process (see Section 2.6.4) could identify more federally listed or state-listed plants along those ROWs. If rare plants are observed, no aerial application of herbicide would take place along parts of the ROW inhabited by listed species. In areas that currently receive aerial applications of herbicides, local changes to vegetation structure and composition would likely occur if the application was suspended. These changes would have little ecological impact because any shifts in species composition would not change the early successional nature of the plant community.
Adoption of this alternative would not require new clearing of forest, although areas of herbaceous vegetation may need to be cleared to facilitate upgrading activities. Effects to herbaceous vegetation in the existing ROWs would be temporary and would not likely persist for more than approximately a year after activities cease. TVA standard operating procedure of revegetating with non-invasive species would help prevent introduction and spread of invasive species in the project area (Muncy 1999). Adoption the Action Alternative would not significantly affect the botanical characteristics of the area in which the subject ROWs are located.
4.5.
Wildlife 4.5.1. Affected Environment Two types of terrestrial habitat occur in the transmission line ROWs associated with proposed generation at BLN. These include early-successional, i.e., herbaceous habitat, which occupies about 95 percent of the subject ROWs and forested habitat, which occupies the remaining 5 percent. A more detailed description of vegetation is provided in Section 4.4.1.
Early successional habitat occurs along most of the existing transmission line ROWs. Within this habitat type, the ROWs cross agricultural fields (occupying about 40 percent of the coverage), herbaceous or scrub-shrub (about 40 percent of the coverage), and maintained lawns or fields (approximatelyl 0 percent of the coverage). Some sections of the subject transmission line ROW occur in areas with minor topographical relief. Such areas likely contain early successional emergent wetland habitat.
Birds commonly observed in early successional habitat include the Carolina wren, American robin, northern mockingbird, northern cardinal, eastern towhee, eastern bluebird, brown Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 219 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
4.4.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Chapter 4 Under this alternative, the existing transmission lines would not be upgraded and the area within the ROWs would remain in its current condition. Methods used to manage vegetation along the ROWand maintain transmission infrastructure would be unchanged. Vegetation maintenance of the ROWs would continue, and portions of the ROW could be periodically disturbed by minor activities related to maintaining transmission infrastructure. TVA standard operating procedure of revegetating any disturbed areas with non-invasive species would help prevent introduction and spread of invasive species in the project area (Muncy 1999). Thus, adoption of the No Action Alternative would not affect plant life in the area of the proposed ROW. The structure and composition of the vegetation would not be appreciably altered, under the No Action Alternative.
Action Alternative Under this alternative, the existing transmission lines would be upgraded, and the methods used to manage vegetation along the ROWand to maintain transmission infrastructure would be comparable to what currently occurs. However, botanical surveys of the ROWs that would occur as part of the process (see Section 2.6.4) could identify more federally listed or state-listed plants along those ROWs. If rare plants are observed, no aerial application of herbicide would take place along parts of the ROW inhabited by listed species. In areas that currently receive aerial applications of herbicides, local changes to vegetation structure and composition would likely occur if the application was suspended. These changes would have little ecological impact because any shifts in species composition would not change the early successional nature of the plant community.
Adoption of this alternative would not require new clearing of forest, although areas of herbaceous vegetation may need to be cleared to facilitate upgrading activities. Effects to herbaceous vegetation in the existing ROWs would be temporary and would not likely persist for more than approximately a year after activities cease. TVA standard operating procedure of revegetating with non-invasive species would help prevent introduction and spread of invasive species in the project area (Muncy 1999). Adoption the Action Alternative would not significantly affect the botanical characteristics of the area in which the subject ROWs are located.
4.5.
Wildlife 4.5.1. Affected Environment Two types of terrestrial habitat occur in the transmission line ROWs associated with proposed generation at BLN. These include early-successional, i.e., herbaceous habitat, which occupies about 95 percent of the subject ROWs and forested habitat, which occupies the remaining 5 percent. A more detailed description of vegetation is provided in Section 4.4.1.
Early successional habitat occurs along most of the existing transmission line ROWs. Within this habitat type, the ROWs cross agricultural fields (occupying about 40 percent of the coverage), herbaceous or scrub-shrub (about 40 percent of the coverage), and maintained lawns or fields (approximately10 percent of the coverage). Some sections of the subject transmission line ROW occur in areas with minor topographical relief. Such areas likely contain early successional emergent wetland habitat.
Birds commonly observed in early successional habitat include the Carolina wren, American robin, northern mockingbird, northern cardinal, eastern towhee, eastern bluebird, brown Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 219
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site thrasher, field sparrow, eastern meadowlark, and European starling. Red-tailed hawk and I
American kestrel also forage along ROWs. Mammals frequently observed in this type of habitat include Virginia opossum, eastern cottontail, striped skunk, white-tailed deer, eastern mole, woodchuck, white-footed mouse, and hispid cotton rat. Coyote, bobcat, red fox, and gray fox also use ROWs that cross forest as corridors for travel and foraging. Common reptiles found along ROWs include black racer, black rat snake, milk snake, and garter snake. Wetlands within early successional habitats provide habitat for amphibians such as American toad, green 3
frog, northern cricket frog, upland chorus frog, and red-spotted newt.
Forested habitat present within the existing ROWs is likely upland deciduous forest. Deciduous forest occurs only in areas where the transmission line crosses very steep terrain. In these I
spanned areas, the conductor is high enough above canopy trees that regular removal of woody species is not necessary to maintain reliability of the transmission system.
3 Deciduous forests provide habitat for wild turkey, downy woodpecker, pileated woodpecker, white-breasted nuthatch, and American crow, as well as neotropical songbirds such as wood thrush, blue-gray gnatcatcher, red-eyed vireo, and ovenbird. White-tailed deer and gray squirrel are frequently found in deciduous forests, and scattered rock outcrops within these forests provide habitat for a variety of small mammals. Northern zigzag salamander and slimy salamander also inhabit the forest floor of deciduous forests. Common reptiles include eastern I
box turtle, northern ringneck snake, black rat snake, and northern copperhead.
Unique and important terrestrial habitats, such as caves, occur near the corridors. The TVA Natural Heritage database contains records of 215 caves within 3 miles of the existing I
transmission line ROWs. The closest cave records are approximately 0.25 mile from transmission line L5613 in Marion County, Tennessee. All other known cave locations are greater than 0.5 mile from the ROWs.
Twelve heron colonies are reported within 3 miles of, but greater than 0.25 mile from, the subject ROWs. Except for seasonal aggregations of waterfowl along the Tennessee River, no I
other aggregations of migratory birds occur in the project area.
4.5.2. Environmental Consequences 3
No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, early-successional and forested habitat within the ROWs would be maintained at current proportions and thus would not result in changes to wildlife habitat.
I Methods used to manage vegetation along the ROW and maintain transmission infrastructure would be unchanged. Clearing of the ROW for vegetation maintenance would continue to occur, and portions of the ROW would be periodically disturbed by minor activities related to I
maintaining transmission infrastructure. Selection of the No Action Alternative would not result in adverse direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to terrestrial animals.
Action Alternative Adoption of the Action Alternative would not require new clearing of forest, although areas of vegetation within some ROWs may need to be re-cleared to facilitate maintenance activities.
Some ROWs likely have undergone secondary succession, resulting in establishment of young I
trees. The removal of the taller vegetation within these areas may temporarily displace larger animals. Some smaller animals occupying the areas, such as mice, shrews, frogs, and salamanders, also may move into adjacent areas during upgrading and maintenance activities.
i Following the upgrading and re-establising maintenance activities of any sites, wildlife favoring edge and early successional habitats would reoccupy these areas.
220 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site thrasher, field sparrow, eastern meadowlark, and European starling. Red-tailed hawk and American kestrel also forage along ROWs. Mammals frequently observed in this type of habitat include Virginia opossum, eastern cottontail, striped skunk, white-tailed deer, eastern mole, woodchuck, white-footed mouse, and hispid cotton rat. Coyote, bobcat, red fox, and gray fox also use ROWs that cross forest as corridors for travel and foraging. Common reptiles found along ROWs include black racer, black rat snake, milk snake, and garter snake. Wetlands within early successional habitats provide habitat for amphibians such as American toad, green frog, northern cricket frog, upland chorus frog, and red-spotted newt.
Forested habitat present within the existing ROWs is likely upland deciduous forest. Deciduous forest occurs only in areas where the transmission line crosses very steep terrain. In these spanned areas, the conductor is high enough above canopy trees that regular removal of woody species is not necessary to maintain reliability of the transmission system.
Deciduous forests provide habitat for wild turkey, downy woodpecker, pileated woodpecker, white-breasted nuthatch, and American crow, as well as neotropical songbirds such as wood thrush, blue-gray gnatcatcher, red-eyed vireo, and ovenbird. White-tailed deer and gray squirrel are frequently found in deciduous forests, and scattered rock outcrops within these forests provide habitat for a variety of small mammals. Northern zigzag salamander and slimy salamander also inhabit the forest floor of deciduous forests. Common reptiles include eastern box turtle, northern ring neck snake, black rat snake, and northern copperhead.
Unique and important terrestrial habitats, such as caves, occur near the corridors. The TVA Natural Heritage database contains records of 215 caves within 3 miles of the existing transmission line ROWs. The closest cave records are approximately 0.25 mile from transmission line L5613 in Marion County, Tennessee. All other known cave locations are greater than 0.5 mile from the ROWs.
Twelve heron colonies are reported within 3 miles of, but greater than 0.25 mile from, the subject ROWs. Except for seasonal aggregations of waterfowl along the Tennessee River, no other aggregations of migratory birds occur in the project area.
4.5.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, early-successional and forested habitat within the ROWs would be maintained at current proportions and thus would not result in changes to wildlife habitat.
Methods used to manage vegetation along the ROWand maintain transmission infrastructure would be unchanged. Clearing of the ROW for vegetation maintenance would continue to occur, and portions of the ROW would be periodically disturbed by minor activities related to maintaining transmission infrastructure. Selection of the No Action Alternative would not result in adverse direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to terrestrial animals.
Action Alternative Adoption of the Action Alternative would not require new clearing of forest, although areas of vegetation within some ROWs may need to be re-cleared to facilitate maintenance activities.
Some ROWs likely have undergone secondary succession, resulting in establishment of young trees. The removal of the taller vegetation within these areas may temporarily displace larger animals. Some smaller animals occupying the areas, such as mice, shrews, frogs, and salamanders, also may move into adjacent areas during upgrading and maintenance activities.
Following the upgrading and re-establising maintenance activities of any sites, wildlife favoring edge and early successional habitats would reoccupy these areas.
220 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I-I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 There are records of 215 caves and 12 heron colonies within 3 miles of the ROWs. However, because caves and heronries are greater than 0.25 mile from the ROWs, adoption of the Action Alternative would not result in adverse impacts to these resources. TVA biologists would perform field surveys to confirm these findings prior to re-clearing of the ROWs for the 500-kV lines and upgrading the transmission lines currently in service. If previously undocumented resources are identified within these ROWs during the surveys, appropriate protective buffers would be placed around those resources. Most work would be restricted to areas immediately surrounding existing ROWs. Because known terrestrial animal resources within the ROWs are regionally abundant and protective measures would be taken to protect newly discovered sensitive resources, selection of the Action Alternative would not result in adverse direct, indirect or cumulative impacts to terrestrial animals.
4.6.
Endangered and Threatened Species In compliance with the Endangered Species Act, TVA has prepared a Biological Assessment (BA) of potential effects to endangered and threatened species of aquatic animals, plants, and terrestrial wildlife from proposed completion/construction and operation of a nuclear plant at BLN, including the subject transmission line upgrades (TVA 2009c). Results of the analysis prepared for the BA indicate proposed actions along transmission lines are not likely to adversely affect any federally listed species or adversely modify critical habitat. Those findings are described in the sections below. TVA expects to conduct formal consultation with the USFWS in accordance with Section 7 of the Act.
4.6.1. Aquatic Animals 4.6.1.1.
Affected Environment As described in Section 4.2 of this document, the project areas of the proposed transmission line improvements drain to the Tennessee River and its tributaries at the following locations: (1)
Guntersville and Wheeler Reservoirs (Jackson, Limestone, and Morgan counties in Alabama);
(2) at Nickajack and Chickamauga Reservoirs in southeast Tennessee (Hamilton, Marion, and Sequatchie counties) and northwest Georgia (Catoosa, Dade, and Walker counties); and (3) upstream and downstream of Normandy Dam on the Duck River in central Tennessee (Bedford and Coffee counties).
Federally listed aquatic species known to be present in streams in counties in the areas crossed by one or more of these transmission lines are listed in Table 4-2. State-listed animal species are provided in Appendix F, Table F-1.
Table 4-2.
Federally Listed Aquatic Animal Species Present in Counties Affected by ProposedTransmission Line Upgrades Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Snails Anthony's river snail*#
Athearnia anthonyi LE Armored snail Pyrgulopsis pachyta LE Owen spring limnephilid caddisfly Glyphopsyche sequatchie C
Royal marstonia Pyrgulopsis ogmorhaphe LE Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 221 I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 There are records of 215 caves and 12 heron colonies within 3 miles of the ROWs. However, because caves and heronries are greater than 0.25 mile from the ROWs, adoption of the Action Alternative would not result in adverse impacts to these resources. TVA biologists would perform field surveys to confirm these findings prior to re-clearing of the ROWs for the 500-kV lines and upgrading the transmission lines currently in service. If previously undocumented resources are identified within these ROWs during the surveys, appropriate protective buffers would be placed around those resources. Most work would be restricted to areas immediately surrounding existing ROWs. Because known terrestrial animal resources within the ROWs are regionally abundant and protective measures would be taken to protect newly discovered sensitive resources, selection of the Action Alternative would not result in adverse direct, indirect or cumulative impacts to terrestrial animals.
I 4.6.
Endangered and Threatened Species I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
In compliance with the Endangered Species Act, TVA has prepared a Biological Assessment (BA) of potential effects to endangered and threatened species of aquatic animals, plants, and terrestrial wildlife from proposed completion/construction and operation of a nuclear plant at BLN, including the subject transmission line upgrades (TVA 2009c). Results of the analysis prepared for the BA indicate proposed actions along transmission lines are not likely to adversely affect any federally listed species or adversely modify critical habitat. Those findings are described in the sections below. TVA expects to conduct formal consultation with the USFWS in accordance with Section 7 of the Act.
4.6.1. Aquatic Animals 4.6.1.1.
Affected Environment As described in Section 4.2 of this document, the project areas of the proposed transmission line improvements drain to the Tennessee River and its tributaries at the following locations: (1)
Guntersville and Wheeler Reservoirs (Jackson, Limestone, and Morgan counties in Alabama);
(2) at Nickajack and Chickamauga Reservoirs in southeast Tennessee (Hamilton, Marion, and Sequatchie counties) and northwest Georgia (Catoosa, Dade, and Walker counties); and (3) upstream and downstream of Normandy Dam on the Duck River in central Tennessee (Bedford and Coffee counties).
Federally listed aquatic species known to be present in streams in counties in the areas crossed by one or more of these transmission lines are listed in Table 4-2. State-listed animal species are provided in Appendix F, Table F-1.
Table 4-2.
Federally Listed Aquatic Animal Species Present in Counties Affected by ProposedTransmission Line Upgrades
. Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Snails Anthony's river snail*#
Athearnia anthonyi LE Armored snail Pyrgu/opsis pachyta LE Owen spring limnephilid caddisfly G/yphopsyche sequatchie C
Royal marstonia Pyrgu/opsis ogmorhaphe LE Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 221
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Slabside pearlymussel Lexingtonia dolabelloides C
Slender campeloma*
Campeloma decampi LE Mussels Alabama lampmussel#
Lampsilis virescens LE Alabama moccasinshell Medionidus acutissimus LT Birdwing pearlymussel Lemiox rimosus LE Cracking pearlymussel Hemistena lata LE Cumberland bean Villosa trabalis LE Cumberland combshell Epioblasma brevidens LE Cumberland monkeyface Quadrula intermedia LE Cumberland pigtoe Pleurobema gibberum LE Dromedary pearlymussel Dromus dromas LE Fine-lined Pocketbook Lampsilis altilis LT Fine-rayed Pigtoe#
Fusconaia cuneolus LE Fluted kidneyshell Ptychobranchus subtentum C
Orange-foot Pimpleback Plethobasus cooperianus LE Pale lilliput#
Toxolasma cylindrellus LE Pink mucket*#
Lampsilis abrupta LE Ring pink Obovaria retusa LE Rough pigtoe*
Pleurobema plenum LE Sheepnose Plethobasus cyphyus C
Shiny pigtoe pearlymussel#
Fusconaia cor LE Slabside pearlymussel*
Lexingtonia dolabelloides C
Southern pigtoe Pleurobema georgianum LE Spectaclecase Cumberlandia monodonta C
Tan riffleshell Epioblasma florentina walkeri LE Tuberculed blossom pearlymussel Epioblasma torulosa torulosa LE Turgid blossom pearlymussel Epioblasma turgidula LE Fish I
I I
3 I
I I
I I
I I
Boulder darter Etheostoma wapiti Palezone shiner#
Notropis albizonatus Slackwater darter Etheostoma boschungi Snail darter Percina tanasi Spotfin chub Cyprinella monacha Yellowfin madtom Noturus flavipinnis LE LE LT LT LT LT Species that are known to occur in watersheds directly affected by construction activities are indicated by (*).
Species reported from Jackson County, Alabama are indicated by (#)
Status Codes: LE = Listed endangered; LT = Listed threatened;; C = Candidate for Federal Listing I!
II 222 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 222 Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Siabside pearlymussel Lexingtonia dolabel/oides C
Slender campeloma*
Campeloma decampi LE Mussels Alabama lampmussel#
Lampsilis virescens LE Alabama moccasinshell Medionidus acutissimus LT Birdwing pearlymussel Lemiox rimosus LE Cracking pearlymussel Hemistena lata LE Cumberland bean Vil/osa traba/is LE Cumberland combshell Epioblasma brevidens LE Cumberland monkeyface Quadrula intermedia LE Cumberland pigtoe Pleurobema gibberum LE Dromedary pearlymussel Dromus dromas LE Fine-lined Pocketbook Lampsilis altilis LT Fine-rayed Pigtoe#
Fusconaia cuneolus LE Fluted kidneyshell Ptychobranchus subtentum C
Orange-foot Pimpleback Plethobasus cooperia nus LE Pale lilliput#
Toxolasma cy/indrel/us LE Pink mucket*#
Lampsilis abrupta LE Ring pink Obovaria retusa LE Rough pigtoe*
Pleurobema plenum LE Sheepnose Plethobasus cyphyus C
Shiny pigtoe pearlymussel#
Fusconaia cor LE Slabs ide pearlymussel*
Lexingtonia dolabel/oides C
Southern pigtoe Pleurobema georgianum LE S pectaclecase Cumberlandia monodonta C
Tan riffles hell Epioblasma f/orentina walkeri LE Tuberculed blossom pearlymussel Epioblasma torulosa torulosa LE Turgid blossom pearlymussel Epioblasma turgidula LE Fish Boulder darter Etheostoma wapiti LE Palezone shiner#
Notropis albizonatus LE Slackwater darter Etheostoma boschungi LT Snail darter Percina tanasi LT Spotfin chub Cyprinel/a monacha LT Yellowfin madtom Noturus f/avipinnis LT Species that are known to occur in watersheds directly affected by construction activities are indicated by (*).
Species reported from Jackson County, Alabama are indicated by (#)
Status Codes: LE = Listed endangered; L T = Listed threatened;; C = Candidate for Federal Listing Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 4.6.1.2.
Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, because the proposed project is on existing ROW, no impacts to federally listed or state-listed aquatic organisms would result from transmission infrastructure upgrades or ongoing maintenance.
Action Alternative The current inactive 500-kV transmission lines would be upgraded as described in Secton 2.6; and routine vegetation and access maintenance would be re-establisted for their ROWs. The other transmission lines that would be upgraded are already in service. These lines undergo environmental review as part of TVA's vegetation maintenance program. Because these transmission lines are already in service and being maintained, upgrades associated with operation of a single unit at BLN would have no additional effects above those presently seen on these transmission ROWs.
Routine maintenance of access roads and transmission facilities can potentially expose soil and increase erosion that could lead to adverse impacts to water quality, thereby affecting aquatic biota. Improper use of herbicides to control vegetation could result in runoff to streams and subsequent aquatic impacts. TVA routinely includes precautions in maintenance of its transmission line projects to minimize these potential impacts (Muncy 1999).
ROW maintenance would employ manual and low-impact methods within SMZs wherever possible (see Appendix H). In areas requiring chemical treatment, only EPA-registered herbicides would be used in accordance with label directions designed in part to restrict applications in the vicinity of receiving waters and to prevent unacceptable impacts to aquatic life impacts. Broadcast aerial application of herbicides adjacent to streams containing federally listed species would be prohibited.
Existing data indicate that no important aquatic species would be affected by re-establishing maintenance activities of the 500-kV lines or upgrading the other transmission lines currently in service. Field reviews will be conducted prior to vegetation clearing or line upgrade activities to confirm these findings. If habitats for any federally or state-listed animal species occur, measures to avoid and/or minimize impacts would be taken such that no significant impacts to sensitive aquatic species or their habitats occur. With the proper implementation of these controls no direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to federally or state-listed aquatic species or their habitats are anticipated.
4.6.2. Plants 4.6.2.1.
Affected Environment Review of the TVA Natural Heritage database (queried September 2009) indicates that 12 occurrences of nine state-listed species and one occurrence of one federally listed species have been documented within the transmission ROWs subject to proposed upgrades (see Table 4.3 and Appendix F, Table F-2). Additionally, five federally listed, one candidate for federal listing, and 108 state-listed plant species occur within 5 miles of the proposed transmission line upgrades. Five other federally listed and one other candidate for federal listing are known from counties where the transmission line upgrades would occur, but greater than 5 miles away from the ROWs. No designated Critical Habitat for plant species occurs in the project area.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 223 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 4.6.1.2.
Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, because the proposed project is on existing ROW, no impacts to federally listed or state-listed aquatic organisms would result from transmission infrastructure upgrades or ongoing maintenance.
Action Alternative The current inactive 500-kV transmission lines would be upgr~ded as described in Secton 2.6; and routine vegetation and access maintenance would be re-establisted for their ROWs. The other transmission lines that would be upgraded are already in service. These lines undergo environmental review as part of TVA's vegetation maintenance program. Because these transmission lines are already in service and being maintained, upgrades associated with operation of a single unit at BLN would have no additional effects above those presently seen on these transmission ROWs.
Routine maintenance of access roads and transmission facilities can potentially expose soil and increase erosion that could lead to adverse impacts to water quality, thereby affecting aquatic biota. Improper use of herbicides to control vegetation could result in runoff to streams and subsequent aquatic impacts. TVA routinely includes precautions in maintenance of its transmission line projects to minimize these potential impacts (Muncy 1999).
ROW maintenance would employ manual and low-impact methods within SMZs wherever possible (see Appendix H). In areas requiring chemical treatment, only EPA-registered herbicides would be used in accordance with label directions designed in part to restrict applications in the vicinity of receiving waters and to prevent unacceptable impacts to aquatic life impacts. Broadcast aerial application of herbicides adjacent to streams containing federally listed species would be prohibited.
Existing data indicate that no important aquatic species would be affected by re-establishing maintenance activities of the 500-kV lines or upgrading the other transmission lines currently in service. Field reviews will be conducted prior to vegetation clearing or line upgrade activities to confirm these findings. If habitats for any federally or state-listed animal species occur, measures to avoid and/or minimize impacts would be taken such that no significant impacts to sensitive aquatic species or their habitats occur. With the proper implementation of these controls no direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts to federally or state-listed aquatic species or their habitats are anticipated.
4.6.2. Plants 4.6.2.1.
Affected Environment Review of the TVA Natural Heritage database (queried September 2009) indicates that 12 occurrences of nine state-listed species and one occurrence of one federally listed species have been documented within the transmission ROWs subject to proposed upgrades (see Table 4.3 and Appendix F, Table F-2). Additionally, five federally listed, one candidate for federal listing, and 108 state-listed plant species occur within 5 miles of the proposed transmission line upgrades. Five other federally listed and one other candidate for federal listing are known from counties where the transmission line upgrades would occur, but greater than 5 miles away from the ROWs. No designated Critical Habitat for plant species occurs in the project area.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 223
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table 4-3.
Federally Listed Terrestrial Plant Species Known Within and Near I
(Within 5 Miles) of the ROWs Subject to Upgrades and from the Counties Where Work Would Occur Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Price's potato-bean Apios priceana THR American Hart's-tongue fern2 Asplenium scolopendrium var.
THR americanum Morefield's leather-flower 2 Clematis morefie/dii END Leafy prairie-clover Dalea foliosa END Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides THR Fleshy-fruit gladecress 2 Leavenworthia crassa C
Mohr's Barbara's Buttons Marshallia mohrii THR Monkey-face orchid Platanthera integrilabia C
Green pitcher plant2 Sarracenia oreophila END Large-flowered skullcap' Scutellaria montana THR Chaffseed2 Schwalbea americana END Virginia spiraea Spiraea virginiana THR Status codes: C = Candidate; END = Endangered; THR = Threatened.
1Federally listed plant species documented from the ROWs where work would occur 2Federally listed species occurring within the county where work would occur, but not within 5 miles of the project area.
The federally listed large-flowered skullcap has been documented from the ROW of the Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line and the surrounding forests. According to the TVA Natural Heritage database, the most recent survey of the site was a 2002 visit when one individual plant was observed in the transmission line ROW. The large-flowered skullcap plant documented from the ROW is likely an aberrant and ephemeral individual; it is widely accepted that the preferred habitat for the species is forest (NatureServe 2009; USFWS 2002; Bridges1 984). The state-listed rose-gentian and fame-flower have also been observed along the Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV ROW. Two separate occurrences of rose-gentian have been documented along the transmission line. The species preference for open areas suggests that more occurrences of the species likely occur along the ROW, which provides one of the largest sources of consistently open habitat in that section of the Cumberland Plateau. Rose-gentian is endemic to the Cumberland Plateau and adjacent foothills of the Ridge and Valley physiographic province and is considered rare and imperiled across its range (NatureServe 2009).
During a 2008 botanical survey of the Widows Creek - Oglethorpe 161-kV #2 and #3 transmission line ROWs, TVA botanists observed multiple, previously unreported occurrences of state-listed species. Yellow giant-hyssop (two occurrences), dwarf larkspur, Dutchman's breeches, American columbo, barrens St. Johnswort, and Eggleston's violet were all observed in portions of the ROW underlain by limestone-derived soils. With exception of Dutchman's breeches, which was found in a spanned section of ROW with a forest overstory, all species occurred in open parts of the ROW dominated by herbaceous species. Between 500 and 1000 Small's stonecrop were estimated to occur in an area of exposed sandstone along the ROW.
All occurrences of state-listed species observed along the Widows Creek - Oglethorpe 161-kV
- 2 and #3 transmission lines appeared healthy and viable, and all have been exposed to periodic vegetation clearing associated with ROW maintenance.
224 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
II I
I 3
I I
I U
I I
I I
I Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table 4-3.
Federally Listed Terrestrial Plant Species Known Within and Near (Within 5 Miles) of the ROWs Subject to Upgrades and from the Counties Where Work Would Occur Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Price's potato-bean Apios priceana THR American Hart's-tongue fern 2
Asplenium scolopendrium var.
THR americanum Morefield's leather-flower 2
Clematis morefieldii END Leafy prairie-clover L
Dalea foliosa END Small whorled pogonia Isotria medeoloides THR Fleshy-fruit gladecress L
Leavenworthia crass a C
Mohr's Barbara's Buttons Marshallia mohrii THR Monkey-face orchid Platanthera integrilabia C
Green pitcher plane Sarracenia oreophila END Large-flowered skullcap 1
Scutellaria montana THR Chaffseed2 Schwalbea americana END Virginia spiraea Spiraea virginiana THR Status codes: C = Candidate; END = Endangered; THR = Threatened.
1 Federally listed plant species d.ocumented from the ROWs where work would occur 2Federally listed species occurring within the county where work would occur, but not within 5 miles of the project area.
The federally listed large-flowered skullcap has been documented from the ROW of the Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line and the surrounding forests. According to the TVA Natural Heritage database, the most recent survey of the site was a 2002 visit when one individual plant was observed in the transmission line ROW. The large-flowered skullcap plant documented from the ROW is likely an aberrant and ephemeral individual; it is widely accepted that the preferred habitat for the species is forest (NatureServe 2009; USFWS 2002; Bridges 1984). The state-listed rose-gentian and fame-flower have also been observed along the Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV ROW. Two separate occurrences of rose-gentian have been documented along the transmission line. The species preference for open areas suggests that more occurrences of the species likely occur along *the ROW, which provides one of the largest sources of consistently open habitat in that section of the Cumberland Plateau. Rose-gentian is endemic to the Cumberland Plateau and adjacent foothills of the Ridge and Valley physiographic province and is considered rare and imperiled across its range (NatureServe 2009).
During a 2008 botanical survey of the Widows Creek - Oglethorpe 161-kV #2 and #3 transmission line ROWs, TVA botanists observed multiple, previously unreported occurrences of state-listed species. Yellow giant-hyssop (two occurrences), dwarf larkspur, Dutchman's breeches, American columbo, barrens St. Johnswort, and Eggleston's violet were all observed in portions of the ROW underlain by limestone-derived soils. With exception of Dutchman's breeches, which was found in a spanned section of ROW with a forest overstory, all species occurred in open parts of the ROW dominated by herbaceous species. Between 500 and 1000 Small's stonecrop were estimated to occur in an area of exposed sandstone along the ROW.
All occurrences of state-listed species observed along the Widows Creek - Oglethorpe 161-kV
- 2 and #3 transmission lines appeared healthy and viable, and all have been exposed to periodic vegetation clearing associated with ROW maintenance.
224 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 One population of fame-flower was also observed along the Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain 161-kV transmission line ROW. This occurrence contained about 100 plants and was last observed in 2004.
Habitat for the majority of the species listed in Table 4-3 and Appendix F, Table F-2 potentially occurs in the subject transmission line ROWs. Rare plant species that inhabit forested areas may occur in the spanned sections of ROW where woody vegetation has not been removed and species capable of occupying open areas with higher light conditions could inhabit multiple locations along the ROW. TVA botanists would perform appropriately timed field surveys for federally and state-listed plant species along the affected ROWs before any upgrading or maintenance activities begin.
4.6.2.2.
Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the existing transmission lines would not be upgraded and methods used to manage vegetation along the ROWs and maintain transmission infrastructure would be unchanged. Aerial application of herbicide would continue to be prohibited in areas where federally listed and state-listed species occur or potentially occur in existing ROWs.
Known locations of rare plants would also continue to be avoided during routine maintenance of transmission infrastructure. Therefore, adoption of the No Action Alternative would have no significant impacts on endangered, threatened, and rare plant species.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, the proposed upgrades to the transmission lines would require some level of vegetation disturbance on existing ROWs. Federally listed and state-listed species have been previously documented along small portions of these ROWs. It is reasonably likely that additional listed species would be identified in the project area during the appropriately timed botanical surveys that would be conducted prior to any ground disturbing work. During these surveys, all sites where species have been previously reported would be resurveyed to determine if the rare species are still present and the full extent of the plants in the ROW. If, after botanical surveys, rare plants are identified in the project area, the following mitigation measures would be used to reduce or eliminate impacts to the species:
Areas with federally listed plant species would be included in the transmission line and access road engineering design specification drawings used during the planning and implementation of the upgrades. TVA botanists would help fence these areas to ensure construction crews would avoid the sites. Depending on the species present, construction may be timed so work takes place during the dormant season when plants are less likely to be harmed by construction. Any new structures would be placed to avoid impacting these areas. Additionally, access roads and the associated vehicle traffic would be excluded from these areas.
" Areas where state-listed species occur in the project area would be avoided unless there is no practical alternative. Avoidance measures would be comparable to those used for federally listed plants.
Any federally listed or state-listed plant species observed during field surveys most likely occupy either relatively undisturbed, spanned portions of ROW where woody vegetation has not been cleared, or areas where vegetation is maintained regularly to ensure that woody species do not interfere with the transmission lines. The proposed actions would not require clearing in areas Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 225 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
'I I
.1 Chapter 4 One population of fame-flower was also observed along the Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain 161-kV transmission line ROW. This occurrence contained about 100 plants and was last observed in 2004.
Habitat for the majority of the species listed in Table 4-3 and Appendix F, Table F-2 potentially occurs in the subject transmission line ROWs. Rare plant species that inhabit forested areas may occur in the spanned sections of ROW where woody vegetation has not been removed and species capable of occupying open areas with higher light conditions could inhabit multiple locations along the ROW. TVA botanists would perform appropriately timed field surveys for federally and state-listed plant species along the affected ROWs before any upgrading or maintenance activities begin.
4.6.2.2.
Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the existing transmission lines would not be upgraded and methods used to manage vegetation along the ROWs and maintain transmission infrastructure would be unchanged. Aerial application of herbicide would continue to be prohibited in areas where federally listed and state-listed species occur or potentially occur in existing ROWs.
Known locations of rare plants would also continue to be avoided during routine maintenance of transmission infrastructure. Therefore, adoption of the No Action Alternative would have no significant impacts on endangered, threatened, and rare plant species.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, the proposed upgrades to the transmission lines would require some level of vegetation disturbance on existing ROWs. Federally listed and state-listed species have been previously documented along small portions of these ROWs. It is reasonably likely that additional listed species would be identified in the project area during the appropriately timed botanical surveys that would be conducted prior to any ground disturbing work. During these surveys, all sites where species have been previously reported would be resurveyed to determine if the rare species are still present and the full extent of the plants in the ROW. If, after botanical surveys, rare plants are identified in the project area, the following mitigation measures would be used to reduce or eliminate impacts to the species:
Areas with federally listed plant species would be included in the transmission line and access road engineering design specification drawings used during the planning and implementation of the upgrades. TVA botanists would help fence these areas to ensure construction crews would avoid the sites. Depending on the species present, construction may be timed so work takes place during the dormant season when plants are less likely to be harmed by construction. Any new structures would be placed to avoid impacting these areas. Additionally, access roads and the associated vehicle traffic would be excluded from these areas.
Areas where state-listed species occur in the project area would be avoided unless there is no practical alternative. Avoidance measures would be comparable to those used for federally listed plants.
Any federally listed or state-listed plant species observed during field surveys most likely occupy either relatively undisturbed, spanned portions of ROW where woody vegetation has not been cleared, or areas where vegetation is maintained regularly to ensure that woody species do not interfere with the transmission lines. The proposed actions would not require clearing in areas Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 225
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site that are currently spanned. Thus, with the implementation of the above mitigation measures, the habitat where listed species occur would not be appreciably different under the Action Alternative. Therefore, the proposed actions under the Action Alternative are not likely to adversely affect federally listed species and would not significantly impact state-listed species.
4.6.3. Wildlife 4.6.3.1.
Affected Environment The TVA Natural Heritage database indicated that three federally listed terrestrial animal species (gray bat, Indiana bat, red-cockaded woodpecker), one federally protected bird (bald eagle), and 14 state-listed terrestrial animal species have been reported within 3 miles of any of the subject ROWs (Table 4-4 and Appendix F, Table F-3). Populations of six uncommon species tracked by the Alabama or Tennessee Natural Heritage Programs were also reported (Table 4-5).. No designated Critical Habitat for terrestrial animals occurs within the ROWs of the subject transmission lines.
Table 4-4.
Federally listed Terrestrial Animals Reported from Jackson, Limestone, and Morgan Counties, Alabama; Dade, Catoosa, and Walker Counties, Georgia; and Bedford, Coffee, Hamilton, Marion, and Sequatchie Counties, Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name Federal Status Birds Bald eagle I Haliaeetus leucocephalus Red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides borealis LE Mammals Gray bat I Myotis grisescens LE Indiana bat Myotis sodalis LE Status abbreviation: LE = Listed Endangered 1Federally protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act I
I I
II I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Table 4-5.
Number of Listed (Federal or State-Listed) Species of Terrestrial Animals, Caves, and Migratory Bird Aggregations within 3 Miles of Each Transmission Line Associated with the Action Alternative Number of State Number of Transmission Lines Number of 1 Species (Tracked Number of Caves Migratory Bird Federal Species Species 2) within 3 miles Aggregations within 3 miles L5829 2
3(1) 10 0
L5054 0
1 (1) 6 0
L5055 0
0(0) 0 0
L5107,L5614 2
4(2) 39 2
L5613 3
7(3) 27 3
L6055 2
0(1) 115 2
L6068 3
8(3) 16 10 L6079 1
3(0) 11 3
L6088,L6100 1
0(2) 69 1
1Includes federal protected species (i.e., bald eagle) 2Species tracked by Alabama, Georgia, or Tennessee State Natural Heritage Programs 226 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site that are currently spanned. Thus, with the implementation of the above mitigation measures, the habitat where listed species occur would not be appreciably different under the Action Alternative. Therefore, the proposed actions under the Action Alternative are not likely to adversely affect federally listed species and would not significantly impact state-listed species.
4.6.3. Wildlife 4.6.3.1.
Affected Environment The TVA Natural Heritage database indicated that three federally listed terrestrial animal species (gray bat, Indiana bat, red-cockaded woodpecker), one federally protected bird (bald eagle), and 14 state-listed terrestrial animal species have been reported within 3 miles of any of the subject ROWs (Table 4-4 and Appendix F, Table F-3). Populations of six uncommon species tracked by the Alabama or Tennessee Natural Heritage Programs were also reported (Table 4-5).. No designated Critical Habitat for terrestrial animals occurs within the ROWs of the subject transmission lines.
Table 4-4.
Federally listed Terrestrial Animals Reported from Jackson, Limestone, and Morgan Counties, Alabama; Dade, Catoosa, and Walker Counties, Georgia; and Bedford, Coffee, Hamilton, Marion, and Sequatchie Counties, Tennessee Common Name
. I Scientific Name II Federal Status Birds Bald eagle I Haliaeetus leucocephalus I
Red-cockaded woodpecker I Picoides borealis I
LE Mammals Gray bat I Myotisgrisescens I
LE Indiana bat I Myotis sodalis I
LE Status abbreviation: LE = Listed Endangered 1Federally protected by the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act Table 4-5.
Number of Listed (Federal or State-Listed) Species of Terrestrial Animals, Caves, and Migratory Bird Aggregations within 3 Miles of Each Transmission Line Associated with the Action Alternative Number of State Number of Transmission Lines Number of Species (Tracked Number of Caves Migratory Bird Federal Species 1 Species2) within 3 miles Aggregations within 3 miles L5829 2
3 (1) 10 0
L5054 0
1 (1) 6 0
L5055 0
0(0) 0 0
L5107, L5614 2
4 (2) 39 2
L5613 3
7 (3) 27 3
L6055 2
o (1) 115 2
L6068 3
8 (3) 16 10 L6079 1
3 (0) 11 3
L6088, L6100 1
0(2) 69 1
11ncludes federal protected species (i.e., bald eagle) 2Species tracked by Alabama, Georgia, or Tennessee State Natural Heritage Programs 226 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I'
I I
Chapter 4 Gray bats roost in caves year-round and typically forage over streams, rivers, and reservoirs.
Foraging habitat exists along the Tennessee River and associated riparian corridors throughout the project area. Numerous populations of gray bats exist throughout the region. The closest known occurrence of gray bats is approximately 0.25 mile from transmission line L5613. A second population is reported 0.5 mile from transmission line L5829. Numerous caves occur in the vicinity of the existing transmission line corridors and offer potential gray bat roosting habitat (Table 4-5). However, gray bats have not been reported from these caves.
Indiana bats roost in caves during the winter and typically roost under the bark of dead or dying trees during the summer (Menzel, et al. 2001). Optimal summer roosts occur in forests with an open understory and available roost trees, usually near water (Romme, et al. 1995). Indiana bats forage primarily in forested habitats. The closest record of Indiana bats occurs in a cave approximately 1.1 mile from transmission line L6068. Although no other records of Indiana bats occur in the project area, other caves may provide suitable hibernacula 12, and mature forested habitat in the area provides suitable summer habitat for this species.
Habitat for red-cockaded woodpecker consists of open, mature pine woodlands, and rarely deciduous or mixed pine-hardwoods located near pine woodlands. Optimal habitat is characterized as a broad savanna with a scattered canopy of large pines and a dense groundcover containing a diversity of grass, forb, and shrub species, historically maintained by fire. Nesting and roosting occur in tree cavities(USFWS 1980). Historical records for red-cockaded woodpecker exist in Walker County, Georgia, approximately 1.8 mile from L5107.
Suitable habitat does not exist within the transmission line ROWs. The species is thought to be extirpated from the County, and does not exist in the ROWs.
Bald eagles were removed from the endangered species list in June 2007, but are still protected by Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. This species typically nests near large bodies of waters including lakes, rivers and riparian wetlands. Bald eagles are fairly common within the region, especially near the Tennessee River. Bald eagles are vulnerable to disturbance during courtship, nest building, egg laying, incubation, and brooding. The closest active bald eagle nest is located at Raccoon Mountain Pumped Storage Facility, less than 0.12 mile from a transmission line ROW. Nesting and foraging habitat exists near (less than 0.5 mile) portions of the existing ROWs.
Barking tree frogs occur in wetlands, and a population is known from New Hope, Tennessee.
This record is approximately 2 miles northwest of the closest associated transmission line ROW (L6068). Emergent wetlands within the ROW way may offer moderately suitable habitat for this species.
Green salamanders primarily inhabit shaded rock outcrops in moist forests between 500 and 1,300 meters in elevation. Breeding females require cool, clean and moist horizontal crevices or narrow chambers in which to suspend their eggs from an overhead substrate (NatureServe 2009). This habitat is abundant along the numerous stretches of escarpment along the Cumberland Plateau and Sand and Lookout mountains in the area. Records for green salamander exist within 3 miles of transmission lines L5107, L5614, L5613, L6079 and L6068.
Hellbenders inhabit medium-sized to large free-flowing streams in the Tennessee and Cumberland River drainages. Inhabited streams possess large rocks or logs that provide shelter and breeding sites. Records for hellbender are located in Morgan County, Alabama, and 12 Hibernacula are places, e.g., caves or other protected areas, where bats hibernate during the winter.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 227 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 Gray bats roost in caves year-round and typically forage over streams, rivers, and reservoirs.
Foraging habitat exists along the Tennessee River and associated riparian corridors throughout the project area. Numerous populations of gray bats exist throughout the region. The closest known occurrence of gray bats is approximately 0.2S mile from transmission line LS613. A second population is reported O.S mile from transmission line LS829. Numerous caves occur in the vicinity of the existing transmission line corridors and offer potential gray bat roosting habitat (Table 4-S). However, gray bats have not been reported from these caves.
Indiana bats roost in caves during the winter and typically roost under the bark of dead or dying trees during the summer (Menzel, et al. 2001). Optimal summer roosts occur in forests with an open understory and available roost trees, usually near water (Romme, et al. 1995). Indiana bats forage primarily in forested habitats. The closest record of Indiana bats occurs in a cave approximately 1.1 mile from transmission line L6068. Although no other records of Indiana bats occur in the project area, other caves may provide suitable hibernacula 12, and mature forested habitat in the area provides suitable summer habitat for this species.
Habitat for red-cockaded woodpecker consists of open, mature pine woodlands, and rarely deciduous or mixed pine-hardwoods located near pine woodlands. Optimal habitat is characterized as a broad savanna with a scattered canopy of large pines and a dense ground cover containing a diversity of grass, forb, and shrub species, historically maintained by fire. Nesting and roosting occur in tree cavities(USFWS 1980). Historical records for red-cockaded woodpecker exist in Walker County, Georgia, approximately 1.8 mile from LS107.
Suitable habitat does not exist within the transmission line ROWs. The species is thought to be extirpated from the County, and does not exist in the ROWs.
Bald eagles were removed from the endangered species list in June 2007, but are still protected by Migratory Bird Treaty Act and the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act. This species typically nests near large bodies of waters including lakes, rivers and riparian wetlands. Bald eagles are fairly common within the region, especially near the Tennessee River. Bald eagles are vulnerable to disturbance during courtship, nest building, egg laying, incubation, and brooding. The closest active bald eagle nest is located at Raccoon Mountain Pumped Storage Facility, less than 0.12 mile from a transmission line ROW. Nesting and foraging habitat exists near (less than O.S mile) portions of the existing ROWs.
Barking tree frogs occur in wetlands, and a population is known from New Hope, Tennessee.
This record is approximately 2 miles northwest of the closest associated transmission line ROW (L6068). Emergent wetlands within the ROW way may offer moderately suitable habitat for this species.
Green salamanders primarily inhabit shaded rock outcrops in moist forests between SOO and 1,300 meters in elevation. Breeding females require cool, clean and moist horizontal crevices or narrow chambers in which to suspend their eggs from an overhead substrate (NatureServe 2009). This habitat is abundant along the numerous stretches of escarpment along the Cumberland Plateau and Sand and Lookout mountains in the area. Records for green salamander exist within 3 miles of transmission lines LS1 07, LS614, LS613, L6079 and L6068.
Hellbenders inhabit medium-sized to large free-flowing streams in the Tennessee and Cumberland River drainages. Inhabited streams possess large rocks or logs that provide shelter and breeding sites. Records for hellbender are located in Morgan County, Alabama, and 12 Hibernacula are places, e.g., caves or other protected areas, where bats hibernate during the winter.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 227
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Bedford and Marion Counties, Tennessee. Limited suitable habitat exists within the project I
area.
Tennessee cave salamanders occur in caves with streams free of sedimentation (Cooper 1968).
One known locality exists approximately 0.5 mile away from the closest transmission line L5829.
There also are historical records of this salamander from Nickajack Cave before it was flooded by Nickajack Reservoir. Suitable habitat still exists in portions of Nickajack cave beyond the influence of the reservoir. Suitable habitat for this species does not exist within the power line corridors.
Bachman's sparrows inhabit early successional, old field habitat that contains a high density of I
grasses and forbs, scattered trees and shrubs with an open understory (Dunning and Watts 1990). Although this species uses the beginning stages of early successional habitat, this habitat only remains suitable for a short time. The species may temporarily use early I
successional habitats along the existing transmission line ROWs within the project area as they are periodically cleared.
Cerulean warblers have been reported from Marion County, Tennessee, within 3 miles of transmission line L5613. The species occurs largely in contiguous, mature deciduous forests, particularly along floodplains or along moist ridge tops. Mature forest adjacent to existing ROWs within the project area may provide habitat for this species. With the possible exception of the forested portions of ROWs on steep hillsides, suitable habitat for this species does not exist within project ROWs.
Osprey typically nest along rivers, lakes, and reservoirs. The species nests in trees or on man-made structures (i.e., transmission towers, channel markers, bridges, mooring cells) within or over water (NatureServe 2009). Osprey nest throughout the study area, primarily along the Tennessee River.
Peregrine falcons have been reported from the ROWs of the subject transmission lines area.
The species typically nests on exposed cliffs in undisturbed areas, near water, and close to plentiful prey (Burleigh 1958). Suitable habitat for peregrine falcons exists along exposed escarpment on Sand, Lookout and Cumberland mountains.
The subject ROWs are located within the northern edge of the breeding range of Swainson's warbler, a neotropical songbird. Breeding habitat for this species ranges from deciduous floodplain and swamp forests to moist lower slopes of mountain ravines at elevations to 900 meters. Swainson's warblers typically require areas with deep shade from both canopy and understory cover (NatureServe 2009). The species has been reported along Lookout Creek, near Chattanooga, Tennessee. Suitable habitat for this species within the existing ROWs is unlikely.
Allegheny woodrats occur in rocky bluffs, caves, and other rocky habitats (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Numerous caves and small rock outcrops within the project area provide suitable habitat for this species.
Common shrews occupy most terrestrial habitats excluding areas with very little or no vegetation. Thick leaf litter in damp forests may represent favored habitat, although this species appears adaptable to major successional disturbances. Suitable habitat is abundant both within the project area and throughout the region.
228 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Bedford and Marion Counties, Tennessee. Limited suitable habitat exists within the project area.
Tennessee cave salamanders occur in caves with streams free of sedimentation (Cooper 1968).
One known locality exists approximately 0.5 mile away from the closest transmission line L5829.
There also are historical records of this salamander from Nickajack Cave before it was flooded by Nickajack Reservoir. Suitable habitat still exists in portions of Nickajack cave beyond the influence of the reservoir. Suitable habitat for this species does not exist within the power line corridors.
Bachman's sparrows inhabit early successional, old field habitat that contains a high density of grasses and forbs, scattered trees and shrubs with an open understory (Dunning and Watts 1990). Although this species uses the beginning stages of early successional habitat, this habitat only remains suitable fora short time. The species may temporarily use early successional habitats along the existing transmission line ROWs within the project area as they are periodically cleared.
Cerulean warblers hav~ been reported from Marion County, Tennessee, within 3 miles of transmission line L5613. The species occurs largely in contiguous, mature deciduous forests, particularly along floodplains or along moist ridge tops. Mature forest adjacent to existing ROWs within the project area may provide habitat for this species. With the possible exception of the forested portions of ROWs on steep hillsides, suitable habitat for this species does not exist within project ROWs.
Osprey typically nest along rivers, lakes, and reservoirs. The species nests in trees or on man-made structures (i.e., transmission towers, channel markers, bridges, mooring cells) within or overwater (NatureServe 2009). Osprey nest throughout the study area, primarily along the Tennessee River.
Peregrine falcons have been reported from the ROWs of the subject transmission lines area.
The species typically nests on exposed cliffs in undisturbed areas, near water, and close to plentiful prey (Burleigh 1958). Suitable habitat for peregrine falcons exists along exposed escarpment on Sand, Lookout and Cumberland mountains.
The subject ROWs are located within the northern edge of the breeding rangeof Swainson's warbler, a neotropical songbird. Breeding habitat for this species ranges from deciduous floodplain and swamp forests to moist lower slopes of mountain ravines at elevations to 900 meters. Swainson's warblers typically require areas with deep shade from both canopy and understory cover (NatureServe 2009). The species has been reported along Lookout Creek, near Chattanooga, Tennessee. Suitable habitat for this species within the existing ROWs is unlikely.
Allegheny wood rats occur in rocky bluffs, caves, and other rocky habitats (Whitaker and Hamilton 1998). Numerous caves and small rock outcrops within the project area provide suitable habitat for this species.
Common shrews occupy most terrestrial habitats excluding areas with very little or no vegetation. Thick leaf litter in damp forests may represent favored habitat, although this species appears adaptable to major successional disturbances. Suitable habitat is abundant both within the project area and throughout the region.
228 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 Eastern big-eared bats roost in caves, abandoned buildings, or in hollow trees. The species has been reported from a cave in Marion County, Tennessee, that is greater than one mile from a ROW. Other caves in the project area offer suitable habitat for big-eared bats.
Eastern small-footed bats roost in rock crevices, caves, bridges, and other rocky habitats. The species has been reported from Nickajack Cave in Marion, Tennessee. Although no other records of eastern small-footed bats occur in the project area, caves in the project area provide suitable habitat for the species.
4.6.3.2.
Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, no impacts to federally listed or state-listed terrestrial animal species would occur as a result of the proposed to transmission infrastructure upgrades. Under this alternative, the existing transmission lines would not be upgraded, and the methods used to manage vegetation along the ROW and maintain transmission infrastructure would be unchanged.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, the proposed upgrades to the transmission lines would require some level of disturbance on existing ROWs. Federally listed and state-listed species and their habitat have been previously documented near some ROWs. Listed terrestrial animal species could be identified in the project area during field surveys associated with future maintenance and upgrading activities. If listed terrestrial animals or their associated habitat are observed in the existing ROWs, the following mitigation measures would be used to reduce or eliminate impacts to listed species:
Depending on the species present, timing restrictions on construction may be implemented. For example, work may be timed to take place outside of the breeding season (e.g., nesting bald eagles or osprey) when species are less likely disturbed by the activity.
Buffers may be placed around suitable habitat restricting clearing activities within a protective radius (e.g., a 200-foot radius around cave openings, hand clearing only).
The proposed project would not require clearing in areas that are currently spanned. Any listed terrestrial animal species identified within these forested ROWs would not be impacted. With implementation of the above mitigation measures, the habitat where listed species occur would not be appreciably different after upgrading takes place. Therefore, the proposed actions under the Action Alternative are not likely to adversely affect federally or state-listed species.
4.7.
Wetlands 4.7.1. Affected Environment Wetland areas are likely located within the length of the transmission line corridors proposed to transmit power from the BLN site (Figure 2-6). These corridors cross a landscape dominated by agricultural fields and scattered residential, commercial, and industrial properties between prominent ridge lines, river valleys, associated tributaries, and wetland floodplain complexes.
These corridors cross 5 large scale watersheds (Guntersville Reservoir, Chickamauga Reservoir, Duck River, Sequatchie River, and Wheeler Reservoir) and 37 local watersheds, all within the Tennessee River Basin. The wetland areas located within these watersheds provide necessary wetland functions for flood abatement, and sediment retention, pollutant absorption, Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 229 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 Eastern big-eared bats roost in caves, abandoned buildings, or in hollow trees. The species has been reported from a cave in Marion County, Tennessee, that is greater than one mile from a ROW. Other caves in the project area offer suitable habitat for big-eared bats.
Eastern small-footed bats roost in rock crevices, caves, bridges, and other rocky habitats. The species has been reported from Nickajack Cave in Marion, Tennessee. Although no other records of eastern small-footed bats occur in the project area, caves in the project area provide suitable habitat for the species.
4.6.3.2.
Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, no impacts to federally listed or state-listed terrestrial animal species would occur as a result of the proposed to transmission infrastructure upgrades. Under this alternative, the existing transmission lines would not be upgraded, and the methods used to manage vegetation along the ROWand maintain transmission infrastructure would be unchanged.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, the proposed upgrades to the transmission lines would require some level of disturbance on existing ROWs. Federally listed and state-listed species and their habitat have been previously documented near some ROWs. Listed terrestrial animal species could be identified in the project area during field surveys associated with future maintenance and upgrading activities. If listed terrestrial animals or their associated habitat are observed in the existing ROWs, the following mitigation measures would be used to reduce or eliminate impacts to listed species:
Depending on the species present, timing restrictions on construction may be implemented. For example, work may be timed to take place outside of the breeding season (e.g., nesting bald eagles or osprey) when species are less likely disturbed by the activity.
Buffers may be placed around suitable habitat restricting clearing activities within a protective radius (e.g., a 200-foot radius around cave openings, hand clearing only).
The proposed project would not require clearing in areas that are currently spanned. Any listed terrestrial animal species identified within these forested ROWs would not be impacted. With implementation of the above mitigation measures, the habitat where listed species occur would not be appreciably different after upgrading takes place. Therefore, the proposed actions under the Action Alternative are not likely to adversely affect federally or state-listed species.
4.7.
Wetlands 4.7.1. Affected Environment Wetland areas are likely located within the length of the transmission line corridors proposed to transmit power from the BLN site (Figure 2-6). These corridors cross a landscape dominated by agricultural fields and scattered residential, commercial, and industrial properties between prominent ridge lines, river valleys, associated tributaries, and wetland floodplain complexes.
These corridors cross 5 large scale watersheds (Guntersville Reservoir, Chickamauga Reservoir, Duck River, Sequatchie River, and Wheeler Reservoir) and 37 local watersheds, all within the Tennessee River Basin. The wetland areas located within these watersheds provide necessary wetland functions for flood abatement, and sediment retention, pollutant absorption, Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 229
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site and wildlife habitat. The transmission lines proposed for upgrade cross the following significant wetland floodplain complexes: Round Island Creek and associated tributaries, Poe Branch, Chickamauga Creek, Raccoon Creek, Glover Creek, Mud Creek and Robinson Creek. Based on NWI Data, Soil Survey Geographic Data (Soil Survey Staff 2009), USGS topographic maps, and aerial photography, a conservative estimate of 150 acres of potential wetland area occurs on the ROWs proposed for upgrade activities. Because of previous and ongoing ROWs maintenance, the majority of wetland habitat within the transmission line corridor, previously mapped or unmapped, would be comprised of emergent or scrub-shrub habitat. Forested wetlands potentially occur along the edges of the ROWs.
Actual wetland acreage within the ROWs will be confirmed and delineated by field surveys prior to upgrades that have the potential to impact wetlands within the ROW. Wetland delineations would be performed according to USACE standards (Environmental Laboratory 1987) which require documentation of hydrophytic (i.e., wet site) vegetation (USFWS 1996), hydric soil, and wetland hydrology (Environmental Laboratory 1987; Reed 1997; U.S. Department of Defense and USEPA 2003). Broader definitions of wetlands, such as provided in EO 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), Alabama state regulations, the USFWS (Cowardin et al. 1979), and the TVA Environmental Review Procedures (TVA 1983b) would also be considered in making the delineations.
4.7.2. Environmental Consequences Activities in wetlands are regulated under Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act and are addressed by EO 11990. In order to conduct specific activities in jurisdictional wetlands authorization would be obtained under a Section 404 Permit from the USACE and under Section 401 from the respective state regulatory agency. In addition, proposed activities would comply with EO 11990, which requires all federal agencies to minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands in carrying out their responsibilities.
No Action Alternative Under the No Action alternative, current ROW maintenance and operations of the subject transmission lines would continue. However, no alterations or improvements would be made to the existing transmission lines for the purpose of transmitting power generated from BLN.
Therefore, no additional direct, indirect or cumulative effects to wetlands would occur under this alternative.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, initial improvements to upgrade about 222 miles of existing transmission lines would take place. This would include some re-establisment of ROW vegetation management, filling associated with structure replacement, and vehicular access along the ROWs. Any improvement activities conducted within a wetland would be performed under specific wetland BMPs (TVA 1992) to minimize wetland impacts. This includes conducting work in dry conditions, use of low ground pressure equipment or ground mats, broadcast spray of herbicides approved for aquatic environments, installation of silt fence as needed, and reseeding disturbed areas with native wetland species. Ongoing maintenance would be conducted using similar BMPs and measures to protect wetlands and conserve wetland functions.
Prior to all proposed upgrade activities, TVA would conduct a ground survey to determine the exact extent of any wetland areas located within the corridors proposed for upgrade. Based on this review, specific measures may be implemented to ensure no significant impacts or loss of 230 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site and wildlife habitat. The transmission lines proposed for upgrade cross the following significant wetland floodplain complexes: Round Island Creek and associated tributaries, Poe Branch, Chickamauga Creek, Raccoon Creek, Glover Creek, Mud Creek and Robinson Creek. Based on NWI Data, Soil Survey Geographic Data (Soil Survey Staff 2009), USGS topographic maps, and aerial photography, a conservative estimate of 150 acres of potential wetland area occurs on the ROWs proposed for upgrade activities. Because of previous and ongoing ROWs maintenance, the majority of wetland habitat within the transmission line corridor, previously mapped or unmapped, would be comprised of emergent or scrub-shrub habitat. Forested wetlands potentially occur along the edges of the ROWs.
Actual wetland acreage within the ROWs will be confirmed and delineated by field surveys prior to upgrades that have the potential to impact wetlands within the ROW. Wetland delineations would be performed according to USACE standards (Environmental Laboratory 1987) which require documentation of hydrophytic (Le., wet site) vegetation (USFWS 1996), hydric soil, and wetland hydrology (Environmental Laboratory 1987; Reed 1997; U.S. Department of Defense and USEPA 2003). Broader definitions of wetlands, such as provided in EO 11990 (Protection of Wetlands), Alabama state regulations, the USFWS (Cowardin et al. 1979), and the TVA Environmental Review Procedures (TVA 1983b) would also be considered in making the delineations.
4.7.2. Environmental Consequences Activities in wetlands are regulated under Sections 401 and 404 of the Clean Water Act and are addressed by EO 11990. In order to conduct specific activities in jurisdictional wetlands authorization would be obtained under a Section 404 Permit from the USACE and under Section 401 from the respective state regulatory agency. In addition, proposed activities would comply with EO 11990, which requires all federal agencies to minimize the destruction, loss or degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands in carrying out their responsibilities.
No Action Alternative Under the No Action alternative, current ROW maintenance and operations of the subject transmission lines would continue. However, no alterations or improvements would be made to the existing transmission lines for the purpose of transmitting power generated from BLN.
Therefore, no additional direct, indirect or cumulative effects to wetlands would occur under this alternative.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, initial improvements to upgrade about 222 miles of existing transmission lines would take place. This would include some re-establisment of ROW vegetation management, filling associated with structure replacement, and vehicular access along the ROWs. Any improvement activities conducted within a wetland would be performed under specific wetland BMPs (TVA 1992) to minimize wetland impacts. This includes conducting work in dry conditions, use of low ground pressure equipment or ground mats, broadcast spray of herbicides approved for aquatic environments, installation of silt fence as needed, and reseeding disturbed areas with native wetland species. Ongoing maintenance would be conducted using similar BMPs and measures to protect wetlands and conserve wetland functions.
Prior to all proposed upgrade activities, TVA would conduct a ground survey to determine the exact extent of any wetland areas located within the corridors proposed for upgrade. Based on this review, specific measures may be implemented to ensure no significant impacts or loss of 230 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I
- 1
'I I
I I
I:
I I
I I
I I
I
Chapter 4 wetland function occurs as a result of the transmission line upgrade activities. These commitments would result in avoidance strategies, minimization measures, or mitigation should wetland functions be compromised. Mitigation would be provided if substantial quality and quantity of forested wetland would be cleared to accommodate a wider ROW, if fill is proposed for switching station construction, or for any other activity that reduces the functional capacity of a specific wetland. BMPs would be in place for upgrade activities, and ground surveys would take place to identify wetland areas where avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures would be required. Therefore, no significant impacts to potential wetland areas within the ROWs are anticipated from the transmission line upgrade.
4.8.
Floodplains 4.8.1. Affected Environment The transmission line routes cross numerous 100-year floodplain areas in several counties in Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia. The 161-kV and 500-kV switchyards existing on the BLN site are locatedon the Town Creek Embayment. With respect to Town Creek, the 100-year floodplain is the area lying below elevation 601.4 feet mean sea level (msl). The Flood Risk Profile (FRP) elevation is 603.1 feet msl. The FRP is used to control flood damageable development for TVA projects, and residential and commercial development on TVA lands. At this location, the FRP elevation is equal to the 500-year flood elevation. The existing switchyards are located outside of the 100-year floodplain and above the FRP elevation.
4.8.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the proposed switchyards and transmission lines would not be upgraded. Therefore, no additional effects to floodplains are likely.
Action Alternatives Consistent with EO 11988, an overhead transmission line and related support structures are considered to be a repetitive action in the 100-year floodplain. Activities conducted within existing switchyards would occur outside the 100-year floodplain. If any new substations, switchyards, or other support facilities need to be constructed to support these transmission lines they would be evaluated prior to construction to ensure compliance with EO 11988.
Therefore, any activities occurring in the substations would be consistent with EO 11988 and floodplains would not be affected.
4.9.
Natural Areas 4.9.1. Affected Environment A review of the TVA Natural Heritage database indicated that the transmission lines proposed for upgrades associated with operations of the BLN site would cover 11 counties in three states and are within 3 miles of, or cross, 68 natural areas and three Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI) streams.
This section addresses natural areas that are crossed by, immediately adjacent to, or within 3 miles of BLN associated transmission line upgrades. Natural areas include managed areas, ecologically significant sites, and streams listed on the NRI.
Managed areas include lands held in public ownership that are managed by an entity (e.g., TVA, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS), State of Tennessee, Jackson County) to protect and maintain certain ecological and/or recreational features.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 231 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 4 wetland function occurs as a result of the transmission line upgrade activities. These commitments would result in avoidance strategies, minimization measures, or mitigation should wetland functions be compromised. Mitigation would be provided if substantial quality and quantity of forested wetland would be cleared to accommodate a wider ROW, if fill is proposed for switching station construction, or for any other activity that reduces the functional capacity of a specific wetland. BMPs would be in place for upgrade activities, and ground surveys would take place to identify wetland areas where avoidance, minimization, or mitigation measures would be required. Therefore, no significant impacts to potential wetland areas within the ROWs are anticipated from the transmission line upgrade.
4.8.
Floodplains 4.8.1. Affected Environment The transmission line routes cross numerous 1 OO-year floodplain areas in several counties in Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia. The 161-kV and 500-kV switchyards existing on the BLN site are locatedon the Town Creek Embayment. With respect to Town Creek, the 100-year floodplain is the area lying below elevation 601.4 feet mean sea level (msl). The Flood Risk Profile (FRP) elevation is 603.1 feet msl. The FRP is used to control flood damageable development for TVA projects, and residential and commercial development on TVA lands. At this location, the FRP elevation is equal to the 500-year flood elevation. The existing switchyards are located outside of the 1 OO-year floodplain and above the FRP elevation.
4.8.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the proposed switchyards and transmission lines would not be upgraded. Therefore, no additional effects to floodplains are likely.
Action Alternatives Consistent with EO 11988, an overhead transmission line and related support structures are considered to be a repetitive action in the 1 OO-year floodplain. Activities conducted within existing switchyards would occur outside the 100-year floodplain. If any new substations, switchyards, or other support facilities need to be constructed to support these transmission lines they would be evaluated prior to construction to ensure compliance with EO 11988.
Therefore, any activities occurring in the substations would be consistent with EO 11988 and floodplains would not be affected.
4.9.
Natural Areas 4.9.1. Affected Environment A review of the TVA Natural Heritage database indicated that the transmission lines proposed for upgrades associated with operations of the BLN site would cover 11 counties in three states and are within 3 miles of, or cross, 68 natural areas and three Nationwide Rivers Inventory (NRI) streams.
This section addresses natural areas that are crossed by, immediately adjacent to, or within 3 miles of BLN associated transmission line upgrades. Natural areas include managed areas, ecologically significant sites, and streams listed on the NRI.
Managed areas include lands held in public ownership that are managed by an entity (e.g., TVA, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service (USFS), State of Tennessee, Jackson County) to protect and maintain certain ecological and/or recreational features.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 231
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Ecologically significant sites are either tracts of privately owned land that are recognized by resource biologists as having significant environmental resources or identified tracts on TVA lands that are ecologically significant but not specifically managed by TVA's Natural Areas Program.
Streams listed on the NRI are free-flowing segments of rivers recognized by the National Park Service (NPS) as possessing remarkable natural or cultural values.
Nine managed areas and ecologically significant sites and two NRI-listed streams are crossed by the existing transmission lines proposed for upgrades associated with operations of the BLN site and are described below. Two NRI-listed streams are within 3 miles of the proposed transmission line upgrades and are described below. The remaining 58 natural areas located within 3 miles of the proposed transmission line upgrades are listed in Table 4-6 according to the transmission line identification number or grouping of transmission lines identification numbers within nearest proximity.
Table 4-6.
Natural Areas within 3.0 miles of the Proposed Upgrades for Transmission Lines Associated with the Action Alternative Distance Line Natural Area Steward from Line h
- -miles)
L5055,11_5054 Mallard Fox Creek State Wildlife ADCNR 0.7 west L5055,__L5054 Management Area (WMA)
ADCNR_0.7_west Swan Creek State WMA ADCNR 1.7 east L5614, L6079, Bellefonte Island TVA Small Wild TVA 1.2 west L5107 Area (SWA)
Mud Creek State WMA ADCNR 1.6 west Crow Creek Refuge State WMA ADCNR 0.4 west Chickamauga and Chattanooga NPS 0.6 southeast National Military Park and northeast Glades and Barrens of Chickamauga NPS 2.1 southeast Battlefield Lulu Falls/Eagle Cliff Potential 0.57 south National Natural Landmark (PNNL)
N L6100, L6088 Neversink Pit PNNL NPS 0.5 east Robinson Spring PNNL NPS 1.1 west Section Bluff TVA SWA TVA 2.6 south Tumbling Rock Cave PNNL NPS 2.4 west L5613 Bill McNabb Gulf Ecologically significant site on 2.5 northwest Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Blowing Springs Branch. Chesnutt Ecologically significant site on Bridge Protection Planning Site Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
northwest (PPS)
Bluff Point /Hicks Mountain Ecologically significant site on 0.62 north Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Cummings Lake Ecologically significant site on 1.05 north Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Ellis Spring Ecologically significant site on 2.1 north Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
U I
K U
I I
£ I
I U
I I
I I
I I
U I
I 232 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Ecologically significant sites are either tracts of privately owned land that are recognized by resource biologists as having significant environmental resources or identified tracts on TVA lands that are ecologically significant but not specifically managed by TVA's Natural Areas Program.
Streams listed on the NRI are free-flowing segments of rivers recognized by the National Park Service (NPS) as possessing remarkable natural or cultural values.
Nine managed areas and ecologically significant sites and two NRI-Iisted streams are crossed by the existing transmission lines proposed for upgrades associated with operations of the BLN site and are described below. Two NRI-Iisted streams are within 3 miles of the proposed transmission line upgrades and are described below. The remaining 58 natural areas located within 3 miles of the proposed transmission line upgrades are listed in Table 4-6 according to the transmission line identification number or grouping of transmission lines identification numbers within nearest proximity.
Table 4-6.
Lilile L5055,.L5054 L5614, L6079, L5107 L6100,L6088 L5613 232 Natural Areas within 3.0 miles of the Proposed Upgrades for Transmission Lines Associated with the Action Alternative Distance Natural Area Steward from Lilile
" ",(miles)
Mallard Fox Creek State Wildlife ADCNR 0.7 west Management Area (WMA)
Swan Creek State WMA ADCNR 1.7 east Bellefonte Island TVA Small Wild TVA 1.2 west Area (SWA)
Mud Creek State WMA ADCNR 1.6 west Crow Creek Refuge State WMA ADCNR 0.4 west Chickamauga and Chattanooga NPS 0.6 southeast National Military Park and northeast Glades and Barrens of Chickamauga NPS 2.1 southeast Battlefield Lulu Falls/Eagle Cliff Potential NPS 0.57 south National Natural Landmark (PNNL)
Neversink Pit PNNL NPS 0.5 east Robinson Spring PNNL NPS 1.1 west Section Bluff TVA SWA TVA 2.6 south Tumbling Rock Cave PNNL NPS 2.4 west Bill McNabb Gulf Ecologically significant site on 2.5 northwest Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Blowing Springs Branch. Chesnutt Ecologically significant site on Bridge Protection Planning Site 2.2 northwest (PPS)
Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Bluff Point /Hicks Mountain Ecologically significant site on 0.62 north Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Cummings Lake Ecologically significant site on 1.05 north Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Ellis Spring Ecologically significant site on 2.1 north Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I'
I I
I I
I I
I I
I, I
I' I
Chapter 4 Distance Line Natural Area
-Steward from Line
________I_____,(miles)
Hicks Gap Designated State Natural TDEC 1.1 west Area (SNA)
Huff Branch TVA Habitat Protection TVA 0.74 north Area (HPA)
TVA_.74_ort Kelly's Ferry Slopes Tennessee River Gorge Trust 1.06 west Lassiter Property Tennessee River Gorge Trust 1.5 north Nickajack River State Mussel TWRA 1.9 northwest Sanctuary Parker Gap Cove Ecologically significant site on 2.6 north Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
2.6_north Ecologically significant site on 1.4 northwest Piney Branch Bottomland Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Pot Point Tennessee River Gorge Trust 1.1 north Renfro Property Tennessee River Gorge Trust 0.4 north Shortleaf Pine Flat PPS Ecologically significant site on 1.55 USFS lands*
northwest L6068 Chickamauga State WMA TWRA 2.1 north Chigger Point TVA HPA TVA 1.18 east 3.0 east, 0.1 Cumberland Trail State Park Tennessee State Parks north north Creek Ravine Ecologically significant site on 2.6 east Dry Creek Ravine Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Hamilton County Park Hamilton County 2.3 south Harrison Bay State Recreation Park TDEC 1.44 south Little Cedar Mountain TVA TVA 1.14 east SWA/HPA Marion Bridge TVA HPA TVA 1.9 west Marion County Park Marion County 1.4 southeast Mile 434 Oaks Ecologically significant site on 2.7 east Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Montlake/Walden Ridge PNNL NPS 0.2 northeast Nickajack Cave TVA HPA TVA 0.1 east Nickajack Cave State Wildlife TVAITWRA 0.1 east Observation Area (WOA)
Nickajack Oak Wetland and TVA TVA 0.1 west HPA North Chickamauga Creek Pocket Bowaters Paper Company 0.2 north Wilderness Southern Prentice Cooper State Forest USFS 0.8 east Pryor Property Tennessee River Gorge Trust 1.2 east Sequatchie Cave Designated SNA TDEC 2.5 west Shellmound Road Bluff TVA HPA TVA 1.7 south Smith Property Tennessee River Gorge Trust 0.6 east Soddy Creek and TVA HPA TVA 1.8 north Tennessee River Blueway TVA 0.3 east Ware Branch Bend TVA HPA TVA 2.4 north University of Tennessee Friendship University of Tennessee Forest Forestry Experiment Station Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 233 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
'I I
pne' L6068
~
Natural Area Steward
~" c ""
Hicks Gap Designated State Natural TDEC Area (SNA)
Huff Branch TVA Habitat Protection TVA Area (HPA)
Kelly's Ferry Slopes Tennessee River Gorge Trust Lassiter Property Tennessee River Gorge Trust Nickajack River State Mussel TWRA Sanctuary Parker Gap Cove Ecologically significant site on Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Piney Branch Bottomland Ecologically significant site on Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Pot Point Tennessee River Gorge Trust Renfro Property Tennessee River Gorge Trust Shortleaf Pine Flat PPS Ecologically significant site on USFS lands*
Chickamauga State WMA TWRA Chigger Point TVA HPA TVA Cumberland Trail State Park Tennessee State Parks Dry Creek Ravine Ecologically significant site on Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Hamilton County Park Hamilton County Harrison Bay State Recreation Park TDEC Little Cedar Mountain TVA TVA SWAlHPA Marion Bridge TVA HPA TVA Marion County Park Marion County Mile 434 Oaks Ecologically significant site on Tennessee River Gorge Lands*
Montlake/Walden Ridge PNNL NPS Nickajack Cave TVA HPA TVA Nickajack Cave State Wildlife TVAITWRA Observation Area (WOA)
Nickajack Oak Wetland and TVA TVA HPA North Chickamauga Creek Pocket Bowaters Paper Company Wilderness Southern Prentice Cooper State Forest USFS Pryor Property Tennessee River Gorge Trust Sequatchie Cave Designated SNA TDEC Shellmound Road Bluff TVA HPA TVA Smith Property Tennessee River Gorge Trust Soddy Creek and TVA HPA TVA Tennessee River Blueway TVA Ware Branch Bend TVA HPA TVA University of Tennessee Friendship University of Tennessee Forest Forestry Experiment Station Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Chapter 4
," Distance
'frolnLine
~(miles) 1.1 west 0.74 north 1.06 west 1.5 north 1.9 northwest 2.6 north 1.4 northwest 1.1 north 0.4 north 1.55 northwest
~-
2.1 north 1.18 east 3.0 east, 0.1 north 2.6 east 2.3 south 1.44 south 1.14 east 1.9 west 1.4 southeast 2.7 east 0.2 northeast 0.1 east 0.1 east 0.1 west 0.2 north 0.8 east 1.2 east 2.5 west 1.7 south 0.6 east 1.8 north 0.3 east 2.4 north 1.4 east 233
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Distance Line Natural Area Steward from Line 1.....__
- (m iles)
L5829 Normandy State WMA TWRA 0.4 northeast Bedford State Fishing Lake TWRA 1.4 northeast Rutledge Falls Tennessee River Gorge Trust 2.4 east Short Springs Designated SNA TDEC 0.5 south 0.65 Short Springs TVA SWA TVA suha southeast Yell Cave Ecologically significant site on 0.36 private land*
northeast
- ESS sites occur on the lands identified but are not managed by these entities Guntersville Reservoir State Mussel Sanctuary is crossed by a segment of the Sequoyah -
Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line (L6068) at the section of the reservoir located in Marion County, Tennessee. The mussel sanctuary extends from the section of the Tennessee River from Nickajack Dam (TRM 424.7) downstream to the Tennessee-Alabama State Line (TRM 416.5) and is designated as a sanctuary in which the taking of aquatic mollusks by any means, and/or the destruction of their habitat is prohibited at all times. This mussel sanctuary is managed by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA) Region III office.
Coon Gulf TVA Small Wild Area (SWA) is located in Jackson County, Alabama approximately 1.0 mile northeast of BLN property boundaries and is crossed by a segment of the Bellefonte -
East Point 500-kV transmission line (L6079). Coon Gulf SWA comprises approximately 2,366 acres managed by TVA and features a forested cove on Guntersville Reservoir. Coon Gulf provides habitat for federally listed and state-listed endangered species.
Raccoon Creek State Wildlife Management Area (WMA) is located in Jackson County, Alabama approximately 3.0 miles northeast of BLN property boundaries and is crossed by a segment of the Bellefonte - East Point 500-kV transmission line (L6079). Raccoon Creek WMA comprises approximately 7,080 acres managed by Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries for waterfowl and small game hunting.
Crow Creek State WMA is located in Jackson County, Alabama approximately 1.8 miles north of Cedar Grove and is crossed by a segment of the Widows Creek - Bellefonte 500-kV #1 transmission line (L6100). Crow Creek WMA comprises 2,161 acres managed by ADCNR Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries for waterfowl and small game hunting.
Raccoon Mountain Pumped Storage State Wildlife Observation Area (WOA) is located in Marion County, Tennessee approximately 3.0 miles west of Chattanooga and is crossed by a segment of the Widows Creek-Raccoon Mountain 161-kV transmission line (L5613). Raccoon Mountain WOA comprises approximately 860 acres managed by TVA in cooperation with TWRA. This large pumped-storage lake on top of Raccoon Mountain is surrounded by mature forests and open areas and provides habitat for many bird species, including wintering bald eagles, hawks, falcons, common loons, and vultures.
Tennessee River Gorge is located in Marion and Hamilton counties, Tennessee approximately 5.0 miles west of Chattanooga. The southern edge of the Tennessee River Gorge boundary is crossed by a segment of the Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain 161 -kV transmission line 234 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
3 I
I I
I I
I I
U I
I Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Distance Line Natural Area Steward from Line
. (miles)
L5829 Normandy State WMA TWRA 0.4 northeast Bedford State Fishing Lake TWRA 1.4 northeast Rutledge Falls Tennessee River Gorge Trust 2.4 east Short Springs Designated SNA TDEC 0.5 south Short Springs TVA SWA TVA 0.65 southeast Yell Cave Ecologically significant site on 0.36 private land*
northeast
- ESS sites occur on the lands identified but are not managed by these entities Guntersville Reservoir State Mussel Sanctuary is crossed by a segment of the Sequoyah -
Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line (L6068) at the section of the reservoir located in Marion County, Tennessee. The mussel sanctuary extends from the section of the Tennessee River from Nickajack Dam (TRM 424.7) downstream to the Tennessee-Alabama State Line (TRM 416.5) and is designated as a sanctuary in which the taking of aquatic mollusks by any means, and/or the destruction of their habitat is prohibited at all times. This mussel sanctuary is managed by the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA) Region III office.
Coon Gulf TVA Small Wild Area (SWA) is located in Jackson County, Alabama approximately 1.0 mile northeast of BLN property boundaries and is crossed by a segment of the Bellefonte -
East Point 500-kV transmission line (L6079). Coon Gulf SWA comprises approximately 2,366 acres managed by TVA and features a forested cove on Guntersville Reservoir. Coon Gulf provides habitat for federally listed and state-listed endangered species.
Raccoon Creek State Wildlife Management Area (WMA) is located in Jackson County, Alabama approximately 3.0 miles northeast of BLN property boundaries and is crossed by a segment of the Bellefonte - East Point 500-kV transmission line (L6079). Raccoon Creek WMA comprises approximately 7,080 acres managed by Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (ADCNR) Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries for waterfowl and small game hunting.
Crow Creek State WMA is located in Jackson County, Alabama approximately 1.8 miles north of Cedar Grove and is crossed by a segment of the Widows Creek - Bellefonte 500-kV #1 transmission line (L61 00). Crow Creek WMA comprises 2,161 acres managed by ADCNR Division of Wildlife and Freshwater Fisheries for waterfowl and small game hunting.
Raccoon Mountain Pumped Storage State Wildlife Observation Area (WOA) is located in Marion County, Tennessee approximately 3.0 miles west of Chattanooga and is crossed by a segment of the Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain 161-kV transmission line (L5613). Raccoon Mountain WOA comprises approximately 860 acres managed by TVA in cooperation with TWRA. This large pumped-storage lake on top of Raccoon Mountain is surrounded by mature forests and open areas and provides habitat for many bird species, including wintering bald eagles, hawks, falcons, common loons, and vultures.
Tennessee River Gorge is located in Marion and Hamilton counties, Tennessee approximately 5.0 miles west of Chattanooga. The southern edge of the Tennessee River Gorge boundary is crossed by a segment of the Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain 161-kV transmission line 234 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement
Chapter 4 (L5613). The protected area of the Tennessee River Gorge consists of 16,777 acres that comprise the total 27,000 acres. This gorge is the fourth largest canyon in the eastern U.S.
This ecologically significant site is managed by The Tennessee River Gorge Trust and has an unusually concentrated diversity of land forms and provides habitat for several varieties of plants, ferns, trees, grasses, and flowers as well as a rich wildlife population. There are federally listed plant and animal species located throughout the gorge.
Grant Property is located in Marion County, Tennessee approximately 5.0 miles southwest of Chattanooga within the boundaries of the Tennessee River Gorge. The southern edge of the Grant Property is crossed by a segment of the Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain transmission line (L5613). This area is owned in fee by the Tennessee River Gorge Trust in cooperation with the University of Tennessee Chattanooga for research purposes. The Grant Property comprises approximately 888 acres and contains wooded slopes, mixed mesophytic forest and cove hardwood forest with land forms characterized by karst topography exhibiting numerous sinkholes and caves. There are federally listed plant and animal species located on the property.
North Chickamauga Creek Gorge and Designated State Natural Area is located in Hamilton County, Tennessee approximately 7.0 miles west of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant and is crossed by the Sequoyah-Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line (L6068). The North Chickamauga Creek Gorge consists of approximately 39,000 acres and the Designated State Natural Area comprises approximately 3,700 acres of the total acreage and is managed by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) in cooperation with the North Chickamauga Creek Conservancy. This area includes a rugged steep gorge cut by Chickamauga Creek into a sandstone plateau. River-side shoals and stream bars provide habitat for several listed plants.
Duck River State Mussel Sanctuary is located in Bedford and Coffee counties, Tennessee and is crossed by the STR 49 - N. Tullahoma tap (L5829) at the section of Normandy Reservoir Reservation. The mussel sanctuary is managed by TWRA and extends from the section of the Duck River from Kettle Mills Dam (Duck River Mile 105.6) upstream.
The Sequatchie River, a NRI-listed stream, is located in Marion and Sequatchie counties, Tennessee. The Sequatchie River Mile (SRM 0), its confluence with Tennessee River, to SRM 109 in its headwaters approximately 10 miles south of Homestead is the segmented listed on the NRI. This segment is crossed at six locations by the Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line (L6068) proposed for upgrades associated with BLN site operations. The NPS recognizes this 109-mile segment for its scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife values and is noted as a clean, pastoral float stream that flows through a narrow scenic valley. The first crossing point of the river north of BLN site is located approximately 0.4 miles north of the town of Ebenezer and west of State Route 27. The second stream crossing occurs 2.07 miles east of Nickletown and west of State Route 27. The third stream crossing occurs at 1.8 miles northeast of Nickletown and west of State Route 27. The fourth, fifth and sixth stream crossings occur north of the town of Oak Grove at 0.4 mile, 0.8 mile, and 1.6 miles respectively.
The segment of the North Chickamauga River is located in Hamilton and Sequatchie counties, Tennessee from SRM 13 (its confluence with Falling Water Creek southeast of Falling Water) to SRM 31 (the headwaters north of Lone Oak) is listed on the NRI. This river is crossed at two locations by the existing Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line (L6068) proposed for upgrades associated with BLN site operations. The NPS recognizes this 18-mile segment for its scenic, recreational, geologic, fish, wildlife, historical and cultural values arid is noted as a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 235 I
I I
I
'I I
I I
I Chapter 4 (LS613). The protected area of the Tennessee River Gorge consists of 16,777 acres that comprise the total 27,000 acres. This gorge is the fourth largest canyon in the eastern U.S.
This ecologically significant site is managed by The Tennessee River Gorge Trust and has an unusually concentrated diversity of land forms and provides habitat for several varieties of plants, ferns, trees, grasses, and flowers as well as a rich wildlife population. There are federally listed plant and animal species located throughout the gorge.
Grant Property is located in Marion County, Tennessee approximately S.O miles southwest of Chattanooga within the boundaries of the Tennessee River Gorge. The southern edge of the Grant Property is crossed by a segment of the Widows Creek - Raccoon Mountain transmission line (LS613). This area is owned in fee by the Tennessee River Gorge Trust in cooperation with the University of Tennessee Chattanooga for research purposes. The Grant Property comprises approximately 888 acres and contains wooded slopes, mixed mesophytic forest and cove hardwood forest with land forms characterized by karst topography exhibiting numerous sinkholes and caves. There are federally listed plant and animal species located on the property.
North Chickamauga Creek Gorge and Designated State Natural Area is located in Hamilton County, Tennessee approximately 7.0 miles west of Sequoyah Nuclear Plant and is crossed by the Sequoyah-Widows Creek SOO-kV transmission line (L6068). The North Chickamauga Creek Gorge consists of approximately 39,000 acres and the Designated State Natural Area comprises approximately 3,700 acres of the total acreage and is managed by the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) in cooperation with the North Chickamauga Creek Conservancy. This area includes a rugged steep gorge cut by Chickamauga Creek into a sandstone plateau. River-side shoals and stream bars provide habitat for several listed plants.
Duck River State Mussel Sanctuary is located in Bedford and Coffee counties, Tennessee and is crossed by the STR 49 - N. Tullahoma tap (LS829) at the section of Normandy Reservoir Reservation. The mussel sanctuary is managed by TWRA and extends from the section of the Duck River from Kettle Mills Dam (Duck River Mile 10S.6) upstream.
The Sequatchie River, a NRI-listed stream, is located in Marion and Sequatchie counties, Tennessee. The Sequatchie River Mile (SRM 0), its confluence with Tennessee River, to SRM 109 in its headwaters approximately 10 miles south of Homestead is the segmented listed on the NRI. This segment is crossed at six locations by the Sequoyah - Widows Creek SOO-kV transmission line (L6068) proposed for upgrades associated with BLN site operations. The NPS recognizes this 1 09-mile segment for its scenic, recreational, geologic, fish and wildlife values and is noted as a clean, pastoral float stream that flows through a narrow scenic valley. The first crossing point of the river north of BLN site is located approximately 0.4 miles north of the town of Ebenezer and west of State Route 27. The second stream crossing occurs 2.07 miles east of Nickletown and west of State Route 27. The third stream crossing occurs at 1.8 miles northeast of Nickletown and west of State Route 27. The fourth, fifth and sixth stream crossings occur north of the town of Oak Grove at 0.4 mile, 0.8 mile, and 1.6 miles respectively.
The segment of the North Chickamauga River is located in Hamilton and Sequatchie counties, Tennessee from SRM 13 (its confluence with Falling Water Creek southeast of Falling Water) to SRM 31 (the headwaters north of Lone Oak) is listed on the NRI. This river is crossed at two locations by the existing Sequoyah - Widows Creek SOO-kV transmission line (L6068) proposed for upgrades associated with BLN site operations. The NPS recognizes this 18-mile segment for its scenic, recreational, geologic, fish, wildlife, historical and cultural values and is noted as a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 235
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site spring-fed, crystal clear mountain stream featuring a variety of flora and an abundance of
£ wildlife. The first crossing point of the river north of the BLN site is located approximately 3.7 miles north of the town of Fairmont on the Sequatchie and Hamilton county line. The second stream crossing occurs approximately 0.5 mile northeast of the town of Mile Straight at Dayton I
Pike Road.
Little Sequatchie River is a NRI-listed stream located in Marion CountyTennessee from SRM 0 to SRM 25 headwaters west of Palmer is located approximately 1.2 miles west of the Sequoyah t
- Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line (L6068) proposed for upgrades associated with BLN site operations. The NPS recognizes this 25-mile segment for its scenic, recreational, fish and wildlife values and is noted as a scenic stream that supports game fishery.
4.9.2. Environmental Consequences i
No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, no alterations or improvements would be made to existing facilities for the purpose of nuclear power generation including associated upgrades of transmission lines. Therefore, there would be no additional effects to natural areas under this alternative.
Action Alternative Nine natural areas and two NRI streams crossed by the transmission lines would be directly affected from disturbance of vegetation within the area and at stream crossings from heavy equipment associated with the upgrades. Activities necessary to upgrade transmission lines are short term and occur on existing ROW with no new clearing beyond the ROW. BMPs and other routine measures would be implemented to mitigate impacts. Managers of the natural areas crossed by the transmission lines would be notified prior to beginning proposed work. Because the proposed work is confined to existing ROW and because appropriate BMPs would be implemented, direct impacts to natural areas crossed by the transmission lines would be minor.
The other natural areas listed in Table 4-6 would not be directly or indirectly affected. Impacts associated with implementation of this alternative would not result in cumulative adverse impacts to natural areas.
4.10. Recreation i
4.10.1. Affected Environment Some low density dispersed recreation activity such as hunting or wildlife observation may currently take place within these existing transmission line corridors. Two developed recreation areas occur adjacent to the transmission line corridors. A segment of the Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV line crosses Nickajack Dam Reservation and passes within a few hundred feet of a boat ramp and fishing berm on the right bank and a fishing pier on the left bank below the dam. The STR 49 - N. Tullahoma 161-kV line crosses Normandy Dam Reservation and passes within 200 feet of Duck River access facilities maintained by TVA as part of the reservation.
4.10.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Routine maintenance of these transmission lines and ROWs whould have minor impacts on any informal recreation use or developed recreation within the area and no mitigation would be required.
I 236 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site spring-fed, crystal clear mountain stream featuring a variety of flora and an abundance of wildlife. The first crossing point of the river north of the BLN site is located approximately 3.7 miles north of the town of Fairmont on the Sequatchie and Hamilton county line. The second stream crossing occurs approximately 0.5 mile northeast of the town of Mile Straight at Dayton Pike Road.
Little Sequatchie River is a NRI-listed stream located in Marion County.Tennessee from SRM 0 to SRM 25 headwaters west of Palmer is located approximately 1.2 miles west of the Sequoyah
- Widows Creek 500-kV transmission line (L6068) proposed for upgrades associated with BLN site operations. The NPS recognizes this 25-mile segment for its scenic, recreational, fish and wildlife values and is noted as a scenic stream that supports game fishery.
4.9.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, no alterations or improvements would be made to existing facilities for the purpose of nuclear power generation including associated upgrades of transmission lines. Therefore, there would be no additional effects to natural areas under this alternative.
Action Alternative Nine natural areas and two NRI streams crossed by the transmission lines would be directly affected from disturbance of vegetation within the area and at stream crossings from heavy equipment associated with the upgrades. Activities necessary to upgrade transmission lines are short term and occur on existing ROW with no new clearing beyond the ROW. BMPs and other routine measures would be implemented to mitigate impacts. Managers of the natural areas crossed by the transmission lines would be notified prior to beginning proposed work. Because the proposed work is confined to existing ROWand because appropriate BMPs would be implemented, direct impacts to natural areas crossed by the transmission lines would be minor.
The other natural areas listed in Table 4-6 would not be directly or indirectly affected. Impacts associated with implementation of this alternative would not result in cumulative adverse impacts to natural areas.
4.10. Recreation 4.10.1. Affected Environment Some low density dispersed recreation activity such as hunting or wildlife observation may currently take place within these existing transmission line corridors. Two developed recreation areas occur adjacent to the transmission line corridors. A segment of the Sequoyah - Widows Creek 500-kV line crosses Nickajack Dam Reservation and passes within a few hundred feet of a boat ramp and fishing berm on the right bank and a fishing pier on the left bank below the dam. The STR 49 - N. Tullahoma 161-kV line crosses Normandy Dam Reservation and passes within 200 feet of Duck River access facilities maintained by TVA as part of the reservation.
4.10.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Routine maintenance of these transmission lines and ROWs whould have minor impacts on any informal recreation use or developed recreation within the areaand no mitigation would be required.
236 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I~
I I
Chapter 4 Action Alternative Minor impacts on informal and developed recreation could occur during routine maintenance of lines and ROWs, as described in the No Action Alternative. Actions related to refurbishing these transmission lines and ROWs could have a minor affect on any informal recreation use that currently occurs. Because these lines already exist and do not directly cross over developed recreation facilities on Nickajack and Normandy Reservations, any impacts on developed recreation facilities should be minor. Further any impacts on dispersed recreation should be negligable and no mitigation required.
4.11.
Land Use 4.11.1. Affected Environment The lines that would be upgraded cross land with a wide variety of uses, including agriculture, residential, commercial and forest.
4.11.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative No additional changes in land use would occur under the No Action Alternative because adoption of this alternative would not involve any additional acreage for transmission lines or electrical facilities.
Action Alternative Some temporary disruption of some land uses particularly agriculture could occur during upgrade activities. TVA would appropriately compensate land owners for any damage including damage to growing crops. Under this alternative, upgrades to the existing ROWs would not change any existing land use.
4.12. Visual Resources 4.12.1. Affected Environment The physical, biological, and man-made features seen in the landscape provide any selected geographic area with particular visual qualities and aesthetic character. The varied combinations of natural features and human alterations that shape landscape character also help define their scenic importance. The presence or absence of these features along with aesthetic attributes such as uniqueness, variety, pattern, vividness, and contrast make the visual resources of an area identifiable and distinct. The scenic value of these resources is based on human perceptions of intrinsic beauty as expressed in the forms, colors, textures, and visual composition seen in each landscape.
The existing transmission line routes traverse a variety of topography through several counties in Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia. The existing 161-kV and 500-kV switchyards are located on the BLN site. The existing transmission lines and associated structures can be seen in the foreground distance (within 0.5 mile of the observer), middleground distance (between 0.5 and 4 miles), and background distance (4 miles to the horizon) by area residents and motorists along local roads. In some areas, views of the transmission lines and structures provide discordant contrast when seen as a focal point and standing alone. In other areas, the line route is visually similar to other transmission structures seen in the landscape.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 237 I
I I
I I
I I
I*
I I
I I
I I
I, I
I Chapter 4 Action Alternative Minor impacts on informal and developed recreation could occur during routine maintenance of lines and ROWs, as described in the No Action Alternative. Actions related to refurbishing these transmission lines and ROWs could have a minor affect on any informal recreation use that currently occurs. Because these lines already exist and do not directly cross over developed recreation facilities on Nickajack and Normandy Reservations, any impacts on developed recreation facilities should be minor. Further any impacts on dispersed recreation should be negligable and no mitigation required.
4.11. Land Use 4.11.1. Affected Environment The lines that would be upgraded cross land with a wide variety of uses, including agriculture, residential, commercial and forest.
4.11.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative No additional changes in land use would occur under the No Action Alternative because adoption of this alternative would not involve any additional acreage for transmission lines or electrical facilities.
Action Alternative Some temporary disruption of some land uses particularly agriculture could occur during upgrade activities. TVA would appropriately compensate land owners for any damage including damage to growing crops. Under this alternative, upgrades to the existing ROWs would not change any existing land use.
4.12. Visual Resources 4.12.1. Affected Environment The physical, biological, and man-made features seen in the landscape provide any selected geographic area with particular visual qualities and aesthetic character. The varied combinations of natural features and human alterations that shape landscape character also help define their scenic importance. The presence or absence of these features along with aesthetic attributes such as uniqueness, variety, pattern, vividness, and contrast make the visual resources of an area identifiable and distinct. The scenic value of these resources is based on human perceptions of intrinsic beauty as expressed in the forms, colors, textures, and visual composition seen in each landscape.
The existing transmission line routes traverse a variety of topography through several counties in Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia. The existing 161-kV and SOO-kV switchyards are located on the BLN site. The existing transmission lines and associated structures can be seen in the foreground distance (within O.S mile of the observer), middleground distance (between O.S and 4 miles), and background distance (4 miles to the horizon) by area residents and motorists along local roads. In some areas, views of the transmission lines and structures provide discordant contrast when seen as a focal point and standing alone. In other areas, the line route is visually similar to other transmission structures seen in the landscape.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 237
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 4.12.2. 4.12.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the existing switchyards and transmission line ROWs would not be upgraded. Thus, there would be no change in visual character, and visual resources would not be affected.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, the existing switchyards and transmission lines would be upgraded. For residents along Town Creek near BLN, upgrade of the existing switchyards and transmission lines would be visually insignificant. Views of the upgrades would be visually similar to existing views residents now have from foreground distances.
For residents, motorists, and lake-users along the existing line routes, most visual impacts would be temporary and minor. These groups would likely notice an increase in traffic and personnel along local roads and access roads. New conductors, structures, and height extensions would add to the number of discordantly contrasting elements seen in the landscape. Visual impacts would likely decrease as viewing positions increase in distance from the transmission line upgrades. Details of views from background distances tend to merge into broader patterns and details become weak.
Upgrades to the transmission line route would require some limited clearing of vegetation.
These activities could include the use of heavy machinery and would increase the number of personnel seen in the area. These minor visual obtrusions would be temporary until the existing ROW and laydown areas have been restored through the use of TVA standard BMPs (Muncy 1999). Any nighttime lighting required would be temporary during the upgrade period and would be insignificant. There may be some minor visual discord during the upgrade period due to an increase in personnel and equipment and the use of laydown and materials storage areas. This would be temporary until all activities are complete.
4.13. Cultural Resources 4.13.1. Affected Environment TVA's procedure for reviewing the operations and maintenance of transmission lines is called a Sensitive Area Review (SAR) (see Appendix G). Under this review procedure, all transmission line corridors, where routine operation and maintenance occur, are reviewed by TVA Cultural Resource staff for the potential to effect historic properties on or eligible for the National Registar of Historic Places (NRHP). The regulatory guidance for the SAR concerning cultural resources is the same guidance for all cultural resource assessments: 36 CFR Part 800. Prior to conducting specific upgrades and other activities along the ROWs, TVA would determine the need for consultation with the respective State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and if needed, define an Area of Potential Effect (APE) in coordination with the SHPO. That requirement would range from no investigations (area already surveyed) to resurvey (if past surveys were not deemed sufficient) to site avoidance, data recovery, or monitoring if a previously or newly identified cultural resource within the APE was determined eligible or potentially eligible for inclusion in the NRHP.
The archaeological record of the Tennessee River valley has documented five major prehistoric occupational periods that began with the Paleo-indian (14,000 to 8000 B.C.), the Archaic (8000 to 900 B.C.), the Woodland (900 B.C to A.D. 1000), the Mississippian (A.D. 1000 to 1630) and I
Historic (1630 to present) Periods. Prehistoric land use and settlement patterns vary during each period, but short-and long-term habitation sites are generally located on flood plains and 238 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 4.12.2.4.12.2 Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, the existing switchyards and transmission line ROWs would not be upgraded. Thus, there would be no change in visual character, and visual resources would not be affected.
Action Alternative Under the Action Alternative, the existing switchyards and transmission lines would be upgraded. For residents along Town Creek near BLN, upgrade of the existing switchyards and transmission lines would be visually insignificant. Views of the upgrades would be visually similar to existing views residents now have from foreground distances.
For residents, motorists, and lake-users along the existing line routes, most visual impacts would be temporary and minor. These groups would likely notice an increase in traffic and personnel along local roads and access roads. New conductors, structures, and height extensions would add to the number of discordantly contrasting elements seen in the landscape. Visual impacts would likely decrease as viewing positions increase in distance from the transmission line upgrades. Details of views from background distances tend to merge into broader patterns and details become weak.
Upgrades to the transmission line route would require some limited clearing of vegetation.
These activities could include the use of heavy machinery and would increase the number of personnel seen in the area. These minor visual obtrusions would be temporary until the existing ROWand laydown areas have been restored through the use of TVA standard BMPs (Muncy 1999). Any nighttime lighting required would be temporary during the upgrade period and would be insignificant. There may be some minor visual discord during the upgrade period due to an increase in personnel and equipment and the use of laydown and materials storage areas. This would be temporary until all activities are complete.
4.13. Cultural Resources 4.13.1. Affected Environment TVA's procedure for reviewing the operations and maintenance of transmission lines is called a Sensitive Area Review (SAR) (see Appendix G). Under this review procedure, all transmission line corridors, where routine operation and maintenance occur, are reviewed by TVA Cultural Resource staff for the potential to effect historic properties on or eligible for the National Registar of Historic Places (NRHP). The regulatory guidance for the SAR concerning cultural resources is the same guidance for all cultural resource assessments: 36 CFR Part 800. Prior to conducting specific upgrades and other activities along the ROWs, TVA would determine the need for consultation with the respective State Historical Preservation Officer (SHPO) and if needed, define an Area of Potential Effect (APE) in coordination with the SHPO. That requirement would range from no investigations (area already surveyed) to resurvey (if past surveys were not deemed sufficient) to site avoidance, data recovery, or monitoring if a previously or newly identified cultural resource within the APE was determined eligible or potentially eligible for inclusion in the NRHP.
The archaeological record of the Tennessee River valley has documented five major prehistoric occupational periods that began with the Paleo-indian (14,000 to 8000 B.C.), the Archaic (8000 to 900 B.C.), the Woodland (900 B.C to A.D. 1000), the Mississippian (A.D. 1000 to 1630) and Historic (1630 to present) Periods. Prehistoric land use and settlement patterns vary during each period, but short-and long-term habitation sites are generally located on flood plains and 238 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
,I:
I
Chapter 4 alluvial terraces along rivers and tributaries. Specialized campsites tend to be located on older alluvial terraces and in the uplands. European interactions with Native Americans in this area began in the 17th and 18th centuries. European settlements vary throughout the regions in this study, but in general, Euro-American settlement increased in the early 19th century as the Historic tribes were forced to give up their land. Sites belonging to each period are differently distributed in the landscape of Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia, but generally, habitation sites are found on flood plains and alluvial terraces along rivers and tributaries, while specialized campsites tend to be found on older alluvial terraces and in the uplands.
For the proposed transmission line upgrades associated with construction of a single BLN unit, the archaeological APE is all lands upon which the existing transmission line would be upgraded and includes all associated infrastructure, including the transmission line ROW, access roads, and staging areas. The APE for architectural studies includes a 0.8-km (0.5-mile) buffer surrounding the subject transmission line ROWs.
Based on available data of previously recorded cultural resources, 25 archaeological sites are located within the APE. One of these sites located in Alabama (1 MG785) is no longer extant.
Seven sites, all located in Alabama (1MG116, 1MG115, 1MG667, 1MG758, 1MG757, 1JA304, 1JA694), were previously determined not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. Two sites, one in Alabama (1 MG735) and one in Georgia (9WA1 64), have been previously determined potentially eligible for the NRHP. The remaining 15 sites in Alabama (1JA637, 1JA650, 1JA453, 1JA452, 1JA304, 1JA377, 1JA518, 1JA532, 1JA524, 1JA617, 1JA558) and Tennessee (40MI246, 40MI247, 40HA0089, 40MI248) have not been assessed for NRHP eligibility. In Alabama, one previously recorded historic district (the City of Bridgeport) falls within the architectural APE. A portion (8 percent, 2.5 miles) of one transmission line proposed for upgrading (i.e., the Widows Creek-Oglethorpe #3) has been subjected to a systematic cultural resources survey (Cleveland et al. 1995). This cultural resource survey identified one NRHP-eligible historic archaeological site (9WA164), one eligible Historic District (Happy Valley Farms in Walker County, Georgia) and two eligible historic structures (WA-WA-1 14 and WA-WA-642).
4.13.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the transmission line upgrades would not take place and there would be no additional impacts to cultural resources from ongoing maintenance of existing transmission lines and ROWs.
Action Alternative Portions of the transmission line ROWs proposed for upgrading are located in areas having a high potential for the presence of archaeological resources. In addition, 17 previously recorded archaeological sites have been determined eligible, or have not been assessed for eligibility for the NRHP. Under the Action Alternative, the upgrade of the existing transmission lines and the construction and/or use of associated infrastructure (e.g., access roads, laydown areas) have the potential to adversely affect archaeological resources located within the APE that may be eligible for the NRHP. The placement of new structures or project-related clearing within the existing transmission line ROW could potentially have a negative visual affect on historic structures eligible for the NRHP within the APE.
In letters dated September 10, 2009, TVA initiated consultation with the Tennessee, Alabama and Georgia SHPOs regarding the proposed transmission line upgrades. Should the Action Alternative be selected, TVA would consult with the appropriate SHPO(s) regarding a Scope of Work (SOW) for a cultural resources survey to identify and evaluate any cultural resources that Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 239 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I' I
I I
I
,I I
I Chapter 4 alluvial terraces along rivers and tributaries. Specialized campsites tend to be located on older alluvial terraces and in the uplands. European interactions with Native Americans in this area began in the 17th and 18th centuries. European settlements vary throughout the regions in this study, but in general, Euro-American settlement increased in the early 19th century as the Historic tribes were forced to give up their land. Sites belonging to each period are differently distributed in the landscape of Tennessee, Alabama, and Georgia, but generally, habitation sites are found on flood plains and alluvial terraces along rivers and tributaries, while specialized campsites tend to be found on older alluvial terraces and in the uplands.
For the proposed transmission line upgrades associated with construction of a single BLN unit, the archaeological APE is all lands upon which the existing transmission line would be upgraded and includes all associated infrastructure, including the transmission line ROW, access roads, and staging areas. The APE for architectural studies includes a 0.8-km (0.5-mile) buffer surrounding the subject transmission line ROWs.
Based on available data of previously recorded cultural resources, 25 archaeological sites are located within the APE. One of these sites located in Alabama (1 MG785) is no longer extant.
Seven sites, all located in Alabama (1MG116, 1MG115, 1MG667, 1MG758, 1MG757, 1JA304, 1 JA694), were previously determined not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP. Two sites, one in Alabama (1 MG735) and one in Georgia (9WA 164), have been previously determined potentially eligible for the NRHP. The remaining 15 sites in Alabama (1JA637, 1JA650, 1JA453, 1JA452, 1JA304, 1JA377, 1JA518, 1JA532, 1JA524, 1JA617, 1JA558) and Tennessee (40MI246, 40M1247, 40HA0089, 40M1248) have not been assessed for NRHP eligibility. In Alabama, one previously recorded historic district (the City of Bridgeport) falls within the architectural APE. A portion (8 percent, 2.5 miles) of one transmission line proposed for upgrading (i.e., the Widows Creek-Oglethorpe #3) has been subjected to a systematic cultural resources survey (Cleveland et al. 1995). This cultural resource survey identified one NRHP-eligible historic archaeological site (9WA164), one eligible Historic District (Happy Valley Farms in Walker County, Georgia) and two eligible historic structures (WA-WA-114 and WA-WA-642).
4.13.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the transmission line upgrades would not take place and there would be no additional impacts to cultural resources from ongoing maintenance of existing transmission lines and ROWs.
Action Alternative Portions of the transmission line ROWs proposed for upgrading are located in areas having a high potential for the presence of archaeological resources. In addition, 17 previously recorded archaeological sites have been determined eligible, or have not been assessed for eligibility for the NRHP. Under the Action Alternative, the upgrade of the existing transmission lines and the construction and/or use of associated infrastructure (e.g., access roads, laydown areas) have the potential to adversely affect archaeological resources located within the APE that may be eligible for the NRHP. The placement of new structures or project-related clearing within the existing transmission line ROW could potentially have a negative visual affect on historic structures eligible for the NRHP within the APE.
In letters dated September 10,2009, TVA initiated consultation with the Tennessee, Alabama and Georgia SHPOs regarding the proposed transmission line upgrades. Should the Action Alternative be selected, TVA would consult with the appropriate SHPO(s) regarding a Scope of Work (SOW) for a cultural resources survey to identify and evaluate any cultural resources that Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 239
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
may be affected by the proposed undertaking. TVA would re-examine the state site files for I
previously recorded sites and conduct a detailed cultural resource investigation of the APE to evaluate any previously recorded cultural resources and for the identification of previously unrecorded cultural resources within the APE. These cultural resources will be evaluated for 1
eligibility for listing in the NRHP and assessed for any adverse affects by the proposed undertaking. If any eligible historic properties are identified within the APE, TVA would consult with the appropriate SHPO(s) and other interested parties, and would develop a Memorandum I
of Agreement (MOA) for each affected state to address treatment measures for the avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to these properties.
TVA would evaluate the presence of historic structures and archaeological sites. This evaluation would be guided by the MOA(s) that TVA is developing with each of the affected states (Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia). TVA would use the phased identification and evaluation procedure set forth in those agreements, as well as other federal legislation pertinent I
to archaeological resources. Site-specific activities proposed in the future would be approved or denied according to the significance of any archaeological resources within the affected ROWs.
Archaeological sites in affected areas would be avoided whenever possible. If avoidance is not possible, mitigation may be required. Such mitigation typically calls for additional archaeological investigation and may require data recovery of potentially impacted archaeological resources in the form of removal, cataloging, and archiving, as defined in the MOA(s). Although mitigation documents the site and preserves certain artifacts, under the revised NHPA regulations, excavation and removal of artifacts are considered an adverse impact to an archaeological site.
4.14. Socioeconomics Socioeconomics is the combination of social and economic factors related to the proposed action. Socioeconomic impacts may be positive, such as increased income, or negative, such as traffic congestion or temporary increases in demand for medical services.
4.14.1. Affected Environment The transmission lines proposed for upgrades associated with operations of the BLN site would I
cover 11 counties in three states, as shown in Figure 2-6.
4.14.2. Environmental Consequences I
No Action Alternative Selection of the No Action Alternative would not affect local socioeconomic conditions because there would be essentially no change in current conditions.
Action Alternative The actions required to re-energize the existing 500-kV lines and switchyard are discussed in the CLWR FEIS (DOE 1999), Section 5.2.3.9.1; the Conversion FEIS (TVA 1997); Section 4.2.18.2; and the COLA ER (TVA 2008a), Section 3.7.2.2. The transmission uprates and refurbishments would be a small piece of the total construction effort for BLN, accounting for II only a small share of expenditures and employment. In addition, as discussed in Section 2.6.2, these activities would be confined to the existing transmission line ROWs. Therefore, these impacts are considered to be minor.
I Post-construction effects of re-energizing the 500-kV line and switchyard are discussed in the Tritium FEIS (ibid), Section 5.2.3.9.1, and the Conversion FEIS (ibid), Section 4.2.18.2. They are also discussed in the COLA ER (ibid), Sections 5.8.1.4 and 5.6.3. Measures would be undertaken (see Section 2.6.2) to prevent or mitigate induced electric current and noise 240 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site may be affected by the proposed undertaking. TVA would re-examine the state site files for previously recorded sites and conduct a detailed cultural resource investigation of the APE to evaluate any previously recorded cultural resources and for the identification of previously unrecorded cultural resources within the APE. These cultural resources will be evaluated for eligibility for listing in the NRHP and assessed for any adverse affects by the proposed undertaking. If any eligible historic properties are identified within the APE, TVA would consult with the appropriate SHPO(s) and other interested parties, and would develop a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) for each affected state to address treatment measures for the avoidance or minimization of adverse effects to these properties.
TVA would evaluate the presence of historic structures and archaeological sites. This evaluation would be guided by the MOA(s) that TVA is developing with each of the affected states (Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia). TVA would use the phased identification and evaluation procedure set forth in those agreements, as well as other federal legislation pertinent to archaeological resources. Site-specific activities proposed in the future would be approved or denied according to the significance of any archaeological resources within the affected ROWs.
Archaeological sites in affected areas would be avoided whenever possible. If avoidance is not possible, mitigation may be required. Such mitigation typically calls for additional archaeological investigation and may require data recovery of potentially impacted archaeological resources in the form of removal, cataloging, and archiving, as defined in the MOA(s). Although mitigation documents the site and preserves certain artifacts, under the revised NHPA regulations, excavation and removal of artifacts are considered an adverse impact to an archaeological site.
4.14. Socioeconomics Socioeconomics is the combination of social and economic factors related to the proposed action. Socioeconomic impacts may be positive, such as increased income, or negative, such as traffic congestion or temporary increases in demand for medical services.
4.14.1. Affected Environment The transmission lines proposed for upgrades associated with operations of the BLN site would cover 11 counties in three states, as shown in Figure 2-6.
4.14.2. Environmental Consequences No Action Alternative Selection of the No Action Alternative would not affect local socioeconomic conditions because there would be essentially no change in current conditions.
Action Alternative The actions required to re-energize the existing 500-kV lines and switchyard are discussed in the CLWR FEIS (DOE 1999), Section 5.2.3.9.1; the Conversion FEIS (TVA 1997); Section 4.2.18.2; and the COLA ER (TVA 2008a), Section 3.7.2.2. The transmission uprates and refurbishments would be a small piece of the total construction effort for BLN, accounting for only a small share of expenditures and employment. In addition, as discussed in Section 2.6.2, these activities would be confined to the existing transmission line ROWs. Therefore, these impacts are considered to be minor.
Post-construction effects of re-energizing the 500-kV line and switchyard are discussed in the Tritium FEIS (ibid), Section 5.2.3.9.1, and the Conversion FEIS (ibid), Section 4.2.18.2. They are also discussed in the COLA ER (ibid), Sections 5.8.1.4 and 5.6.3. Measures would be undertaken (see Section 2.6.2) to prevent or mitigate induced electric current and noise 240 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I, I
I I
'I I
.1 I
Chapter 4 impacts, and to minimize public exposure to electric and magnetic fields. Therefore, these potential impacts are considered to be minor and insignificant.
4.15. Environmental Justice Environmental justice is the fair treatment of all people with respect to the distribution of impacts of projects, programs, and policy. Fair treatment implies that low-income or minority populations will not incur a disproportionate share of adverse effects. Environmental justice analysis is mandated by EO 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. TVA assesses the impact of its actions on minority communities and low-income populations in the NEPA process.
No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative there would be no upgrades to the subject transmission lines.
There would be no impacts on businesses, industries, and residences in the area. Therefore, no significant disproportionate impacts to low-income or minority populations would occur under this alternative.
Action Alternative All work would involve existing facilities and ROWs. No businesses, industries, and residences in the area not already affected by the existing transmission system would be affected beyond the minor and temporary effects. Therefore, no significant disproportionate impacts to low-income or minority populations would occur should the Action Alternative be implemented.
4.16. Operational Impacts 4.16.1. Electric and Magnetic Fields Transmission lines, like all other types of electrical wiring, generate both electric and magnetic fields (EMF). The voltage on the conductors of the transmission line generates an electric field that occupies the space between the conductors and other conducting objects such as the ground, transmission line structures, or vegetation. A magnetic field is generated by the current (i.e., the movement of electrons) in the conductors. The strength of the magnetic field depends on the current, design of the line, and distance from the line.
The fields from a transmission line are reduced by mutual interference of the electrons that flow around and along the conductors and between the conductors. The result is dissipation of the already low energy. Most of this energy is dissipated on the ROW, and the residual very low amount is reduced to background levels near the ROW or energized equipment.
Magnetic fields can induce currents in conducting objects. Electric fields can create static charges in ungrounded, conducting materials. The strength of the induced current or charge under a transmission line varies with (1) the strength of the electric or magnetic field, (2) the size and shape of the conducting object, and (3) whether the conducting object is grounded.
Induced currents and charges can cause shocks under certain conditions by making contact with objects in an electric or magnetic field.
The transmission lines subject to upgrades, like other transmission lines, have been designed to minimize the potential for such shocks. This is done, in part, by maintaining sufficient clearance between the conductors and objects on the ground. Stationary conducting objects, such as metal fences, pipelines, and highway guard rails that are near enough to the transmission line to develop a charge would be grounded by TVA to prevent them from being a source of shocks.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 241 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Chapter 4 impacts, and to minimize public exposure to electric and magnetic fields. Therefore, these potential impacts are considered to be minor and insignificant.
4.15. Environmental Justice Environmental justice is the fair treatment of all people with respect to the distribution of impacts of projects, programs, and policy. Fair treatment implies that low-income or minority populations will not incur a disproportionate share of adverse effects. Environmental justice analysis is mandated by EO 12898 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations. TVA assesses the impact of its actions on minority communities and low-income populations in the NEPA process.
No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative there would be no upgrades to the subject transmission lines.
There would be no impacts on businesses, industries, and residences in the area. Therefore, no significant disproportionate impacts to low-income or minority populations would occur under this alternative.
Action Alternative All work would involve existing facilities and ROWs. No businesses, industries, and residences in the area not already affected by the existing transmission system would be affected beyond the minor and temporary effects. Therefore, no significant disproportionate impacts to low-income or minority populations would occur should the Action Alternative be implemented.
4.16. Operational Impacts 4.16.1. Electric and Magnetic Fields Transmission lines, like all other types of electrical wiring, generate both electric and magnetic fields (EMF). The voltage on the conductors of the transmission line generates an electric field that occupies the space between the conductors and other conducting objects such as the ground, transmission line structures, or vegetation. A magnetic field is generated by the current (i.e., the movement of electrons) in the conductors. The strength of the magnetic field depends on the current, design of the line, and distance from the line.
The fields from a transmission line are reduced by mutual interference of the electrons that flow around and along the conductors and between the conductors. The result is dissipation of the already low energy. Most of this energy is dissipated on the ROW, and the residual very low amount is reduced to background levels near the ROW or energized equipment.
Magnetic fields can induce currents in conducting objects. Electric fields can create static charges in ungrounded, conducting materials. The strength of the induced current or charge under a transmission line varies with (1) the strength of the electric or magnetic field, (2) the size and shape of the conducting object, and (3) whether the conducting object is grounded.
Induced currents and charges can cause shocks under certain conditions by making contact with objects in an electric or magnetic field.
The transmission lines subject to upgrades, like other transmission lines, have been designed to minimize the potential for such shocks. This is done, in part, by maintaining sufficient clearance between the conductors and objects on the ground. Stationary conducting objects, such as metal fences, pipelines, and highway guard rails that are near enough to the transmission line to develop a charge would be grounded by TVA to prevent them from being a source of shocks.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 241
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Under certain weather conditions, high-voltage transmission lines, such as 500-kV and 161-kV 1
lines, may produce an audible low-volume hissing or crackling noise. This noise is generated by the corona resulting from the dissipation of energy and heat as high voltage is applied to a small area. Under normal conditions, corona-generated noise is not audible. The noise may be I
audible under some wet conditions, and the resulting noise level off the ROW would be well below the levels that can produce interference with speech. Corona is not associated with any adverse health effects in humans or livestock.
j Other public interests and concerns have included potential interference with AM radio reception, television reception, satellite television, and implanted medical devices. If interference occurs with radio or television reception, it would be due to unusual failures of power line insulators or a poor alignment of the radio or television antenna and the signal source. Both conditions are correctable and would be repaired if reported to TVA.
J Implanted medical devices historically had a potential for power equipment strong-field interference when they came within the influence of low-frequency, high-energy workplace exposure. However, the older devices and designs (i.e., more than five to 10 years old) have been replaced with different designs and different shielding that eliminate the potential for interference from external field sources up to and including the most powerful magnetic resonance imaging medical scanners. Unlike high-energy radio frequency devices that can still 1
interfere with implanted medical devices, low-frequency, and low-energy powered electric or magnetic devices no longer potentially interfere (Journal of the American Medical Association 2007).
I Research has been done on the effects of EMF on animal and plant behavior, growth, breeding, development, reproduction, and production. This research has been conducted in the laboratory and under environmental conditions, and no adverse effects on health or the above I
considerations have been reported for the low-energy power frequency fields (World Health Organization [WHO] 2007a). Effects associated with ungrounded, metallic objects and static charge accumulation and discharge in dairy facilities have been found when the connections I
from a distribution line meter have not been properly installed on the farm side of a distribution circuit.
There is some public concern as to the potential for adverse health effects that may be related to long-term exposure to EMF. A few studies of this topic have raised questions about cancer and reproductive effects on the basis of biological responses observed in cells or in animals or on associations between surrogate measures of power line fields and certain types of cancer.
Research has been ongoing for several decades.
The consensus of scientific panels reviewing this research is that the evidence does not support a cause-and-effect relationship between EMF and any adverse health outcomes (e.g., American Medical Association [AMA] 1994; National Research Council 1997; National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [NIEHS] 2002). Some research continues of the statistical I
association between magnetic field exposure and a rare form of childhood leukemia known as acute lymphocytic leukemia. A recent review of this topic by the WHO (International Association for Research on Cancer 2002) concluded that this association is very weak, and there is
£ inadequate evidence to support any other type of excess cancer risk associated with exposure to EMF.
TVA follows medical and health research related to EMF, along with media coverage and reports that may not have been peer-reviewed by scientists or medical personnel. No controlled 242 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement i
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Under certain weather conditions, high-voltage transmission lines, such as 500-kV and 161-kV lines, may produce an audible low-volume hissing or crackling noise. This noise is generated by the corona resulting from the dissipation of energy and heat as high voltage is applied to a small area. Under normal conditions, corona-generated noise is not audible. The noise may be audible under some wet conditions, and the resulting noise level off the ROW would be well below the levels that can produce interference with speech. Corona is not associated with any adverse health effects in humans or livestock.
Other public interests and concerns have included potential interference with AM radio reception, television reception, satellite television, and implanted medical devices. If interference occurs with radio or television reception, it would be due to unusual failures of power line insulators or a poor alignment of the radio or television antenna and the signal source. Both conditions are correctable and would be repaired if reported to TVA.
Implanted medical devices historically had a potential for power equipment strong-field interference when they came within the influence of low-frequency, high-energy workplace exposure. However, the older devices and designs (i.e., more than five to 10 years old) have been replaced with different designs and different shielding that eliminate the potential for interference from external field sources up to and including the most powerful magnetic resonance imaging medical scanners. Unlike high-energy radio frequency devices that can still interfere with implanted medical devices, low-frequency, and low-energy powered electric or magnetic devices no longer potentially interfere (Journal of the American Medical Association 2007).
Research has been done on the effects of EMF on animal and plant behavior, growth, breeding, development, reproduction, and production. This research has been conducted in the laboratory and under environmental conditions, and no adverse effects on health or the above considerations have been reported for the low-energy power frequency fields (World Health Organization [WHO] 2007a). Effects associated with ungrounded, metallic objects and static charge accumulation and discharge in dairy facilities have been found when the connections from a distribution line meter have not been properly installed on the farm side of a distribution circuit.
There is some public concern as to the potential for adverse health effects that may be related to long-term exposure to EMF. A few studies of this topic have raised questions about cancer and reproductive effects on the basis of biological responses observed in cells or in animals or on associations between surrogate measures of power line fields and certain types of cancer.
Research has been ongoing for several decades.
The consensus of scientific panels reviewing this research is that the evidence does not support a cause-and-effect relationship between EMF and any adverse health outcomes (e.g., American Medical Association [AMA] 1994; National Research Council 1997; National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences [NIEHS] 2002). Some research continues of the statistical association between magnetic field exposure and a rare form of childhood leukemia known as acute lymphocytic leukemia. A recent review of this topic by the WHO (International Association for Research on Cancer 2002) concluded that this association is very weak, and there is inadequate evidence to support any other type of excess cancer risk associated with exposure to EMF.
TVA follows medical and health research related to EMF, along with media coverage and reports that may not have been peer-reviewed by scientists or medical personnel. No controlled 242 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
-I I
I I
Chapter 4 laboratory research has demonstrated a cause-and-effect relationship between low-frequency electric or magnetic fields and health effects or adverse health effects even when using field strengths many times higher than those generated by power transmission lines. Statistical studies of overall populations and increased use of low-frequency electric power have found no associations (WHO 2007b).
Neither medical specialists nor physicists have been able to form a testable concept of how these low-frequency, low-energy power fields could cause health effects in the human body where natural processes produce much higher fields. To date, there is no agreement in the scientific or medical research communities as to what, if any, electric or magnetic field parameters might be associated with a potential health effect in a human or animal. There are no scientifically or medically defined safe or unsafe field strengths for low-frequency, low-energy power substation or line fields.
The current and continuing scientific and medical communities' position regarding the research and any potential for health effects from low-frequency power equipment or line fields is that there are no reproducible or conclusive data demonstrating an effect or an adverse health effect from such fields (WHO 2007c). In the United States, national organizations of scientists and medical personnel have recommended no further research on the potential for adverse health effects from such fields (AMA 1994; U.S. Department of Energy 1996; NIEHS 1998).
Although no federal standards exist for maximum EMF strengths for transmission lines, two states (New York and Florida) have promulgated EMF regulations. Florida's regulation is the more restrictive of the two, with field levels being limited to 150 milligauss (mG) at the edge of the ROW for lines of 230-kV and less. The expected magnetic field strengths at the edge of the proposed ROW would fall well within these standards.
In light of all of the above, the upgrade, re-energizing, and operation of the transmission lines are not anticipated to cause any significant EMF-related impacts.
4.16.2. Lightning Strike Hazard TVA transmission lines are built with overhead ground wires that lead a lightning strike into the ground for dissipation. Thus, a safety zone is created under the ground wires at the top of structures and along the line for at least the width of the ROW. The National Electrical Safety Code is strictly followed when installing, repairing, or upgrading TVA lines or equipment.
Transmission line structures are well grounded, and the conductors are insulated from the structure. Therefore, touching a structure supporting a transmission line poses no inherent shock hazard.
4.16.3. Noise and Odor During the proposed upgrade of the transmission lines, equipment would generate noise above ambient levels. Because of the short activity period, noise-related effects are expected to be temporary and insignificant. In the more densely populated areas along the ROW, techniques would be used to limit noise as much as possible. For similar reasons, noise related to periodic line maintenance is also expected to be insignificant. In residential areas, the need for periodic ROW vegetation maintenance, i.e., mowing, would be limited or nonexistent. Upgrade, re-energizing, and operation of the lines are not expected to produce any noticeable odors.
Additionally, no significant long-term impacts related to noise are expected as a result of the operation of the transmission lines. None of the proposed upgrades would result in any increase in the potential for noise produce by the lines.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 243 I
I, I
I I
I I
I I
I
,I
'I I
Chapter 4 laboratory research has demonstrated a cause-and-effect relationship between low-frequency electric or magnetic fields and health effects or adverse health effects even when using field strengths many times higher than those generated by power transmission lines. Statistical studies of overall populations and increased use of low-frequency electric power have found no associations (WHO 2007b).
Neither medical specialists nor physicists have been able to form a testable concept of how these low-frequency, low-energy power fields could cause health effects in the human body where natural processes produce much higher fields. To date, there is no agreement in the scientific or medical research communities as to what, if any, electric or magnetic field parameters might be associated with a potential health effect in a human or animal. There are no scientifically or medically defined safe or unsafe field strengths for low-frequency, low-energy power substation or line fields.
The current and continuing scientific and medical communities' position regarding the research and any potential for health effects from low-frequency power equipment or line fields is that there are no reproducible or conclusive data demonstrating an effect or an adverse health effect from such fields (WHO 2007c). In the United States, national organizations of scientists and medical personnel have recommended no further research on the potential for adverse health effects from such fields (AMA 1994; U.S. Department of Energy 1996; NIEHS 1998).
Although no federal standards exist for maximum EMF strengths for transmission lines, two states (New York and Florida) have promulgated EMF regulations. Florida's regulation is the more restrictive of the two, with field levels being limited to 150 milligauss (mG) at the edge of the ROW for lines of 230-kV and less. The expected magnetic field strengths at the edge of the proposed ROW would fall well within these standards.
In light of all of the above, the upgrade, re-energizing, and operation of the transmission lines are not anticipated to cause any significant EMF-related impacts.
4.16.2. Lightning Strike Hazard TVA transmission lines are built with overhead ground wires that lead a lightning strike into the ground for dissipation. Thus, a safety zone is created under the ground wires at the top of structures and along the line for at least the width of the ROW. The National Electrical Safety Code is strictly followed when installing, repairing, or upgrading TVA lines or equipment.
Transmission line structures are well grounded, and the conductors are insulated from the structure. Therefore, touching a structure supporting a transmission line poses no inherent shock hazard.
4.16.3. Noise and Odor During the proposed upgrade of the transmission lines, equipment would generate noise above ambient levels. Because of the short activity period, noise-related effects are expected to be temporary and insignificant. In the more densely populated areas along the ROW, techniques would be used to limit noise as much as possible. For similar reasons, noise related to periodic line maintenance is also expected to be insignificant. In residential areas, the need for periodic ROW vegetation maintenance, i.e., mowing, would be limited or nonexistent. Upgrade, re-energizing, and operation of the lines are not expected to produce any noticeable odors.
Additionally, no significant long-term impacts related to noise are expected as a result of the operation of the transmission lines. None of the proposed upgrades would result in any increase in the potential for noise produce by the lines.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 243
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
4.16.4. Other Impacts 3
No significant impacts are expected to result from the relatively short-term activities related to line upgrades. Appendix E, Environmental Quality Protection Specifications for Transmission Line Construction, lists the methods which would used to limit the effects of these activities.
4.16.5. Summary No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, no new EMFs, lighting strike hazards, or noise and odors would be created from the proposed upgrading of the transmission lines, therefore there would be no impacts to the environment.
Action Alternative Magnetic fields would continue be produced along the length of the existing 161 -kV 5
transmission lines and new magnetic fields would be produced along the length of the re-energized 500-kV line. The proposed transmission line upgrades would allow the subject line to carry higher current levels as system conditions require. The strength of the magnetic fields within and near the ROW would vary with the electric load on the line as well as with the terrain.
Since line voltages would not change, there would be no increase in electric field strength.
Some of the proposed upgrades would result in increased line height above ground during most system conditions, thus reducing the electric field levels. Public exposure to EMF would change over time after the line work is completed as adjacent land uses change. No significant impacts from EMF are anticipated.
3 Transmission line structures are well grounded, and the conductors are insulated from ground.
Therefore, touching a structure supporting a 161-kV transmission line poses no inherent shock hazard. Additionally, TVA transmission lines are built with overhead ground wires that would I
lead a lightning strike into the ground for dissipation. Thus, a safety zone is created under the ground wires at the top of structures and along a line for at least the width of the ROW. The National Electrical Safety Code is strictly followed when installing, repairing, or upgrading TVA i
lines or equipment. None of the proposed actions would alter line grounding. Therefore, there would be no additional hazards from lightning strikes.
During upgrading activities, equipment would generate some noise above ambient levels.
i Because of the general lack of nearby sensitive receptors and the short work period, noise-related effects are expected to be temporary and insignificant. For similar reasons, noise related to periodic line maintenance is also expected to be insignificant. Upgrading activities I
and operation of the line is not expected to produce any noticeable odors.
2 244 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 4.16.4. Other Impacts No significant impacts are expected to result from the relatively short-term activities related to line upgrades. Appendix E, Environmental Quality Protection Specifications for Transmission Line Construction, lists the methods which would used to limit the effects of these activities.
4.16.5. Summary No Action Alternative Under the No Action Alternative, no new EMFs, lighting strike hazards, or noise and odors would be created from the proposed upgrading of the transmission lines, therefore there would be no impacts to the environment.
Action Alternative Magnetic fields would continue be produced along the length of the existing 161-kV transmission lines and new magnetic fields would be produced along the length of the re-energized 500-kV line. The proposed transmission line upgrades would allow the subject line to carry higher current levels as system conditions require. The strength of the magnetic fields within and near the ROW would vary with the electric load on the line as well as with the terrain.
Since line voltages would not change, there would be no increase in electric field strength.
Some of the proposed upgrades would result in increased line height above ground during most system conditions, thus reducing the electric field levels. Public exposure to EMF would change over time after the line work is completed as adjacent land uses change. No significant impacts from EMF are anticipated.
Transmission line structures are well grounded, and the conductors are insulated from ground.
Therefore, touching a structure supporting a 161-kV transmission line poses no inherent shock hazard. Additionally, TVA transmission lines are built with overhead ground wires that would lead a lightning strike into the ground for dissipation. Thus, a safety zone is created under the ground wires at the top of structures and along a line for at least the width of the ROW. The National Electrical Safety Code is strictly followed when installing, repairing, or upgrading TVA lines or equipment. None of the proposed actions would alter line grounding. Therefore, there would be no additional hazards from lightning strikes.
During upgrading activities, equipment would generate some noise above ambient levels.
Because of the general lack of nearby sensitive receptors and the short work period, noise-related effects are expected to be temporary and insignificant. For similar reasons, noise related to periodic line maintenance is also expected to be insignificant. Upgrading activities and operation of the line is not expected to produce any noticeable odors.
244 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I.
I I
Chapter 5 CHAPTER 5 5.0 OTHER EFFECTS 5.1.
Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts This section describes principal unavoidable adverse environmental impacts for which mitigation measures are either considered impractical, do not exist, or cannot entirely eliminate the impact.
Specifically, this section considers unavoidable adverse impacts that would occur for either of the action alternatives, i.e., constructing and operating one Westinghouse AP1000 reactor, or completing and operating one partially-completed B&W reactor at the BLN in addition to maintaining and operating associated transmission facilities. These unavoidable construction and operational effects are identified in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1. Construction and Operational-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts Cssuei Unavoidable Adverse impact
- Construction oidI The BLN site is approximately 1600 acres in total. Disturbance of approximately 185 additional acres of land within the 1600 acre BLN site would occur for an AP1 000 unit and associated infrastructure. No additional area of land disturbance would occur for completion of either of the two partially completed B & W units. Original disturbance for the partially completed units was approximately 400 acres (200 acres each). There would be a long-term commitment of Land Use land for the existing transmission corridors.
Potential for unanticipated disturbances to historic, cultural, or paleontological resources is mostly or entirely mitigated.
Some land would be dedicated to long-term disposal of construction debris and not available for other uses.
A small amount of water is consumed during construction activities.
Hydrologic &
Ground disturbing activities along river banks or stream banks (in the case of the transmission Water Use line maintenance) on a short-term basis, introduces minor amounts of sediments and potentially chemicals into water bodies.
Construction at river's edge may cause direct, short-term and minor loss of some organisms Aquatic Ecology and temporary degradation of habitat. Existing transmission line crossing streams may continue to cause minor disruption of some organisms and degradation of habitat.
Operation of the BLN and transmission corridor would continue minor alterations to habitat and the suite of species which inhabit them. Construction, clearing and grading of the BLN site TErrrlog could directly harm or displace a few animals. Construction noises may startle or scare Ecology animals. These minor impacts are intermittent and would continue throughout the construction phase.
Construction workers and local residents would be exposed to elevated levels of traffic through the course of the construction phase.
The influx of construction workforce would cause short-term, minor effects on local housing, and infrastructure, land use and community services such as fire or police protection. In the short-Environmental term, there may be school crowding. Increased tax revenue would mitigate much of this Justice impact.
Construction workers and local residents would be exposed to elevated levels of dust, exhaust emissions, and noise from construction and equipment. These constitute minor unavoidable impacts. No unavoidable adverse construction impacts to minority populations are anticipated.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 245 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 5 CHAPTER 5 5.0 OTHER EFFECTS 5.1.
Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts This section describes principal unavoidable adverse environmental impacts for which mitigation measures are either considered impractical, do not exist, or cannot entirely eliminate the impact.
Specifically, this section considers unavoidable adverse impacts that would occur for either of the action alternatives, i.e., constructing and operating one Westinghouse AP1 000 reactor, or completing and operating one partially-completed B&W reactor at the BLN in addition to maintaining and operating associated transmission facilities. These unavoidable construction and operational effects are identified in Table 5-1.
Table 5-1. Construction and Operational-Related Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts
,Issue".-
I;Jnavdidable Adver~e Impact " '
"Construction The BLN site is approximately 1600 acres in total. Disturbance of approximately 185 additional acres of land within the 1600 acre BLN site would occur for an AP1 000 unit and associated infrastructure. No additional area of land disturbance would occur for completion of either of the two partially completed B & W units. Original disturbance for the partially completed units was approximately 400 acres (200 acres each). There would be a long-term commitment of Land Use land for the existing transmission corridors.
Potential for unanticipated disturbances to historic, cultural, or paleontological resources is mostly or entirely mitigated.
Some land would be dedicated to long-term disposal of construction debris and not available for other uses.
A small amount of water is consumed during construction activities.
Hydrologic &
Ground disturbing activities along river banks or stream banks (in the case of the transmission Water Use line maintenance) on a short-term basis, introduces minor amounts of sediments and potentially chemicals into water bodies.
Construction at river's edge may cause direct, short-term and minor loss of some organisms Aquatic Ecology and temporary degradation of habitat. Existing transmission line crossing streams may continue to cause minor disruption of some organisms and degradation of habitat.
Operation of the BLN and transmission corridor would continue minor alterations to habitat and Terrestrial the suite of species which inhabit them. Construction, clearing and grading of the BLN site Ecology could directly harm or displace a few animals. Construction noises may startle or scare animals. These minor impacts are intermittent and would continue throughout the construction phase.
Construction workers and local residents would be exposed to elevated levels of traffic through the course of the construction phase.
Socioeconomics The influx of construction workforce would cause short-term, minor effects on local housing, and infrastructure, land use and community services such as fire or police protection. In the short-Environmental term, there may be school crowding. Increased tax revenue would mitigate much of this Justice impact.
Construction workers and local residents would be exposed to elevated levels of dust, exhaust emissions, and noise from construction and equipment. These constitute minor unavoidable impacts. No unavoidable adverse construction impacts to minority populations are anticipated.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 245
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Issue -
Operational Unavoidable Adverse Impact The commitment of land use described above would continue over the operational life of this project. Some of the land would be returned to its former state following the end of construction.
The BLN and UFC increases radioactive and nonradioactive wastes that would require land to be dedicated for the long-term disposal of hazardous and nonhazardous materials in permitted disposal facilities or permitted landfills. This land would not be available for most other uses.
The viewscape of the BLN site and transmission facilities would continue to be impacted over the operational period, but no more so than at the present.
Normal plant operations result in discharge of small amounts of chemicals and radioactive effluents to Guntersville Reservoir throughout the life of the BLN. Compliance with the NPDES permit, applicable water quality standards; stormwater pollution prevention(SWPPP) and Spill Prevention Countermeasures and Control (SPCC) Plans ; and discharge of radioactive effluents in compliance with applicable regulatory standards, would ensure that the result would be little or no unavoidable adverse impacts.
Hydrologic &
Discharge of cooling water results in a thermal plume in Guntersville Reservoir throughout the Water Use operational life of the BLN. The differences between plume temperature and ambient water temperature are maintained within limits set in the NPDES permit. Cooling towers mitigate much of the heat that would otherwise be discharged to the reservoir. Use of closed cycle cooling would result in only minor adverse impacts.
Water lost to evaporation represents consumption of water that would not be available for other uses. The maximum consumptive use of surface water, which would continue throughout the operational life of the plant, is less than 1 percent of 7Q10.
The effects of entrainment or impingement result in a loss of fish and other aquatic species.
Because a closed-loop cooling system that substantively reduces the loss of fish and aquatic species is used, the impacts of entrainment or impingement on aquatic species would be minor and insignificant.
Aquatic Ecology Routine maintenance activities may result in rare episodic chemical or petroleum spills near water that could, in turn, affect aquatic life. Preparation and adherence to SPCC Plan would avoid/minimize contamination from any such spills.
Although within NPDES permit limits, discharge of small amounts of chemicals to Guntersville Reservoir from outine plant operations could result in minor insignificant effects on aquatic life over the operational life of this project.
Birds may periodically collide with the cooling towers or the existing transmission lines. Such occurrences are anticipated to be minor.
Terrestrial Some minor clearing, maintenance and upgrading of transmission lines could result in short-Ecology term disruption of wildlife, but no long-term changes would be expected from existing habitat conditions.
Periodic noise, such as maintenance at the site or along the existing transmission line, may cause temporary and minor impacts to nearby wildlife over the operational life of this project.
Minor unavoidable adverse impacts are expected over the life of operating a unit at BLN.
The transmission lines are built in accordance with applicable regulations and codes to minimize the risk of electric shock. However, over the life of the plant, the transmission line has Socioeconomics the potential to produce electric shock to people working near the line or from fallen lines.
and Environmental Operation and outages of the BLN would increase traffic on local roads during shift change.
Justice Although emissions would be maintained within limits established in permits, air emissions from diesel generators and equipment, and vehicles would have a small impact on workers and local residents over the operational life of this project.
Unavoidable adverse operational impacts to minority populations are not expected to occur.
I I
I I
U I
I U
I I
246 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Issue-Operational:
Land Use Hydrologic &
Water Use Aquatic Ecology Terrestrial Ecology Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice 246 Unavoidable Adverse Impact The commitment of land use described above would continue over the operational life of this project. Some of the land would be returned to its former state following the end of construction.
The BLN and UFC increases radioactive and nonradioactive wastes that would require land to be dedicated for the long-term disposal of hazardous and nonhazardous materials in permitted disposal facilities or permitted landfills. This land would not be available for most other uses.
The viewscape of the BLN site and transmission facilities would continue to be impacted over the operational period, but no more so than at the present.
Normal plant operations result in discharge of small amounts of chemicals and radioactive effluents to Guntersville Reservoir throughout the life of the BLN. Compliance with the NPDES permit, applicable water quality standards; stormwater pollution prevention.(SWPPP) and Spill Prevention Countermeasures and Control (SPCC) Plans; and discharge of radioactive effluents in compliance with applicable regulatory standards, would ensure that the result would be little or no unavoidable adverse impacts.
Discharge of cooling water results in a thermal plume in Guntersville Reservoir throughout the operational life of the BLN. The differences between plume temperature and ambient water temperature are maintained within limits set in the NPDES permit. Cooling towers mitigate much of the heat that would otherwise be discharged to the reservoir. Use of closed cycle cooling would result in only minor adverse impacts.
Water lost to evaporation represents consumption of water that would not be available for other uses. The maximum consumptive use of surface water, which would continue throughout the operational life of the plant, is less than 1 percent of 7Q1 O.
The effects of entrainment or impingement result in a loss of fish and other aquatic species.
Because a closed-loop cooling system that substantively reduces the loss of fish and aquatic species is used, the impacts of entrainment or impingement on aquatic species would be minor and insignificant.
Routine maintenance activities may result in rare episodic chemical or petroleum spills near water that could, in turn, affect aquatic life. Preparation and adherence to SPCC Plan would avoid/minimize contamination from any such spills.
Although within NPDES permit limits, discharge of small amounts of chemicals to Guntersville Reservoir from outine plant operations could result in minor insignificant effects on aquatic life over the operational life of this project.
Birds may periodically collide with the cooling towers or the existing transmission lines. Such occurrences are anticipated to be minor.
Some minor clearing, maintenance and upgrading of transmission lines could result in short-term disruption of wildlife, but no long-term changes would be expected from existing habitat conditions.
Periodic noise, such as maintenance at the site or along the existing transmission line, may cause temporary and minor impacts to nearby wildlife over the operational life of this project.
Minor unavoidable adverse impacts are expected over the life of operating a unit at BLN.
The transmission lines are built in accordance with applicable regulations and codes to minimize the risk of electric shock. However, over the life of the plant, the transmission line has the potential to produce electric shock to people working near the line or from fallen lines.
Operation and outages of the BLN would increase traffic on local roads during shift change.
Although emissions would be maintained within limits established in permits, air emissions from diesel generators and equipment, and vehicles would have a small impact on workers and local residents over the operational life of this project.
Unavoidable adverse operational impacts to minority populations are not expected to occur.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I
- 1 I
I I
I
- 1 I
I
- 1 I
I I
Chapter 5 Issue -
Operational Unavoidable Adverse Impact (continued)
Small radiological doses to workers and members of the public from releases to air and surface water would occur over the operational life of this project. Releases are well below regulatory limits. Effluents are treated according to applicable regulatory standards before being discharged into Guntersville Reservoir. While employees are potentially exposed over the long term, adherence to applicable regulatory standards, radiological safety procedures, work plans and safety measures reduce this exposure to a negligible impact.
High-level radioactive spent fuel is stored and isolated from the biosphere for thousands of years. The impacts of high-level radioactive waste and spent fuel are reduced through specific plant design features in conjunction with a waste minimization program. Impacts are further Radiological reduced through employee safety training programs and work procedures, and by strict adherence to applicable regulations for storage, treatment, transportation, and ultimate disposal of this waste in a geological repository, or re-processing. The mitigation measures reduce the risk of radioactive impacts, but there is still some residual risk. Waste disposal constitutes a commitment of land that continues for thousands of years into the future.
Low-level radioactive and nonradioactive waste would be stored, treated, and disposed.
Disposal of these materials represents a commitment of land for hundreds or thousands of years. The impacts of low-level radioactive and nonradioactive hazardous waste are reduced through waste minimization programs, employee training programs, and strict adherence to work procedures and applicable regulations.
Diesel generators and equipment would contribute to minor air emissions over the course of this project. Burning of any material associated with maintaining transmission line rights-of ways would contribute to short-term air pollution As described in Chapter 3, minor radioactive emissions would occur from the proposed unit Atmospheric &
during normal operations. Compliance with permit limits and regulations for installing and Meteorological operating air emission sources and monitoring of those air emissions would result in little or no adverse impacts.
Cooling towers would emit a plume of water vapor resulting in a limited obstructed view of the sky and causing a shadowing effect on the ground that has a small effect on vegetation. The plumes present little environmental effect on humans or biota.
5.2.
Relationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the Human Environment One of NEPA's basic Environmental Impact Statement requirements is to describe "the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity." Unavoidable adverse impacts of construction and operation are discussed in Section 5.1 and the irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources are discussed in Section 5.3. This section focuses on and compares the significant short-term benefit (e.g., principally generation of electricity) and uses of environmental resources which have long-term consequences on environmental productivity. Table 5-2 summarizes the proposed action's short-term uses and benefits versus the long-term consequences on environmental productivity. For the purposes of this section, the term "short term" represents the period from start of construction to end of plant life, including prompt decommissioning. In contrast, the term "longterm" represents the period extending beyond the end of plant life, including the period up to and beyond that required for delayed plant decommissioning. This discussion applies to the general ramifications of implementing either action alternative.
The short-term beneficial impacts of usage outweigh the adverse impacts on long-term environmental productivity. The principal short-term benefit from the BLN is the production of a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 247 I
I I
I I
I I'
I I
I I
I 1
I I
I 1
I I
Issue-Operational (ccfntinued)
Radiological Atmospheric &
Meteorological Chapter 5 Unavoidable Adverse Impact Small radiological doses to workers and members of the public from releases to air and surface water would occur over the operational life of this project. Releases are well below regulatory limits. Effluents are treated according to applicable regulatory standards before being discharged into Guntersville Reservoir. While employees are potentially exposed over the long term, adherence to applicable regulatory standards, radiological safety procedures, work plans and safety measures reduce this exposure to a negligible impact.
High-level radioactive spent fuel is stored and isolated from the biosphere for thousands of years. The impacts of high-level radioactive waste and spent fuel are reduced through specific plant design features in conjunction with a waste minimization program. Impacts are further reduced through employee safety training programs and work procedures, and by strict adherence to applicable regulations for storage, treatment, transportation, and ultimate disposal of this waste in a geological repository, or re-processing. The mitigation measures reduce the risk of radioactive impacts, but there is still some residual risk. Waste disposal constitutes a commitment of land that continues for thousands of years into the future.
Low-level radioactive and nonradioactive waste would be stored, treated, and disposed.
Disposal of these materials represents a commitment of land for hundreds or thousands of years. The impacts of low-level radioactive and nonradioactive hazardous waste are reduced through waste minimization programs, employee training programs, and strict adherence to work procedures and applicable regulations.
Diesel generators and equipment would contribute to minor air emissions over the course of this project. Burning of any material associated with maintaining transmission line rights-of ways would contribute to short-term air pollution As described in Chapter 3, minor radioactive emissions would occur from the proposed unit during normal operations. Compliance with permit limits and regulations for installing and operating air emission sources and monitoring of those air emissions would result in little or no adverse impacts.
Cooling towers would emit a plume of water vapor resulting in a limited obstructed view of the sky and causing a shadowing effect on the ground that has a small effect on vegetation. The plumes present little environmental effect on humans or biota.
5.2.
Relationship Between Short-Term Uses and Long-Term Productivity of the Human Environment One of NEPA's basic Environmental Impact Statement requirements is to describe "the relationship between local short-term uses of man's environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity." Unavoidable adverse impacts of construction and operation are discussed in Section 5.1 and the irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources are discussed in Section 5.3. This section focuses on and compares the significant short-term benefit (e.g., principally generation of electricity) and uses of environmental resources which have long-term consequences on environmental productivity. Table 5-2 summarizes the proposed action's short-term uses and benefits versus the long-term consequences on environmental productivity. For the purposes of this section, the term "short term" represents the period from start of construction to end of plant life, including prompt decommissioning. In contrast, the term "longterm" represents the period extending beyond the end of plant life, including the period up to and beyond that required for delayed plant decommissioning. This discussion applies to the general ramifications of implementing either action alternative.
The short-term beneficial impacts of usage outweigh the adverse impacts on long-term environmental productivity. The principal short-term benefit from the BLN is the production of a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 247
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
relatively clean and stable form of electrical energy. With respect to long-term benefits, nuclear I
energy avoids carbon dioxide emissions that may have a significant long-term detrimental effect on global climate. Nuclear energy also reduces the depletion of fossil fuels. Chapter 3 describes effects associated with the uranium fuel cycle (UFC). These impacts include the I
effects of mining and in-situ leaching, conversion, enrichment of uranium, fabrication of nuclear fuel, use of fuel, and disposal of the used (spent) fuel.
There are two key long-term adverse impacts on productivity. Both of these environmental liabilities are governed by the half-lives of the respective radioisotopes. The first involves long-term radioactive contamination of the reactor vessel, equipment, and other material that are exposed to radioactive isotopes. The second involves irradiated fuel and high-level waste that must be safeguarded and isolated from the biosphere for thousands of years, or reprocessed for use as fuel.
5.2.1. Short-Term Uses and Benefits There are a number of short-term benefits that are derived from construction and operation of a single nuclear generating unit at BLN. These benefits, as summarized below include:
Electric generation Fuel Diversity I
Avoidance of Air Pollution and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Land Use Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota, and I
Socioeconomic Changes and Growth As described in Chapter 1, the principal short-term benefit of BLN is the generation of electricity to meet the growing demand for electricity in TVA's power service area. Energy diversity is also an element fundamental to the objective of achieving a reliable and affordable electrical power supply system. Over-reliance on any one fuel source leaves consumers vulnerable to price spikes and supply disruptions. BLN furthers the goal of creating new nuclear baseload generating capacity. Operation of a reactor at BLN also advances the Congressional goal of obtaining a diversified mix of electrical generating sources. Upgrading of the existing transmission lines would increase the short-term and long-term capacity and reliability of the power supply in TVA's service area.
Natural gas, and in particular, coal-fired electrical generation plants produce substantive I
amounts of air pollutant emissions. Fossil fuel air emissions, particularly carbon dioxide, are believed by many in the scientific community to contribute to the greenhouse effect and, consequently, global climate change. Beyond steam and water vapor, modern nuclear reactors I
produce virtually no air emissions during operation, and only very minor levels of radioactive emissions. The generation of significant air emissions is avoided by foregoing construction of a comparably sized coal or gas fired alternative, and instead constructing or completing a single unit at BLN. Even with contributions from the Uranium Fuel Cycle (UFC), the net benefits of reduced emissions from nuclear over those of natural gas or coal-fired facilities are substantive.
I I
I 248 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site relatively clean and stable form of electrical energy. With respect to long-term benefits, nuclear energy avoids carbon dioxide emissions that may have a significant long-term detrimental effect on global climate. Nuclear energy also reduces the depletion of fossil fuels. Chapter 3 describes effects associated with the uranium fuel cycle (UFC). These impacts include the effects of mining and in-situ leaching, conversion, enrichment of uranium, fabrication of nuclear fuel, use of fuel, and disposal of the used (spent) fuel.
There are two key long-term adverse impacts on productivity. Both of these environmental liabilities are governed by the half-lives of the respective radioisotopes. The first involves long-term radioactive contamination of the reactor vessel, equipment, and other material that are exposed to radioactive isotopes. The second involves irradiated fuel and high-level waste that must be safeguarded and isolated from the biosphere for thousands of years, or reprocessed for use as fuel.
5.2.1. Short-Term Uses and Benefits There are a number of short-term benefits that are derived from construction and operation of a single nuclear generating unit at BLN. These benefits, as summarized below include:
Electric generation Fuel Diversity Avoidance of Air Pollution and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Land Use Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota, and Socioeconomic Changes and Growth As described in Chapter 1, the principal short-term benefit of BLN is the generation of electricity to meet the growing demand for electricity in TVA's power service area. Energy diversity is also an element fundamental to the objective of achieving a reliable and affordable electrical power supply system. Over-reliance on anyone fuel source leaves consumers vulnerable to price spikes and supply disruptions. BLN furthers the goal of creating new nuclear base load generating capacity. Operation of a reactor at BLN also advances the Congressional goal of obtaining a diversified mix of electrical generating sources. Upgrading of the existing transmission lines would increase the short-term and long-term capacity and reliability of the power supply in TVA's service area.
Natural gas, and in particular, coal-fired electrical generation plants produce substantive amounts of air pollutant emissions. Fossil fuel air emissions, particularly carbon dioxide, are believed by many in the scientific community to contribute to the greenhouse effect and, consequently, global climate change. Beyond steam and water vapor, modern nuclear reactors produce virtually no air emissions during operation, and only very minor levels of radioactive emissions. The generation of significant air emissions is avoided by foregoing construction of a comparably sized coal or gas fired alternative, and instead constructing or completing a single unit at BLN. Even with contributions from the Uranium Fuel Cycle (UFC), the net benefits of reduced emissions from nuclear over those of natural gas or coal-fired facilities are substantive.
248 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
=
m M
M mm=m m
=
m m
m
=
M
=
=
=
0 0)
CD CD 3
CD a)
CD Table 5-2.
Summary of the Proposed Action's Principal Short-Term Benefits Versus the Long-Term Impacts on Productivity Relationship to Maintenance and Enhancement Issue Short-Term Uses and Benefits of Long-Term Environmental Productivity Continued commitment of land use at the No long-term loss as the land could be released for Land Use existing site. Some potential loss in other uses or returned to its natural state after the agricultural productivity, or natural habitats and reactor is decommissioned.
woodlands.
Disrupts or destroys some flora and fauna on and near the BLN, and along the transmission corridor. No significant effect to species or No significant long-term detrimental disturbance to Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology habitats is expected to occur. After biota or their habitats.
construction, some flora and fauna may recover in areas that are no longer affected by construction or plant operations.
Injection of tax revenues, plant expenditures, Tax revenues, plant expenditures, and employee and employee spending contributes to the spending leads to some long-term direct and Socioeconomic Growth growth of the local economy. In the short-term, secondary growth in the local economy, this growth may strain local infrastructure and infrastructure, and services that may continue after services.
the reactors are decommissioned.
Managed as a High-Level Radioactive Waste, and either reprocessed or isolated from the biosphere for Irradiated Spent Fuel Provides a short-term supply of relatively clean thousands or tens of thousands of years. Long-term energy.
commitment of the local storage area and the underground geological repository.
The radioactively contaminated reactor vessel Contaminated waste must be managed and isolated Other Radioactive Waste and equipment are required for the short term from the biosphere for hundreds or thousands of production of nuclear energy years.
Potential security consequences of a reactor accident could range from small to large.
However, the probability or likelihood of a severe accident is deemed to be very remote.
Potential for Accident Because the probability or likelihood of such In the advent of an accident, the impacts could be an event is so small, the overall risk of a long-term and substantial.
nuclear accident is likewise considered to be so small as not to constitute a potentially significant impact upon the human C--)
.environment.
_0 CD Cn IN0 CD Table 5-2.
Summary of the Proposed Action's Principal Short-Term Benefits Versus the Long-Term Impacts on Productivity m
- l
< a
- l 3
co
- l -
OJ 3
-0 OJ n.
(J) -
OJ -
co 3
co
~
Issue*
I Land Use Terrestrial and Aquatic Ecology Socioeconomic Growth Irradiated Spent Fuel Other Radioactive Waste Potential for Accident
~-
. :. Short"Term Uses and Benefifs Continued commitment of land use at the existing site. Some potential loss in agricultural productivity, or natural habitats and woodlands.
Disrupts or destroys some flora and fauna on and near the BLN, and along the transmission corridor. No significant effect to species or habitats is expected to occur. After construction, some flora and fauna may recover in areas that are no longer affected by construction or plant operations.
Injection of tax revenues, plant expenditures, and employee spending contributes to the growth of the local economy. In the short-term, this growth may strain local infrastructure and services.
Provides a short-term supply of relatively clean energy.
The radioactively contaminated reactor vessel and equipment are required for the short term production of nuclear energy Potential security consequences of a reactor accident could range from small to large.
However, the probability or likelihood of a severe accident is deemed to be very remote.
Because the probability or likelihood of such an event is so small, the overall risk of a nuclear accident is likewise considered to be so small as not to constitute a potentially significant impact upon the human environment.
RelationshiptoMaintenance and Erih.incelTlent.
.. 'of Long-TetmEhvironrriental Productivity*
No long-term loss as the land could be released for other uses or returned to its natural state after the reactor is decommissioned.
No significant long-term detrimental disturbance to biota or their habitats.
Tax revenues, plant expenditures, and employee spending leads to some long-term direct and secondary growth in the local economy, infrastructure, and services that may continue after the reactors are decommissioned.
Managed as a High-Level Radioactive Waste, and either reprocessed or isolated from the biosphere for thousands or tens of thousands of years. Long-term commitment of the local storage area and the underground geological repository.
Contaminated waste must be managed and isolated from the biosphere for hundreds or thousands of years.
In the advent of an accident, the impacts could be long-term and substantial.
()
- r OJ co
N)
(31 Cn C
CD CD m
0 3
CD CD Issue Short-Term Uses and Benefits Relationship to Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Environmental Productivity Construction and operation of the BLN contributes to DepletionofUraniAs a reactor fuel, the uranium provides a the long-term cumulative depletion of the global mshort-term supply of relatively clean energy.
uranium supply.
During operation, BLN avoids the consumption of fossil fuels, albeit with some increase in the Offset Usage of Finite Fossil Fuel Supplies use of uranium. Consumption of fossil fuels in Reduces the cumulative long-term depletion of the UFC are substantively less than would global fossil fuel supplies.
occur for equivalently-sized fossil fuel based generation.
In the short term, the energy used in constructing the reactors results in far more Construction and operation of the BLN contributes to electrical power generation than was used in the cumulative long-term irretrievable use of their construction. The use of materials in materials, energy, and water used in the construction Materials, Energy and Water constructing the BLN is also critical to the goal and operation of the reactors. However, the reactor of producing a clean and reliable supply of prov i
on f the rergy th e inacts electrical power. A relatively modest quantity provides far more energy than is consumed in its of cooling water is lost through evaporation and drift.
Operation of BLN avoids air pollutants that Operation of the unit results in a long-term cumulative avoidance of greenhouse emissions that Air Pollution would likely be produced by fossil fuel plants if wouldtike produce by foss eliplans the the eactr wa no contruced.would likely be produced by fossil fuel plants if the the reactor was not constructed.
ui eentcntutd unit were not constructed.
The project stimulates economic growth and Payments made in lieu of taxes by TVA, and wages productivity in the local area. In the short-term, spent by the operational staff may inject significant however, this growth may strain local revenues into the local economy that have long-infrastructure and services, resulting in lasting economic growth and development effects, Social Changes infrablmstucture and servicesresuing in scthat may continue after the BLN is decommissioned.
anproblems such as overcrowding of schools, Socioeconomic changes such as transformation in and traffic congestion. However, revenue the nature and character of the community likely derived from this project may fund increased continue long after the BLN has been infrastructure and social services.
commissioned.
decommissioned.
Cn C:
a CD a)
CD CD 00 CD)
M M
M mm M
M MM-MMM o
OJ
- p (J)
C "0
"0 CD 3
CD
~ -
[l) m
~
~:r
~
3 CD
~ -
[l)
N CJ1 o*
Issue Short-Term Uses and Benefits Relationship to Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Environmental Productivity Depletion of Uranium As a reactor fuel, the uranium provides a Construction and operation of the BLN contributes to short-term supply of relatively clean energy.
the long-term cumulative depletion of the global uranium supply.
During operation, BLN avoids the consumption of fossil fuels, albeit with some increase in the Offset Usage of Finite Fossil Fuel Supplies use of uranium. Consumption of fossil fuels in Reduces the cumulative long-term depletion of the UFC are substantively less than would global fossil fuel supplies.
occur for equivalently-sized fossil fuel based generation.
In the short term, the energy used in constructing the reactors results in far more Construction and operation of the BLN contributes to electrical power generation than was used in their construction. The use of materials in the cumulative long-term irretrievable use of Materials, Energy and Water constructing the BLN is also critical to the goal materials, energy, and water used in the construction of producing a clean and reliable supply of and operation of the reactors. However, the reactor electrical power. A relatively modest quantity provides far more energy than is consumed in its of cooling water is lost through evaporation construction.
and drift.
Air Pollution Operation of BLN avoids air pollutants that Operation of the unit results in a long-term would likely be produced by fossil fuel plants if cumulative avoidance of greenhouse emissions that the reactor was not constructed.
would likely be produced by fossil fuel plants if the unit were not constructed.
The project stimulates economic growth and Payments made in lieu of taxes by TVA, and wages productivity in the local area. In the short-term spent by the operational staff may inject significant however, this growth may strain local revenues into the local economy that have long-Social Changes infrastructure and services, resulting in lasting economic growth and development effects problems such as overcrowding of schools, that may continue after the BLN is decommission~d.
and traffic congestion. However, revenue Socioeconomic changes such as transformation in derived from this project may fund increased the nature and character of the community likely infrastructure and social services.
continue long after the BLN has been decommissioned.
- - - -- - - --.... I!!I!I I!!I!I (J)
~
to CD Z
c
()
CD
[l) c
~
~
[l) --
- T CD OJ
~
CD 0'
~
CD (J)
~
CD
Chapter 5 The construction and operation of a single unit at the BLN would result in the continued commitment of land use at the existing site, as well as for the transmission corridor (i.e.,
there are not "new" long-term effects on land use within the existing rights-of-way). Land required for the corridor results in the continued loss of some agricultural or pastureland from transmission structures, or undeveloped habitats and woodlands. In the short term, the project results in some potential loss in agricultural productivity, or natural habitats and woodlands. However, this loss does not represent a long-term loss as the land may be released for other uses or returned to its natural state after the BLN has been decommissioned. Construction and operation of a single unit at BLN also disrupts or destroys some flora and fauna on and near the BLN, as does maintenance along the transmission corridor. However, no significant effect to species or habitats is expected to occur. After construction is completed, some flora and fauna may recover in areas that are no longer affected by construction or plant operations.
Construction of a BLN unit is expected to stimulate economic growth and productivity in the local area. Wages spent by workers are expected to provide an economic boost to the region. The construction and operation of the BLN may also spur indirect or secondary socioeconomic growth. In the short-term, however, this growth may strain some local infrastructure and services, resulting in problems such as overcrowding of schools and increased traffic. However, tax revenue derived from this project may fund increased infrastructure and social services. Property taxes paid by BLN and wages spent by the operational staff inject revenues into the local economy that may have long-lasting economic growth and developmental effects. In the long-term, some of this growth may continue even after the unit has been decommissioned. Socioeconomic changes brought about by the operation of the unit may also continue long after the plants have been decommissioned. This increased growth leads to long-term changes in the nature and character of the community that some may regard to be adverse.
5.2.2. Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Environmental Productivity Potential long-term effects on the productivity of the human environment are described below and summarized in Table 5-2. The assessment of long-term productivity impacts does not include the short-term effects related to construction and operation of a BLN unit.
Some of the adverse environmental impacts may remain after practical measures to avoid or mitigate them have been taken. As described in Chapter 1, the BLN site was originally designated for construction of nuclear reactors, therefore siting and operation of a single nuclear unit at the BLN represents a continuation of the originally planned land use of the site. After the reactor is shutdown, and the BLN unit is decommissioned to NRC standards, this land would be available for other industrial or non-industrial uses. Therefore, land use impacts are not expected to constitute a long-term productivity issue. Similarly, impacts such as air emission, water effluents, and other impacts described in Chapter 3, but not specifically mentioned in this section are insignificant.
Exposure to Hazardous and Radioactive Materials and Waste Workers may be exposed to low doses of radiation and trace amounts of hazardous materials and waste. Workerplace exposures are carefully monitored to ensure that radioactive exposure is within regulatory limits. Local nonworkers also receive a very small incremental dose of radiation. Radiological monitoring and impacts related to operation of BLN are described in Chapter 3. The persistence of radionuclides depends on the half life of the radionuclides. The doses are in compliance with applicable regulatory standards and permits and do not significantly affect humans, biota, or air or water resources.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 251 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 5 The construction and operation of a single unit at the BLN would result in the continued commitment of land use at the existing site, as well as for the transmission corridor (i.e.,
there are not "new" long-term effects on land use within the existing rights-of-way). Land required for the corridor results in the continued loss of some agricultural or pastureland from transmission structures, or undeveloped habitats and woodlands. In the short term, the project results in some potential loss in agricultural productivity, or natural habitats and woodlands. However, this loss does not represent a long-term loss as the land may be released for other uses or returned to its natural state after the BLN has been decommissioned. Construction and operation of a single unit at BLN also disrupts or destroys some flora and fauna on and near the BLN, as does maintenance along the transmission corridor. However, no significant effect to species or habitats is expected to occur. After construction is completed, some flora and fauna may recover in areas that are no longer affected by construction or plant operations.
Construction of a BLN unit is expected to stimulate economic growth and productivity in the local area. Wages spent by workers are expected to provide an economic boost to the region. The construction and operation of the BLN may also spur indirect or secondary socioeconomic growth. In the short-term, however, this growth may strain some local infrastructure and services, resulting in problems such as overcrowding of schools and increased traffic. However, tax revenue derived from this project may fund increased infrastructure and social services. Property taxes paid by BLN and wages spent by the operational staff inject revenues into the local economy that may have long-lasting economic growth and developmental effects. In the long-term, some of this growth may continue even after the unit has been decommissioned. Socioeconomic changes brought about by the operation of the unit may also continue long after the plants have been decommissioned. This increased growth leads to long-term changes in the nature and character of the community that some may regard to be adverse.
5.2.2. Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Environmental Productivity Potential long-term effects on the productivity of the human environment are described below and summarized in Table 5-2. The assessment of long-term productivity impacts does not include the short-term effects related to construction and operation of a BLN unit.
Some of the adverse environmental impacts may remain after practical measures to avoid or mitigate them have been taken. As described in Chapter 1, the BLN site was originally designated for construction of nuclear reactors, therefore siting and operation of a single nuclear unit at the BLN represents a continuation of the originally planned land use of the site. After the reactor is shutdown, and the BLN unit is decommissioned to NRC standards, this land would be available for other industrial or non-industrial uses. Therefore, land use impacts are not expected to constitute a long-term productivity issue. Similarly, impacts such as air emission, water effluents, and other impacts described in Chapter 3, but not specifically mentioned in this section are insignificant.
Exposure to Hazardous and Radioactive Materials and Waste Workers may be exposed to low doses of radiation and trace amounts of hazardous materials and waste. Workerplace exposures are carefully monitored to ensure that radioactive exposure is within regulatory limits. Local nonworkers also receive a very small incremental dose of radiation. Radiological monitoring and impacts related to operation of BLN are described in Chapter 3. The persistence of radionuclides depends on the half life of the radionuclides. The doses are in compliance with applicable regulatory standards and permits and do not significantly affect humans, biota, or air or water resources.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 251
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Radiological emissions are not expected to contaminate BLN property or the surrounding i
land. Once the plant ceases to operate and is decommissioned, radiological releases also cease. No future issues associated with the radiological emissions from operation of a nuclear unit are expected to affect the long-term uses of the BLN site.
I Potential for Nuclear Accident The risk of a potential accident is the product of the potential consequences, and the 3
probability or likelihood that an event occurs. The potential consequences of an accident could range between small to large. However, the probability or likelihood of a major accident is very remote. Because the probability or likelihood of such an event is so small, the overall risk of a nuclear accident is likewise so small as not to constitute a potentially I
significant impact upon the human environment. The results of TVA's analysis in section 3.19 indicate that the environmental risks due to postulated accidents are exceedingly minor.
Uranium Fuel Cycle and Depletion of Uranium The principal use of uranium is as a fuel for nuclear power plants. With approximately 440 I
nuclear reactors operating worldwide, these plants currently produce approximately 16 percent of the world's electrical power generation. Global uranium fuel consumption is increasing as nuclear power generation continues to expand worldwide. The BLN contributes to a small incremental increase in the depletion of uranium. The World Nuclear Association studies uranium supply and demand issues and states that there is currently a 50-year supply of relatively low-cost uranium. Higher prices are expected to induce increased uranium exploration and production. A doubling in market price from the 2003 level might increase the supply of this resource tenfold. The introduction of fast breeder reactors and other technologies could further reduce the gap between supply and demand.
Offset Usage of Finite Fossil Fuel Supplies Fossil fuels represent a finite geological deposit, the use of which constitutes a cumulative irreversible commitment of a natural energy resource. The construction and operation of the I
BLN helps offset the cumulative depletion of this limited resource.
Use of Materials, Energy, and Water Construction and operation of the BLN results in the long-term irreversible use of materials and energy for the construction and operation of the reactors. However, in the short-term, the reactors provide far more energy than is consumed in their construction. A small amount of water is consumed in the construction of a BLN unit. A relatively modest quantity of cooling water is also consumed as loss to the atmosphere through evaporation and drift.
5.3.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources i
This section describes anticipated Irreversible and Irretrievable (I&I) commitments of environmental resources that would occur in either the construction and operation of the AP1000 advanced reactor, or the completion and operation of the partially-completed B&W I
reactor at the BLN. The I & I commitments are summarized in Table 5-3 below.
For the purposes of this analysis, the term "irreversible" applies to the commitment of I
environmental resources (e.g., permanent use of land) that cannot by practical means be reversed to restore the environmental resources to their former state. In contrast, the term "irretrievable" applies to the commitment of material resources (e.g., irradiated steel, I
petroleum) that, once used, cannot by practical means be recycled or restored for other uses.
252 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Radiological emissions are not expected to contaminate BLN property or the surrounding land. Once the plant ceases to operate and is decommissioned, radiological releases also cease. No future issues associated with the radiological emissions from operation of a nuclear unit are expected to affect the long-term uses of the BLN site.
Potential for Nuclear Accident The risk of a potential accident is the product of the potential consequences, and the probability or likelihood that an event occurs. The potential consequences of an accident could range between small to large. However, the probability or likelihood of a major accident is very remote. Because the probability or likelihood of such an event is so small, the overall risk of a nuclear accident is likewise so small as not to constitute a potentially significant impact upon the human environment. The results of TVA's analysis in section 3.19 indicate that the environmental risks due to postulated accidents are exceedingly minor.
Uranium Fuel Cycle and Depletion of Uranium The principal use of uranium is as a fuel for nuclear power plants. With approximately 440 nuclear reactors operating worldwide, these plants currently produce approximately 16 percent of the world's electrical power generation. Global uranium fuel consumption is increasing as nuclear power generation continues to expand worldwide. The BLN contributes to a small incremental increase in the depletion of uranium. The World Nuclear Association studies uranium supply and demand issues and states that there is currently a 50-year supply of relatively low-cost uranium. Higher prices are expected to induce increased uranium exploration and production. A doubling in market price from the 2003 level might increase the supply of this resource tenfold. The introduction of fast breeder reactors and other technologies could further reduce the gap between supply and demand.
Offset Usage of Finite Fossil Fuel Supplies Fossil fuels represent a finite geological deposit, the use of which constitutes a cumulative irreversible commitment of a natural energy resource. The construction and operation of the BLN helps offset the cumulative depletion of this limited resource.
Use of Materials, Energy, and Water Construction and operation of the BLN results in the long-term irreversible use of materials and energy for the construction and operation of the reactors. However, in the short-term, the reactors provide far more energy than is consumed in their construction. A small amount of water is consumed in the construction of a BLN unit. A relatively modest quantity of cooling water is also consumed as loss to the atmosphere through evaporation and drift.
5.3.
Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources This section describes anticipated Irreversible and Irretrievable (1&1) commitments of environmental resources that would occur in either the construction and operation of the AP1000 advanced reactor, or the completion and operation of the partially-completed B&W reactor at the BLN. The I & I commitments are summarized in Table 5-3 below.
For the purposes of this analysis, the term "irreversible" applies to the commitment of environmental resources (e.g., permanent use of land) that cannot by practical means be reversed to restore the environmental resources to their former state. In contrast, the term "irretrievable" applies to the commitment of material resources (e.g., irradiated steel, petroleum) that, once used, cannot by practical means be recycled or restored for other uses.
252 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Chapter 5 Table 5-3.
Summary of Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Environmental Resources Environmental and Material Resource Irreversible Irretrievable Issues The project results in both short-term and long-term changes in the population and nature and character of the local community, Socioeconomic and the local socioeconomic structure. Some Changes impacts on infrastructure and services are temporary, while other changes represent a permanent and irreversible change in socioeconomic infrastructure.
The generation of radioactive, hazardous, and nonhazardous waste that needs to be Disposal of Hazardous disposed. Land committed to the disposal of and Radioactivity radioactive and nonradioactive wastes is an None Contaminated Waste irreversible impact because it is committed to that use, and is largely unavailable for other purposes.
High-level waste and spent nuclear fuel is Commitment of isolated from the biosphere for thousands or Underground Geological tens of thousands of years in a deep Resources for Disposal underground geological repository. This long-None of Radioactive Spent term commitment makes the surrounding Fuel geological resources unusable for thousands or tens of thousands of years.
Destruction of Uranium mining can result in Geological Resources contamination and destruction of During Uranium Mining None geological resources, and pollution of and Fuel Cycle lakes, streams, underground aquifers, and the soil.
Some of the materials used in the construction of the BLN are Contaminated and contaminated or irradiated over the Irradiated Materials None life of the BLN. Much of this material is not reused or recycled, and must be isolated from the biosphere for hundreds or thousands of years.
The range of available land uses for the BLN site and existing transmission line ROW are now restricted for the life of the project Land Use None and transmission lines resulting in irretrievable lost production or use of renewable resources such as timber, agricultural land, or wildlife habitat during the period the land is used.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 253 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 5 Table 5-3.
Summary of Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Environmental Resources Environ ""~fI~~,I"'c:ln~,,;;,,'i:'i,:i<f,; "", '.',','" "',',, ',',','"."'".",:',',','.:,i';',,,,',:',',',',,'!:*'*'.:';":",:,',.',','!*,!":,',',.'I*,!"i!,,,:,,:,i,i,i",i,
- "":"':""'':',','1,:',,: ie', v'
", 'e"': "r":,s', 'i'~,:"""",'I' e'i:,"~,
"Materil:~~:::9~'fa~':!I"'.'I::':" "",
u Socioeconomic Changes Disposal of Hazardous and Radioactivity Contaminated Waste Commitment of Underground Geological Resources for Disposal of Radioactive Spent Fuel Destruction of Geological Resources During Uranium Mining and Fuel Cycle Contaminated and Irradiated Materials Land Use The project results in both short-term and long-term changes in the population and nature and character of the local community, and the local socioeconomic structure. Some impacts on infrastructure and services are temporary, while other changes represent a permanent and irreversible change in socioeconomic infrastructure.
The generation of radioactive, hazardous, and nonhazardous waste that needs to be disposed. Land committed to the disposal of radioactive and nonradioactive wastes is an irreversible impact because it is committed to that use, and is largely unavailable for other purposes.
High-level waste and spent nuclear fuel is isolated from the biosphere for thousands or tens of thousands of years in a deep underground geological repository. This long-term commitment makes the surrounding geological resources unusable for thousands or tens of thousands of years.
None None None None None None Uranium mining can result in contamination and destruction of geological resources, and pollution of lakes, streams, underground aquifers, and the soil.
Some of the materials used in the construction of the BLN are contaminated or irradiated over the life of the BLN" Much of this material is not reused or recycled, and must be isolated from the biosphere for hundreds or thousands of years, The range of available land uses for the BLN site and existing transmission line ROW are now restricted for the life of the project and transmission lines resulting in irretrievable lost production or use of renewable resources such as timber, agricultural land, or wildlife habitat during the period the land is used.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 253
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Environmental and Material Resource Irreversible Irretrievable Issues Relatively small amounts of potable water are used during construction and operation of BLN. A small fraction of the cooling water taken Water Consumption None from Guntersville Reservoir is lost through evaporation. The impact to surface water resources is relatively small, but represents a natural resource that is no longer readily available for use.
Nonrenewable energy in the form of fuels (gas, oil, and diesel) and Consumption of Energy None electricity is consumed in construction and to a lesser extent, operation of the BLN.
The BLN reactors contribute a Consumption of None relatively small increase in the Uranium Fuel depletion of uranium that is used to fuel the reactors.
5.3.1. Irreversible Environmental Commitments Irreversible environmental commitments resulting from the BLN project would relate primarily to those of the UFC, i.e., 1) land disposal of equipment and materials contaminated by hazardous and low-level radioactive waste; and 2) UFC effects that include commitment of underground geological resources for disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent fuel-and destruction of geological resources during uranium mining. Implementation of either action alternative would also result in both short-term and long-term minor changes in the population, the nature and character of the local community, and the local socioeconomic infrastructure. Once the unit ceases operations, and the BLN is decontaminated and decommissioned in accordance with U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements, the land that supports the facility may be returned to other industrial or nonindustrial uses. However, the land may continue to be committed to use for other future electrical projects or other purposes.
Uranium Fuel Cycle The UFC is defined as the total of those options and processes associated with the provision, utilization, and ultimate disposition of fuel for nuclear power reactors.
Environmental effects are contributed from uranium mining and milling, the production of uranium hexafluoride, isotopic enrichment, fuel fabrication, use of the fuel, possible future reprocessing of irradiated fuel, transportation of radioactive materials, disposal of used (spent) fuel and management of low-level and high-level wastes.
The BLN unit would generate radioactive, hazardous, and nonhazardous wastes that require disposal. This waste is disposed of in permitted hazardous, mixed, or radioactive landfills or disposal facilities. Land committed to the disposal of radioactive and hazardous wastes represents an irreversible impact because it is committed to that use, and can be used for few other purposes.
I I
I I
I II I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 254 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Environmental and
~
Material Resource
- I~reversible Irretrievable Issues i
~
Relatively small amounts of potable water are used during construction and operation of BLN. A small fraction of the cooling water taken Water Consumption None from Guntersville Reservoir is lost through evaporation. The impact to surface water resources is relatively small, but represents a natural resource that is no longer readily available for use.
Nonrenewable energy in the form of fuels (gas, oil, and diesel) and Consumption of Energy None electricity is consumed in construction and to a lesser extent, operation of the BLN.
The BLN reactors contribute a Consumption of None relatively small increase in the Uranium Fuel depletion of uranium that is used to fuel the reactors.
5.3.1. Irreversible Environmental Commitments Irreversible environmental commitments resulting from the BLN project would relate primarily to those of the UFC, i.e., 1) land disposal of equipment and materials contaminated by hazardous and low-level radioactive waste; and 2) UFC effects that include commitment of underground geological resources for disposal of high-level radioactive waste and spent fuel* and destruction of geological resources during uranium mining. Implementation of either action alternative would also result in both short-term and long-term minor changes in the population, the nature and character of the local community, and the local socioeconomic infrastructure. Once the unit ceases operations, and the BLN is decontaminated and decommissioned in accordance with U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements, the land that supports the facility may be returned to other industrial or nonindustrial uses. However, the land may continue to be committed to use for other future electrical projects or other purposes.
Uranium Fuel Cycle The UFC is defined as the total of those options and processes associated with the provision, utilization, and ultimate disposition of fuel for nuclear power reactors.
Environmental effects are contributed from uranium mining and milling, the production of uranium hexafluoride, isotopic enrichment, fuel fabrication, use of the fuel, possible future reprocessing of irradiated fuel, transportation of radioactive materials, disposal of used (spent) fuel and management of low-level and high-level wastes.
The BLN unit would generate radioactive, hazardous, and nonhazardous wastes that require disposal. This waste is disposed of in permitted hazardous, mixed, or radioactive landfills or disposal facilities. Land committed to the disposal of radioactive and hazardous wastes represents an irreversible impact because it is committed to that use, and can be
\\
used for few other purposes.
254 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 5 Table 5.7-2 of the Environmental Report (ER) submitted to NRC as part of the TVA COL Application for siting two AP1000 units at BLN presents environmental data on the UFC.
Those UFC effects noted in Table 5.7-2 as permanent or comprising emissions for fuel production or storage of spent fuel would be considered irreversible. That ER analysis, which is herein incorporated by reference, described the UFC environmental effects from both a single 1000 MW nuclear power reactor and those of two 1150 MWe units operating at the BLN. As described in the ER, the approach taken by NRC in estimating effects was intended to ensure that the actual environmental effects were less than the quantities shown for the 1000 MWe reference plant and to envelope the widest range of operating conditions for light water reactors. That analysis concluded all resource impacts were small (i.e., not detectable or are so minor that they neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource). The effects from either of the current action alternatives for constructing and operating a single 1100 MWe unit at BLN are bounded by that analysis. As such, impacts would be even less than the two unit analysis which concluded only small effects.
5.3.2. Irretrievable Environmental Commitments Irretrievable environmental commitments resulting from the BLN include:
" Construction and irradiated materials.
" Water consumption.
" Consumption of energy.
" Consumption of uranium fuel.
Construction and Irradiated Materials Common irretrievable commitments of materials used in either new reactor (AP1000) construction or for completion of the partially completed B&W reactors (BLN Unit 1 or Unit
- 2) include concrete, rebar, structural steel, power cable, small bore piping and large bore piping. A portion of these materials used in the construction of either type of reactor become contaminated or irradiated over the life of BLN operations. Much of this material cannot be reused or recycled, and must be isolated from the biosphere for hundreds or thousands of years. However, because some of this material may be reused (if uncontaminated) or decontaminated for future use, the recycled portion does not constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources. The estimated quantities of materials needed to construct an AP1000 reactor at BLN are concrete (77, 200 cu. yds.), rebar (10,000 T.),
structural steel (6,400 T.), power cable( 810,000 linear ft.), small bore piping (230,000 linear ft.) and large bore piping (68,000 linear ft.). As these reactors are partially complete, proportionally smaller amounts of materials would be needed to complete them than the Apl000 alternative. Additionally, smaller amounts of materials would be required to complete Unit 1 than Unit 2.
While the amount of construction materials is large, use of such quantities in large-scale construction projects such as nuclear reactors, hydroelectric and coal-fired plants, and many large industrial facilities (e.g., refineries and manufacturing plants) represents a relatively small incremental increase in the overall use of such materials. Even if this material is eventually disposed of, use of construction materials in such quantities has a small impact with respect to the national or global consumption of these materials. An additional irretrievable commitment of resources includes materials used during normal plant operations, some of which are recovered or recycled.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 255 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 5 Table 5.7-2 of the Environmental Report (ER) submitted to NRC as part of the TVA COL Application for siting two AP1 000 units at BLN presents environmental data on the UFC.
Those UFC effects noted in Table 5.7-2 as permanent or comprising emissions for fuel production or storage of spent fuel would be considered irreversible. That ER analysis, which is herein incorporated by reference, described the UFC environmental effects from both a single 1000 MW nuclear power reactor and those of two 1150 MWe units operating at the BLN. As described in the ER, the approach taken by NRC in estimating effects was intended to ensure that the actual environmental effects were less than the quantities shown for the 1000 MWe reference plant and to envelope the widest range of operating conditions for light water reactors. That analysis concluded all resource impacts were small (Le., not detectable or are so minor that they neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of the resource). The effects from either of the current action alternatives for constructing and operating a single 1100 MWe unit at BLN are bounded by that analysis. As such, impacts would be even less than the two unit analysis which concluded only small effects.
5.3.2. Irretrievable Environmental Commitments Irretrievable environmental commitments resulting from the BLN include:
- Construction and irradiated materials.
- Water consumption.
- Consumption of energy.
- Consumption of uranium fuel.
Construction and Irradiated Materials Common irretrievable commitments of materials used in either new reactor (AP1 000) construction or for completion of the partially completed B&W reactors (BLN Unit 1 or Unit
- 2) include concrete, rebar, structural steel, power cable, small bore piping and large bore piping. A portion of these materials used in the construction of either type of reactor become contaminated or irradiated over the life of BLN operations. Much of this material cannot be reused or recycled, and must be isolated from the biosphere for hundreds or thousands of years. However, because some of this material may be reused (if uncontaminated) or decontaminated for future use, the recycled portion does not constitute an irretrievable commitment of resources. The estimated quantities of materials needed to construct an AP1000 reactor at BLN are concrete (77, 200 cu. yds.), rebar (10,000 T.),
structural steel (6,400 T.), power cable( 810,000 linear ft.), small bore piping (230,000 linear ft.) and large bore piping (68,000 linear ft.). As these reactors are partially complete, proportionally smaller amounts of materials would be needed to complete them than the Ap1000 alternative. Additionally, smaller amounts of materials would be required to complete Unit 1 than Unit 2.
While the amount of construction materials is large, use of such quantities in large-scale construction projects such as nuclear reactors, hydroelectric and coal-fired plants, and many large industrial facilities (e.g., refineries and manufacturing plants) represents a relatively small incremental increase in the overall use of such materials. Even if this material is eventually disposed of, use of construction materials in such quantities has a small impact with respect to the national or global consumption of these materials. An additional irretrievable commitment of resources includes materials used during normal plant operations, some of which are recovered or recycled.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 255
I Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Irreversible commitments of resources generally occur through the use of nonrenewable resources that have few or no alternative uses at the termination of the proposed action.
Transmission line reconductoring and upgrades also would require the irretrievable commitment of fossil fuels (diesel and gasoline), oils, lubricants, and other consumables used by construction equipment and by workers commuting to the site. Other materials used for construction of the proposed facilities would be committed for the life of the facilities. Some of these materials, such as ceramic insulators and concrete foundations, may be irretrievably committed, while the metals used in conductors, supporting structures, and other equipment could be and would likely be recycled. The useful life of the transmission structures is expected to be at least 60 years.
Water Consumption Relatively small amounts of potable water are used during construction and operation of the BLN. Some of the cooling water taken from Guntersville Reservoir is lost through the cooling towers by way of drift and evaporation. The impact to surface water resources is relatively small, but represents a natural resource that may no longer be available for use.
However, as part of the natural hydrologic cycle, this water is eventually re-cycled through the ecosystem.
Consumption of Energy Used in Constructing the Reactors II Nonrenewable energy in the form of fuels (gas, oil, and diesel) and electricity are consumed in construction and, to a much smaller extent, in the operation of the BLN. Beyond ancillary (e.g., vehicles, equipment) usage, nuclear reactors do not consume fossil fuels such as I
petroleum or coal.
The total amount of energy consumed during construction or operation of the BLN is very small in comparison to the total amount consumed within the United States. On net balance, the reactor produces far more energy (as measured in British Thermal Units) than is consumed in its construction and operation. For this reason, one of the key I
considerations related to the I & I requirement is that operation of the BLN helps conserve or helps avoid the consumption of finite fossil fuels supplies.
Uranium Fuel Cycle and Depletion of Uranium I
The principal use of uranium is as a fuel for nuclear power plants. With approximately 440 nuclear reactors operating worldwide, these plants currently produce approximately 16 percent of the world's electrical power generation. Global uranium fuel consumption is I
increasing, as nuclear power generation continues to expand worldwide. The BLN reactors contribute a relatively small increase in the depletion of uranium. Sources of uranium include primary mine production as well as secondary sources. Nuclear reactor uranium I
consumption now exceeds the supplies produced through mining. The resulting shortfall has been covered by several secondary sources including excess inventories held by producers, utilities, other fuel cycle participants, reprocessed reactor fuel, and uranium I
derived from dismantling Russian nuclear weapons.
The limited availability of uranium fuel may affect the future expansion of nuclear power.
U.S. Department of Energy uranium estimates indicate that sufficient resources exist in the i
United States to fuel all operating reactors and reactors being planned for the next ten years at a U308 cost (1996 dollars) of $30.00/lb or less. The resource categories designated as reserves and estimated additional resources can supply these quantities of uranium.
256 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Irreversible commitments of resources generally occur through the use of nonrenewable resources that have few or no alternative uses at the termination of the proposed action.
Transmission line reconductoring and upgrades also would require the irretrievable commitment of fossil fuels (diesel and gasoline), oils, lubricants, and other consumables used by construction equipment and by workers commuting to the site. Other materials used for construction of the proposed facilities would be committed for the life of the facilities. Some of these materials, such as ceramic insulators and concrete foundations, may be irretrievably committed, while the metals used in conductors, supporting structures, and other equipment could be and would likely be recycled. The useful life of the transmission structures is expected to be at least 60 years.
Water Consumption Relatively small amounts of potable water are used during construction and operation of the BLN. Some of the cooling water taken from Guntersville Reservoir is lost through the cooling towers by way of drift and evaporation. The impact to surface water resources is relatively small, but represents a natural resource that may no longer be available for use.
However, as part of the natural hydrologic cycle, this water is eventually re-cycled through the ecosystem.
Consumption of Energy Used in Constructing the Reactors Nonrenewable energy in the form of fuels (gas, oil, and diesel) and electricity are consumed in construction and, to a much smaller extent, in the operation of the BLN. Beyond ancillary (e.g., vehicles, equipment) usage, nuclear reactors do not consume fossil fuels such as petroleum or coal.
The total amount of energy consumed during construction or operation of the BLN is very small in comparison to the total amount consumed within the United States. On net balance, the reactor produces far more energy (as measured in British Thermal Units) than is consumed in its construction and operation. For this reason, one of the key considerations related to the I & I requirement is that operation of the BLN helps conserve or helps avoid the consumption of finite fossil fuels supplies.
Uranium Fuel Cycle and Depletion of Uranium The principal use of uranium is as a fuel for nuclear power plants. With approximately 440 nuclear reactors operating worldwide, these plants currently produce approximately 16 percent of the world's electrical power generation. Global uranium fuel consumption is increasing, as nuclear power generation continues to expand worldwide. The BLN reactors contribute a relatively small increase in the depletion of uranium. Sources of uranium include primary mine production as well as secondary sources. Nuclear reactor uranium consumption now exceeds the supplies produced through mining. The resulting shortfall has been covered by several secondary sources including excess inventories held by producers, utilities, other fuel cycle participants, reprocessed reactor fuel, and uranium derived from dismantling Russian nuclear weapons.
The limited availability of uranium fuel may affect the future expansion of nuclear power.
U.S. Department of Energy uranium estimates indicate that sufficient resources exist in the United States to fuel all operating reactors and reactors being planned for the next ten years at a U308 cost (1996 dollars) of $30.00/Ib or less. The resource categories designated as reserves and estimated additional resources can supply these quantities of uranium.
256 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 5 The World Nuclear Association studies supply and demand for uranium and states that the world's present measured resources of uranium, in the cost category somewhat above present spot prices and used only in conventional reactors, at current rates of consumption, are sufficient to last for some 70 years. Very little uranium exploration occurred between 1985 and 2005, so the significant increase in exploration that is currently being witnessed might double the known economic reserves. On the basis of analogies with other metal minerals, a doubling in price from present levels could be expected to create about a tenfold increase in measured resources over time. The introduction of fast breeder reactors and other technologies may also reduce the supply-demand gap. The addition of BLN increases consumption of uranium in the United States by approximately 2 percent and increases worldwide consumption of uranium by about 0.5 percent. Thus, the addition of BLN by itself does not create a significant impact on uranium resources.
5.4.
Energy Resources and Conservation Potential The total amount of energy consumed during construction or operation of the BLN is very small in comparison to the total amount consumed within the United States. On net balance, the reactor would produce far more energy (as measured in British Thermal Units) than would be consumed in its construction and operation. For this reason, one of the key considerations related to the I & I requirement is that operation of the BLN helps conserve or helps avoid the consumption of finite fossil fuels supplies.
Nonrenewable energy in the form of fuels (gas, oil, and diesel) and electricity would be, however, consumed in construction and, to a much smaller extent, in the operation of any of the action alternatives for BLN. An AP1 000 reactor would require more off-site fabrication of components, transport of components, and on-site construction, and therefore more energy to build, than completing either the partially-built BLN Unit 1 or Unit 2.
Because the existing Unit 1 is more complete than Unit 2, of the two units, Unit 1 would require less energy to build.
Beyond ancillary (e.g., vehicles, equipment) usage and that required to support the UFC, nuclear reactors do not consume fossil fuels such as petroleum or coal during operation.
Processing of nuclear fuel is, however, an energy-intensive activity. Existing uranium enrichment facilities are large and each facility services several nuclear generating plants.
For comparative purposes, the energy required to process or enrich uranium using gaseous diffusion sufficient to fuel a single 1000 MW pressurized boiling water reactor nuclear plant (slightly smaller than the action alternatives for a single BLN unit) would be approximately that of the output from a 50 MW fossil-fueled (coal-fired) facility operating at 75% capacity factor. Newer technologies (e.g., centrifuge or atomic vapor laser isotope separation) currently, or becoming, commercially available for enrichment, utilize only 4-15% as much power as this gaseous diffusion example. As it is anticipated that these new, less energy intensive technologies will eventually become the norm for production of nuclear fuel, the processing portion of the UFC would likely use even less energy and become even more "carbon-friendly" in the future. The DOE has also released the Draft Programmatic EIS for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) (DOE 2008) with the identified preferred alternative of implementing a "closed" cycle for nuclear fuel management in the United States (i.e., select among nuclear fuel reprocessing alternatives). If selected and implemented by DOE, this approach for GNEP could both expand the availability of nuclear fuel and potentially stabilize or reduce the worldwide GHG releases associated with mining and milling of uranium as a fuel source.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 257 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 5 The World Nuclear Association studies supply and demand for uranium and states that the world's present measured resources of uranium, in the cost category somewhat above present spot prices and used only in conventional reactors, at current rates of consumption, are sufficient to last for some 70 years. Very little uranium exploration occurred between 1985 and 2005, so the significant increase in exploration that is currently being witnessed might double the known economic reserves. On the basis of analogies with other metal minerals, a doubling in price from present levels could be expected to create about a tenfold increase in measured resources over time. The introduction of fast breeder reactors and other technologies may also reduce the supply-demand gap. The addition of BLN increases consumption of uranium in the United States by approximately 2 percent and increases worldwide consumption of uranium by about 0.5 percent. Thus, the addition of BLN by itself does not create a significant impact on uranium resources.
5.4.
Energy Resources and Conservation Potential The total amount of energy consumed during construction or operation of the BLN is very small in comparison to the total amount consumed within the United States. On net balance, the reactor would produce far more energy (as measured in British Thermal Units) than would be consumed in its construction and operation. For this reason, one of the key considerations related to the I & I requirement is that operation of the BLN helps conserve or helps avoid the consumption of finite fossil fuels supplies.
Nonrenewable energy in the form of fuels (gas, oil, and diesel) and electricity would be, however, consumed in construction and, to a much smaller extent, in the operation of any of the action alternatives for BLN. An AP1 000 reactor would require more off-site fabrication of components, transport of components, and on-site construction, and therefore more energy to build, than completing either the partially-built BLN Unit 1 or Unit 2.
Because the existing Unit 1 is more complete than Unit 2, of the two units, Unit 1 would require less energy to build.
Beyond ancillary (e.g., vehicles, equipment) usage and that required to support the UFC, nuclear reactors do not consume fossil fuels such as petroleum or coal during operation.
Processing of nuclear fuel is, however, an energy-intensive activity. Existing uranium enrichment facilities are large and each facility services several nuclear generating plants.
For comparative purposes, the energy required to process or enrich uranium using gaseous diffusion sufficient to fuel a single 1000 MW pressurized boiling water reactor nuclear plant (slightly smaller than the action alternatives for a single BLN unit) would be approximately that of the output from a 50 MW fossil-fueled (coal-fired) facility operating at 75% capacity factor. Newer technologies (e.g., centrifuge or atomic vapor laser isotope separation) currently, or becoming, commercially available for enrichment, utilize only 4-15% as much power as this gaseous diffusion example. As it is anticipated that these new, less energy intensive technologies will eventually become the norm for production of nuclear fuel, the processing portion of the UFC would likely use even less energy and become even more "carbon-friendly" in the future. The DOE has also released the Draft Programmatic EIS for the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP) (DOE 2008) with the identified preferred alternative of implementing a "closed" cycle for nuclear fuel management in the United States (i.e., select among nuclear fuel reprocessing alternatives). If selected and implemented by DOE, this approach for GNEP could both expand the availability of nuclear fuel and potentially stabilize or reduce the worldwide GHG releases associated with mining and milling of uranium as a fuel source.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 257
I I
I I
I Page intentionally blank Page intentionally blank I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 6 CHAPTER 6 6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS 6.1.
NEPA Project Management Amy Burke Henry Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Ruth M. Horton Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Anita E. Masters Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Loretta McNamee Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Bruce L. Yeager Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
NEPA Specialist M.S., Zoology and Wildlife; B.S., Biology 12 years in Biological Surveys, Natural Resources Management Planning, and Environmental Reviews NEPA Compliance and Document Preparation Senior NEPA Specialist B.A., History 30 years in Public Policy and Planning, including 12 years in Environmental Impact Assessment NEPA Compliance and Document Preparation Senior NEPA Specialist M.S., Biology/Fisheries; B.S., Wildlife Management 22 years in Fisheries Biology/Aquatic Community and Watershed Assessments, Protected Aquatic Species and Habitat Monitoring, and NEPA Compliance NEPA Compliance and Document Preparation Contract Biologist B.S., Biology 1 year NEPA Compliance Document Preparation NEPA Program Manager MS., Zoology (Ecology); B.S., Zoology (Aquatic Ecology) 33 years in Environmental Compliance for Water, Air, and Land Use Planning; Environmental Business Services NEPA Compliance Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 259 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 6 CHAPTER 6 6.0 LIST OF PREPARERS 6.1.
NEPA Project Management Amy Burke Henry Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Ruth M. Horton Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Anita E. Masters Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Loretta McNamee Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Bruce L. Yeager Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
NEPA Specialist M.S., Zoology and Wildlife; B.S., Biology 12 years in Biological Surveys, Natural Resources Management Planning, and Environmental Reviews NEPA Compliance and Document Preparation Senior NEPA Specialist BA, History 30 years in Public Policy and Planning, including 12 years in Environmental Impact Assessment NEPA Compliance and Document Preparation Senior NEPA Specialist M.S., Biology/Fisheries; B.S., Wildlife Management 22 years in Fisheries Biology/Aquatic Community and Watershed Assessments, Protected Aquatic Species and Habitat Monitoring, and NEPA Compliance NEPA Compliance and Document Preparation Contract Biologist B.S., Biology 1 year NEPA Compliance Document Preparation NEPA Program Manager M.S., Zoology (Ecology); B.S., Zoology (Aquatic Ecology) 33 years in Environmental Compliance for Water, Air, and Land Use Planning; Environmental Business Services NEPA Compliance Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 259
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 6.2.
Other Contributors Anne M. Aiken Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
John G. Albright Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Nolan D. Baier Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Jessica M. Baker Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Hugh S. Barger Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
John (Bo) T. Baxter Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Francine Beck Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Senior Environmental Engineer M.S., Environmental Engineering; B.A., Environmental Studies 19 years in Water Quality and Environmental Engineering Services Surface Water and Industrial Wastewater Civil Engineer B.S., Civil Engineering 29 years in Transmission Line Design/Construction, Fossil Waste Planning and Disposal, Fossil Site and Environmental Design, Fossil and Hydro Environmental Permitting, Fossil Railroad Inspection and Upgrade, Gas Transmission Pipeline Design, NEPA Environmental Reviews Transportation Senior Specialist B.S., Civil Engineering; MBA 10 years Energy Industry Analytics Need for Power Analysis and Preparer Resource Planning Specialist M.B.A. and B.B.A., Finance 8 years in Risk Management, Price Forecasting and Long-Term Planning Need for Power Environmental Engineering Specialist B.S., Engineering 36 years in Transmission Line Planning and Preparation of Environmental Review Documents Project Coordination, Purpose and Need, Description of Alternatives Specialist, Aquatic Endangered Species Act Permitting and Compliance M.S. and B.S., Zoology 19 years in Protected Aquatic Species Monitoring, Habitat Assessment, and Recovery; 11 years in Environmental Review Aquatic Ecology/Threatened and Endangered Species Technical Specialist, ENERCON Ph.D. and M.A., Geography; B.S. Land Use 3 years in BLN COLA preparation; 9 years in Program Development/Project Management; 5 years in Technical Editing Document Preparation; Contributing Author for AP1000 Information, Site and Energy Alternatives, Spent Fuels and Chemical Additives I
II I
II I
II I
I I
I I
I I
I 260 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 6.2.
Other Contributors Anne M. Aiken Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
John G. Albright Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Nolan D. Baier Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Jessica M. Baker Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Hugh S. Barger Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
John (Bo) T. Baxter Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Francine Beck Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
260 Senior Environmental Engineer M.S., Environmental Engineering; B.A., Environmental Studies 19 years in Water Quality and Environmental Engineering Services Surface Water and Industrial Wastewater Civil Engineer B.S., Civil Engineering 29 years in Transmission Line Design/Construction, Fossil Waste Planning and Disposal, Fossil Site and Environmental Design, Fossil and Hydro Environmental Permitting, Fossil Railroad Inspection and Upgrade, Gas Transmission Pipeline Design, NEPA Environmental Reviews Transportation Senior Specialist B.S., Civil Engineering; MBA 10 years Energy Industry Analytics Need for Power Analysis and Pre parer Resource Planning Specialist M.B.A. and B.B.A., Finance 8 years in Risk Management, Price Forecasting and Long-Term Planning Need for Power Environmental Engineering Specialist B.S., Engineering 36 years in Transmission Line Planning and Preparation of Environmental Review Documents Project Coordination, Purpose and Need, Description of Alternatives Specialist, Aquatic Endangered Species Act Permitting and Compliance M.S. and B.S., Zoology 19 years in Protected Aquatic Species Monitoring, Habitat Assessment, and Recovery; 11 years in Environmental Review Aquatic EcologylThreatened and Endangered Species Technical Specialist, ENERCON PhD. and M.A., Geography; B.S. Land Use 3 years in BLN COLA preparation; 9 years in Program Development/Project Management; 5 years in Technical Editing Document Preparation; Contributing Author for AP1 000 Information, Site and Energy Alternatives, Spent Fuels and Chemical Additives Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 6 Ralph Berger Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Susan H. Biddle Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
W. Nannette Brodie, CPG Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Michael G. Browman, P.E.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Jennifer M. Call Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Patricia B. Cox Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Elizabeth A. Creel Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Technical Specialist, ENERCON P.E., Ph.D., M.S. and B.S., Mechanical Engineering 28 years in Nuclear Utility Industry Cooling Tower Plume Impacts, Control Room Habitability, and Severe Accident Consequences Senior Manager, Long-Term Resource Planning M.S., Environmental Engineering, B.S., Civil Engineering 14 years in Reservoir Operations and Power Supply Planning Need for Power Senior Environmental Scientist B.S., Environmental Science; B.S., Geology 14 years in Environmental Analyses, Surface Water Quality, and Groundwater Hydrology Evaluations Groundwater/Surface Water Environmental Engineer Specialist Ph.D., M.S., and B.S., Soil Science; M.S., Environmental Engineering 27 years in Environmental Control Technology Development and Environmental Impact Analysis Groundwater and Surface Water Resources; Wastewater; Solid and Hazardous Waste Meteorologist M.S. and B.S., Meteorology/Geosciences 7 years in Meteorological Forecasting, Air Quality Monitoring, Data Analysis, and Air Quality Research Air Resources Botanist, Specialist Ph.D., Botany (Plant Taxonomy and Anatomy); M.S. and B.S.,
Biology 31 years in Plant Taxonomy at the Academic Level; 6 years in Environmental Assessment and NEPA Compliance Threatened and Endangered Species Compliance, Invasive Plant Species, and Terrestrial Ecology General Manager, Resource Planning B.S., Mathematics 33 years in System Planning and Bulk Power Trading Areas Need for Power Review Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 261 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Ralph Berger Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Susan H. Biddle Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
- w. Nannette Brodie, CPG Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Michael G. Browman, P.E.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Jennifer M. Call Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Patricia B. Cox Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Elizabeth A. Creel Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Technical Specialist, ENERCON P.E., Ph.D., M.S. and B.S., Mechanical Engineering 28 years in Nuclear Utility Industry Chapter 6 Cooling Tower Plume Impacts, Control Room Habitability, and Severe Accident Consequences Senior Manager, Long-Term Resource Planning M.S., Environmental Engineering, B.S., Civil Engineering 14 years in Reservoir Operations and Power Supply Planning Need for Power Senior Environmental Scientist B.S., Environmental Science; B.S., Geology 14 years in Environmental Analyses, Surface Water Quality, and Groundwater Hydrology Evaluations Groundwater/Surface Water Environmental Engineer Specialist PhD., M.S., and B.S., Soil Science; M.S., Environmental Engineering 27 years in Environmental Control Technology Development and Environmental Impact Analysis Groundwater and Surface Water Resources; Wastewater; Solid and Hazardous Waste Meteorologist M.S. and B.S., Meteorology/Geosciences 7 years in Meteorological Forecasting, Air Quality Monitoring, Data Analysis, and Air Quality Research Air Resources Botanist, Specialist PhD.,Botany (Plant Taxonomy and Anatomy); M.S. and B.S.,
Biology 31 years in Plant Taxonomy at the Academic Level; 6 years in Environmental Assessment and NEPA Compliance Threatened and Endangered Species Compliance, Invasive Plant Species, and Terrestrial Ecology General Manager, Resource Planning B.S., Mathematics 33 years in System Planning and Bulk Power Trading Areas Need for Power Review Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 261
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Thomas Cureton Jr.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Adam J. Dattilo Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Eric J. Davis, C.F.A.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Britta P. Dimick Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
James H. Eblen Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
David A. Hankins Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Michelle S. Harle Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Heather M. Hart Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Civil Engineer M.S., Civil Engineering 34 years in Power Plant Design and Inspection and Transmission Line and Substation Siting Project and Siting Alternatives Botanist M.S., Forestry; B.S., Natural Resource Conservation Management 8 years in Ecological Restoration and Plant Ecology; 5 years in Botany Threatened and Endangered Plant Species, Botany, Plant Ecology, and Invasive Plant Species Program Manager, Investment Trusts M.B.A., General Management; B.S., Economics and Finance; A.S.,
Business Administration 10 years in Treasury-Finance Decommissioning Wetlands Biologist M.S., Botany-Wetlands Ecology Emphasis; B.A., Biology 11 years in Wetlands Assessments, Botanical Surveys, Wetlands Regulations, and/or NEPA Compliance Wetlands Contract Economist Ph.D., Economics; B.S., Business Administration 41 years in Economic Analysis and Research Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice Geographic Analyst B.S., Fish and Wildlife Management 29 years in Geographic Information and Engineering GIS Maps Contract Archaeologist ABD, M.A., B.A. in Anthropology 11 years in Archaeology Cultural Resource Analysis Contract Natural Areas Biologist M.S., Environmental and Soil Science; B.S., Plant and Soil Science 7 years in Surface Water Quality, Soil and Groundwater Investigations, and Environmental Reviews Managed Areas I
II I
I i
I I
I I
I I
I I
262 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I,
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Thomas Cureton Jr.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Adam J. Dattilo Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Eric J. Davis, C.F.A.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Britta P. Dimick Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
James H. Eblen Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
David A. Hankins Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Michelle S. Harle Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Heather M. Hart Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
262 Civil Engineer M.S., Civil Engineering 34 years in Power Plant Design and Inspection and Transmission Line and Substation Siting Project and Siting Alternatives Botanist M.S., Forestry; B.S., Natural Resource Conservation Management 8 years in Ecological Restoration and Plant Ecology; 5 years in Botany Threatened and Endangered Plant Species, Botany, Plant Ecology, and Invasive Plant Species Program Manager, Investment Trusts M.B.A., General Management; B.S., Economics and Finance; A.S.,
Business Administration 10 years in Treasury-Finance Decommissioning Wetlands Biologist M.S., Botany-Wetlands Ecology Emphasis; BA, Biology 11 years in Wetlands Assessments, Botanical Surveys, Wetlands Regulations, and/or NEPA Compliance Wetlands Contract Economist Ph.D., Economics; B.S., Business Administration 41 years in Economic Analysis and Research Socioeconomics and Environmental Justice Geographic Analyst B.S., Fish and Wildlife Management 29 years in Geographic Information and Engineering GIS Maps Contract Archaeologist ABO, MA, B.A. in Anthropology 11 years in Archaeology Cultural Resource Analysis Contract Natural Areas Biologist M.S., Environmental and Soil Science; B.S., Plant and Soil Science 7 years in Surface Water Quality, Soil and Groundwater Investigations, and Environmental Reviews Managed Areas Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 6 Jeffrey W. Head Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Travis Hill Henry Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
John M. Higgins, P.E.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Paul N. Hopping Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Charles S. Howard Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Nathan D. Jackson Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
T. A. Keys Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Holly G. Le Grand Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Nuclear Engineer, ENERCON B.S., Nuclear Engineering 2 Years in Nuclear Power Modifications and Analysis Transportation of Radioactive Materials, Atmospheric Dispersion.
Radioactive Waste, Gaseous Doses Terrestrial Endangered Species Specialist M.S., Zoology; B.S., Wildlife Biology 20 years in Zoology, Endangered Species, and NEPA Compliance Terrestrial Ecology, Threatened and Endangered Species Water Quality Specialist Ph.D., Environmental Engineering; B.S. and M.S., Civil Engineering 36 years in Environmental Engineering and Water Resources Management Surface Water and Wastewater Technical Specialist Ph.D., Civil and Environmental Engineering; M.S. and B.S, Civil Engineering 26 years in Hydrothermal and Surface Water Analysis Hydrothermal and Surface Water Analysis Aquatic Endangered Species Biologist M.S., Zoology (Aquatic Ecology); B.S., Biology 17 years in Aquatic Ecology Research, Consulting, and Impact Assessment Specializing in Freshwater Mussels Aquatic Threatened and Endangered Species (Mollusks)
Nuclear Engineer, ENERCON B.S., Nuclear Engineering 1 year in BWR Reactor Engineering, 4 months in Nuclear Power Modifications and Analysis.
Design Basis Accident Doses, Gaseous Doses Manager, Nuclear Fuel Supply & Disposal NA NA Spent Fuel Storage Biologist/Zoologist M.S., Wildlife; B.S., Biology 6 years in Biological Surveys, Natural Resource Management, and Environmental Reviews Terrestrial Ecology and Threatened and Endangered Species Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 263 I
I Jeffrey W. Head Position:
I Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
I Travis Hill Henry Position:
I Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
I John M. Higgins, P.E.
Position:
Education:
I Experience:
Involvement:
I Paul N. Hopping Position:
Education:
I Experience:
Involvement:
I Charles S. Howard Position:
Education:
I Experience:
Involvement:
I Nathan D. Jackson Position:
Education:
I Experience:
Involvement:
I T. A. Keys Position:
Education:
I Experience:
Involvement:
Holly G. Le Grand I
Position:
Education:
Experience:
I Involvement:
I I
Chapter 6 Nuclear Engineer, ENERCON B.S., Nuclear Engineering 2 Years in Nuclear Power Modifications and Analysis Transportation of Radioactive Materials, Atmospheric Dispersion.
Radioactive Waste, Gaseous Doses Terrestrial Endangered Species Specialist M.S., Zoology; B.S., Wildlife Biology 20 years in Zoology, Endangered Species, and NEPA Compliance Terrestrial Ecology, Threatened and Endangered Species Water Quality Specialist PhD., Environmental Engineering; B.S. and M.S., Civil Engineering 36 years in Environmental Engineering and Water Resources Management Surface Water and Wastewater Technical Specialist PhD., Civil and Environmental Engineering; M.S. and B.S, Civil Engineering 26 years in Hydrothermal and Surface Water Analysis Hydrothermal and Surface Water Analysis Aquatic Endangered Species Biologist M.S., Zoology (Aquatic Ecology); B.S., Biology 17 years in Aquatic Ecology Research, Consulting, and Impact Assessment Specializing in Freshwater Mussels Aquatic Threatened and Endangered Species (Mollusks)
Nuclear Engineer, ENERCON B.S., Nuclear Engineering 1 year in BWR Reactor Engineering, 4 months in Nuclear Power Modifications and Analysis.
Design Basis Accident Doses, Gaseous Doses Manager, Nuclear Fuel Supply & Disposal NA NA Spent Fuel Storage Biologist/Zoologist M.S., Wildlife; B.S., Biology 6 years in Biological Surveys, Natural Resource Management, and Environmental Reviews Terrestrial Ecology and Threatened and Endangered Species Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 263
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Eric D. Loyd Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Robert A. Marker Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Norman M. Meinert, P.E.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Roger A. Milstead, P.E.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Jared Monroe Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Todd C. Moore Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Joanne Morris Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Marvin Morris Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Mechanical Engineer, Design B.S., Mechanical Engineering; working toward M.S., Mechanical Engineering 4 years in Mechanical Engineering Performed Hydrothermal Simulations Using Cormix Contract Recreation Planner B.S., Outdoor Recreation Resources Management 37 years in Recreation Resources Planning and Management Recreation Resources Project Manager, ENERCON B.S., Mechanical Engineering 15 years Project Management and 10 years Mechanical Design and Analysis Project oversight and SEIS Review Program Manager, Flood Risk B.S., Civil Engineering 33 years in Floodplain and Environmental Evaluations Floodplains Mechanical Engineer, ENERCON B.S., Mechanical Engineering 3 Years in Health Physics, Meteorology, and Mechanical Engineering Routine Doses and Meteorology Civil Engineering Siting and Environmental M.S. and B.S., Civil Engineering 7 years in Civil Design, 4 years in Fossil Plant Maintenance; 4 years in Transmission Line Siting Transmission Lines Supervisor Mechanical Engineering, ENERCON M.S., Mechanical Engineering, B.A., Physics 25 years in Nuclear Utility Industry Design Basis Accident Doses, Gaseous Doses, Liquid Doses, and Control Room Habitability Supervisor Safety Analysis, ENERCON B.S., Mathematics; M.S. Physics 30 years in Nuclear Utility Industry Design Basis Accident Doses, Gaseous Doses, Liquid Doses, Cooling Tower Plume impacts, Transportation, Control Room Habitability, and Severe Accident Consequences I
I I
I I
I I
I I
264 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Eric D. Loyd Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Robert A. Marker Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Norman M. Meinert, P.E.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Roger A. Milstead, P.E.
Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Jared Monroe Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Todd C. Moore Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Joanne Morris Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Marvin Morris Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Mechanical Engineer, Design B.S., Mechanical Engineering; working toward M.S., Mechanical Engineering 4 years in Mechanical Engineering Performed Hydrothermal Simulations Using Cormix Contract Recreation Planner B.S., Outdoor Recreation Resources Management 37 years in Recreation Resources Planning and Management Recreation Resources Project Manager, ENERCON B.S., Mechanical Engineering 15 years Project Management and 10 years Mechanical Design and Analysis Project oversight and SEIS Review Program Manager, Flood Risk B.S., Civil Engineering 33 years in Floodplain and Environmental Evaluations Floodplains Mechanical Engineer, ENERCON B.S., Mechanical Engineering 3 Years in Health Physics, Meteorology, and Mechanical Engineering Routine Doses and Meteorology Civil Engineering Siting and Environmental M.S. and B.S., Civil Engineering 7 years in Civil Design, 4 years in Fossil Plant Maintenance; 4 years in Transmission Line Siting Transmission Lines Supervisor Mechanical Engineering, ENERCON M.S., Mechanical Engineering, BA, Physics 25 years in Nuclear Utility Industry Design Basis Accident Doses, Gaseous Doses, Liquid Doses, and Control Room Habitability Superviso"r Safety Analysis, ENERCON B.S., Mathematics; M.S. Physics 30 years in Nuclear Utility Industry Design Basis Accident Doses, Gaseous Doses, Liquid Doses, Cooling Tower Plume impacts, Transportation, Control Room Habitability, and Severe Accident Consequences 264 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
E I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 6 Jeffrey W. Munsey Position:
Civil Engineer Education:
M.S. and B.S., Geophysics Experience:
24 years in Geophysical and Geological Studies and Investigations, including Applications to Environmental Assessments Involvement:
Seismology Duane T. Nakahata Position:
Senior Technical Specialist, ENERCON Education:
Ph.D., Environmental Engineering; MS., Nuclear Engineering; B.S.,
Chemical Engineering Experience:
25 years in Thermal-Hydraulic, Nuclear and Radiological Analyses Involvement:
Normal Liquid Doses and Atmospheric Dispersion Factor Analyses R. Michael Payne Position:
Chemistry Program Manager, Technical Programs Reliability Education:
B.S., Chemistry Experience:
6 years as Chemistry Program Manager; 4 years as Technical Services Analyst; 10 years as Field Technical Representative to the Chemical, Metals, and Paper Industries Involvement:
Evaluation of Chemical Additives to Raw Water W. Chett Peebles, RLA; ASLA Position:
Specialist, Landscape Architect Education:
Bachelor of Landscape Architecture Experience:
21 years in Site Planning, Design, and Scenic Resource Management; 4 years in Architectural History and Historic Preservation Involvement:
Visual Resources and Historic Architectural Resources Erin E. Pritchard Position:
Archaeologist Education:
M.A., Anthropology Experience:
10 years in Archaeology and Cultural Resource Management Involvement:
Cultural Resources William L. Raines Position:
Technical Specialist Education:
Ph.D., Chemistry (Nuclear/Radiochemistry)
Experience:
30 years in Radiological Environmental Monitoring and Radioanalytical Analysis Involvement:
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Involvement:
NGD Rick Rogers Position:
Mechanical Engineer, ENERCON Education:
B.S., Mechanical Engineering Experience:
2 years in Dose Analysis Involvement:
Severe Accident and Design Basis Accident Analyses Thomas E. Spink Position:
Licensing Project Manager, Units 3 and 4 Education:
M.S. and B.S., Nuclear Engineering Experience:
36 years in Nuclear Licensing, Engineering, Quality Assurance, Materials and Project Management, and Power System Planning Involvement:
NGDC Project Manager Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 265 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Jeffrey W. Munsey Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Duane T. Nakahata Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
R. Michael Payne Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
W. Chett Peebles, RLA; ASLA Chapter 6 Civil Engineer M.S. and B.S., Geophysics 24 years in Geophysical and Geological Studies and Investigations, including Applications to Environmental Assessments Seismology Senior Technical Specialist, ENERCON PhD., Environmental Engineering; M.S., Nuclear Engineering; B.S.,
Chemical Engineering 25 years in Thermal-Hydraulic, Nuclear and Radiological Analyses Normal Liquid Doses and Atmospheric Dispersion Factor Analyses Chemistry Program Manager, Technical Programs Reliability B.S., Chemistry 6 years as Chemistry Program Manager; 4 years as Technical Services Analyst; 10 years as Field Technical Representative to the Chemical, Metals, and Paper Industries Evaluation of Chemical Additives to Raw Water Position:
Specialist, Landscape Architect Education:
Bachelor of Landscape Architecture Experience:
21 years in Site Planning, Design, and Scenic Resource Management; 4 years in Architectural History and Historic Preservation Involvement:
Erin E. Pritchard Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
William L. Raines Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Involvement:
Rick Rogers Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Thomas E. Spink Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Visual Resources and Historic Architectural Resources Archaeologist M.A., Anthropology 10 years in Archaeology and Cultural Resource Management Cultural Resources Technical Specialist PhD., Chemistry (Nuclear/Radiochemistry) 30 years in Radiological Environmental Monitoring and Radioanalytical Analysis Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program NGD Mechanical Engineer, ENERCON B.S., Mechanical Engineering 2 years in Dose Analysis Severe Accident and Design Basis Accident Analyses Licensing Project Manager, Units 3 and 4 M.S. and B.S., Nuclear Engineering 36 years in Nuclear Licensing, Engineering, Quality Assurance, Materials and Project Management, and Power System Planning NGDC Project Manager Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 265
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Kevin M. Stewart Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Jan K. Thomas Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Kenneth G. Wastrack Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Cassandra L. Wylie Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
W. Richard Yarnell Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Water Resources Engineer M.S. and B.S., Civil and Environmental Engineering Seven years in Hydrothermal and Surface Water Analysis Hydrothermal and Surface Water Analysis Contract Natural Areas Specialist M.S., Human Ecology 11 years in Health and Safety Research, Environmental Restoration, Technical Writing; 6 years in Natural Area Reviews Natural Areas Meteorologist M.B.A.; B.S., Meteorology 34 years in Meteorology Tornado Risk and General Meteorology Atmospheric Analyst M.S., Forestry and Statistics; B.S., Forestry 21 years in Atmospheric Modeling and Effects of Air Pollution on Forests; 9 years in Noise Analysis Noise Impacts Archaeologist B.S., Environmental Health 38 years, Cultural Resource Management Cultural Resources I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 266 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Kevin M. Stewart Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Jan K. Thomas Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Kenneth G. Wastrack Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Cassandra L. Wylie Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
W. Richard Yarnell Position:
Education:
Experience:
Involvement:
Water Resources Engineer M.S. and B.S., Civil and Environmental Engineering Seven years in Hydrothermal and Surface Water Analysis Hydrothermal and Surface Water Analysis Contract Natural Areas Specialist M.S., Human Ecology 11 years in Health and Safety Research, Environmental Restoration, Technical Writing; 6 years in Natural Area Reviews Natural Areas Meteorologist M.B.A.; B.S., Meteorology 34 years in Meteorology Tornado Risk and General Meteorology Atmospheric Analyst M.S., Forestry and Statistics; B.S., Forestry 21 years in Atmospheric Modeling and Effects of Air Pollution on Forests; 9 years in Noise Analysis Noise Impacts Archaeolog ist B.S., Environmental Health 38 years, Cultural Resource Management Cultural Resources 266 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I.
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Chapter 7 CHAPTER 7 7.0 LIST OF AGENCIES TO WHOM COPIES ARE SENT Federal Agencies Natural Resources Conservation Service, Alabama State Conservationist Natural Resources Conservation Service, Georgia State Conservationist U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Nashville District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cookeville Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Daphne Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Refuge Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region Office U.S. Forest Service, Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests U.S. Forest Service, Region 8 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission National Park Service, Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Military Park National Park Service, Southeast Region Office State Agencies Alabama Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Alabama Department of Environmental Management Alabama Department of Environmental Economic and Community Affairs Alabama Historical Commission North-Central Alabama Regional Council of Governments Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments Georgia Economic Development Administration Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources Division Georgia State Clearing House Tennessee Southeast Tennessee Development District South Central Tennessee Development District Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Air Pollution Control Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Ground Water Protection Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 267 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 7 CHAPTER 7 7.0 LIST OF AGENCIES TO WHOM COPIES ARE SENT Federal Agencies Natural Resources Conservation Service, Alabama State Conservationist Natural Resources Conservation Service, Georgia State Conservationist U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Nashville District U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Savannah District U.S. Department of the Interior U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Cookeville Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Daphne Field Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Refuge Office U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Southeast Region Office U.S. Forest Service, Chattahoochee-Oconee National Forests U.S. Forest Service, Region 8 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission National Park Service, Chickamauga-Chattanooga National Military Park National Park Service, Southeast Region Office State Agencies Alabama Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources Alabama Department of Environmental Management Alabama Department of Environmental Economic and Community Affairs Alabama Historical Commission North-Central Alabama Regional Council of Governments Top of Alabama Regional Council of Governments Georgia Economic Development Administration Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Environmental Protection Division Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Historic Preservation Division Georgia Department of Natural Resources, Wildlife Resources Division Georgia State Clearing House Tennessee Southeast Tennessee Development District South Central Tennessee Development District Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Air Pollution Control Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Ground Water Protection Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 267
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Supply Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Resource Management Division Tennessee Historical Commission Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Federally Recognized Tribes (E-mail notification of availability)
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma Cherokee Nation Chickasaw Nation Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Kialegee Tribal Town Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Shawnee Tribe Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Seminole Tribe of Florida Jena Band of Choctaw Indians Poarch Band of Creek Indians 268 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement U
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I U
I I
I I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Supply Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Resource Management Division Tennessee Historical Commission Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency Federally Recognized Tribes (E-mail notification of availability)
Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians 268 United Keetoowah Band of Cherokee Indians in Oklahoma Cherokee Nation Chickasaw Nation Muscogee (Creek) Nation of Oklahoma Thlopthlocco Tribal Town Kialegee Tribal Town Alabama-Quassarte Tribal Town Alabama-Coushatta Tribe of Texas Eastern Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Shawnee Tribe Absentee Shawnee Tribe of Oklahoma Seminole Tribe of Florida Jena Band of Choctaw Indians Poarch Band of Creek Indians Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I'
I
Chapter 8 CHAPTER 8 8.0 LITERATURE CITED Alabama Department of Environmental Management. 1998. Alabama Department of Environmental Management Permit Rationale, Tennessee Valley Authority Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. Prepared by David Butts, September 9, 1998.
2008. 2008 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring & Assessment Report. Retrieved from
<http://www.adem.state.al.us/waterdivision/WQuality/305bMWQ305bReport.htm>
(accessed October 21, 2009).
Advanced National Seismic System. ANSS Catalog Search. Retrieved from
<http://www.ncedc.org/anss/catalog-search.html> (accessed January 5, 2009).
Alabama Invasive Plant Council. 2006. Alabama's 10 Worst Weeds. Retrieved from
<http://www.se-eppc.org/eddMapS/alabama.cfm> (accessed September 1, 2009).
Algermissen, S. T., and G. A. Bollinger, eds. 1993. Hazard Assessment. Monograph 1 presented at the 1993 National Earthquake Conference, Memphis, Tennessee, May 2-5.
American Medical Association. 1994. "Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields." Chicago, Ill.:
AMA, Council on Scientific Affairs (December 1994).
American Meteorological Society. 1959. Glossary of Meteorology. Boston, Mass.
Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO). 2000. Environmental Report, Attachment G, Severe Accident Management Alternatives Analysis.
AREVA, Inc. 2008. Bellefonte Plant Site-Specific Seismic Assessment Report: 20004-015.
Document No.: 51-9115097-000-Proprietary. September 20, 2008.
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). 1972. The Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear Plants. WASH-1 238.
1974. Final Environmental Statement Related to Construction of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, Tennessee Valley Authority. Washington, D.C.: Directorate of Licensing.
Best, T. L., W. S. Cvilikas, A. B. Goebel, T. D. Haas, T. H. Henry, B. A. Milam, L. R. Saidak, and D. P. Thomas. 1995. Foraging Ecology of the Endangered Gray Bat (Myotis grisescens) at Guntersville Reservoir, Alabama. Joint Agency Guntersville Project Aquatic Plant Management.
Bohac, C. E., and M. J. McCall. 2008. Water Use in the Tennessee Valley for 2005 and Projected Use in 2030. Retrieved from
<http://www.tva.gov/river/watersupply/watersupplyreport-to_2030.pdf> (accessed October 21, 2009)
Bridges, E. 1984. Element Stewardship Abstract for Scutellaria Montana. Tennessee Natural Heritage Program files. Nashville, Tennessee.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 269 I
I I
I I
I I
I
'I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Chapter 8 CHAPTER 8 8.0 LITERATURE CITED Alabama Department of Environmental Management. 1998. Alabama Department of Environmental Management Permit Rationale, Tennessee Valley Authority Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. Prepared by David Butts, September 9, 1998.
---. 2008. 2008 Integrated Water Quality Monitoring & Assessment Report. Retrieved from
<http://www.adem.state.al.us/waterdivision/WQuality/305b/WQ305bReport.htm>
(accessed October 21, 2009).
Advanced National Seismic System. ANSS Catalog Search. Retrieved from
<http://www.ncedc.org/anss/catalog-search.html> (accessed January 5, 2009).
Alabama Invasive Plant Council. 2006. Alabama's 10 Worst Weeds. Retrieved from
<http://www.se-eppc.org/eddMapS/alabama.cfm> (accessed September 1, 2009).
Algermissen, S. T., and G. A. Bollinger, eds. 1993. Hazard Assessment. Monograph 1 presented at the 1993 National Earthquake Conference, Memphis, Tennessee, May 2-5.
American Medical Association. 1994. "Effects of Electric and Magnetic Fields." Chicago, III.:
AMA, Council on Scientific Affairs (December 1994).
American Meteorological Society. 1959. Glossary of Meteorology. Boston, Mass.
Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO). 2000. Environmental Report, Attachment G, Severe Accident Management Alternatives Analysis.
AREVA, Inc. 2008. Bellefonte Plant Site-Specific Seismic Assessment Report: 20004-015.
Document No.: 51-9115097-000-Proprietary. September 20,2008.
Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). 1972. The Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear Plants. WASH-1238.
---. 1974. Final Environmental Statement Related to Construction of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, Tennessee Valley Authority. Washington, D.C.: Directorate of Licensing.
Best, T. L., W. S. Cvilikas, A. B. Goebel, T. D. Haas, T. H. Henry, B. A. Milam, L. R. Saidak, and D. P. Thomas. 1995. Foraging Ecology of the Endangered Gray Bat (Myotis grisescens) at Guntersville Reservoir, Alabama. Joint Agency Guntersville Project Aquatic Plant Management.
Bohac, C. E., and M. J. McCall. 2008. Water Use in the Tennessee Valley for 2005 and Projected Use in 2030. Retrieved from
<http://www. tva.gov/river/watersupply/watersupply _report_to _ 2030. pdf> (accessed October 21, 2009)
Bridges, E. 1984. Element Stewardship Abstract for Scutellaria Montana. Tennessee Natural Heritage Program files. Nashville, Tennessee.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 269
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Burleigh, T. D. 1958. Georgia Birds. Norman, Okla.: University of Oklahoma Press.
CE-QUAL-W2, 1995. A Two-Dimensional, Laterally Averaged, Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model, Version 2.0: Users Manual. Edited by T. M. Cole and E. M. Buchak.
I Vicksburg, Miss.: USACE Waterways Experiment Station, Instruction Report EL-95-1.
Center for Invasive Plant Management. 2009. Weed Management: Prevention. Retrieved from <http://www.weedcenter.org/index.html> (accessed September 1, 2009).
Cleveland, M. T., R. W. Stoops, and J. Holland. 1995. Archaeological and Architectural Surveys for the Proposed Widows Creek-Oglethorpe #3 Transmission Line, Walker County, Georgia. Report submitted to Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee, by Garrow and Associates.ii Cooper, J. E. 1968. "The Salamander Gyrinophilus palleucus in Georgia, With Notes on Alabama and Tennessee Populations." Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science 39:182-185.
I Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetland and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Publication FWS/OBS-79/31.
Department of Energy. 1999. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Production of Tritium in a Commercial Light Water Reactor. Washington, D.C.: DOE EIS - 0288, March 1999.
Deter-Wolf, Aaron. 2007. Phase I Archaeological Survey of 606 Acres at the Bellefonte Nuclear Site, Jackson County, Alabama. Report submitted to Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee, by TRC Inc.
Dunning, J. B., Jr., and B. D. Watts. 1990. "Regional Differences in Habitat Occupancy by Bachman's Sparrow." Auk 107:463-72.
Kim, Won-Young. 2009. Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, New.York, New York. 29 April 2003 Fort Payne, Alabama Earthquake Page. Retrieved from
<http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20030429/20030429 0859.html> (accessed November 2, 2009).
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Vicksburg:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report Y-87-1.
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise. 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues. Fort Walton Beach, Fla.: Spectrum Sciences and Software Inc.,
August 1992.
Geological Survey of Alabama. 2003. "Fort Payne Earthquake, April 29, 2003." Earthquakes in Alabama. Retrieved from
<http://www.qsa.state.al.us/qsa/geologichazards/earthquakes/ftpayne.html>
(accessed January 2009).
270 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Burleigh, T. D. 1958. Georgia Birds. Norman, Okla.: University of Oklahoma Press.
CE-QUAL-W2, 1995. A Two-Dimensional, Laterally Averaged, Hydrodynamic and Water Quality Model, Version 2,0: Users Manual. Edited by T. M. Cole and E. M. Buchak.
Vicksburg, Miss.: USACE Waterways Experiment Station, Instruction Report EL-95-1.
Center for Invasive Plant Management. 2009. Weed Management: Prevention. Retrieved from <http://www.weedcenter.org/index.html> (accessed September 1, 2009).
Cleveland, M. T., R. W. Stoops, and J. Holland. 1995. Archaeological and Architectural Surveys for the Proposed Widows Creek-Oglethorpe #3 Transmission Line, Walker County, Georgia. Report submitted to Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee, by Garrow and Associates.
Cooper, J. E. 1968. The Salamander Gyrinophilus palleucus in Georgia, With Notes on Alabama and Tennessee Populations." Journal of the Alabama Academy of Science 39:182-185.
Cowardin, L. M., V. Carter, F. C. Golet, and E. T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetland and Deepwater Habitats of the United States, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Publication FWS/OBS-79/31.
Department of Energy. 1999. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Production of Tritium in a Commercial Light Water Reactor, Washington, D.C.: DOE EIS - 0288, March 1999.
Deter-Wolf, Aaron. 2007. Phase I Archaeological Survey of 606 Acres at the Bellefonte Nuclear Site, Jackson County, Alabama. Report submitted to Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee, by TRC Inc.
Dunning, J. B., Jr., and B. D. Watts. 1990. "Regional Differences in Habitat Occupancy by Bachman's Sparrow." Auk 107:463-72.
Kim, Won-Young. 2009. Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory of Columbia University, New York, New York. 29 April 2003 Fort Payne, Alabama Earthquake Page. Retrieved from
<http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/LCSN/Eq/20030429/200304290859.html> (accessed November 2, 2009).
Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual. Vicksburg:
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Technical Report Y-87-1.
Federal Interagency Committee on Noise. 1992. Federal Agency Review of Selected Airport Noise Analysis Issues. Fort Walton Beach, Fla.: Spectrum Sciences and Software Inc.,
August 1992.
Geological Survey of Alabama*. 2003. "Fort Payne Earthquake, April 29, 2003." Earthquakes in Alabama. Retrieved from
<http://www.gsa.state.al.us/gsa/geologichazards/earthquakes/ftpayne.html> (accessed January 2009).
270 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I, I
I I
I I,
I I
I I
I I
I' I
Chapter 8 Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, and S.H. Azevedo. 1998. Ecoregions of Tennessee. (2 sided color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs). Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1:940,000).
Griffith, G. E., J. M. Omernik, J. A. Comstock, S. Lawrence, G. Martin, G., A. Goddard, V. J.
Hulcher, and T. Foster. 2001. Ecoregions of Alabama and Georgia, (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S.
Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,700,000).
Hickman, G. H., and T. A. McDonough. 1996. "Assessing the Reservoir Fish Assemblage Index-a Potential Measure of Reservoir Quality" in Reservoir Symposium -
Multidimensional Approaches to Reservoir Fisheries Management. Edited by D.
DeVries. Bethesda, Md.: American Fisheries Society, Southern Division, Reservoir Committee.
International Association for Research on Cancer. 2002. "Non-Ionizing Radiation, Part 1; Static and Extremely Low-Frequency (ELF) Electric and Magnetic Fields." Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. IARC, Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 1992. Effects of Ionizing Radiation on Plants and Animals at Levels Implied by Current Radiation Standards, Technical Report Series No.
332.
International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). 1959. Report of Committee l/ on Permissible Dose for Internal Radiation. ICRP Publication 2. New York: Pergamon, Adopted July 1959.
Jenkins, Ellen. 2008. Historic Resource Survey for the Bellefonte Nuclear Site in Jackson County, Alabama. Report submitted to Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee, by TRC, Atlanta.
Jennings, M. J., L. S. Fore, and J. R. Karr. 1995. Biological Monitoring of Fish Assemblages in Tennessee Valley Reservoirs. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management.
Jirka, Gerhard H., R. L. Doneker, and S. W. Hinton. 2007. User's Manual for CORMIX: A Hydrodynamic Mixing Zone Model and Decision Support System for Pollutant Discharges into Surface Waters. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-823-K-07-001, Dec. 2007.
Journal of the American Medical Association. 2007. "Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators."
JAMA 297(17), May 2, 2007.
Julian, H. E. 1996. Assessment of Groundwater Impacts from Releases of Diesel Fuel Oil at Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. Norris, Tenn.: Tennessee Valley Authority, Engineering Laboratory, Report No. WR28-1-88-120.
1999. Natural Attenuation of Diesel Fuel Oil at Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. Norris, Tenn.:
Tennessee Valley Authority, Engineering Laboratory, Report No. WR99-2-88-122.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 271 I
'I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Chapter 8 Griffith, G.E., J.M. Omernik, and S.H. Azevedo. 1998. Ecoregions of Tennessee. (2 sided color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs). Reston, Virginia, U.S. Geological Survey (map scale 1 :940,000).
Griffith, G. E., J. M. Omernik, J. A. Comstock, S. Lawrence, G. Martin, G., A. Goddard, V. J.
Hulcher, and T. Foster. 2001. Ecoregions of Alabama and Georgia, (color poster with map, descriptive text, summary tables, and photographs): Reston, Virginia, U.S.
Geological Survey (map scale 1:1,700,000).
Hickman, G. H., and T. A. McDonough. 1996. "Assessing the Reservoir Fish Assemblage Index-a Potential Measure of Reservoir Quality" in Reservoir Symposium-Multidimensional Approaches to Reservoir Fisheries Management. Edited by D.
DeVries. Bethesda, Md.: American Fisheries Society, Southern Division, Reservoir Committee.
International Association for Research on Cancer. 2002. "Non-Ionizing Radiation, Part 1; Static and Extremely Low-Frequency (ELF) Electric and Magnetic Fields." Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. IARC, Working Group on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans.
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 1992. Effects of Ionizing Radiation on Plants and Animals at Levels Implied by Current Radiation Standards, Technical Report Series No.
332.
International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP). 1959. Report of Committee /I on Permissible Dose for Internal Radiation. ICRP Publication 2. New York: Pergamon, Adopted July 1959.
Jenkins, Ellen. 2008. Historic Resource Survey for the Bellefonte Nuclear Site in Jackson County, Alabama. Report submitted to Tennessee Valley Authority, Knoxville, Tennessee, by TRC, Atlanta.
Jennings, M. J., L. S. Fore, and J. R. Karr. 1995. Biological Monitoring of Fish Assemblages in Tennessee Valley Reservoirs. Regulated Rivers: Research and Management.
Jirka, Gerhard H., R. L. Doneker, and S. W. Hinton. 2007. User's Manual for CORMIX: A Hydrodynamic Mixing Zone Model and Decision Support System for Pollutant Discharges into Surface Waters. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-823-K-07-001, Dec. 2007.
Journal of the American Medical Association. 2007. "Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators."
JAMA 297(17), May 2, 2007.
Julian, H. E. 1996. Assessment of Groundwater Impacts from Releases of Diesel Fuel Oil at Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. Norris, Tenn.: Tennessee Valley Authority, Engineering Laboratory, Report No. WR28-1-88-120.
---. 1999. Natural Attenuation of Diesel Fuel Oil at Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. Norris, Tenn.:
Tennessee Valley Authority, Engineering Laboratory, Report No. WR99-2-88-122.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 271
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Keiser, E. D., G. 0. Dick, and R. M. Smart. 1995. Turtle Populations in Guntersville Reservoir, I
Alabama. Joint Agency Guntersville Project Aquatic Plant Management.
Kingsbury, J. A. 2003. Shallow Groundwater Quality in Agricultural Areas of Northern Alabama 3
and Middle Tennessee, 2000-2001. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 2003-4181.
Lindquist, K. 1990. Bellefonte Groundwater Impacts of Trisodium Phosphate Land Application.
Norris, Tenn.: Tennessee Valley Authority, Engineering Laboratory, Report No. WR28-1-88-112.
Lloyd, 0. B., Jr., and W. L. Lyke. 1995. Groundwater Atlas of the United States, Segment 10.
Reston, Va.: United States Geological Survey.
McDonough, T. A., and G. D. Hickman. 1999. "Reservoir Fish Assemblage Index Development: A Tool for Assessing Ecological Health in Tennessee Valley Authority Impoundments," 523-540 in Assessing the Sustainability and Biological Integrity of Water Resources Using Fish Communities. Edited by T. P. Simon. Boca Raton, Fla.:
CRC Press.
Menzel, M. A., J. M Menzel, T. C. Carter, W. M. Ford, and J.W. Edwards. 2001. Review of the Forest Habitat Relationships of the Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis). Newton Square, Pa.:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Gen.
Tech. Rep. NE-284.
Miller, J. A. 1990. Groundwater Atlas of the United States. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas 730-G.
Miller, B.A., V. Alavian, M.D. Bender, D.J. Benton, L.L. Cole, L.K. Ewing, P. Ostrowski, et al.
1993. Sensitivity of the TVA Reservoir and Power Supply Systems to Extreme Meteorology. Norris, Tenn.: Tennessee Valley Authority, Engineering Laboratory, Report No. WR28-1-680-111. June 1993 Miller, N. E., R. D. Drobney, R. L. Clawson, and E. V. Callahan. 2002. "Summer Habitat in Northern Missouri," 165-171 in The Indiana bat: Biology and Management of an Endangered Species. Edited by A. Kurta and J. Kennedy. Austin, Tex.: Bat Conservation International.
Muncy, J.A. 1999. A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities, revised edition. Edited by C. Austin, C. Brewster, A. Lewis, K. Smithson, T. Broyles, and T. Wojtalik. Norris: Tennessee Valley Authority, Technical note TVA/LR/NRM 92/1.
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS). 1998. Report on Health Effects From Exposure to Power Line Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields. Research Triangle Park: NIEHS, Publication No. 99-4493.
2002. Electric and Magnetic Fields Associated With the Use of Electric Power.
Retrieved from <httip://www.niehs.nih..qov/about/visiting/index.cfm> (n.d.)
272 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Keiser, E. D., G. O. Dick, and R. M. Smart. 1995. Turtle Populations in Guntersville Reservoir, Alabama. Joint Agency Guntersville Project Aquatic Plant Management.
Kingsbury, J. A 2003. Shallow Groundwater Quality in Agricultural Areas of Northern Alabama and Middle Tennessee, 2000-2001. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources I nvestigations Report 2003-4181.
Lindquist, K. 1990. Bellefonte Groundwater Impacts of Trisodium Phosphate Land Application.
Norris, Tenn.: Tennessee Valley Authority, Engineering Laboratory, Report No. WR28-1-88-112.
Lloyd, O. B., Jr., and W. L. Lyke. 1995. Groundwater Atlas of the United States, Segment 10.
Reston, Va.: United States Geological Survey.
McDonough, T. A, and G. D. Hickman. 1999. "Reservoir Fish Assemblage Index Development: A Tool for Assessing Ecological Health in Tennessee Valley Authority Impoundments," 523-540 in Assessing the Sustainability and Biological Integrity of Water Resources Using Fish Communities. Edited by T. P. Simon. Boca Raton, Fla.:
CRC Press.
Menzel, M. A, J. M Menzel, T. C. Carter, W. M. Ford, and J.W. Edwards. 2001. Review of the Forest Habitat Relationships of the Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis). Newton Square, Pa.:
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Research Station, Gen.
Tech. Rep. NE-284.
Miller, J. A 1990. Groundwater Atlas of the United States. U.S. Geological Survey Hydrologic Investigations Atlas 730-G.
Miller, B.A, V. Alavian, M.D. Bender, D.J. Benton, L.L. Cole, L.K. Ewing, P. Ostrowski, et al.
1993. Sensitivity of the TVA Reservoir and Power Supply Systems to Extreme Meteorology. Norris, Tenn.: Tennessee Valley Authority, Engineering Laboratory, Report No. WR28-1-680-111. June 1993 Miller, N. E., R. D. Drobney, R. L. Clawson, and E. V. Callahan. 2002. "Summer Habitat in Northern Missouri," 165-171 in The Indiana bat: Biology and Management of an Endangered Species. Edited by A Kurta and J. Kennedy. Austin, Tex.: Bat Conservation International.
Muncy, J.A 1999. A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities, revised edition. Edited by C. Austin, C. Brewster, A Lewis, K. Smithson, T. Broyles, and T. Wojtalik. Norris: Tennessee Valley Authority, Technical note TVAILR/NRM 92/1.
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS). 1998. Report on Health Effects From Exposure to Power Line Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields. Research Triangle Park: NIEHS, Publication No. 99-4493.
---. 2002. Electric and Magnetic Fields Associated With the Use of Electric Power.
Retrieved from <http://www.niehs.nih.gov/abouUvisiting/index.cfm> (n.d.)
272 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I:
I I
I, I
I I
I I
,I, I,
I I'
I I
I I
I:
Chapter 8 National Research Council. 1997. Possible Health Effects of Exposure to Residential Electric and Magnetic Fields. NRC, Committee on the Possible Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on Biologic Systems. Washington National Academy Press.
NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Explorer: An Online Encyclopedia of Life, Version 7.1.
Arlington, Va.: NatureServe. Retrieved from <http://www.natureserve.org/explorer>
(accessed September 4, 2009).
Nuclear Energy Institute. 2002. Aircraft Crash Impact Analyses Demonstrate Nuclear Power Plant's Structural Strength.
Nix, A. B. 2006. Correspondence from Aaron B. Nix of TVA to Cary P. Spiegel of ADEM, July 13, 2006,
Subject:
GW Incident No. GW-11-01.
Oakley, Carey B. 1972. An Archaeological Survey of the Bellefonte Power Plant. Report on file at TVA Cultural Resources Office, Knoxville, Tennessee.
Osborne, W. E., M. W. Szabo, T. L. Neathery, and C. W. Copeland Jr. 1988. Geologic Map of Alabama, Northeast Sheet, Geological Survey of Alabama Special Map 220.
Reed, P. B., Jr. 1997. Revised National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(24).
Romme, R. C., K. Tyrell, and V. Brack Jr. 1995. "Literature Summary and Habitat Suitability Index Model: Components of Summer Habitat for the Indiana Bat, Myotis sodalis" in 3/D Environmental, Federal Aid Project E-1-7, Study No. 8.
Simmons, J. W. and C. F. Walton. 2009. Results of Biological Monitoring in the Vicinity of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant During Spring and Summer 2009, with an Analysis of Fish Species Occurrences in Guntersville Reservoir-A Comparison of Historic and Recent Data. TVA Aquatic Monitoring and Management, Chattanooga. 47 pp +appendix.
SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC). 2008. SERC Power System Stabilizer Guideline.
Revision 1. November 15, 2008.
Soil Survey Staff. 2009. Soil Survey Geographic Database. USDA-NRCS National Soil Survey Center. Lincoln, NE. Accessed September 13, 2008.
Thomas, D. P., and T. L. Best. 2000. "Radiotelemetric Assessment of Movement Patterns of the Gray Bat (Myotis grisescens) at Guntersville Reservoir, Alabama." Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences and the North Carolina Biological Survey, 12:50-66.
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation. 2002. Tennessee Groundwater 305b Water Quality Report. TDEC, Division of Water Supply.
Tennessee Valley Authority. 1974. Final Environmental Statement, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
1975. Hartsville Nuclear Plants Environmental Report. Tennessee Valley Authority.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 273 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 8 National Research Council. 1997. Possible Health Effects of Exposure to Residential Electric and Magnetic Fields. NRC, Committee on the Possible Effects of Electromagnetic Fields on Biologic Systems. Washington National Academy Press.
NatureServe. 2009. NatureServe Explorer: An Online Encyclopedia of Life, Version 7.1.
Arlington, Va.: NatureServe. Retrieved from <http://www.natureserve.org/explorer>
(accessed September 4, 2009).
Nuclear Energy Institute. 2002. Aircraft Crash Impact Analyses Demonstrate Nuclear Power Plant's Structural Strength.
Nix, A. B. 2006. Correspondence from Aaron B. Nix of TVA to Cary P. Spiegel of ADEM, July 13, 2006,
Subject:
GW Incident No. GW-11-01.
Oakley, Carey B. 1972. An Archaeological Survey of the Bellefonte Power Plant. Report on file at TVA Cultural Resources Office, Knoxville, Tennessee.
Osborne, W. E., M. W. Szabo, T. L. Neathery, and C. W. Copeland Jr. 1988. Geologic Map of Alabama, Northeast Sheet, Geological Survey of Alabama Special Map 220.
Reed, P. B., J r. 1997. Revised National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: National Summary. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Report 88(24).
Romme, R. C., K. Tyrell, and V. Brack Jr. 1995. "Literature Summary and Habitat Suitability Index Model: Components of Summer Habitat for the Indiana Bat, Myotis sodalis" in 3/0 Environmental, Federal Aid Project E-1-7, Study NO.8.
Simmons, J. W. and C. F. Walton. 2009. Results of Biological Monitoring in the Vicinity of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant During Spring and Summer 2009, with an Analysis of Fish Species Occurrences in Guntersville Reservoir-A Comparison of Historic and Recent Data. TVA Aquatic Monitoring and Management, Chattanooga. 47 pp +appendix.
SERC Reliability Corporation (SERC). 2008. SERC Power System Stabilizer Guideline.
Revision 1. November 15, 2008.
Soil Survey Staff. 2009. Soil Survey Geographic Database. USDA-NRCS National Soil Survey Center. Lincoln, NE. Accessed September 13, 2008.
Thomas, D. P., and T. L. Best. 2000. "Radiotelemetric Assessment of Movement Patterns of the Gray Bat (Myotis grisescens) at Guntersville Reservoir, Alabama." Occasional Papers of the North Carolina Museum of Natural Sciences and the North Carolina Biological Survey, 12:50-66.
Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation. 2002. Tennessee Groundwater 305b Water Quality Report. TDEC, Division of Water Supply.
Tennessee Valley Authority. 1974. Final Environmental Statement, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2.
---. 1975. Hartsville Nuclear Plants Environmental Report. Tennessee Valley Authority.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 273
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 1976. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, Environmental Report Operating License Stage, Tennessee Valley Authority, Volume 1, January 1, 1976.
. 1977a. Final Environmental Statement, Phipps Bend Nuclear Plant Units I and 2.
. 1977b. Submerged Multiport Diffuser Design for Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. TVA Report No. 81-13, September 1977.
. 1977c. Diffuser Mixing Zone and Far Field Dispersion Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. TVA Report No. WM28-2-88-002, November 1977.
1978a. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Final Safety Analysis Report, Amendment 16.
1978b. Final Environmental Statement, Yellow Creek Nuclear Plant Units I and 2.
1978c. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1977. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
1979. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1978. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
1980a. Final Safety Analysis Report, Bellefonte Units 1 and 2, Amendment 19.
1980b. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1979. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
1981 a. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Coal Gasification Project. July 1981 1981 b. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1980. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
1982a. Predicted Effects for Mixed Temperatures Exceeding 30'C (86°F) in Guntersville Reservoir, Alabama, in the Vicinity of the Diffuser Discharge, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. TVA Report No. TVA/ONR/WRF 82/5, February 1982.
1982b. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1981. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
1982c. Final Safety Analysis Report, Bellefonte Units 1 and 2. Amendment 22 1983a. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1982. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
1983b. Procedures for Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act:
Instruction IX Environmental Review. Retrieved from
<http://www.tva.gov/environment/reports/pdf/tvanepaprocedures.pdf> (n.d.).
1984. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1983. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
274 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site
---. 1976. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, Environmental Report Operating License Stage, Tennessee Valley Authority, Volume 1, January 1, 1976.
---. 1977a. Final Environmental Statement, Phipps Bend Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2.
---. 1977b. Submerged Multiport Diffuser Design for Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. TVA Report No. 81-13, September 1977.
---. 1977 c. Diffuser Mixing Zone and Far Field Dispersion Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. TVA Report No. WM28-2-88-002, November 1977.
1978a. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Final Safety Analysis Report, Amendment 16.
1978b. Final Environmental Statement, Yellow Creek Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2.
1978c. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1977. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
---. 1979. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1978. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
1980a. Final Safety Analysis Report, Bellefonte Units 1 and 2, Amendment 19.
1980b. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1979. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
---. 1981a. Final Environmental Impact Statement, Coal Gasification Project. July 1981
---. 1981 b. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1980. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
---. 1982a. Predicted Effects for Mixed Temperatures Exceeding 30 DC (8~F) in Guntersville Reservoir, Alabama, in the Vicinity of the Diffuser Discharge, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. TVA Report No. TVAlONRIWRF 82/5, February 1982.
---. 1982b. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1981. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
---. 1982c. Final Safety Analysis Report, Bellefonte Units 1 and 2. Amendment 22
---. 1983a. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1982. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
---. 1983b. Procedures for Compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act:
Instruction IX Environmental Review. Retrieved from
<http://www.tva.gov/environmentlreports/pdf/tvanepa_procedures.pdf> (n.d.).
---. 1984. Environmental Radioactivity Levels, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Annual Report, 1983. TVA Radiological Health Staff.
274 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I' I
I' I
I I
I I
Chapter 8 1985. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Construction and Operational Employee Survey Results and Mitigation Summary April 30, 1984. Knoxville, Tenn.: Tennessee Valley Authority, June 1985.
1986. Final Safety Analysis Report, Bellefonte Units I and 2. Amendment 27.
1991. Final Safety Analysis Report, Bellefonte Units 1 and 2. Amendment 30.
1992. A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities.
Norris, Tenn.: TVA.
1993a. Environmental Impact Statement Review, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant White Paper. March 1993.
1993b. Sensitivity of the TVA Reservoir and Power Supply Systems to Extreme Meteorology. TVA Report No. WR28-1-680-111, June 1993.
1995. Energy Vision 2020 - Integrated Resource Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. December 1995.
1997. Environmental Impact Statement for the Bellefonte Conversion Project. October 1997.
2000. Record of Decision and Adoption of the Department of Energy Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Production of Tritium in a Commercial Light Water Reactor. May 19, 2000.
2001. Guntersville Reservoir Land Management Plan, Jackson and Marshall Counties, Alabama, and Marion County, Tennessee. August 2, 2001.
2004. Reservoir Operations Study Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, May 19, 2004.
2006. Final Environmental Assessment Bellefonte Plant Redress, Jackson County, Alabama. January 2006.
2007. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Completion and Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2, Rhea County, Tennessee. June 2007.
2008a. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 3&4, COL Application, Part 3, Environmental Report, Revision 1.
2008b. Activities at Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Related to Future Site Use, Jackson County Alabama. July 2008.
2008c. Bellefonte Combined License Application - Additional Information Regarding Cost Estimates for Construction of New Nuclear, Coal-and Gas-Fired Electricity Generating Units. TVA Letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
[ML083250490], November 18, 2008.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 275 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Chapter 8
---. 1985. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Construction and Operational Employee Survey Results and Mitigation Summary April 30, 1984. Knoxville, Tenn.: Tennessee Valley Authority, June 1985.
1986. Final Safety Analysis Report, Bellefonte Units 1 and 2. Amendment 27.
1991. Final Safety Analysis Report, Bellefonte Units 1 and 2. Amendment 30.
1992. A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities.
Norris, Tenn.: TVA.
---. 1993a. Environmental Impact Statement Review, Bellefonte Nuclear Plant White Paper. March 1993.
---. 1993b. Sensitivity of the TVA Reservoir and Power Supply Systems to Extreme Meteorology. TVA Report No. WR28-1-680-111, June 1993.
---. 1995. Energy Vision 2020 - Integrated Resource Plan and Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. December 1995.
---. 1997. Environmental Impact Statement for the Bellefonte Conversion Project. October 1997.
---. 2000. Record of Decision and Adoption of the Department of Energy Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Production of Tritium in a Commercial Light Water Reactor. May 19, 2000.
---. 2001. Guntersville Reservoir Land Management Plan, Jackson and Marshall Counties, Alabama, and Marion County, Tennessee. August 2,2001.
---. 2004. Reservoir Operations Study Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision. Prepared in cooperation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, May 19, 2004.
---. 2006. Final Environmental Assessment Bellefonte Plant Redress, Jackson County, Alabama. January 2006.
---. 2007. Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, Completion and Operation of Watts Bar Nuclear Plant Unit 2, Rhea County, Tennessee. June 2007.
---. 2008a. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 3&4, COL Application, Part 3, Environmental Report, Revision 1.
---. 2008b. Activities at Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Related to Future Site Use, Jackson County Alabama. July 2008.
---. 2008c. Bellefonte Combined License Application - Additional Information Regarding Cost Estimates for Construction of New Nuclear, Coal-and Gas-Fired Electricity Generating Units. TVA Letter to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
[ML083250490], November 18, 2008.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 275
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 2008d. Descriptions of Existing Facilities and Infrastructure for Alternative Sites to the Selected Bellefonte Site. White paper submitted to NRC, June 2008.
2008e. Criteria and Basis for Comparative Ratings Among Alternative Brownfield and 3
Greenfield Sites. White paper submitted to NRC, August 2008.
2008f. Site Screening Process: Information Complementary to Section 9.3.2 of the Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 3 and 4, COLA Applicant's Environmental Report. White I
paper submitted to NRC, August 2008.
2009a. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 3 & 4, COL Application, Final Safety Analysis I
Report, Revision 1.
2009b. Interconnection System Impact Study Report for Bellefonte Nuclear Plant 3
Unit 1. August 2009.
2009c. Biological Assessment: Proposed Single Unit Nuclear Plant Development at Bellefonte Nuclear Site and Associated Transmission Line Upgrades, Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia. Office of Environmental and Research, Environmental Permitting & Compliance. November 2009.
£ U.S. Census Bureau, 2000a. Total Population. Retrieved from
<http://factfinder.census.qov/home/saff/main.html? lanq=en> (accessed October 9, 2009).
2000b. Minority Population by Race. Retrieved from
<http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?
lanq=en> (accessed October 9, 2009).
2000c. Poverty Status. Retrieved from 3
<http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?
lanq=en> (accessed October 9, 2009).
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2007. Invasive and Noxious Weeds. Retrieved from
<http://plants.usda.gov/java/noxiousDriver> (accessed September 1, 2009).
U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). 2007. Local Area Annual I
Personal Income, Jackson County, Alabama. Retrieved from
<http://www.bea.gov/regional/reis/> (accessed November 2, 2009).
3 2009a. Total Full-Time and Part-Time Employment by NAICS Industry, Alabama.
(2007 data.)
2009b. Per capita personal income by state, United States. (2007 data.)
2009c. Per capita personal income by Alabama County. (2007 data.)
9 U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. "Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Clean Water Act Regulatory Definition of Waters of the United States." Federal Register 68(10), January 15, 2003.
276 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site
---. 2008d. Descriptions of Existing Facilities and Infrastructure for Alternative Sites to the Selected Bellefonte Site. White paper submitted to NRC, June 2008.
---. 2008e. Criteria and Basis for Comparative Ratings Among Alternative Brownfield and Greenfield Sites. White paper submitted to NRC, August 2008.
---. 2008f. Site Screening Process: Information Comp{elTlentary to Section 9.3.2 of the Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 3 and 4, COLA Applicant's Environmental Report. White paper submitted to NRC, August 2008.
---. 2009a. Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Units 3 & 4, COL Application, Final Safety Analysis Report, Revision 1.
---. 2009b. Interconnection System Impact Study Report for Bellefonte Nuclear Plant Unit 1. August 2009.
---. 2009c. Biological Assessment: Proposed Single Unit Nuclear Plant Development at Bellefonte Nuclear Site and Associated Transmission Line Upgrades, Alabama, Tennessee, and Georgia. Office of Environmental and Research, Environmental Permitting & Compliance. November 2009.
u.s. Census Bureau, 2000a. Total Population. Retrieved from
<http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html? lang=en> (accessed October 9, 2009).
---. 2000b. Minority Population by Race. Retrieved from
<http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html? lang=en> (accessed October 9, 2009).
---. 2000c. Poverty Status. Retrieved from
<http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html? lang=en> (accessed October 9, 2009).
u.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 2007. Invasive and Noxious Weeds. Retrieved from
<http://plants.usda.gov/java/noxiousDriver> (accessed September 1, 2009).
u.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA). 2007. Local Area Annual Personal Income, Jackson County, Alabama. Retrieved from
<http://www.bea.gov/regional/reis/> (accessed November 2, 2009).
--. 2009a. Total Full-Time and Part-Time Employment by NAICS Industry, Alabama.
(2007 data.)
2009b. Per capita personal income by state, United States. (2007 data.)
2009c. Per capita personal income by Alabama County. (2007 data.)
u.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. "Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on the Clean Water Act Regulatory Definition of Waters of the United States." Federal Register 68(1 0), January 15, 2003.
276 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Chapter 8 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1971. Noise From Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances. Washington, D.C.: USEPA Office of Noise Abatement and Control.
2006. Area Designations for 2006 24-Hour fine Particle (PM2.5) Standards. Found at
<http://www.epa..qov/pmdesigqnations/2O06standards/final/region4.htm> (accessed October 21, 2009).
2008a. "Oil Pollution Prevention." Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 40, Part 112.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government.
2008b. Ground-level Ozone Standards - Region 4 Recommendations and EPA Responses. Found at
<http://www.epa..qov/ozonedesignations/2008standards/rec/reqion4R. htm> (accessed October 21, 2009).
2009. Local Drinking Water Information. Retrieved from
<http://www.epa..qov/safewater/dwinfo/index.html> (accessed October 23, 2009)
U.S. Forest Service. 2008. Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment: Invasive Plants.
Retrieved from <http://www.forestthreats.org/invasive-plants> (accessed June 11, 2009).
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1980. Selected Vertebrate Endangered Species of the Seacoast of the United States: The Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Laboratory, FWS/OBS 80/01.7.
1996a. National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary.
1996b. Leafy Prairie-Clover Recovery Plan. Atlanta, Ga.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
2002. Reclassification of Scutellaria Montana (Large-flowered skullcap) from endangered to threatened. Federal Register 67: 1662-1668.
U. S. Geological Survey. Poster of the Fort Payne, Alabama Earthquake of 29 April 2003 -
Magnitude 4.6. Retrieved from
<http://earthquake.usqs..qov/eqcenter/egarchives/poster/2003/20030429 image.php>
(accessed January 5, 2009).
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 1975. Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials To and From Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement 1. NUREG-75/038.
1973. Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants, Revision
- 1. Regulatory Guide 1.60. Directorate of Regulatory Standards, December 1973.
1976. Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Materials in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents from Pressurized Water Reactors. Washington, D.C.: Office of Standards Development, NUREG-0017.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 277 I
I
,I
'I I
I, I
'I I
I I
I I
Chapter 8 u.s. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 1971. Noise From Construction Equipment and Operations, Building Equipment, and Home Appliances. Washington, D.C.: USEPA Office of Noise Abatement and Control.
---. 2006. Area Designations for 2006 24-Hour fine Particle (PM2.5) Standards. Found at
<http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/2006standards/final/region4.htm> (accessed October 21, 2009).
---. 2008a. "Oil Pollution Prevention." Code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 40, Part 112.
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government.
---. 2008b. Ground-level Ozone Standards - Region 4 Recommendations and EPA Responses. Found at
<http://www.epa.gov/ozonedesignations/2008standards/rec/region4R.htm> (accessed October 21, 2009).
---. 2009. Local Drinking Water Information. Retrieved from
<http://www.epa.gov/safewater/dwinfo/index.html> (accessed October 23, 2009) u.s. Forest Service. 2008. Eastern Forest Environmental Threat Assessment: Invasive Plants.
Retrieved from <http://www.forestthreats.org/invasive-plants> (accessed June 11, 2009).
u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1980. Selected Vertebrate Endangered Species of the Seacoast of the United States: The Red-Cockaded Woodpecker. Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Laboratory, FWS/OBS 80/01.7.
---. 1996a. National List of Vascular Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: 1996 National Summary.
---. 1996b. Leafy Prairie-Clover Recovery Plan. Atlanta, Ga.: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
---. 2002. Reclassification of Scutellaria Montana (Large-flowered skullcap) from endangered to threatened. Federal Register 67: 1662-1668.
U. S. Geological Survey. Poster of the Fort Payne, Alabama Earthquake of 29 April 2003 -
Magnitude 4.6. Retrieved from
<http://earthguake.usgs.gov/egcenter/egarchives/poster/2003/20030429 image.php>
(accessed January 5, 2009).
u.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). 1975. Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials To and From Nuclear Power Plants, Supplement 1. NUREG-75/038.
---. 1973. Design Response Spectra for Seismic Design of Nuclear Power Plants, Revision
- 1. Regulatory Guide 1.60. Directorate of Regulatory Standards, December 1973.
---. 1976. Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Materials in Gaseous and Liquid Effluents from Pressurized Water Reactors. Washington, D.C.: Office of Standards Development, NUREG-0017.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 277
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site i
1977a. Calculation of Annual Doses to Man From Routine Releases of Reactor
'i, Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance With 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Revision 1. Regulatory Guide 1.109. October 1977.
1977b. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersal of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Revision 1.
Regulatory Guide 1.111. Office of Standards Development, July 1977.
1
. 1982. Atmospheric Dispersion Models for Potential Accident Consequence Assessments at Nuclear Power Plants, Revision 1. Regulatory Guide 1.145. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, November 1982.
1986, LADTAP II - Technical Reference and User Guide. NUREG/CR-4013, PNL-5270, April 1986.
1987. GASPAR Il-Technical Reference and User Guide. NUREG/CR-4653, March 1987.
1990. Severe Accident Risks: An Assessment for Five U.S. Nuclear Power Plants, Final Summary Report. NUREG-1 150. Washington, D.C.: Office of Nuclear Regulatory 3
Research.
1996. Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants. NUREG-1437, Washington, D.C.
I 1998. Code Manual for MACCS2. NUREG/CR-6613, SAND97-0594. May 1998.
5 1999. Environmental Standard Review Plan. NUREG 1555. October 1999.
2002. Subpart D - Radiation Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public. 10 CFR I
Part 20.1301. October 2002. Retrieved from <http://www.nrc.qov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part020/part020-1301.html> (n.d.).
i 2007a. A Performance-Based Approach to Define the Site-Specific Earthquake Ground Motion. Regulatory Guide 1.208. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, March 2007.
2007b. Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion "As Low as is Reasonably Achievable" for Radioactive Material inl Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents. Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.
Retrieved from <http://www.nrc.qov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/partO50/part050-appi.html> (accessed October 21, 2009).i£ Westinghouse Electric Company (WEC). 2008. APIO00 Design Control Document, APP-GW-GL-700, Revision 17.
3 Whitaker, J. 0., Jr., and W. J. Hamilton. 1998. Mammals of the Eastern United States, 3 rd edition. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
3 I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site
---. 1977a. Calculation of Annual Doses to Man From Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance With 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Revision 1. Regulatory Guide 1.109. October 1977.
---. 1977b. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersal of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Revision 1.
Regulatory Guide 1.111. Office of Standards Development, July 1977.
---. 1982. Atmospheric Dispersion Models for Potential Accident Consequence Assessments at Nuclear Power Plants, Revision 1. Regulatory Guide 1.145. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, November 1982.
--. 1986, LAD TAP /1-Technical Reference and User Guide. NUREG/CR-4013, PNL-5270, April 1986.
--. 1987. GASPAR /I-Technical Reference and User Guide. NUREG/CR-4653, March 1987.
---. 1990. Severe Accident Risks: An Assessment for Five U.S. Nuclear Power Plants, Final Summary Report. NUREG-1150. Washington, D.C.: Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research.
---. 1996. Generic Environrnentallmpact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants. NUREG-1437, Washington, D.C.
1998. Code ManualforMACCS2. NUREG/CR-6613, SAND97-0594. May 1998.
1999. Environmental Standard Review Plan. NUREG 1555. October 1999.
2002. Subpart 0 - Radiation Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public. 10 CFR Part 20.1301. October 2002. Retrieved from <http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-coliections/cfr/part020/part020-1301.html> (n.d.).
---. 2007a. A Performance-Based Approach to Define the Site-Specific Earthquake Ground Motion. Regulatory Guide 1.208. Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, March 2007.
---. 2007b. Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion 'J!\\s Low as is Reasonably Achievable" for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents. Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.
Retrieved from <http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/partO50/part050-appi.html> (accessed October 21, 2009).
Westinghouse Electric Company (WEC). 2008. AP1000 Design Control Document, APP-GW-GL-700, Revision 17.
Whitaker, J. 0., Jr., and W. J. Hamilton. 1998. Mammals of the Eastern United States, 3rd edition. Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press.
278 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
,I.
I I
I I'
I I
I I'
'I I
I I
I I.
Chapter 8 World Health Organization (WHO). 2007a. Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health. WHO EMF Task Force Report, WHO Fact Sheet No. 299, March 2007.
- 2007b. Extremely Low Frequency Fields. Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No.
238, August 2007.
- 2007c. Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health Exposure to Extremely Low Frequency Fields. WHO Fact Sheet No. 322, June 2007.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 279 I
I I
,I I
I I
It I
I I
I*
I I
Chapter 8 World Health Organization (WHO). 2007a. Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health. WHO EMF Task Force Report, WHO Fact Sheet No. 299, March 2007.
---. 2007b. Extremely Low Frequency Fields. Environmental Health Criteria Monograph No.
238, August 2007.
---.2007c. Electromagnetic Fields and Public Health Exposure to Extremely Low Frequency Fields. WHO Fact Sheet No. 322, June 2007.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 279
II I
I I
I I'
I I
I jge intentionally blank I
I
£ U
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
'I I
II I
I intentionally blank I'
I
'I I'
I I
I I
I I
Appendix A Appendix A - CORMIX Modeling Results Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 281 I
Appendix A
.1 I
I'
.1 I
I I
I
'I Appendix A - CORMIX Modeling Results I
I
'1' I*
I I*
I I
I Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 281
Page intentionally blank I
I I
'I I
I I
I I
Page intentionally blank I'
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
mm
=
=
=
=
mm-m m=m =
mm
=
M
=
M M
f AAMIII$1 II m.
UJ)
C:
_0 (D
CD m
0 (D
_0 CD)
(D TaDle A-1.
SOmmary OT CURMIX Model Results Ambient River Conditions Blowdown Conditions, Conditions at Edgeof Mixi*ng Zone Plant Case Month" Flow Temp m Discharge Imp Tem Temp Plume Plume Plat Ce M
h F
TRise Width Thickness
- (cfs)
(0°F)
(cfs)
(0 F)
(F))
(feet)
(feet) 36-inch Diameter, 45-foot Long Diffuser Pipe B&W 1
March 3130 41.0 50 86.4 43.2 2.2 246 8
B&W-- -- 2-- -April 190 52.0 50 90.4 53.9 1.9 249 8
B&W- --
3 ------ July 3760 89.5 50 97.7 89.9 0.4 193 10 B&W 4
March
-9160 (1) 41.0 50 86.4 44.4 3.4 343 9
AP 1000 1
March 3130 41.0 18 86.4 43.1 2.1 444 4
-1000 -2 April 190 52.0 18 90.4 53.9 1.9 424 5
AP 1000 3
July 3760 89.5 18 97.7 89.9 0.4 337 5
AP 1000 4
March
-9160 (1) 1-41.0 18 86.4 42.4 1.4 348 7
42-inch Diameter, 75-foot Long Diffuser Pipe B&W 1
March 3130 41.0 50 86.4 43.6 2.6 368 6
B&W---
April 190 52.0 50 90.4 54.3 2.3 356 7
_ _B&W --..
3_-..
-July ------- 3760 --------. 89.5 -------- 50 ------- 97.7 90.0 ----
0.5...
286....... 8 ----
B&W 4
March
-9160 (1)-
41.0 50 86.4 43.3 2.3 442 10 AP 1000 1
March (2) 3130 41.0 18 86.4 43.5 2.5 758 3
_AP_00_ _00 2
April 1N 190 -------- 52.0 1-------
18 ------- 90.4 _
54.3 2.3 625 4
AP 1000 ----- July 3760 89.5 18 97.7 89.8 0.3 632 7
AP 1000 4
March
-9160 (1) 1-41.0 18 86.4 42.0 1.0 375 10 Notes: (1) Reverse river flow with diffuser ports pointing vertically upward CD 03 a
"x o
OJ
- l!
U>
C "0
"0 CD 3
CD
~
OJ m
~
< a
~
3 CD
~
OJ Table A-1.
Plant B&W B&W B&W B&W AP 1000 AP 1000 AP 1000 AP 1000 B&W B&W B&W B&W AP 1000 AP 1000 AP 1000 AP 1000 Summ of CORMIX Model Results Case 2
3 4
2 3
4 2
3 4
2 3
4 Month 36-inch Diameter, 45-foot Long Diffuser Pipe March 3130 41.0 50 86.4
__ !\\P!~ _ _ _ ____ ~ ~9 _ _ _ _ _ ___ 5?~~ _ _ _ _ ___ ~g _ _ _ _ _ __ 99~~ __ _
___ J_u~L _ _ ___ ~!?9 _ _ _ _ _ __ ~~~~ _ _ _ _ ___ ~g _ _ _ _ _ _
~7~ ~ __ _
March
-9160(1) 41.0 50 86.4 March 3130 41.0 18 86.4
__ !\\P!~ __ _____ ~~9 _______ ??~~ _______ !~ ______ ~9~~ __ _
___ J_u~L _ _ ___ ~!?9 _ _ _ _ _ __ ~~~~ _ _ _ _ ___ ! ~ _ _ _ _ _ __ 97~ ~ __ _
March
-9160 (1) 41.0 18 86.4 42-inch Diameter, 75-foot Long Diffuser Pipe March 3130 41.0 50 86.4
-- !\\P!~ --
190 52.0 50 90.4
___ J_u~~ __
3760 89.5 50 97.7 March
-9160 (1) 41.0 50 86.4 March (2) 3130 41.0 18 86.4
-- !\\P!~ __
190 52.0 18 90.4
___ J_u~~ __
3760 89.5 18 97.7 March
-9160 (1) 41.0 18 86.4 Notes: (1) Reverse river flow with diffuser ports pointing vertically upward 43.2 53.9 89.9 44.4 43.1 53.9 89.9 42.4 43.6 54.3 90.0 43.3 43.5 54.3 89.8 42.0 2.2 1.9 0.4 3.4 2.1 1.9 0.4 1.4 2.6 2.3 0.5 2.3 2.5 2.3 0.3 1.0 246 249 193 343 444 424 337 348 368 356 286 442 758 625 632 375 8
8 10 9
4 5
5 7
6 7
8 10 3
4 7
10
-0.
4 m m A A 7
03
¢.t 3CD 0
CD
.rf 0
C',
aE CD 3
CD
¢D Table A-2.
Summary ot 1999 Guntersville Reservoir Model Results' Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Guntersville Forebay Parameter (Units)
IntakeDicag Ta t 409.5 -410.7 TRM 393.0 - 393.9 DischargeTRM 349.8 - 350.5 TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Max.
April-Sept.
July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Temperature (OF) 2 Day 3 Mean 4 Mean 4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 89.4 77.9 85.3 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.5 78.1 85.6 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 Min.
April-Sept.
July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Dissolved Oxygen (mgIL)2 Day3 Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.2 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.4 8.8 8.0 Algae Biomass(mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept.
July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 3.5 2.2 2.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 1All values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2All values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the entire year 4Mean is the average of the 6-hour model outputs over the designated time period 5Min. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year z
00 CD CD Z3 a'-
CD U)
CD 03 CD Mnn~
-M-MM M MMM N co
-I:>-
o til
~
(f)
C "0
"0 CD 3
Cll
- J iii m
- J < a*
- J 3
Cll
- J iii 3
"0 til
$1 (f) iii CD 3
Cll
~
T bl A 2 a e -
5 ummary 0 f 1999 G t
'II R un ersvi e
, M d I R eservolr 0 e esu It 1 5
Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Temperature (OF)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Dal Mean4 Mean4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 Dissolved Oxygen (mglL)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Oat Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 Algae Biomass (mglL)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 1AII l.elues in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2AII l.elues are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily l.elue for the entire year 4Mean is the average of the 6-hour model outputs over the designated time period sMin. day is the minimum daily l.elue for the entire year Guntersville Forebay TRM 349.8 - 350.5 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 89.4 77.9 85.3 89.5 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 6.5 8.8 8.2 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.4 8.8 8.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 3.5 2.2 2.1.
3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0 (f)
- J to CD Z
c
(")
CD til.,
C
- J til --
- r Cll OJ
~
CD 0'
- J -
Cll (f)
Cll
=
m M
=
=
=
=
=
M
=
m=
mm m
Mm =
m (n
Cl)
C-o a
CD 3
m 0
CD
-0 Cl)
B CD 3
"D a
Table A-3.
Summary of 2007 Guntersville Reservoir Model Results' Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Guntersville Forebay Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 349.8 - 350.5 TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Temperature (°C)2 Day3 Mean 4 Mean 4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 86.5 77.0 83.8 86.9 77.4 84.2 87.2 77.5 84.4 88.5 78.4 85.5 Base 86.5 77.0 83.8 88.4 79.0 85.6 88.3 79.0 85.7 88.6 78.5 85.7 B&W 86.5 77.0 83.8 88.4 79.0 85.6 88.3 79.1 85.7 88.7 78.5 85.7 AP 1000 86.5 77.0 83.8 88.4 79.0 85.6 88.3 79.0 85.7 88.7 78.5 85.7 Dissolved Oxygen(rag/L)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day 5 Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.2 6.6 5.8 5.1 6.4 5.6 5.0 6.5 5.6 7.1 8.9 8.5 Base 5.2 6.6 5.8 5.1 6.4 5.6 5.0 6.4 5.5 6.9 8.9 8.5 B&W 5.2 6.6 5.8 5.1 6.4 5.6 5.0 6.4 5.5 6.9 8.9 8.5 AP 1000 5.2 6.6 5.8 5.1 6.4 5.6 5.0 6.4 5.5 6.9 8.9 8.5 Algae Biomass(mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 3.8 2.8 3.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 3.9 2.9 3.1 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 3.9 2.9 3.1 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 3.9 2.9 3.1
'All values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2All values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the period April through September 4Mean is the average of the 6-hour model outputs over the designated time period SMin. day is the minimum daily value for the period April through September CD
=3 11) o 03
- P C/)
C "0
"0 CD
- 3 CD
- J -
OJ m
- J <
o
- J
- 3 CD
- J -
OJ
- 3 "0
OJ D-C/) -
OJ -
CD
- 3 CD
~
T bl A 3 a e -
s ummary 0 f 2007 G t
'II R un ersvi e
, M d I R eservolr 0 e esu It 1 s
Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393,0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Temperature (oC)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Dal Mean4 Mean4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 86.5 77.0 83.8 86.9 77.4 84.2 87.2 77.5 84.4 Base 86.5 77.0 83.8 88.4 79.0 85.6 88.3 79.0 85.7 B&W 86.5 77.0 83.8 88.4 79.0 85.6 88.3 79.1 85.7 AP 1000 86.5 77.0 83.8 88.4 79.0 85.6 88.3 79.0 85.7 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
DayS Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.2 6.6 5.8 5.1 6.4 5.6 5.0 6.5 5.6 Base 5.2 6.6 5.8 5.1 6.4 5.6 5.0 6.4 5.5 B&W 5.2 6.6 5.8 5.1 6.4 5.6 5.0 6.4 5.5 AP 1000 5.2 6.6 5.8 5.1 6.4 5.6 5.0 6.4 5.5 Algae Biomass (mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.4 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.2 0.2 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.2 0.2
'AII values in table are from model simUlation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2AII values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the period April through September 4Mean is the a-.erage of the 6-hour model outputs o-.er the designated time period sMin. day is the minimum daily value for the period April through September Guntersville Forebay TRM 349.8 - 350.5 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 88.5 78.4 85.5 88.6 78.5 85.7 88.7 78.5 85.7 88.7 78.5 85.7 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 7.1 8.9 8.5 6.9 8.9 8.5 6.9 8.9 8.5 6.9 8.9 8.5 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 3.8 2.8 3.1 3.9 2.9 3.1 3.9 2.9 3.1 3.9 2.9 3.1
NJ 00 O0)
Cn C
00-CD)
C
-o CD 0) m 0
CD Z3 0
Cn CD 3
CD a
Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Guntersville Forebay Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 3939 Discharge TRM 409.5 -410.7 TRM 389.0 -390.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Temperature (°F)2 Day3 Mean 4 Mean 4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 89.4 77.9 85.3 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0' 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.5 78.1 85.6 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)2 Days Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.2 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.4 8.8 8.0 Algae Biomass(mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 3.5 2.2 2.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 1All values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2All values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the'entire year 4Mean is the average of the 6-hour model outputs over the designated time period 5Min. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year Cf) z C0 CD CD c) a CD CD Cf)
-9 M-- M-M M
N CO CJ) o ill
~
(fJ C
"0 "0
CD
- 3 CD
- l -
OJ m
- l S.
.... o
- l
- 3 CD
- l 9I Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 409.5 -410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Temperature r'F)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean4 Mean4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Oat Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 Algae Biomass (mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 1AII values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2AII values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the 'entire year 4Mean is the a\\rage of the 6-hour model outputs o\\r the designated time period 5Min. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year Guntersville Forebay TRM 349.8 - 350.5 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 89.4 77.9 85.3 89.5 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 6.5 8.8 8.2 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.4 8.8 8.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 3.5 2.2 2.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0 (fJ
- l (Q
CD z c
()
CD OJ C
- l
=m
=M m==mm=M
=Mm=i=M
=
=m
0 Cl)
C-0 CD 0) 0 CD
-0 0) 0)
CD)
CD)
CD Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Guntersville Forebay Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 3939 Discharge TRM 349.8 - 350.5 TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Temperature (OF)2 Day3 Mean4 Mean 4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 89.4 77.9 85.3 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.5 78.1 85.6 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 Dissolved Oxygen(rag/L)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day5 Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.2 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.4 8.8 8.0 RVIA 01R 101 A
R
.0 11 A
R Day I-"
e1pL.
FU y-PMUy.
Mean Mean IVOA.
Day Mpe ant.
Mueyaun.
Mean Mean Day Mpe apn.
ueyaun.
Mean Mean Day Mean Mean 1
0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 3.5 2.2 2.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 1
0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 1All values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2All values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the entire year 4Mean is the average of the 6-hour model outputs over the designated time period 5Min. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year CD X
"-4 m
~
.... o
~
3 co
~ -
OJ 3
"0 OJ
$1 (J)
Oi CD 3
co
- l Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Temperature (OF)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Dai Mean4 Mean4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Dal Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 Algae Biomass (mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 1AII values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2AII values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the entire year 4Mean is the al.rage of the 6-hour model outputs ol.r the designated time period sMin. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year Guntersville Forebay TRM 349.8 - 350.5 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 89.4 77.9 85.3 89.5 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 6.5 8.8 8.2 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.4 8.8 8.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 3.5 2.2 2.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0
CD cj)
CD
-3 CD m
3
-0 CD
~0 C)
C')
CD 3
CD Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Guntersville Forebay Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 349.8 - 350.5 TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Temperature (OF) 2 Day 3 Mean 4 Mean 4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 89.4 77.9 85.3 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.5 78.1 85.6 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)2 Day3 Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.2 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.4 8.8 8.0 Algae Biomass (mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 3.5 2.2 2.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 1All values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2All values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the entire year 4Mean is the average of the 6-hour model outputs over the designated time period 5Min. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year C/)
z C:
CD CD CD CD Q0 C/)
09
=m =--m =-
=-
=-
M M
M M
n N
ex>
ex>
o OJ
- r (j)
C "0
"0 CD
- 3 co
~
ai m
~
o
~
- 3 CO
~
ai
- 3 "0
OJ Sl (j) -
OJ CD
- 3 CO
~
Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 409.5 -410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Temperature (OF)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Oat Mean4 Mean4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Da/
Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 Algae Biomass (mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 1AII values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2AII values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the entire year 4Mean is the a-.erage of the 6-hour model outputs o-.er the designated time period 5Min. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year Guntersville Forebay TRM 349.8 - 350.5 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 89.4 77.9 85.3 89.5 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 6.5 8.8 8.2 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.4 8.8 8.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 3.5 2.2 2.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0 (j)
~
co CD Z
c
(")
CD OJ
M m
mmm m
m M
M m
m m m Mm m
m M
Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Guntersville Forebay Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 349.8 - 350.5 TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Temperature(OF)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day 3 Mean 4 Mean 4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 89.4 77.9 85.3 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87.9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.5 78.1 85.6 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 89.6 78.1 85.6 Dissolved Oxygen(rag/L)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day 5 Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.2 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.5 8.8 8.0 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 6.4 8.8 8.0 Agae Biomass (mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 3.5 2.2 2.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 1All values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2All values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the entire year 4Mean is the average of the 6-hour model outputs over the designated time period 5Min. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year V"0 CD X
Upstream of Widow's Creek Upstream of Bellefonte Intake Downstream of Bellefonte Parameter (Units)
Intake TRM 393.0 - 393.9 Discharge TRM 409.5 - 410.7 TRM 389.0 - 390.0 Temperature (oF)2 Max.
Apri I-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Dal Mean4 Mean4 Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 85.4 76.6 83.0 86.5 77.0 83.4 86.5 77.1 83.5 Base 85.4 76.6 83.0 87,9 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 B&W 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 AP 1000 85.4 76.6 83.0 88.0 78.5 84.4 87.6 78.5 84.5 Dissolved Oxygen (mg/L)2 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day5 Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.7 5.9 5.2 6.7 5.9 Base 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 B&W 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 AP 1000 5.3 6.8 6.0 5.2 6.6 5.9 5.2 6.6 5.9 Algae Biomass (mg/L)2 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Day Mean Mean Reference 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.1 0.1 Base 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 B&W 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 AP 1000 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.1 0.1 1AII values in table are from model simulation results and are based on the 6-hour model output for the parameter indicated.
2AII values are based on model results at the 5-foot depth 3Max day is the maximum daily value for the entire year 4Mean is the a\\rage of the 6-hour model outputs o\\r the designated time period 5Min. day is the minimum daily value for the entire year Guntersville Forebay TRM 349.8 - 350.5 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 89.4 77.9 85.3 89.5 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 89.6 78.1 85.6 Min.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 6.5 8.8 8.2 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.5 8.8 8.0 6.4 8.8 8.0 Max.
April-Sept. July-Aug.
Day Mean Mean 3.5 2.2 2.1 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0 3.6 2.1 2.0
Page intentionally blank I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Page intentionally blank I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix B Appendix B - Wetlands Field Delineation and Habitat Assessment Forms Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 291 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B - Wetlands Field Delineation and Habitat Assessment Forms Appendix B Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 291
ag,-ire intentionally blank I
I I
I I,
I I
I I
intentionally blank I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix B TVA Natural Heritage Project Routine Wetland Determination Form jProject: Bellefonte NIP Investigator: J. Groton, H. Hart Normal Circumstances:
y Sample ID:
wool REQ 10389 County: Jackson Atypical Situation:Station or Structure State: AL Date: April 6, 2006 Problem Area:
Cowardin Code:
PFO1E Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Quercus phe/Ios Tr Facw-
- 9.
Toxkodendron radicans WV Fac
- 2.
Quercus nigra Tr Fac
- 10.
Carux tribuloides H
Facw
- 3.
Quercus pagoda Tr Fac+
- 11.
Ulmus amencana Tr Facw
- 4.
Pinus taeda Tr Fac
- 12.
Ulmus thomasit Tr, Sh Fac
- 5.
Acer rubrum Tr Fac
- 13.
Impetlens sp.
H Facw
- 6.
Liqubdambar styraciflua Tr, Sh Fac+
14.
- 7.
Ilex decidua Sh Facw-15.
- 8.
Berchemia scandens WV Facw 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0-6 (in.)
Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
11 (in.)
y Inundated Drift Lines y
Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
8 (in.)
y Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks y
Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits y
Drainage Patterns Remarks: wet weather drainage to Town Creek embayment on Guntersville Reservoir Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydrc soil?
Yes No Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-2 10 YR 6/2 Loam 2-8 10 YR 6/4 Silt loam 8-12 lOYR 6/4 10 YR 6/2 Common Silty clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions y
Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soil color not quite hydric (chroma is too high); lots of evidence of extensive soil disturbance in past:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point W/thin a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes No N
Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 2.95 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 293 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVA Natural Heritage Project Routine Wetland Determination Form Project: Bellefonte NP Investigator: J. Groton, H. Hart Normal Circumstances:
Sample ID:
REO 10389 Y
I--
County: Jackson Atypical Situation:
n Station or Structure Number(st State: AL Date: April 6, 2006 Problem Area:
v egetatJon Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Quercus phe/los Tr Facw-
- 9.
- 2.
Quercus nigra Tr Fac
- 10.
- 3.
Quercus pagoda Tr Fac+
- 11.
- 4.
Pinus taeda Tr Fac
- 12.
- 5.
Acerrubrum Tr Fac
- 13.
- 6.
Liquidambar styraciflua Tr,Sh Fac+
- 14.
- 7.
/lex decidua Sh Facw-
- 15.
- 8.
Berchemia scandens WI Facw
- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
0-6 (in.)
Primary Indicators 11 8
(in.)
(in.)
Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Sediment Deposits Remarks: wet weather drainage to Town Creek embayment on Guntersville Reservoir Soils Soil Unit: I I Drainage class: I Profile
Description:
I--
n Cowardin Code:
Plant Species Toxicodendron radicans Carex tribuloides Ulmus afflan'cana Ulmus thomas;i Impatiens sp.
Drift Lines Water Marl<s Drainage Pattems I Listed hydric soil?
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance 0-2 10 YR 612 2-8 10 YR 6/4 8-12 10IYR 6/4 10 YR 612 Common Hydric Soil Indicators:
WOO 1 PF01E Stratum Indicator WI Fac H
Facw Tr Facw Tr, Sh Fac H
Facw Secondary Indicalors Oxidized Root Channels Water Stained Leaves I Yes I I No I Texture Loam Silt loam Sitty clay loam Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Ep i ped~n Aquic Moisture Regime I--
Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions I--
y Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarl<s: Soil color not quite hydric (chroma is too high); lots of evidence of extensive soil disturbance in past:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Estimated size: 2.95 acres Yes Yes Yes y
Y No No No Is this Sampling Point \\Mthin a USACE Wetland?
Does area on!y meet USFWS wetland definition?
N Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Yes Y
No Yes No Yes No N
N 293
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 294 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 294 f'h:rlo 10(s)' )/I.Ol-1W, \\II.O.1-2W, \\II.O.1-3W RaooingDescription: 1:29 counterdockw ise: tom' NWcomernearcuh.ert around to east; 30-70 dod<wise*tom ~1 around,north side bad< to ~29' Drawing Ple,ase, tldude: North,Pmlw, Project.Centerline, Sun.ey Corridor 8oundiuies, l,ength ~f \\ll.etland Feature, Clstances tom Centerline,PhOt~ Locations s-
~-
,-,.,0 ObJi ous Connecti ons to Waters of the USlState?
Pri mary lJIMer Source
~ other, note' in comments TVA RAM SCORE:
other Description ci~lard and other Comments: ~.e.&n.t,8geduJ;1Ial!ibtfN!lrEl;I9'.ardogif:~; leoaFim ctillewelUr\\dwtU.eofcr ~umt mROW; tn..... potadW, e:Wtinar~WEl, a.ljatmtlaM 1.UIe, v.iUIie"bs~ IWioJi.J'aJJ'OO4D,lat-l.mg, in).
Flatwood brested wetland Small perched wetlari.dlv'emal pool.in center, of eastem end; numerous scattered dep ress'ions with w'~r-stained lea>.es OblAOUS signs of soil disturbance and earth-moving in past Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix B TVA Natural Heritage Project Routine Wetland Determination Form Project:
Investigator: J. Groton, H. Hart Normal Circumstances:
y Sample ID:
W002 REt 1038e9 NPHra County: Jackson Station or Structure Atypical Situation:
Number(s)
State: AL Date: April 6, 2006 Problem Area:
Cowardin Code:
PFO1E Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Carpinus caroliniana Tr, Sh Fac
- 9.
Toxkiodendron radicans WV Fac
- 2.
Quercus nigra Tr Fac
- 10.
Ulmus americana Tr Facw
- 3.
Quercus pagoda Tr Fac
- 11.
Ulmus thomasii Tr, Sh Fac
- 4.
Pinus taeda Tr Fac
- 12.
Impatiens sp.
H Facw
- 5.
Acer rubrum Tr Fac 13.
- 6.
Liquidambar styraciflua Tr. Sh Fac+
14.
- 7.
l~ex decidua Sh Fac 15.
- 8.
Berchemia scandens V
I Facw 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0-4 (in.)
Primary Incicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
(in.)
y Inundated Drift Lines y
Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
6 (in.)
y Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks y
Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits y
Drainage Patterns Remarks: wet weather drainage to Town Creek embayment on GuntersvIlle Reservoir Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydric soil?
Yes No Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-2 10 YR 42 Silt loam 2-5 10 YR 5/2 Silt loam 5-9 10 YR 7t3 10 YR 7/2 Common Silly clay 9-12 10 YR 7/3 10 YR 7/2 Common Clay Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime y
Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions y
Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wedand Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 4.52 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 295 I
Appendix B I
TVA Natural Heritage Project Routine Wetland Determination Form I
Project: Bellefonte NP Investigator: J. Groton, H. Hart Normal Circumstances:
y Sample 10:
W002 REO 10389 County: Jackson Atypical S~uation:
n Station or Structure Number(st I
State: AL Date: April 6, 2006 Problem Area:
n Cowardin Code:
PF01E v eaetatJon Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Carpinus caroliniana Tr, Sh Fac
- 9.
Toxicodendron radicans WV Fac
- 2.
Quercus nigra Tr Fac
- 10.
Ulmus americana Tr Facw I
- 3.
Quercus pagoda Tr Fac
- 11.
Ulmus thomas;i Tr, Sh Fac
- 4.
Pinus taecJa Tr Fac
- 12.
Impatiens sp.
H Facw
- 5.
Acerrubrum Tr Fac
- 13.
I I
- 6.
Liquidambar styraciflua Tr. Sh Fac+
- 14.
- 7.
/lex decidua Sh Fac
- 15.
- 8.
Berchemia seandens WV Facw
- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 100%
I Hydr%gy Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
I Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Waler in Pi!:
G-4 (in.)
(in.)
Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators Inundated Drift Lines Oxidized Rool Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
6 (in.)
Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Waler Marks Water Stained Leaves I
Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns Remarks: wet weather drainage to TQ\\NTl Creek embayment on GuntersV'ilie Reservoir I
Soils Soil Unit: I I Drai nage class: I I Listed hydric soil? I Yes I I No I Profile
Description:
I Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Moltle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture G-2 10 YR 412 Sill loam 2-5 10 YR 512 Silt loam 5-9 10 YR 7/3 10 YR 7/2 Common SiHy clay 9-12 10 YR 7/3 10 YR 7/2 Common Clay I
Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Y
Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions I
y Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
I Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegelation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No -
I Weiland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS weiland definition?
Yes No N
Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 4.52 aa-es I
I Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 295 I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Wetland Descriptors Sanrqe in: W00o2 I Phlto ID(s) VWV02-1W, VV02-2W, W02-3VV;rW02-4W, W02-5W,'Wf02-EN, \\02-7VV,2W,02-SW, W02-SW Flagging Descriplior W2-1 to W2-1 6 clock Wse from scuthern edge arund 'to northest corner, W2A-1 tb W2A-43 dock Wse from northeastern corner back to VV2-1 Drawing Please Include North Arrow, Project Centedine; Survey Corridor Boundaries, Length of Wetland Feature, Distances from Centerline; Photo Locations Ott4L
,r.-.-
\\
/...V AIL
,'1 2,$"
ObiusoneIont
".~e No I,
Waterbody/VVatershed: Unnamed drainage VV!VC) to "1ov* Creek (Tennessee River-Waters af the US/State?
yIýutr~l eiror io te Primar'y Watres Source Cp rne11 Oebnig13 hef~
.1G~nae 4
-id (If other, note in comments)
I D escription oilWetland and Other Connm' ss:
(ia firest am ]lm; habitat fiatun; ]4dr-olbgk: rehme; da~cripno ft]e wvetbrin* ouid oor a~acerat to ROW; erosbnpota
, eod-*ng d*
ances, Atjacer lan wq wi&Ff oU ~lieraioxk, sta~o imobrv
]a-mr etc)
FlatmAod forested 4tLcand Wetland v01 receive stortnvoter'runoff from construction -area Obviouis C of soion dt sturbance and earth-moving in past ee Several perched thcUndstternal p6ol? scattered about northeastern lbbe of vetland Numerous large trso* (18-24+ inches DBH)tFroughout I-ertland but es3pecially innortheasterntlobe There is a dtch nearnthe northeast corer that looks likoe sameone attempted (unsuccessf ly) to conned W02 to W06, about 100-150 feetto the north 296 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 296 Wetland,Descri
'SarT1JleIO: WO02 Proto IO(s~ 1Ml2-1W, W02-2I/II, W02-31/11;W02-4W,.W02-SVV:W02~8N, W02~NV,W02.svv, W02-'JiIV F lagiJir(l Oesc:ription: W2-1 to W2-16 cloc!<wsefrom 'sruthernedge around' to northViest Comer, VV2A-1 tii W2A-43 dockwse from northeastern '
cerner back to VIi2 -1 ".
p~wing PleaSe Include: North.Alrow, Project Centertine; Survey CerridorBoundaries., Length of Wetland Feature, Distances from Centertine; Photo Locations 0:iC!D5 C/'.JC6.~
wCC),'3; pt Obvious Connections to Water'S 1# the USlState?
PrimuyWater Source
. If other nOte in comments TVARAM SCORE:
Other Desc:ription I#WeUand and othff CoITll"leRS: (i.e.i>reri_c.... ; habilatftoature.; b"drologj< regime; de":r~,tionoft).,w&Iimd <ndDIeofora<\\iacent to ROW;....... impoEnlia1, exirting dimubanc..., adjacent Lind 180j wid1ife 01i.s8V.m..m, otatioi. nmMerB,... ~
etc)
FlatVlOod forested 'I\\elland Wetlend >Nil receive stormVlter'runoff from construction'area Obvioussigns of soil disturbance and earth~moving in past Several perched \\o>.etlandsJv8rnal pools scattered about nortl'ieasternl6be of VIellend Numerous large trees (18-24+ inches DBH)throughout VIel,land but especially in northeastffn*lobe There is a dlch nearlhe northeast oomer ihat looks like someoneattemj:JIed (uriSuccessfuly) to cXmnect W02 to W06:about 1 00-150 feejto the north Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVA Natural Heritage Project Routine Wetland Determination Form Project:
1039Bellefnte NP Investigator: J. Groton, H. Hart Normal Circumstances:
y Sample ID:
W003 C ty Atypical Situation:
y NumberStrt State: AL Date: April 6, 2006 Problem Area:
n Cowardin Code:
PFO1B Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Ligustrum sinense Sh Fac
- 9.
Glycena striata H
ObI
- 2.
Cetis laevigata Tr Facw
- 10.
Ulmus thomasii Tr, Sh Fac
- 3.
Fraxinus penn"syivanica Sh, Sap Facw
- 11.
Quercus michauxii Tr Facw-
- 4.
Berchemia scandens WV Facw 12.
- 5.
Ulmus a/ata Tr Facu+
13.
- 6.
Carex cherokeensis H
Facw-14.
- 7.
Nothomordumn bivalve H
Fac 15.
- 8.
Sanicula sp.
H Fac-Facu 16+
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
82%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0-1 (in.)
Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free VWater in Pit:
(in.)
y Inundated Drift Lines Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
7 (in.)
y Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits y
Drainage Patterns Remarks: Headwater of unnamed drainage (WWC) to Town Creek (Tennessee River-Guntersville Reservoir): connects by drainage channel to W02 Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydnc soil?
Yes No Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-3 10 YR 3/2 Silt loam 3-6 10 YR 5/3 10 YR 6/2 Common Silt loam 6-12 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 6/6 Common Silty clay Hydric Soil Indicators:
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions y
Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soil color not quite hydric (chroma in second horizon too high): lots of evidence of extensive soil disturbance in past:
Wedand Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Wtthin a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes No N
Is wetland mapped on N\\M?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 0.28 acre Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 297 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVA Natural Heritage Project Routine Wetland Determination Form Project: Bellefonte NP Investigator: J. Groton, H. Hart Normal Circumstances:
y Sample ID:
REO 10389 r--
County: Jackson Atypical S~uation:
Station or Structure y
Number/s\\:
State: AL Date: April 6, 2006 Prob I em Area:
n Cowardin Code:
v egetatlon Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species
- 1.
Ligustrum sinense Sh Fac
- 9.
Glyceria striata
- 2.
Celis laevigata Tr Facw
- 10.
Ulmus thomasi;
- 3.
Fraxinus pennsylvan;ca Sh,Sap Facw
- 11.
Quercus michauxij
- 4.
Berchemia scandens WI Facw
- 12.
- 5.
Ulmus alata Tr Facu+
- 13.
- 6.
CBrex cherokeensis H
Facw-
- 14.
- 7.
Nolhoscordum bivalve H
Fac
- 15.
- 8.
Sanicu/a sp.
H Fac-Facu
- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 82'%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
0-1 7
(in.)
(in.)
(in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators Inundated Drift lines Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns
\\MJ03 PF01B Stratum Indicator H
Obi Tr. Sh Fac Tr Facw-Secondary Indicators Oxidized Root Channels Water Stained Leaves Remarks: Headwater of unnamed drainage (WWC) to Town Creek (Tennessee River-Guntersville Reservoir): connects by drainage channel to W02 Soils Soil Unit: I I Drai nage class: I I Listed hydric soil? I Yes I I No I Profil e Descripti on:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Moltle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-3 10 YR 3/2 Silt loam 3-6 10 YR 5/3 10YR 6/2 Common Silt loam 6-12 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 6/6 Common Si~y clay Hydric Soil Indicators:
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime r---
Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions r---
y Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Soil color not quite hydric (chroma in second horizon too high): lots of evidence of extensive soil disturbance in past:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Estimated size: 0.28 acre Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point WIthin a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Yes Y
No Yes No Yes No N
N 297
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Wetland Descriptors Sarmple ID: VV003 Photo ID(s): WJ3-1 WWlO3-2 Flagginrij Descrplion: 1-19 counterdqckýe.from northvvest Drawing Please Include North Arrow, Project Centerine; Survey Corridor Boundaries, Length otfWetland Feature, Distances fromCenterline, Photo Locations I
I I
'I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I U
I I
Obvious Connections to Yes N
- WaterbodyNVatershed: Headvater of unnamed drainage (VWVC) to Towm Creek Waters ofthe US State?o No (Tennessee Ri Ve-Guntersville'R eservoir)
WIftersratnte iSnrcmen p Fringe overbanking 2
Sheet Flow II Groundvxater 3
Precipitation Other PdmatherWater Sourcent)
TYARAM SCORE:
35 1 TiARAMCATEGORY:
Category 2 Description ofWedland and Other Corr.rets (to.
(t tae cltam hbihatfeatum; dro-og cregime; descwrji oftlewedalm oubtueoforAdeat to ROW; neiinipotnkout, iYng diotutafncow, ajoemn lad me willife obhesýao statiomn neors, ktnxrW, etc)
Small area of forested vetland;,prtialy intersacts potential construction area (-O.25 acre inside construction footprint). It,Il also be affected by proposed haul road.to site and module assembly areas Wetland is connected to Wetland W02 by vxet vxeather conveyance but higher in 'eatershed Possible small seep near southern edge 298 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 298 WetlandDescri SafT1lle 10: V\\I003 Photo 10(s)c V\\I03-1W;V\\I03-2VV flaming'Oescliption: '1,19 OJunterdo,ckwSe,,from nortliVlest Drawing Please Include; North Arrow, Project, Centerline; Survey Ccrridor Boundaries, Length 01 Wetland Feature, Distances from'Centerline, Photo Locations
'IAlOO:$
Li.jc<:')~ NDT "'TO s.,c,~I~LI.:::<
,~cd?;
., pt Obvious Connections to '
Water'S m"the USlState?
PlimaryWater" Source
, II ott-er note in comments TVARAM SC'ORE:
/k..'-'I)'~"(...k,, /&:.!l other Oescliption m"Wdiand andothB" Comnerts: (i.e. me.t _..... ; haLilai features; ~gi<
redme;dmc:q,tionoftJe wetland ouD:ide of or aotia<ent iO ROW; B..... npoEnlial, exirtingdinurba.. <e., adja<entlimd UI~ wid1ifeobssvaDo.... ~mnDers, Ia.~..tt)
Small area ollorested 'Y\\elland; partially.intersects pJlentil:f OJnstruction area (,,-0.25 acre inside OJnstru:::tion lootprint).ltWIl also be affected by proposed 'hall road,to site r1d module assem bly areas Wetlr1d iSOJnnected to Wetland V\\I02 by VIet VleatherOJnwyance but hig-.er in V\\6lershed Possible sml:fl seep near Southem edge Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix B Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Tr, Sh, Facw
- 9.
Nothoscordum, brvalve H
Fac Sap
- 2.
Quercus phe/los Tr,, Sap Facw-
- 10.
Galiurn aparne H
Facu
- 3.
Ulmus americana Tr, Sh Facw
- 11.
Diospyros virginiana Sap Fac
- 4.
Campsis radicans Sap Fac
- 12.
Toxicodendron radicans WV, Sap Fac
- 5.
Berchernia scandens WV Facw
- 13.
Lycopus sp H
ObN
- 6.
Ampelopsis arborea Sap Fac+
- 14.
Glyceria striata H
ObI
- 7.
flex decidua Sh Facw
- 15.
Several unidentified Carex species H
- 8.
Pinus taeda Tr Fac
- 16.
moss H
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 93%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0-12 (in.)
Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
3 (in.)
y Inundated Drift Lines Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
0 (in.)
y Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits x
Drainage Patterns Remarks: Unnamed drainage (WWC) to Town Creek (Tennessee River-Guntersville Reservoir)
Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydnc soil?
IYesoI Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-3 10 YR 513 10 YR 5/6 Common Silty clay loam 3-10 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 5/6 Common Silty clay loam 10-12+
10 YR 6/1 10 YR 5/6 Common Silty clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
Y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Y
Reducing Conditions Y
Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 1.81 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 299 I
Appendix B I
I Project: Bellefonte NP Investigator: J. Groton, B. Dimick Normal Cjrcums~ances:
y Sample ID:'
w004 REO 10389 r--
County: Jackson Atypical Sauation:
n Station or Structure Number{sl:
f--
State: AL Date: April 26, 2006 Problem Area:
n Cowardin Code:
PF01E I
v egetatJon Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsyJvanica Tr. $h, Facw
- 9.
Nothosc:ordum b;valve H
Fac Sap
- 2.
QUBn:US phe/los Tr" Sap Facw-
- 10.
Galium aparine H
Facu I
- 3.
Ulmus amelicana Tr,Sh Facw
- 11.
Diospyros virginians Sap Fac
- 4.
Campsisradicans Sap Fac
- 12.
Toxicodendron radicans WV, Sap Fac
- 5.
Berchemia scandens WV Facw
- 13.
Lycopus sp H
Obi I
- 6.
Ampelopsis arborea Sap Fac+
- 14.
G/yceria striata H
Obi I
- 7.
/lex decidua Sh Facw
- 15.
Several unidentified Carex species H
- 8.
Pinustaecia Tr Fac
- 16.
moss H
Percent of Dominant Species That are OSL, FACW, or FAC: 93%
I Hvdr%gv Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
0-12 (in.)
Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators I
Depth to Free 'Nater in Pit:
3 (in.)
Inundated Drift Lines Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
o (in.)
Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns I
Remarks: Unnamed drainage (WWC) to Town Creek (Tennessee River-Guntersville Reservoir)
Soils Soil Unit: I I Drai nage class: I I Listed hydric soil? I Yes I I No I Profile
Description:
I Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Motile Abundance Texture I
0-3 10 YR 5/3 10 YR 5/6 Common Si~y clay loam
- >-10 10 YR 6/2 10 YR 5/6 Common Silty clay loam 10-12+
10 YR 6/1 10 YR 5/6 Common Silty clay loam I
Hydric Soil Indicators:
Y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime I---
Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cant. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Y
Reducing Conditions I---
Y Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
I Remarks:
I Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No -
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
I Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Estimated size: 1.81 acres Is wetland mapped on NWi?
Yes No N
I I
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 299 I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Wetland Descriptors Photo ID(s): WO4-1W (northern end), W04-2W (center of wetland), W04-3W (southern end)
Sample 1D: rAO04 Flagging
Description:
1-48 clockwise from northeast 'comer Drawing Please Include: North Arrow, Project'Centerline, Survey Corridor Boundanes, Length of Wetland Feature, Distances from Centedine, Photo Locations i-
/..
if
/
./
,/
I-Obvious Connectionsto I
WaterbodyN~atershed:
Unnamed drainage (VWVC) to Town Creek (Tennessee. River-Waters of the US/State?
Y"Ys No Guntersville.Reservoir)
Primary Water Source (if other, note in comments)
Ca Fm-g 2
0 1 verbanking I1 Sheet Flow I Groundwater 1 31 Precipitationl Other SSCORE:
55 ITVARAM CATEGORY:
Category 2 Description of Wetland and Other Comments:.(Le; forest age class; habitat features; hydrologic regime; description of the wetland outside of or adjacent to ROW; erosion potential, existing disturbances, adjacent land use, wildlife ob servations, stathinunumbers, lat-toug, etc)
Young forested wetland formed in flooded drainageway No evidence of beaver Wetland drains into drainage ditch beside perimeter road Drainage is impeded where wetland VV04 intersects witih the roadside drainage ditch - no evidence of plugged culvert There are several shallow, liniear ditches in the upper end of W04 (southern' end ) that run transverse to main axis of wetland. These appear to be the result of a past attempt to drain part of the wetland?
Gray Tree Frogs 300 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 300 Wetland Descnptors Sample 10: Wl04 Photo ID(s): N04'1W(northem end), 'N04-2W (center of wetland), 'N04-3W (southern end)
Flagging
Description:
1-48 dockwise from northeast comer Drawing Please Include. North Arrow, Project' Centerline, Survey Corridor Boundaries, Length of Wetland Feature, Distances from Centenine, Photo Locations r--'....- vJo \\
....., I,
r; elJ I
(
r/
."l r-
... <c.......,,'
t r//
Obvious Connections to Waters of the USlState?
Y Yes I I No WaterbodyNVatershed: Unnamed drainage (WWC) to Town Creek (Tennessee. River-Guntersville* Rese [Voir)
'Cap Fringe 1 21 Overbanking 111 Sheel Flow 1 1 Groundwater 1 31 Precipitation 1 1 Other Primary Water Source (If other, note in comments)
TVARAM SCORE:
55 I TVARAM CATEGORY: I Category 2 Description of Wetland and Other Comments :.(ie, forest age class; habitat features; hydrologic regime; description of the wetland outside of or adjacent to ROW; erosion potential, existing disturbances, adjacent land use, wildlife observatimls, station. nwnbers, lat-hmg, etc)
Young forested wetland formed in ftooded drainageway No evidence of beaver Wetland drains into drainage ditch beside perimeter road Drainage is impeded where wetland Wl4 intersects with the roadside drainage ditch - no evidence of plugged culvert There are several shaliow, linear ditches In the upper end of W04 (southern' end) that run transverse to main axis of wetland These appear to be the result of a past attempt to drain part of the wetland?
Gray Tree Frogs Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix B Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Tr, Sh, Facw
- 9.
Ulmus alata Tr, Sh Facu+
Sap
- 2.
Microstegium vimineum H
Fac+
- 10.
Rumex crispus H
Fac
- 3.
Toxicodendron radicans WV, Sap Fac
- 11.
Ilex decidua Sh Facw
- 4.
Ulmus thomasii Tr, Sh Fac
- 12.
Populus deltoides Tr Fac+
- 5.
Carex cherokeensis H
Facw-
- 13.
Berchemia scandens Sap Facw
- 6.
Senecio sp.
H 14.
- 7.
Salix Tr, Sh ObI 15.
- 8.
Lonicerajaponica VVA, Sap Fac-16.
Percent of Dominant Species Tha are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 77%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0-4 (in.)
Primary Incicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
>12 (in.)
y Inundated Drift Lines Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
0 (in.)
y Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits Drainage Patterns Remarks: Isolated, perched wetland on terrace of WV*C draining VW02; -25 feet from channel but no obvious connection to stream channel Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydnc soil?
Yes No Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-12+
10 YR 4/2 7.5 YR 5/6 Common Silty clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mappedon NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 0.26 acre Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 301 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B Project: Bellefonte NP Investigator: J. Groton, B. Dimick Normal Circumstances:
y Sample 10:
w005 REO 10389 County: Jackson Atypical S~uation:
n Station or Structure Number(s):
state: AL Date: April 26, 2006 Problem Area:
n Cowardin Code:
PF01E v egetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsyivanica Tr. Sh, Facw
- 9.
Ulmusalata Tr, Sh Facu+
Sap
- 2.
Microstegium vimineum H
Fac+
- 10.
Rumex crispus H
Fac
- 3.
Toxicodendron radicans WV, Sap Fac
- 11.
/lex decidua Sh Facw
- 4.
Ulmus thomasii Tr, Sh Fac
- 12.
Populus deftoides Tr Fac+
- 5.
Carex cherokoonsis H
Facw-
- 13.
Berchemia scanclens Sap Facw
- 6.
Seneciosp.
H
- 14.
- 7.
Salix Tr, Sh Obi
- 15.
- 8.
Lonicem japonica WV, Sap Fac-
- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 77%
Hvdrology Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
0-4 (in.)
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
>12 (in.)
Depth to Saturated Soil:
o (in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Sediment Deposits Secondary Indicators Drilllines Oxidized Root Channels Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Drainage Patterns Remarks: Isolated, perched wetland on terrace of'NWC draining VV02; -25 feet from channel but no obv;ous connection to stream channel Soils Soil Unit: I I Drainage class: I I Listed hydric soil? I Yes I I No I Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Moltle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-12+
10 YR 412 7.5 YR 5/6 Common Si~y clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors H istic Ep i pedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wet/and Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No -
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped'on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimaled size: 0.26 acre Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 301
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Wetland Descriptors
.sanie ID:
Photo lD(s): W5-1 W;W05-2VVW; VM5-3W, W05-4W FlaggirnDesciiptiorx 1-17 dockvrsetfrom sobthern tip ofvxetland Drawing Please Include North Arrow, Project Centedine,' Survey Corridor Boundaries, Length of Wetland Feature, Distances from Centerline, Photo Locations Obuioti 6'npo s'to d
Yes No Waterbo-yWatershed:
Waters ofthe US /State?
Primrnay Water S ource dap. Ftinge Overbankmng 2F heFlow Groundvyater Precipitation iiOther TVARAM SCORE:
- 60)
IVARAM CATEGOY Cegory 3 o escrigtion of Weland and Other Conrnints: (i. fimet ar clan; hrabitat feturn; hodnologik region; dncrtfionoff tire wlaisi oetsids dor a4aeent to ROW,-
&fnorti~edttr diduh sir, adjacent hut u w%
vl&s owratloms stwtion usnhers, kt-hmg, etc)
Shellow. perched vxetland or vernal pool on terrace of wet vxeather conveyance draining:WetlandW02 Wetlaend W05 is about 25 feet from conveyance chlannel 'pth no obvious signs of a direct hydrologic cornection to the stream channel, even during high flors I
I 302 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 302
- San1Jle 10: woos Photo 10(s)c WOS-1W:WOS~2W:WOS-3VV, WOS-4W Flagging_Oesi:nption: 1-17 dock'llise*from sOUthern tip of \\O\\e!land Drawing Please Include: Northiltrow, Project Centertine,' Survey Ccrridor Brundaries, Length otWetland Femure, Di5iances.from-Centertine, Photo Locatio~s I)J()05 JC;D~ rJDT '-f'1:J s,GA-u;'"
~-vi()'?~
r-J f*
,.a.V!)*/<-J.c--I4[f=.£~*I='=====
~:::;::.~~: /1
- T-
{f W'"
- /
."-"1"~ --
Obvious Conrections to Wateni mthe USlState?
PnlTlilryWater Source Ifother riote in OJmments TVARAM SCORE:
Yes other o escnption dWedand and othwCorTInlrts: (:i.e. me.t _.... ;...... iiat f&t1ureo; JQ.lroIogjc redme;""'~tionoftte wetland outride of or a<ijacent to ROW;.rn.*..... poEDial, eDriing diotud>anc"".adjac...d JmI -u.~ w:id.Iife obs.... ationr, statimi....men, lai-Iong; etc)
Sha116~ perched \\O\\e!land or vernal pool on terrace 'ot \\O\\e! \\'\\emher OJnveyance craini ng Wetl and W02 Weth,nd WOS is abotl 25 teet from conveyance cnllnel Wth no obvious signs of a direct hydrologic comection to the stream channel, even during high flCYoM>
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsytvanica Tr Facw
- 9.
Glycefia striata H
Obi
- 2.
Liquidambar styraciflua Tr Fac+
- 10.
Polygonum sp.
H
- 3.
Quercus phelos Tr Facw-
- 11.
Gratiola neglecta H
ObI
- 4.
Hex decidua Sh Facw
- 12.
Ligustrum sinense Sh Fac
- 5.
Berchemia scandens WV Facw
- 13.
Impatiens sp.
H Facw
- 6.
Smilax glauca WV Fac
- 14.
Carpirus caroliniana Tr, Sh Fac
- 7.
G arim aperine H
Facu
- 15.
Campsis radicans Sap Fac
- 8.
Celat laevigata Tr Facw
- 16.
Moss H
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 88%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0-12 (in.)
Primary Indcators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
3 (in.)
y Inundated Drift Lines Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
0 (in.)
y Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits y
Drainage Patterns Remarks:
Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydnc soil?
Yes No Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-4 10 YR 3/2 Silty clay loam 4-12+
10 YR 5/2 10 YR 5.6 Common Silty clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 2:36 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 303 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B Proj ed: Bellefonte N P Investigator: J. Groton, B. Dimick Normal Circumstances:
y Sample 10:
REO 10389 f--
County: Jackson Atypical Situation:
n Station or Structure Number(s):
f--
State: AL Date: April 26, 2DD6 Problem Area:
n CO\\Nardin Code:
v egetatJon PI ant Species Stratum Indiclllor Plant Species
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsyhtanica Tr Facw
- 9.
Glyceria striata
- 2.
Uquidambar siyracfflua Tr Fac+
- 10.
Polygonum sp.
- 3.
Quercus phe/los Tr Facw-
- 11.
Gratiola neglecta
- 4.
/lex decidua Sh Facw
- 12.
Ligustrum sinense
- 5.
Berchemia scandens WI Facw
- 13.
Impatiens sp.
- 6.
Smilax glauca WI Fac
- 14.
Carpinus caroliniana
- 7.
Galium aparine H
Facu
- 15.
Campsis radicans
- 8.
Celis laevigata Tr Facw
- 16.
Moss Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC: 88%
Hydr%gy Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Remarks:
Soils Soil Unit: I Profile
Description:
()'12 (in.)
3 o
(in.)
(in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Sediment Deposits I Drainage class: I Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
MOItie Colors (Munsell Moist) 0-4 10 YR 312 4--12+
10 YR 5/2 10 YR 5.6 Hydric Soil Indicators:
Drift Lines Water Marks Drainage Patterns I Listed hydric soil?
Mottle Abundance Common w006 PF01E Stratum Indicator H
Obi H
H Obi Sh Fac H
Facw Tr, Sh Fac Sap Fac H
Secondary Indicators Oxidized Root Channels Water Stained Leaves I Yes I I No I Texture SiRy clay loam SiRy clay loam y
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime I---
Sulfidic Odor High Organic ConI. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions I--
Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No -
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 2",36 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 303
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Wetland Descriotors Photo ID(s): W06-1W (northeastern end), W06-2W (center of wetland). WtJ6-3W (northwestern end)
Sample ID: V\\,006 Flagging
Description:
1-75 clockwise from the northwest comer Drawing Please Include: North Arrow. Project Centerline, Survey Corridor Boundares. Length of Wetland Feature, Distances from Centerline. Photo Locations
...., 7',
7r,/
( qj.r:
z l C
ý Cl (i 3
K N ~'K VZC)
-1
- f.
I
- 1.
5'.
(\\
r~ (
(
t#
C-
-N
(: T"*":,,4 '7....
i I
I I
I I
i I
i I
I I
I I
I I
i Obvious I Waters of amed drainages (WVV) to Town Creek (Tennessee Primary Water (If other, note in Cap. Fringe I 1 Overbanking TVARAM SCORE:
TVARAM CATEGORY:
Description of Wetland and Other Comments: (Le. forest age class; habitat features; hydrologic regtmeý description of the wetland outside of or adjacent to ROW; erosion potential, existing disturbances, adjacent land use, wildlife observatioms, station numbers, lat-long, etc)
There is a ditch nearthe northeast corner that looks like someone attempted (unsuccessfully)to connect Mve6 to W02, about 100-150 feet to the south Wetland VVO6 is fed by a wet weather conveyance that enters the wetland from the south and splits into two channels. one that flows northeast and a second that flows northwest. Both channels exit through culverts under the perimeter road Both culverts are plugged with debris and water has ponded up at both culverts south of the perimeter road.
There appears to be some local groundwater influence (high water table) although no seeps or springs were observed Grey tree frog, cricket frog, crayfish middens 304 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 304 Wetland Descnptors Sample 10: WJ06 Photo ID(s): VV06'1W(northeastem end), VV06-2W(centerofwe~and), 'Ml6-3W(north",estern end)
Flagging
Description:
1-75 clockwise from the northwest comer Drawing
,~
\\
N'\\'
)
,,/--'
I
',I I."
I, Obvious Connections to Waters of the US/state?
~
I
\\
/v!
y I I N I WaterbodylWatershed,: Two unnamed drainages (WWC) to Town Creek (Tennessee es 0
River-Guntersville Reservoir)
\\
Cap, Fringe 111 Overbanking 1 1 Sheel Flow 1 21 Groundwater 1 31 Precipitation I lather Prim ary Wate r Source (If other, note in comments)
TVARAM SCORE:
I TVARAM CATEGORY: I Description of Wetland and other Comments: (Le. forest age class; habitat features; hydrologic regime; descriptinn of the wetland outside of or adjacent to ROW; erosion potential, existing disturbances, adjacent land use, wildlife observations, station nwnbers, lat-Iong, etc)
There is a ditch near the northeast corner that looks like someone attempted (unsuccessfully) to connect V\\'06 10 W02, aboul 100-150 feet to the south Wetland W06 is fed by a wet weather conveyance that enters the wetland from the south and splits into two channels,one that flows northeast and a second that flows northwest. 80th channels exit through culverts under the perimeter road 80th culverts are plugged with debris and water has ponded up at both culverts south of the perimeter' road, There appears to be some local groundwater influe'nce (high water table) although no seeps or springs were observed Grey tree frog, cricket frog, crayfish middens Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I, I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B Project: Bellefonte NP Investigator: B. Dimick. K. Pilarski, Normal Circumstances:
y Sample ID:
W007 REQ 10389 L.BurtonNomlCrusacs ySmpeI:
W0 County: Jackson Atypical Situation:
1n Station or Structure Number*,s:
State: AL Date: September 1,2009 Problem Area:
Cowardin Code:
PFOIE Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Fraxsnus pennsylvanica Tr Facw 9.
- 2.
Celis Iaevigata Tr Facw 10.
- 3.
Berchernia scandens VIN Fa cw 11.
- 4.
Populus deltoides Tr Fac 12.
- 5.
Ligqustrum sinense Sn Fac 13.
- 6.
14.
- 7.
15.
- 8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0 (in.)
Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
0 (in.)
n Inundated Drift Lines y
Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
0 (in.)
n Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits y
Drainage Patterns Remarks: small drainage feature between 2 culverts Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydric soil?
Yes No Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-4 10 YR 3I2 Silty clay loam 4-12+
10 YR 5t2 10 YR 5/6 Common Silty clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Rerrarks:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 0.02 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 305 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Appendix B Project: Bellefonte NP Investigator: B. Dim ick. K. Pilarski, Normal Circumstances:
REO 10389 L.Burton County: Jackson Atypical Snuation:
State: AL Date: September 1,2009 Problem Area:
v egetation Ptant Species Stratum tndicator
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Tr Facw
- 9.
- 2.
Celis laevigata Tr Facw
- 10.
- 3.
Berchemia scandens VW Facw
- 11.
- 4.
Populus de/toides Tr Fac
- 12.
- 5.
Ligustrum sinense Sh Fac
- 13.
- 6.
- 14.
- 7.
- 15.
- 8.
- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OSL, FACW, or FAC: 100%
Hydr%gy Fietd Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free Water in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
o o
o Wettand Hydrology Indicators:
(in.)
Primary Indicators (in.)
(in.)
Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Sediment Deposits Remarks: small drainage feature between 2 culverts Soils Soil Unit: I I Drainage class: J Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Malrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) 0-4 10 YR 312 4-12+
10 YR 512 10 YR 5/6 Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Sample ID:
W007 n
Station or Structure Number(s)'
n Coward in Code:
PF01E Plant Species Stratum Indicator Secondary Indicators Drift Unes Oxidized Root Channels WaterMarks Water Stained Leaves Drainage Patterns I Listed hydric soil? I Yes I I No I Mottle Abundance Texture Si~y clay loam Common Si~y clay loam y
Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
IReTT,'arks:
Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No -
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Seils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 0.02 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 305
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 306 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 306 Wetland Descriptors Samp" e ID: \\Ml07 Pt"!:to I[{s): 60,64 Raooing Descrip:ion: 41ags Dravriing other Description of Wetlard and other Commerts: (i.e.tmt.lt a,., daff; JWxibt~; ~
reP>>.e; d.eoa:iptim d1heViEibnd rutsile 01 cr ~8(.m'
-roRow; ~Pct.mial, ~
~UIA:ti, ~ai:.m1sM we, ~
obI'ln'Emf,ltmonmmilon, bt*~ ED:)
Q-aw ish burrows.
Culvert cOnnects \\J\\007 to \\Ml0 1 and another cullJi!rt lea..es \\J\\007 and goes bene<llh road towards Towns ClI!ek.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I, I
I I
Appendix B Project: Bellefonte NP Lnvestigator:
B. Dimick, K.Pilarski, Normal Circumstances:
y Sample ID:
W008 County: Jackson Atypical SituationStation Structure Atypcal ituaion:Nurnberlst:
State: AL Date: Sept. 1,2009 Problem Area:
n Cowardin Code:
PSS1E Vegetadon Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Salix nigra Sapling OBL 9.
- 2.
Juncus effusus H-erb FACVV 10.
- 3.
Festuca aruncinacea Herb FAC 11.
- 4.
Eupatoriur serotinum Herb FAC 12.
- 5.
13.
- 6.
14.
- 7.
15.
- 8.
16 Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Sur'sace Water:
0 (in.)
Primary Incicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
(in.)
Inundated Drift Lines Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
0 (in.)
Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits y
Drainage Patterns Remarks:
Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydn soil?
Yes Io Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-4 10 YR 4/4 Silt loam 4-12+
10 YR 4/3 Silt Loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
N Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydric soils not present Wedand Determination F Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes N
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes Y
No Hydric Soils Present?
Yes No N
Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 0.43 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 307 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Appendix B Project: Bellefonte NP Investigator: B. Dimick, K. Pilarski, Normal Circumstances:
L.Burton County: Jackson Atypical Sttuation:
State: AL Date: Sept. 1,2009 Problem Area:
Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Salix nigra Sapling OBL
- 9.
- 2.
Juncus effusus Hem FACIIV
- 10.
- 3.
Festuca arundinacea Hem FAC
- 11.
- 4.
Eupatorium serotinum Herb FAC
- 12.
- 5.
- 13.
- 6.
14.
- 7.
. 15.
- 8.
- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBl, FACW, or FAC: 100%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free \\Nater in Pi!:
Depth to Saturaled Soil:
Remarks:
Soils Soil Unit: I Profile Desa-iption:
o o
(in.)
(in.)
(in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Sediment Deposits I Drainage class: I Depth (Inches)
Malrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist) 0-4 10 YR 4/4 4-12+
10 YR 4/3 Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Sample ID:
W008 I--
n Station or Structure Number{s):
I--
n Coward in Code:
PSS1E Plant Species Stratum Indicator Secondary Indicalors Drift lines Oxidized Rool Channels Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Drainage Patterns I Listed hydric soil? I Yes I I No I Mottle Abundance Texture Sill loam Silt Loam N
Gleyed or Law Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime I---
Sulfidic Odor f--
Concretions Remarks: Hydric soils not present Wet/and Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Estimaled size: 0.43 High Organic Coni. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point IMthin a USACE Wetland?
Yes N
No -
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes Y
No -
Yes No N
Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 307
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site WetbandDescriutors Sample ID:*tD8 Phdo.IE(s]: 3809 Flagg rgOescription:,
Drawing Pleaselnclude: NorthAr*o, Project Centedine; Surjey Conidor Boundaries. Length ofttland Feature. Distances from Centerline. Photo Locations A*.*t I
I I
I I
1
£ I
I I
I I
I I
I I
II I
I Obvious Connectiors to Waters ofthe'US/State?
x Yes No Waterbodyahtershed: Epherreralconveyanceto Guntersville Reservoir Primary Water Source Cap. Fringe Ovrtanldng Sheet Flow Gmundisater 1 31 Preipittion I I Other (Ifotherb'ote in comments)
IIIIIIIII TVARAM SCORE:
31 TVARAM CATEGORY:
2 Description d Wetland and Other Commerts: (Le. hint a l
c.s kbat*ei*dm-e; Ivdrokck r
,eo ; llusiplim ddhe 'wle al or*di]
or 4u*
to ROW; &rodm pctatdia eusiing &rdfrneiN s4 mated hrduseý vAd~e q1)ssw~friDu Atdim saint " ht-kxrc, eb This wetland likely formed as a result of grading nearbythat oreated a depression near a road. This wetland does not meet ih e jurisdictional setland criteria as defined bythe USAC:E. It meest USFFWS w eland definition and should be considered forimpacts under NEPAand E&ecutive Order 11990.
308 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 308 Wet.and DescrIPtors Sample 10: \\fI.008 Phcto*IQs): 38,39 Flagg rg, Descripti en:.
Drawing PI ease 'Include: North '4ro w. Project Cenlenine; SUI'IEY Corridor Boundaries. Length 01 I)lktland Feature,Distances from Cenle nin~. Photo Locations fJ+
IJ t,'~' l'o~C:ilI~
Obvious Cennections to 1 1 I'
wale'rs ofthe:US/state?
x Yes t-<<>
Waterbod~rshed: Ephemeral conve'folnceto GUnlers\\lilie ResenJOir Primary Water Source I 1 1 1 1 1 1,I 1 1 (l1other 'note in comments)
Cap, Fringe Overbanidng Sh,eet Flow Groundwater 31 Precipit3tion Other TVA RAM SCORE:
31 J TVA RAM CA TEGO~Y: 12 This wetland likely,formed as a result 01 grading nearby that created a depression near a road,' This wetland does not meet the jurisdictional wetland criteria as de~ned by the US ACE,t meest US FWS w e1Ian d detinitionand sh ould be considere d for impacts under N EP Aand 6:ecutive Order 11990.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I:
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B Vegetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Salix nigra Sapling OBL 9.
- 2.
Juncus effusus H erb FACW 10.
- 3.
Festuca arundinacea Herb FAC 11.
- 4.
Cephalaithus occidertafis Shrub OBL 12.
- 5.
Eupatoriun serotinum Herb FAC 13.
- 6.
14.
- 7.
15.
- 8.
16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0 (in.)
Primary Indicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
(in.)
Inundated Drift Lines Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
0 (in.)
Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits y
Drainage Patterns Remarks:
Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydric soil Y
o Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-4 10 YR 4/4 Silt loam 4-12+
10 YR 4/3 Silt Loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
N Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks: Hydric soils not present Wedand Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Wtthin a USACE Wetland?
Yes N
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes Y
No Hydric Soils Present?
Yes No N
Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 0.61 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 309 I
I.
I I
I I
I I
I' I
I I
I I
,I Appendix B Project: Bellefonte N P Investigator: B. Dimick, K. Pilarski, Normal Circumstances:
y Sample ID:
W009 L.Burton r--
County: Jackson Atypical Sttuation:
n Station or Structure Number{s):
r--
State: AL Date: Sept 1,2009 Problem Area:
n Cowardin Code:
PSS1E v egetation Plant Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Salix nigra Sapling OBL
- 9.
- 2.
Juncus effusus Herb FACW
- 10.
- 3.
Festuca arundinacea Herb FAC
- 11.
- 4.
Cephalarthus occiderta5s Shrub OBL
- 12.
- 5.
Eupatorium sera/inurn Herb FAC
- 13.
- 6.
- 14.
- 7.
- 15.
- 8.
- 16.
P.... cent of Dominant Species Thai are OSL, FACW, or FAC: 100%
Hydrology Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free VVater in Pit:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Remarks:
Soils Soil Unit: I Profile
Description:
o o
(in.)
(in.)
(in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Sediment Deposits I Drainage class: I Secondary Indicators Drift Lines Oxidized Root Channels Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Drainage Pattems r
I Listed hydric soil? I Yes I I No I Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-4 10 YR 4/4 4-12+
10 YR 4/3 Hydric Soil Indicators:
N Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors I--
Sulfidic Odor I--
Concretions Remarks: Hydric soils not present Wetland Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Hydric Soils Present?
Estimated size: 0.61 Yes Yes Yes Y
Y No No No Sill loam Silt Loam Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils Reducing Conditions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Is this Sampling Point IMthin a USACE Wetland?
Yes N
Y No No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes N
Is wetland mapped on NWt?
Yes No N
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 30B
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site WetbndfDescriptors Sample ID: M09 PhoIl(s'): no photos Flaggrg Description Drawjing Please Include: NorthArrow; Project Centedine, Surwey Con'idor Boundaries. Length of.tetland Feature.,Distances from Cernerdine. Photo Locations
-I (I,ý I
I 4f Obvious Ccnrectiors to I
I I
Waters Cothe US/ctoe?
x Yes Ni
'WaterbodV-ateirshed:
Ephenmeralc6nve*,nceto Guntersville Reservoir Ptimary.Water Scurce ICap..Fringe II Overbanldng IISh~eet Flow GrIomundisiater I 31 Precipitation IOte (Ifother.note in commens)
I I
I I I
I TVARAM SCORE:
31 TVARAM CATEGORY:
2 Description cf Wetland and. Otl-er Commerts: o.tr q
- h.
tfo
-r; r
retu; desaip ta 'w1flau ouik of &o r4a toD ROW; ensi
]pctedi odsifirnj frtzrtnmn a4 me~d hruuow fe; e~dlitvbsevinms edstri htkxrng,t Does not have soilsto meet jurisdictional wetland criteria as delned bythe USACE. This w.etlan d likely developed in a loI spot let over aier grading occurred. It meest USFWS W etland detinition and should be considered tbr impacts under NEPAand Executixw Order 11990.
I I
I I
I
£ I
I I
I I
I I
IL I
I II I
I 310 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 310 Wet.and DescriptOis Sample 10 : \\1\\009 Flagg n;J Descripti rn:
Drawing Please'lnclu~: North ATo w; Project Centerline. SUru!yConidor ~oundaries,l.ength ofW!tland Feature,pistances from Centerline, Phato Locations tJ1-'
1° 0'1" 1'0 *W'f.h.,<f Obvious Crnnections to 1 1 I'
Waters Of the US/Slate?
x Yes No Waterbod'f\\l\\latei'shed: Ephemeral conve)'anceto Guntersllille Reservoir Primary.. Water Source I
1 1 1 1 1 "
1 1 (lfather nate in comments)
- Cap. Fringe I
Overbanl<ing Sh.eet Flow Groundwater 3,
Precipitation Other TVA RAM SCORE:
31 1 TVA~AM CA TEGO~Y: 12 Oescri ption cr Wetland and. other Commeris : (i.e. fm'eri. du.; habibttedilref; ~
~;
iIeIaipD.m dille VIUl!md. 01dU.e d II:' 8Iljti< uROW; a1>1i.m pcta!ii.aJ, ~
.tiotJ.ut>""'.... 8Ilj.. &It IDul UJ~ wHile ob.mwI:iim.o, n:mm lllIIrI> 4D, lit-1m\\{, ~)
Does nat have soils to meet jurisdictional wetland criteria as de1ned by the USACE. This w.etland likely developed in a low spat let over atergrading occurre d. t meest US FWS iii etland delinition and should be considered br impacts under NEP A and ExecutiV2 Order 11990.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
.1 I
'I I
I I
I I
I I,
Appendix B Projec: Bellefonte Investigator: B. Dimick, K.Pilarski, N
yS L Burton Normal Circumstances:
Sample ID:
W010 County: Jackson Atypical Situation:
n Station or Structure Num bergsl':
State: AL Date: September 1,2009 Problem Area:
Cowardin Code:
PFO1E Vegetatlon Plait Species Stratum Indicator Plant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Tr Facw
- 9.
Glycena stnata H
Obl
- 2.
Liquiddambar styraciflua Tr Fac+
- 10.
Polygonum sp.
H
- 3.
Quercus phellos Tr Facw
- 11.
Salix nigra Tr OBL
- 4.
Ilex decidua Sh Facw
- 12.
Ligtustrum sinense Sh Fac
- 5.
Berchemia scandens WV Facw
- 13.
Saurnrus cernuum Herb OBL
- 6.
Smilax glauca WV Fac
- 14.
Carpinus caroliniana Tr, Sh Fac
- 7.
Populus deltoides Tr Fac
- 15.
Campsis radicans Sap Fac
- 8.
Celtis laevigata Tr Facw 16.
Percent of Dominant Species That are OBL, FACW, or FAC:
100 Hydrology Field Observations:
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Depth of Surface Water:
0 (in.)
Primary Incicators Secondary Indicators Depth to Free Water in Pit:
0 (in.)
Inundated Drift Lines Y
Oxidized Root Channels Depth to Saturated Soil:
0 (in.)
y Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Water Marks Water Stained Leaves Sediment Deposits y
Drainage Patterns Remarks:
Soils Soil Unit:
Drainage class:
Listed hydric soil?
Yes No Profile
Description:
Depth (Inches)
Matrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-4 10 YR 3/1 Silty clay loam 4-12+
10 YR 5/2 10 YR 5/6 Common Silty clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Gleyed or Low Chroma Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wetland Determination IHydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point Within a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
Hydric Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 0.96 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 31 1 I
I I
I I
I I:
I I
I I
I' I
Appendix B Project: Bellefonte Investigator: B. Dimick, K.Pilarski, Normal Circumstances:
y Sample 10:
W010 L Burton f--
County: Jackson Atypic," Snuation:
n Station or Structure Number(s)*
f--
State: Al Date: September 1,2009 Problem Area:
n Cowardin Code:
PF01E Vegetation Plant Species Stratum IndiCalor ptant Species Stratum Indicator
- 1.
Fraxinus pennsylvanica Tr Facw
- 9.
Glyeeria striata H
Obi
- 2.
Liquidambar styraciflua Tr Fac+
- 10.
Polygonum sp.
H
- 3.
Quercus phellos Tr Facw-
- 11.
Salix nigra Tr OBl
- 4.
/lex decidua Sh Facw
- 12.
Ligustrum sinense Sh Fac
- 5.
Berchemia scandens WI!
Facw
- 13.
Saururus cernuum Herb OBl
- 6.
Smilax gJauca WI!
Fac
- 14.
Carpinus caroliniana Tr,Sh Fac
- 7.
Populus deltoides Tr Fac
- 15.
Campsis radicans Sap Fac
- 8.
Celis laevigata Tr Facw
- 16.
Percent of Dominant Species Thai are OBl, FACW, or FAC: 100 Hydr%gy Field Observations:
Depth of Surface Water:
Depth to Free 'Nater in Pi/:
Depth to Saturated Soil:
Remarks:
Soils Soil Unit: I Profile Descripti on:
o o
o (in.)
(in.)
(in.)
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators Inundated Saturated in Upper 12 in.
Sediment Deposits I Drainage class: I Secondary Indicators Drift Lines Y
Oxidized Root Channels Water Marks Water Stained Lea'V'eS Drainage Patterns I listed hydric soil? I Yes I I No I Depth (Inches)
Malrix Color (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Colors (Munsell Moist)
Mottle Abundance Texture 0-4 10 YR 311 Sitty clay loam 4-12+
10 YR 5/2 10 YR 5/6 Common Sitty clay loam Hydric Soil Indicators:
y Gleyed or Low Chrom a Colors Histic Epipedon Aquic Moisture Regime Sulfidic Odor High Organic Cont. Surf. Layer Sandy Soils y
Reducing Conditions Concretions Organic Streaking in Sandy Soils Other (Explain in Remarks)
Remarks:
Wedand Determination Hydrophytic Vegetation Present?
Yes Y
No Is this Sampling Point IMthin a USACE Wetland?
Yes Y
No -
Wetland Hydrology Present?
Yes Y
No Does area only meet USFWS wetland definition?
Yes No N
HydriC Soils Present?
Yes Y
No Is wetland mapped on NWI?
Yes No N
Estimated size: 0.96 acres Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 31 'I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Wetland Descriptors SanwIe ID: W Photo ID(s): 1 6-18.24;26,153-1 65 Flagging
Description:
Drawing Please Include: North Arrow. Project Centerline.Survey Corridor Boundaries, Length of Wetland Feature. Distances from Centedine, Photo Locations I
-I-"-6 A
I I
I I
I I,
I I
I II Obijous Connecions.to
- x.
Yes I INo WaterbodyANatershed: Drains directly into Guntersville Resevoir via a culvert Waters of the US/State?
I Prinary Water Source Cap Frnge Dverbanking IIShe Flow 2 1 Groundveter 1 31 Precipitation Othe (if othr, note in oommnts) oO Fno0 1 v ra.n I S e F° l 1 ° n ~ r I 1
- e i'~ '° TVARAM SCORE:
0 TA MCT Y
Description of Wetland and Other Convmmits: (m fbes.tagec*ss; habitat firuluu; hydnkgk nrgim;dwiptiunoftrwetlu oultsite orradjaemet to ROW; ensonpotathl, exi ting difbaues, adjtcent bd me widttife obw'atimm, statlmnnumbes, t-klm,, ek)
This drainage feature is a wide bottom, natural ravinewvith large vetlandtrees and wetland soils (aithough some places are rocky). The majority ofthe ravine.-cntainsat least minimal vegetation. The ravine empties into Guntersville Resevoir via a culvert near the shoreline.
312 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 312 Wetland Descflptors Safr4llelD: W01 0 PhotoID(s): 16-18,24,26,153-165 Flagging
Description:
Drawing Please Include: North Arrow, Project Centerline,SurveY Corridor Boundaries, Length 01 Wetland F~ature, Distances from Centerline, Photo Locations Nt o bilious Comections to I I I waters of the USistate?'
x, Yes No WaterbodyNVatershed: Drains directly into Guntersville Resevoir via a culvert Primary Water Soun:e I I I I I,I I,I I I (II other, note in comments)
CaR, Fringe 1
Overbanking Sheet Flow 21 GrnundW3ter 31 Precipitation Other TVARAMSCORE:
50 1 TVARAMCATEGORY: 12 D ascription of Wed and and Othe~ Comments: (Le. fin:esl age class; bobililt Iimures; bydro"p: regime; dl!5ll:ription oflbe wetla.nd outride of or adjaceul to ROW; erornnpoten-. exiitiog dil:ttoba:no:es, odjaceullimd me, wildlili! ObseIVlltions, station numbers,.... i-.. ng, eII:)
This drainage leature isa ",de 'bottom, natural ravine.v~th large I'.eIlandlreesand,v..etland sons (ailhough some places are rocky), The majorityollhe ravine,containsal least minimalvegetalion, The ralAne em'plies into GuntersvilieR esevoirlAa a culvert near Iheshoreline, Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I,
I I
I I
I I,
I
'I I,
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W001 I Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 11SsI(
)
Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. lfan Metric 1. Wetland Area size open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres max 6pts.
subtotal (8 ha),.then add only 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wetland size for Metic 1.
Select one size class and assign score.
E] >50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pts)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6))
Aeril Photos 10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field Survey 3to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2))
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0) 17 10 Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use
-ax 14 pts subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 Ift) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25.m to <50 m (82 to <164 It) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 it to <82 it) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 fIt) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
OW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow feld (3)
High. Urban, industrial. open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 121 31 Metric 3. Hydrology max 30 ots subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater (5)
[]100-year foodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
Between streamAake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
1 Part of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
SeasonalAntermittent surface water (3) j11 Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
U Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
Li >0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
LI 0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)1 Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
l Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3) 5 ditch
[] point source (nonstormwater) l Recent or no recovery (1)
I tile (including culvert) 0 filling/grading 0 dike 0 road bed/RR track 0 weir 0 dredging
[
stormwater input D other 113.5 144.5 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pts.
subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
L None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
EExcellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
E] None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6)
Qmowing El shrub/sapling removal H Recovering (3) 0 grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal Recent or no recovery (1)
[
clearcutting 0 woody debris removal E0 selective cutting E0 sedimentation 0 farming 0 dredging 5 toxic pollutants E] nutrient enrichment 44.5 suatotal this paxe Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 313 I
I I
I I
- 1 I
I
.1 I
- 1 I
I I
I' I
I Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Ratln Site: Bellefonte WOO1 Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 13 13 1 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BRfCM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres (8 ha),.then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pts subtotal max 14 pts subtotal max 30 pts subtotal Select one size class and assign score.
D >50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pts)
~
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6>>)
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6>>)
3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5>>)
§ 0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Aerial Photos Field Survey Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 ft) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25.m to <50 m (82 to <164 ft) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10m to <25 m (32 11 to <82 11) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m <<32 ft) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, pari<, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial. open pasture, row cropping. mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~
10().year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5>>)
Between streamJ1ake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5>>)
1 Part of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
SeasonalAntermitlent suriace water (3) 1 Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial suriace water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi-to permanentiy inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regula~y inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4>>)
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)J Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)J
<0.4 m <<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2>>)
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3) 0 ditch 0 paint source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 181 tile (including culvert) 181 filling/grading 181 dike 0 road bed/RR track o weir 0 dredging 181 stormwater input 0 other 113.5 144.5 I Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pis.
subtotal II 44.5 II subtotal thiS page Last revised 200S-04-29 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
~
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
D None or none apparent (9) irRecovered (6)
D Recovering (3)
D Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturbances observed o mowing 0 shrub/sapling removal o grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal o clearcutting 0 woody debris removal o selective cutting 0 sedimentation o farming 0 dredging o toxic pollutants 0 nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 313
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte WO01 Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 subtotal preious page 110 154.5 Metric 5. Special Wetlands 10ts subtotal If the documented raw score for Metric 5 is 30 points or higher. the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
r-score, Select al! that apply, vdiere multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value, Provide documentation for each selection (photos. checklists, maps, resource specialist-concuttence. data sources, references, etc).
Bog, fen. wet prairie (10): acidophilic veg.. mossy substrate t10 sq~m, sphagnum or.other moss (5); muck. organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. forest (wetl. &or adj. upland) ind. >0.25 acre (0.1 ha): old grovwh (1l); mature >18 in. (45 cm) dbh (5) [exclude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologicfeature such as spring/seep, sink. losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope wedand (4); headwoaterwetlantt [1st order perennial orabove] (3)
Island Wetland >0.1 acre (0.04 ha) in reservoir, river, or perennial water >:5 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar, etc )(3)
Gross morph. adapt 'in -5 trees >1 0 in. (25 cm') dbhi buttress, multitrunk/stool, stilted. shallow roots/tip-up, or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological corrmmunitywith global rank (NatureServe) Gt1(10), G2o(5). G3*(3) r'use higher rankwhere rixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10): other rare species With global rank G1"(10), G2?(5), G30(3)
E ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude recordswhich are only "historic']
Superior/enhanced habitatldse: migratory ssngbirdtwterfowl (5): in-reeservoir buttonbush (4); other,fishh/,ldlife management/designation (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality): <1 acre (0.4 ha) AND EITHER 80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on rrined/excavated land (t10) 29 6s3.5su Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography mao 20 pts subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
Aquatic bed Emergent Shrub Forest Mudflats Open water <20 acres (8 ha)
Moss/ichen. Other 6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Select only onei
[High (5)
E Moderately high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
l Moderate (3XBR/CM (5)]
2.Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Low ()1)BR/CM (2)]
U None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage El Extensive>75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75 %o cover (-3) flSparse 5-2 5% cover (-1)
U Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
U Absent.(1) 6d. Microtopography.
Score all present using 0to 3 scale.
QC Vegetated hummocks/tussocks.
coarse woody debris >15 cm (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 in.) dbh Auphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0 = Absent or <0Q1 ha (0 25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0.1 acred 1 =
Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate qualitv or comorises a sianificant part but is of low oualitv 2 =
Present and either comprises a significant part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comprises a small sart and is of hioh Qualitv 3 =
Present and comprises a significant part or more ofwetland's vegetation and is of hiah oualitv I
I I
I I
I I
I I
3 I
I I
I I
I 1k I
11 Narrative uescnDoon Or vepeiaxion,U allu v low = Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Native:species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o presence'of rare threatened or endangered species high> Apredortiinance ofnative species with nonnative sp &/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent orvirtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always. the oresence of rate threatened, or endanaered species Mudflat and Open Water Class Quality 0 = Absent <0 1 ha (0 25 acres) 'For BR/CM <0 04 ha (0 1 acre)]
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to'2.5 acres) [BR/CM 004 to <0.2 ha (0 1 t1 0 5 acre))
2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2.5 to 9.9 acres)[ BR/CM 0 2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acrel) 3 = Hiah 4 ha (9 9 acres) or more rBR/CM 2 ha (5 acres ( or more)
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Low Moderale Moderate High Microtopography Cover Scale 0 = Absent 1 = Present in very emall amounts or if more common of marainal oualitv 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quaslty orin small amounts of hiohest quality 3 = Present in'moderate or oreater amounts and of hiohest oualitv 63.5 Categoryj3 GRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer tolhe most recent ORA M Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakponts between wetland categories at the following address: http://w'w epa state oh us/ds*w/O t1/401 html Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 314 Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 314 TVARAM Field Fonn Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W001 Rater(s): J.Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 II 44.5 II subtotal prelious page 110 154.5 I Metric 5. Special Wetlands I m 1
a,O'o pts I subtotal raw score'
'If the documented raw score for Metric 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered a CategorY 3 wetland.
Select all that apply. Vvhere multiple values apply in row, 5 core TOW as single feature with highest point value, Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps, resource:spedaliskoncut'rence, data sources, references, etc).
Bog, fen, wet prairie (10): aCidophilic veg.. mossy substrate >10 sqm, sphagnum or.other moss (5): muck, organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. forest (wetL &lor adj, upland) indo >0.25 acre (0.1 hal: oldgr'owth (10) mature >18 in. (45 cm) dbh (5) [exclude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologiC feature such as springfseep, sink, losingfunderground stream, cave, 'llllaterfa II, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope we~and (4): headwaler'weUand [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland >D.l acre (0.04 hal in reservOir, river, or perennial water >6 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or fioodplainlterrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar,.etc.) (3)
Gross 'morph, adapt 'in >5 trees >10 in. (25 em) dbh: buttress, multitrunklstool, stilted, shallow roots/tip*up, or pneumatophores (3)
Eoological oorrrrunitywith global rank (NatureServe) Gl'(10), G2'(51. G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mxed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence statelfederal threatenedlendangered species (10): other rare species wth global rank G 1'(1 D), G2'(5), G3'(3)
["use higher rank where mixeq rank or qualifier] [exclude records which are only "historic']
DSuperiorlenhanced habitat/uSe: mgratorysongbirdMiiterfow (5), in*reservoir buttonbush (4): otherhshlWldlife managementlde~gnation (3)
D Cat. 1 (very low quality) <1 acre (OA hal AND EITHER >80% cover of invaSlves OR nonvegetated on mnedlexcavated land (*1 0) 19 IS3,5 I Metric S, Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pts subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
~
AquatiC bed Emergent Shrub 2 Forest Mudftats Open water <20 acres (8 hal Moss~lchen. Other ______ _
6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Select only one,
~
Hi9h (5)
Moderately high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3 XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Low (1 )[BR/CM (2)]
None (OJ 6c. Coverage of Invasive plants Add or deduct points for coverage
~
Extensive'>75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3) 1 Sparse 5-25% cover (-1 )
Nearly absent <5% cover (D)
Absent,{ 1) 6d. Microtopography.
Score all present using Oto 3 scale.
~
vege.ta.ted hummocks/tuSS.OCkS.
Coarse woody debris >15 em (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 em (10 In.) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0= Absent or <0:1 ha (O 25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BRICM <0.04 ha (0 1 acre II 1 -
Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate guality or comprises a significant part but is of low Quality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comprises a small part and is of hiqh quality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of hiqh quality Narrative Description of vegetation Quality low -
Low spedes diversity &Ior dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native'species mod - Native species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native spedes can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally wlo presence'of rare threatened or endangered species high - A predominance of native spedes with nonnative sp &/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and o~en but not always the presence of rate threatened or endangered species Mudflat and Open Water Class Quality o
Absent <0 1 ha !O 25 acres 1 [F or BR/CM<O 04 ha !O 1 acre)]
1 = Low 0,1 to <1 ha (025 to'2,5 acres) [BRICM 004 to <0.2 ha (Q 1 to 0 5 acrel]
2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (25 to 9.9 acresl [BR/CM 02 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acre I]
3 = High 4 ha (9 9 acresl or more rBRICM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Low Moderate Mooerate Microtopography Cover Scale 0-Absent 1 -
Present in very small'amounts or if more common of marginal guality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest guality 3 -
Present in'moderate or greater amounts and of highest quality High I!:::::::==:::::!!:~=:::::!IGRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer to the most recent ORA M Score CalibratIOn Report for the scoring breakpOints between wetland categories at the following address* htlp://vttww.epa state oh.us/dSIAIJ401/401.html Last revise<l2005-04*29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I.
I:
I I
'I I
,I I
- 1 I
I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W002 I Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 1 3 1 3 I Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BR/CM = adjused points for Blue Ridge and Curmberland Mountains. ]fan t
Aopen water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres ma 6 pis.
subtotal (8 ha), then add only 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wetland size for Metric 1.
Select one size class and assign score.
>50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pts)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
Aerial Photos 10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field Survey 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0) 11 114 IMetric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use max 14 pts subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 ft) or more around wetland perimeter (7) 1 MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 11) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 It to <82 fit) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 fIt) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland. young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 123 137 Metric 3. Hydrology max 30 nts subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater.(5) 100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
Il Between stream/lake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
1] Part of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
Seasonalhntermirtent surface water (3)
Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
El Semi-to permanentiy inundated/saturated (4)
El >0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
E Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
S0.4to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3)
D ditch
[I point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1)
E] tile (including culvert)
M filling/grading
[I dike J@ road bed/RR track o weir 5 dredging 0 stormwater input 5 other 14 51 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pts subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
(j Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
EExcellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6) 5] mowing E] shrub/sapling removal H Recovering (3) 5 grazing 5 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal URecent or no recovery (1) 5 clearcutting 5 woody debris removal o selective cutting
[
sedimentation 0 farming 5 dredging o toxic pollutants 5 nutrient enrichment subtotal this page Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 315 I
I I
I I
I I
I I*,
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantltallve Ralln Site: Bellefonte WOO2 Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 13 13 1
Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres (8 hal, then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pis.
subtotal max 14 pis subtotal 123 137 max 30 pts subtotal max 20 pis subtotal II 51 II subtotal thiS page Last revised 200>04-29 Select one size class and assign score.
D >50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pts)
~
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6))
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6))
3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5))
§ 0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3))
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2))
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Aerial Photos Field Su rvey Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 It) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 It) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 It to <82 It) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m <<32 It) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland. young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Uroan, industrial. open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Conneclivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater.(5)
~
10D-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5))
1 Between streamAake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5))
1 Part ofwetland/upland (e.g.. forest), complex (1)
Seasonal~ntermittent suliace water (3)
Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial suliace water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi* to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regular1y inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4))
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3))
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4))
<0.4 m <<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2>>)
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2))
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturoances observed Recovering (3) 0 ditch 0 point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 0 tile (including culvert) 181 filling/grading o dike 181 road bed/RR track o weir 0 dredging 181 stormwater input 0 other Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habital development. Select only one and assign score.
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
~
Excellent (7)
Poor (1) rr====================91 4c. Habitat aiteration. Score one or double check and average.
~ None or none apparent (9)
III Recovered (6)
Check all disturoances observed o mowing 0 shrub/sapling removal D Recovering (3)
D Recent or no recovery (1) o grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal o clearcutting 0 woody debris removal o selective cutting 181 sedimentation o farming 0 dredging o toxic pollutants 0 nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 315
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W002 Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 subtotal prmeeus page 10 61 Metric.5. Special Wetlands bo If the documented raw score for Metoc 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
ramscore' Select all that apply WYfhere multiple values apply in row. score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps,.-esource specialist concurrence. data sources, references, etc).
Bog. fen, wet prairie (10);.acidophilic veg., mossy substrate >t0 sq.m: sphagnum or other moss (5);, muck. organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. forest (wed. &/or adj. upland) ind. >0.25 acre (0.t ha); old growth (10). mature >18 in. (45 cm) dbh (5) excdude pine plantation]
Sensitve geologic featuresuch as spring/seep, sink, loDsing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5): isolated, perched, or slope wtland (4); headwater wetland [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland >0.1 acre (0.134 ha) in reservoir, river, or perennial water >6 1t:(2 m) deep (5)
H Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow. meander scar, etc.) (3)
LGross morph. adapt. in >5 trees >1 0 in. (25 cm) dbh: buttress, multitrunkdstool, stilted, shallow roots/tip-up, or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological community with global rank (NatureServe) GI"(10). G2'(5). G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier)
Known occurrence state/federal thsratened/endangered species (10): other rare species Wth global rank G13(10), G2(5), G3'(3)
E Vuse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier) [exclude records which are only 'historic"]
Superior/enhanced habitat/use: migratory songbird/waterfoW (5). in-reservoir buttonbush (4): other fhh/wildlife management/designatbdn (3)
UCat. 1 (very low quality) <l acre (0.4 ha) AND EITHER 130% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on mined/excavated land (-10) 1F877769f7 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography 18ax 20 pis.
SubtotK I
I I
I I
Sa. Wetland vegetation communities Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
Aquatic bed Emergent Shrub Forest Mudflats Open water <20 acres (8 ha) fMossilichen. Other---
61b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Selectonly one.
ElHigh (5)
Moderately high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
3Moderate (3XBR/CM (5))
Moderately low (2) (BR/CM (3)]
Low (1 )[BR/CM (2)]
l None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage Extensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent ( 1) 6d. Microtopography.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
D Vegetated hummocks/tussocks.
1* Coarse woody debris >15 c/rn (11 in.)
'jl Standing dead >25 cm (10 in.) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0 = Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre iFor BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 acrejI 1 = Present and either comprises a small part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate qualitv, or comorises a sionificant oart but is of low quality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate duality or comorises a small sart and is of hioh oualitv 3
Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of high quality Narrative Descrptioon of Vegetation Quality Low = Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native-species mod = Nabive species are dominant component of the vegetatbon, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species can also be present.
and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o presence of rare, threatened or endanoered soecies high = A predominance of native species with nonnative sp &/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent orvirtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the presence of rate threatened or endanoered soecres Mudiflat and Ooen Water Class Quality 0 = Absent <0 1 ha 10.25 acresl) For BR/CM.<0 04 ha (0 1 acre)l 1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to 2.5 acres))BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre)l 2 = Moderate i to <4 ha (2,5 to 9.9 acres) IBR/CM 0 2 to <02 ha 10 5 to 5 acrelt 3 = Hioh 4 ha 19.9 acres) or more (BR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion I
I I
I I
I!
II None Low CN,>rýh Low Moderate Moderate High Microtopolraphy Cover Scale 0 = Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more,common of marginal qualitv 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest quality 3 = Present in moderate or oreater amounts and of hiohest oualitv EF6-9Category 3 GRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer tothe most recent ORAM Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakpoits between wetland caregores at the following address hop'/Asoweepa.state.oh us/d*r 401i4/Ol.html Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
316 Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 316 TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Rater(s): J.Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 110 161 I Metric.S. Special Wetlands I =2 XOl 0 piS. I sublolal
'If the'documented raw score for Metric 5 is 30 pOints or higtier. the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland ro"scor.*
Select all that apply V\\I1ere multiple values apply in row. score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps..resource spedalist concurrence, data sources, references, etc).
Bog, fen, wet prairie (1 0); acidophilic veg, mossy substrate >1 0 sq.m, sphagnum or other moss (5):, muck, organic soil layer (3)
Assoc:.forest (wetl. &lor adj. upland) Ind. >0.25 acre (0.1 hal, old grOWh (10); matuTe >18 in. (45 em) dbh (5) [exdude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature'such as spring/seep, sink, IDsing/undergro~nd stream, cave, V'oIaterfall, rock Dutcroplclrtf (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope wetland (4); headwoter wetland [1 st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland >0.1 acre (0.04 hal in reservoir, ri"ver, or perennial water >6 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or fioodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar, etc.) (3)
Gross morph. adapt: i~ ",5 tie~s >lD In. (25 ern) dbh buttress:multitrunklstool, stilted, shallow roots/tip-up,.or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological corrrrunity with global rank (NatureServe) Gl'(l D), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier)
Known occurrence state/feDeral threatenedlendangered species (10); otherrare species... th global rank Gl'(l D), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank Dr qualifier] [exclude records which are on~ "historic"]
o Superior/enhanced habrtatJuse: mgratory songbirdlwaterfm (5), in-reservoir bunonbush (4); other f,sh,wldlife management/designation (3) o Cat 1 (very low quality) <1 acre (OA hal AND EITHER >80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on rrinedlexcavated land (-10)
L..".,..=............. =..... Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography 6a*. Wetland vegetation communities Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
~
AquatiCbed Emergent Shrub Forest Mudftats Open water <20 acres (8 hal Moss~ichen. Other ______ _
6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
sele~ct~~~h o(~~
MOde. r,ately hig. h (4)[BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3 XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Low (1) [BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct pOints for coverage
~
Extensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3) 1 Sparse 5-25% cover.(-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover(O)
Absent (1)
- 6d. Microtopography.
- Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
.~ Vegetated hummocks/tussocks, 1 Coarse woody debris >15 em (6 in.)
1 Standing dead >25 em [10 in.) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0= Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre tFor BR/CM <004 ha (0 1 acre)]
1 = Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate auality or corTwrises a sianiflcant oart but is of low guality 2 -
Present and either comprises a significant part of wet land's vegetation and is of moderate guality or comprises a small oart and is of high guality 3 -
Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of high guality Narratlye Rescription of Veaetation Quality Low - Low spedes diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant nativ e 'species mod = Native:species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native spedescan also be present, and species diverSity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o presence of rare threatened or endangered species high - A predominance of native spedes with nonnative sp &/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the presence of rate threatened or endangered speCies Mudflat and Open Water Class quality o
Absent <01 ha (0.25 acres)[ForBR/CM*<O 04 ha (01 acrell 1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (025 to 2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre))
2 -
Moderate 1 to <4 ha (25 to 9.9 acres) [BR/CM 02 to <02 ha (05 to 5 acre))
3 -
High 4 ha (9.9 acres) or more rBR/CM 2 ha [5 acres) or more)
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Low Moderate Moderate Microtopography Cover Scale 0-Absent 1 -
Present In very small amounts or if mo@,common of marginal guallty 2 -
Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest guallty 3 -
Present inmQderate or greater amounts'and of highest auality High 1!:::116=9=c=a=te::::!!g!::::o::'!rY::::3====::::!I11 GRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer to the most recent ORAM Score Calibration Report for the sconng breakponls between wetland categories al the following address* hltp*/fwww.epa.state.ohus/d9H/401/401.html Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I' I
I
'I
-I I
I I
Appendix B IVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W003 I Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 1 2 12 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size )
Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. Ifan M i eopen water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres max 6 ps subtotal Selctnesi.(8 ha), then add only 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) ofit to the wetand size for Metric 1.
Select one size class and assign score.
>50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pis)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
Aerial Photos 10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) (BR/CM (6)]
Field Survey 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0) 14 1
I Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use max 14 pts subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 ft) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m t(<50 m (82 to0<164 t) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 ft to <82 ift) around wetland perimeter (1)
RY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 fit) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
OW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 114 120 1 Metric 3. Hydrology max 30 pts sublotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater (5)
[]100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
] Between strearrmlake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
1] Part of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
I Seasonal,,ntermittent surface water (3) t] Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
E] Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
H Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) (BR/CM (3)]
H Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) (BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
1 Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3) 0l ditch 0l point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1)
] tile (including culvert) 0 filling/grading o dike 0 road bed/RR track El weir El dredging o stormwater input 0l other 19 129 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pis subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
H None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6)
El mowing El shrub/sapling removal g Recovehng (3)
El grazing El herbaceous/aquatic bed removal Recent or no recovery (1)
E] clearcutting El woody debris removal C] selective cutting El sedimentation E] farming El dredging El toxic pollutants El nutrient enrichment subtotal this page Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 317 I
I:
'I I
,I I
I I
I I
I
,I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Ratln Site: Bellefonte WOO3 Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 12 12 1 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BRICM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres (8 hal, then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pts subtotal max 14 pts subtotal max 30 pts subtotal 19 129 max 20 pts subtotal II 29 II subtotal this page Last revised 2005-04*29 Select one size class and assign score.
~
>50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pts) 25 to <50 acres (10 1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6>>)
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6>>)
310 <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5>>)
~
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
0.1 to<0.3 acre (004to <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Aerial Photos Field Survey Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WI DE. Buffers average 50 m (16411) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to '<50 m (82 to <164 11) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (3211 to <82 11) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10m <<3211) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATEL Y HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, pari<, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial. open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~
100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5>>)
1 Between streamJIake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5>>)
1 Part of wetland/upland (e.g.. forest), complex (1)
Seasonalnntermittent surface water (3) 1 Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4>>)
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4>>)
<0.4 m <<16 in.)( 1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in) (2>>)
1 Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.)(1) [BR/CM (2>>)
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovering (3) 0 ditch 0 point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 0 tile (including culvert) 181 filling/grading o dike 181 road bed/RR track o weir 0 dredging o stormwater input 0 other Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
~
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
B None or none apparent (9)
Recovered (6) tlI Recovering (3) o Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturbances observed o mOwing 0 shrub/sapling removal o grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal o clearcutting 0 woody debris removal o selective cutting 0 sedimentation o farming 0 dredging o toxic pollutants 0 nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 317
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W003 Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 subtotal preious page 14 1 33iI Metric 5. Special Wetlands a lg tl subtotal If the documented raw score forMetrc5 is30 points or higher. the site is autornatically considered a Category3wetland.
ra score*
Select all that apply. Where multiple values.appiy inrow, score row as single feature with highest point value Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps, resourcespedalisbconcutrence. data sources, references, etc).
Bog, fen, vet prairie (10): acidophilicveg., mossy substrate >10 sq.m, sphagnum or other moss(5): muck. organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. forest (wei. S/or adj. dpland) ins. >0.25 acre (0.1 ha):old growth (10); mature >18 in. (45 cm) dbs (5) [exclude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff(5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope wetland (4). headwater wetand [1st order perennial or above] (3) lsland Wetand >10.1 acre (0.04 ha) in reservoir, hver, or peren'nial water.'6 ft t2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar..etc.) (3)
Gross morph.adapt, in >5 trees >1 0 in. (25 cm) dbh: buttress, rroiltitrunldstool, stilted. shallow rootsltip-uip, or pneumnatophores (3)
Ecological coemmnityw with global rank (NatureServe) G1'(1(. 0G2'(5). G3'(3) r use higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10) other rare species Wth global rank t151), )G2'(5). G3'(3)
E ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] (exclude records which are only*historic]
Superior/enhanced habitat/dse: migratory sengbird/ewaterfowl (5I in-reservoir buttonbush (4); other fhshwildlife management/designation (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality),:
1 acre (04 ha) AND EITHER '80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on rrined/excavated land I-10) 12 135 Metric s. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pts.
subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
Aquatic bed Emergent Shrub Forest Mudflats Open water <20 acres (8 ha)
Moss/ichen Other 6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion Select only one.
High (5)
Moderately high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3))
I Low (1) [BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage.
E xtensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1)
Ed. Microtopography.
Score all present using Oto 3 scale.
H Vegetated hummocks/tussocks Coarse woody debris >15 cm (S in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 in.) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0 = Absent or <0:1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre rFor BR/CM <0.04 ha (0.1 acre]t
=
Present and either comprises a small part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comorises a sionificant part but is oflow quality 2 =
Present and either comprises a significant part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comprises a small part andis of hiuh quality 3 =
Present and comprises a significant part or more ofwetland's vegetation and is of hich oualitv I
I
£ I
I It I
I I
£ I
rarrative Liescnctuon or vegetation uuaimiv low = Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnabve or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Nabve species are dominant component of the'vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species can also be present.
arid species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/s presence of rare threatened or endangered soecies high = A predominance'of native species with nonnative sp &/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent orvirtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the presence of rate threatened or endanoered spocies Mudflat and Open Water Class Quality 03= Absent <0 1 ha (0.25 acres) [For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0.1 acre)]
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to 2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre))
2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2.5 to 9g9 acres) EBR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0 5 to 5 acre))
3 = Hiidh 4 ha (9.9 acres) or more [BR/CM 2 ha(5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Mirrmtnnnn~rrnhv Cnser C Lo-Moderate Moderate High role rot--r"nh Cover......
0 = Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more common of marcinal quality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of hiohest quality 3 = Present in moderate or areater amounts and of highest quality
- 5.
.1 1135 Category 2 IIGRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer to the mest recent CRAM Score Calbration Report for the scoring breakpoints beteenewetland categories at the following address: htop:/A/ew.espa.slate.oh.us/dcw/401/401.html Last revised 200"-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 318 Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 318 TVARAM Field Fonn Quantitative Rating Rater(s): J. Groton, H. Hart Date: April 6, 2006 14 133 1 Metric 5, Special Wetlands 14 rna, 10 pts 1 subtotal
'lIthe documented raw score lor Metric 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is autoin*atically considered a CategorY 3 wetland, raw score' Select all that appIY.,W1ere multiple values. apply inTow, score row as single feature with highest point value Provide documentation for each selection (photos', checklfsts, maps, resource*specialist-concurrence, data'sources, references, etc).
12 135 m~)( -20 pts.
subtotal Bog, fen, V\\t prairie (10); acidophilic veg., mossy substrate >10 sq,m, sphagnum or other moss (5); muck, organic scillayer (3)
Assoc. foreSt (wetl. &lor adj, uplan*d) ind, >0.25 acre (0.1 ha);;old gr(J\\'\\(h (10); mature >18 in. (45 cm) dbh (5) [exdude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink,losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope wetland (4), headwater wetland [1 st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland >0.1 a~e (0.04 hal in reservoir, nver, or peren'nial water.>6 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided' channel or ftoodplain/terrace depressions (ftoodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar"etc,) (3)
Gross morph. adapt. 'in :>5 trees :>10 in.,(25 em) dbh: buttress, rrultitrunklstool, stilted, shallow rootsltip-up, or pneurnatophores (3)
ECiJlogical corrmunity Witli global rank (NatureServe) Gl'(1 0), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10); oiherrare species.... th global rank Gl'(IO), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude records which are only'historicl 8
superior/enhanc.ed habit. atluse: mgratory songbirdMaterfolM (5), in-reservoir buttonbush (4); other fishlwldlife management/designation (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality) <1 acre (04 hal AND EITHER >80% cover of Invasives OR nonvegetated on mned/excavated land (-10)
Metric 6, Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography 6a. Wetland vegetation communities sco~re ~~::~~~~~Sing 0 to 3 scale, Emergent Shrub Forest Mudftats Open water <20 acres (8 hal MossAlchen, Other _______ _
6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion sele~ct ~~~h o(~~
MOde.ratelY high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3 XBR/CM (5))
Moderately low (2) (BR/CM (3)]
1 Low (1 )[BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage.
~
ExtensOJe >75% cover (-5)
Modera.te 25-75% cover(-3) 1 Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1) 6d. Microtopography.
Score all present using *O'to 3 scale,
~
Vegetated hummocks/tusSO. cks Coarse woody debris >15 ern (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 ern (10 In.) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0-Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BRACM <004 ha (Q 1 acre 1I 1 -
Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comprises a sianiflcant part but is of low auality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comprises a small part and is of high guality 3 = Present and comprises a Significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of high quality Narratlye Description of Vegetation quality low -
Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant natOJe species mod = Native:species are dominant component ofthe'vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant natOJe species can also be present, arid species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally wlo presence 01 rare threatened or endangered species high - A predominance' of native species with nonnative sp &Ior disturbance tolerant nativesp absent or virtually absent, and high sp dOJersity and often but not always the presence of rate threatened or endangered species Mudflat and Open Water Class quality o
Absent <0 1 ha(O.25 acres I [ForBR/CM <004 ha (01 acre))
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (025 to 2,5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0,2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre)!
2 Moderate 1 to <4 ha (25 to 9.9 acres) [BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0 5 to 5 acre)]
3 HiGh 4 ha (99 acres) or more [BR/CM 2 har5 acres) or more!
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Low Moderate Moderate Microtopography Cover Scale o
Absent 1
Present in very small amounts or if more common of marginal quality 2 -
Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of hiqhest qualitv 3 -
Present in moderate or greater amounts 'and of hiqhest quality High l!::113=:5=c=a=te::::!!:g=or::Y:::::::2===!.I11 GRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer to the most recent ORA M Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakponls between wetland categories al the following address: http://'owNtI.epa.S1ate.oh.us/d9N1401/~Ol.html Lost revised 2005.04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I, I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W004 IRater(s): J. Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 12 1
2 Metric 1 Wetland Area Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Curmberland Mountains. If an S(Siz open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres max 6 pis subtotal (8 ha), then add only 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wettand size for Metric 1.
Select one size class and assign score.soreasupinfrszestme(lt)
E >50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pis)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
H25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
Aerial Photos 10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field Survey 3to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
H 0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha).(2) (BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0)
I15 18 I Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use
-ox 14 pts subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 ft) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 fl) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 1t to <82 fl) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 ft) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
L High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 115 123 Metric 3. Hydrology mox 30 ptsl subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater (5)
E 100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
1 Between streamlake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
1 Part ofwetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
Seasonallntermittent surface water (3) 1 Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
El Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
El >0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3) l Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
0.4to 0.7 m (116 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
LJ Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3) 0 ditch E] point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 0 tile (including culvert) 0g filling/grading 0 dike C1 road bed/RR track E] weir 5 dredging
[@ stormwater input 0 other 11 34 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development
<ax 20 pts subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
[RRNone or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fa ir (2)
Poor (1)
E] None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6)
[] mowing 5 shrub/sapling removal Recovering (3)
E] grazing 5 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal E Recent or no recovery (1)
I0 clearcutting 0 woody debris removal El selective cutting 0 sedimentation C] farming 0 dredging 34 toxic pollutants
[]nutrient enrichment subtotal this puge Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 319 I
.1 I
I I
I I,
I I
I*
I' I
I*
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Ratln Site: Bellefonte WOO4 Rater(s): J. Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 12 12 I Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres (8 hal, then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for M ehic 1 mal( 6 pts subtotal Is 18 max 14 pts subtotal max 30 pts subtotal max 20 pts subtotal II 34 II subtota! this page Last revised 200:;'04-29 Selecl one size class and assign score.
0>50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pis)
§ 2510 <50 acres (10.1 10 <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6)J 10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6)J 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5)]
~
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha).(2) [BR/CM (3)J 0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2)J
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Aerial Photos Field Survey Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WI DE. Buffers average 50 m (16411) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 11) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (3211 to <82 11) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m <<3211) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban. industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~
10G-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
1 Between streamJ1ake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)J 1 Part of wetland/upland (e.g" forest), complex (1)
Seasonallintermitlent surface water (3)
Part of riparian or upland conridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularty inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)J 0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)J Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)J
<0.4 m <<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.)(2)J Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovering (3)
D ditch D point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 181 tile (including culvert)
~ filling/grading
~ dike D road bed/RR track D weir D dredging
~ stormwater input D other Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
~
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
D None or none apparent (9)
~Recovered (6)
!:ji Recovering (3) o Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturbances observed D mowing D shrub/sapling removal D grazing D herbaceous/aquatic bed removal D clearcutling D woody debris removal D selective culting D sedimentation D farming D dredging D toxic pollutants D nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 319
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W004 Rater(s): J.'Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 subtotal prevous page 18 42 Metric 5. Special Wetlands 1 t subt oral
- If the documented raw score for Metnc 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
raw score' Select all that apply.,V\\'Aere multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps, resource specialistconcurrence, dataos6urces, references, etc).
[agten, wet prairie (l5): addophilicveg.. massy substrate >10 sq.m, sphagnum or othermoss (5): muck, organic soil layer (3)
Lirssoc. forest (ewet &/ar adj. upland)inla
>0=25 acts (0.1 ha): old greowtf (15): mature >18 In. (45 cm) dbh (5) (exclude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologicfeature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or dope weltand (4): headwater wedgand [tst order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland >0.1 acre (0.04 ha) in reservoir, river. or perennial water >8 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar.,etc.) (3)
G oss mdrlh adapt. in >5 trees >10 in. (25 cm) dbh: buttress, multitrumndstool, stilted, shallow roots/tip-up, or pneurnatophores (3)
Ecological community with global rank (NatureServe) O1(lt0). G2'(5), 33'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (t0); other rare species wth global rank GOt(t0, 132'(5) G3 3(
ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude recordswhich are only'historic"]
Superior/ehhanced habitatlase: migratory snngbirdAwaterfov4 (5) in-reservoir buttonbush (4): other fish/MIldlife rmanagemem/designadbn (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality) : <1 acre (0.4 ha) AND EITHER >80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on mrnedfexcavated land (-1t) 113 1 55 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 21 pts.
subtotal I
I I
I I
I i
I I
I I
I 6a Wetland vegetation bommunities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
A quatic bed Emergent Shrub Forest Mudllats Open water <20 acres (8 ha)
Moss/lichen. Other 6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Select only one.
H High,(5)
Moderately high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
3 Moderate (3XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Low (1)[BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage ofinvasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage.
Extensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent.( 1 )
6d. Microtopography.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
[
Vegetated hummrcks/tussocks 21Coarse woody debris >15 ore (S in.)
1 Standing dead >25 cm (10 in.) dbh iAmphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0 = Absent or <0:1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0.1 acre)f 1 = Present and either comprises a small part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate qualityv or comprises a signiticant oart but is ot low ouality 2 =
Present and either comprises a significant part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate aualitv or comprises a small part and is of hiah ouality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more oftwetland's vegetation andis of hinh quality Narrative Description of Vegetation Quality low = Low species diversity&/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Native species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o oresence of rare threatened or endanaered species high = A predominanceof native species with nonnative sp &/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the oresence of rate, threatened or endanoered soecies Mudflat and Open Water Class Quality 0 = Absent <0 1 ha (0.25 acres) [For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 acrel]
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to02.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre))
2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2 5 to 9.9 acres] [BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acre)]
3 = Hiah 4 he (9.9 acres) or more [BR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion 0C() C~
DY)
None Low
-ow Moderate Moderate High Microtopography Cover Scale 0 = Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more,common of marginal quality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest Quality 3 = Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest qualitv I55 -Category2 1GRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer tothe most recent ORAM Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakponts betweenwetland categories at the following address: http:/kuwww.epa saate ohsus/ds/!401/401.html Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I 320 Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 320 TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte w004 Rater(s): J.'Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26,2006 II 34 II subtotal previous page la 142 I Metric 5. Special Wetlands I
maa, 10 pts I subtotal
'lithe documented raw score for Metnc S is 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland raw score' Select all that applY.,Wlere multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest pOint value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps, resourcespedalist'concurrence, data'sources, references, etc).
Bog, fen, wet prairie (1 D); acidophilic veg'., mossy substrate >10 sq,m, sphagnum or other moss (5), muck, organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. for~st (wetl &lor adj, upland) ind >1}25 acre (0.1 hal; old growth (1 D); mature >18 In, (45 em) dbh (5) (e~clude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, 'lNaterfalJ, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope we~and (4); headwale'r w.e~and (1 st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland >D. 1 acre (0.04 hal in reservOir, river, or perennial water >6 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or fioodplainlterrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar "etc,) (3)
Ginss morph adapt in >5 trees >10 in, (25 em) dbh: buttress, mu~itrunklstool, stilted, shallow rootsltip-up, or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological comrirunity with global rank (NatureServe) Gl'(1 0), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence statelfederal threatenedlendangered species (1 D); othei rare species ""til global rank Gl'(1 0), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank Dr qualifier] [exclude records \\lVhich are only "historic"]
Dsuperiorlenhanc.ed habitaUtise: nngratorysongbirdiwaterfoVl4,(5, in-reservoir bunonbush (4); otller flshlwldlife managementldesignation (3)
D Cat 1 (very low quality) <1 acre (OA hal AND EITHER >80% cover of invaSJves OR nonvegetated on mnedlexcavated land (-10)
,-:11=3~~1-:5~5::::--,1 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pIs.
subtotal 6a Wetland vegetation communities, Score all present uSing 0 to 3 scale,
~
AquatiC bed Emergent Shrub Forest Mudftats Open water <20 acres (8 hal MossAlchen. Other _______ _
6b, Horizontal (plan view) interspersion sele~ct ~~~ho(~~
Moder~tely high (4) [BRICM (S)]
3 Moderate (3 XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Low (1) [BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants Add or deduct pOints for coverage,
~
Extensive >7S% cover (-S)
Moderate 2S-75% cover (-3) 1 Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent.(1 )
6d. Mi crotopo gra phy Score all present using Oto 3 scale,
~
Vegetated hummocks/tussocks Coarse woody debris >15 em (6 in,)
1 Standing dead >25 cm (10 in) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation 'Community Cover Scale 0= Absent or <0:1 ha (0,25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <004 ha (01 acre))
1 -
Present ana either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate guality or comprises a significant part but is of low auality 2 -
Present ana either comprises a significant pari of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate gua)ity or comprises a small part and is of high guality 3 -
Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and'is of high guality Narrat!ve Rescription of Vegetation quality low -
Low spedes diversity &Ior dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod - Native species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant natrve species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o presence of rare threatened or endangered species high - A predominance'of native spedes with nonnative sp &Ior disturbance tolerant native sp absent orvirtuaJly absent, and high sp diversity and onen but not always the presence of rate threatened or endangered spedes Mudflat and Open Water Class quality 0-Absent <01 ha (0.25 acres)[For BRICM<0.04 ha (0 1 acrell 1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to'2,S acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acrell 2 -
Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2 5 to 9.9 acres) [BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (O.S to 5 acre)!
3 = High 4 ha (9 9 acres) or more [BR/CM 2 ha (S acres) or more!
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of IntersperSion None Low Low Moderate Moderate Microtopography Cover Scale 0-Absent 1 -
Present in veN small amounts or if mare'common of marginal Quality 2 -
Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in sma)1 amounts of highest guality 3 -
Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest guality High 1=====:i::::::::::::::!!::::::~==:::::!1 GRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer to the most recent ORAM Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakpoills between wetland categories at the following address' http://w'ww.epa.statB.oh.us/dS\\lll/401/401.hlm!
last revised 2005~4-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I
'I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte WOOS I Rater(s): J. Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 1 2 12 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size )
Notes: BR/CM
= adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres max 6 Pts subtotal
.(8 ha), then addonly 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wetland size for Metric 1.
Select one size class and assign scorn.
>50 acres (520.2 ha) (6 pis)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
Aerial Photos 10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field Survey 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
S0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0) 113 115 1 Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use max 14 its subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
VWIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 ft) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 fl) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 ft to <82 ft) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 ft) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 19 134 Metric 3. Hydrology max 30pts subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater (5)
[1 100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
I11 Between streamalake and other human use (1 1 Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
Part of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
[]easonalAntermittent surface water (3)
L Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
[7"Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
LI >0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
Li 0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3))
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
S seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3) 0 ditch 0 point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1)
Q tile (including culvert)
[] filling/grading O dike 0 road bed/RR track o weir 0 dredging
[] stormwater input 0 other --
114 48 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pts subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
] None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6) 0] mowing 0 shrub/sapling removal H Recovering (3) 0] grazing E0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal Recent or no recovery (1) 0 clearcutting 0 woody debris removal o selective cutting 0 sedimentation o] farming E] dredging o toxic pollutants 5 nutrient enrichment Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 321 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Ratln Site: Bellefonte WOOS Rater(s): J. Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 12 12 1 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BRfCM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflatS) is :>20 acres (8 hal, then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pIs subtotal max 14 pts subtotal 119 134 max 30 pts subtotal 114 148 max 20 pts subtotal II 48 II subtotal thiS page Last revised 2005-04*29 Select one size class and assign score.
~
>50 acres (:>20.2 hal (6 pts) 25 to <50 acres (10 1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6)]
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/cM (6)]
3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5)]
~
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to<0.3 acre (0.04to <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sou rces/assu mptions for size estimate (list):
Aerial Photos Field Survey Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 It) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 It) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 1 0 m to <25 m (32 It to <82 It) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10m <<32 It) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATEL Y HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~
100-yearfloodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
1 Between streamAake and other human use (1) 1 Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
1 Part of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1) seasonallintermittent surface water (3) 1 Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or db!. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. select only one and assign score.
~'Semi'IO permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m <<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovering (3) 0 ditch 0 point source (nonstorrnwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 0 tile (including culvert) 0 filling/grading o dike 0 road bed/RR track o weir 0 dredging o stormwater input 0 other Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
~
Excellent (7)
Poor (1) rr======================jJ 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
D None or none apparent (9)
!lI Recovered (6) 8 Recovering (3)
Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturbances observed o mowing 0 shrub/sapling removal o grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal o clearcutting 0 woody debris removal o selective cutting 181 sedimentation o farming 0 dredging o toxic pollutants 0 nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 321
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W005 Rater(s): J. Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26,2006 subtotal preeeus page 14 12oi Metric,5. Special Wetlands m 10 pt subto0tal It the documented raw score for Metnc 5 is30 points or higher. the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
raw'score" Select all that apply. Wyhere multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature withohighest point value Provide documentation for each'selection ýphotos, checklists, maps; resource specialist-concurrence, data'sources; references, etc)
Bog. fen. wt prairie (10): acidophilicveg., mossy substrate >10 sq5m, sphagnum or other moss (5): rruckk organic soil layerf3)
Assoc. forest (we. 5/or adj upland) nc >0.25 acrce (01 ha): old growh (10): mature >18 in :(45 cm) dbhf(5) [exodube pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5)t isolated, perched, or slope eretland (4); headwaterwetland [1st order peretnnial or above],(3)
[]slasdwetland >0:1 atme (0.04 ha) ih reservoir, river, or perenhiil wateruB tt (2 ro) deal (5)
Braided clhannel or floodplain/terrace d'epressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar,.etc.) (3)
Gross morph. adapflin >5 trees >10 in. (25cm):dbh:rbuttress, multitru*dkstool, stilted, shallow rootsitip-up: or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological corrmunitywith global rank (NatureServe) G1O(10), G2h(5), G3'(3) *use higher rankwhere mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence stateffederal threatened/endangered species (10): otherrare species With global rank GO*(10), G20(5). G31(3)
Eruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] (exclude records which are;only'historic"]
Superiorfehhanced habitarictie: rrmigratory songbird/waterfowl (5), in-reservoir buttonbush (4)] other fish'wildlife management/designatidh (3)
UCat. 1 (veryflow quality) : <1 acre (0.4 ha) ANDGEITHER >80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on rnied/excavated land (-10) 18 110 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography mwx 20 pis.
Subt~otalI 6a Wetland vegetation communities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
Aq uat c bed Emergent Shrub Forest Mudflats EOpen water <20 acres (8 ha)
Mossuichen Other 6b Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Select only one.
U High (5)
[
Moderately high (4)[BR/CM (5)]
3[Moderate (3XBRICM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
L Low (l) [BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage.
Extensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% covet (-3)
ISparse 5-25% cover (-1)
I Nearly absent <5% cover(0)
Absent (1)
Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0 = Absent or <0:1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre (For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 sare)t 1T Present and either comprises a small part ofwetland's vegetation.and is.of moderate oualitvy or comprises a significant part but is of low duality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part otwetland.s vegetation and is of moderate Quality ortcomorises a small oart andis of hiah oualitv 3= Present and comprises a signifcant part or more ofweoland's vegetation and is of high qualitv Narrative Description of Veoetation Quality Low = Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant natie species mod = Natbve, species ;are dominant component ofthe vegetation, although nonnative.&/or disturbance tolerant native species.can also be present.
and species diversity mroderate to moderately.higlt. but generally w/o oresence of rare threatened or endangered soecies high = Alpred6mdirance ofrnative species with nonnative sp &/or:disturbance.
tolerant native sp absent orvirtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always, the presence of rate threatened or endangered species Mudflat and Open Water Class Qualitv 0 = Absent <0 1 ha (0.25 acres) FFor BR/CM-<0 04 ha (0 1 acretl 1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (025 to 2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0 2 ha (01 o 0 5 acre)]
2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2 5'to 99 acres) fBR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acre)]
3 = High 4 ha t9.9 acrest or more rBR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
5d Microtopography.
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion Score all present using O*to 3 scale.
P CVegeetated hummocis/tussocks.
Coarse woody debris >15 cm (6 in.,
f Standing deadp>25 cm (10 in.) cbh__
SAtnphidbian breeding pools None LoW Love Moederale Moderate High Microtopography Cover Scale 0 = Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more common of marginal quality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest quality 3 = Present in moderate or creater amounts and of hiohest oualitv 60category 3 GRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer to.the most recent ORA M Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakpoints between wetland categories at the following address: http:/Ava'.epaesate.oh.us/oswf4OlJ401 html Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 322 Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 322 TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating
'Site: BeilefonteWOO5 Rater(s): J:Groton, B: Dimick Date: April 26,.2006 II 48 II subtotal previous page 14 152 1 Metric.5. Special Wetlands 14 max 10 pts I subtotal
'If the documented raw score for Metnc 5 is 30 pOints or higner. the site IS automatically considered a Category 3 wetland raw'score' Select all that apply.. ~ere mUltiple values apply In row,score-row as single featurewith'highest point value Provide documentation for each'selection(photos, checkli'sts, maps; resource specialist-concurrence, data'sources; references, etc)
Bog, fen, wet prairie (10): aCidophilic veg, mossy substrate >10 sq,m, sphagnum or olller moss (5): muck, organic soil layer (3)
AssO[; for~~(wetl. &lor adjupland).Irid >0.25 acre (0 1 ha):old gro..:rh (10): mature >18 in.(45 cm) dbh'(5) [exdiJae pine plantationJ Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink,loslng/underground stream, cave, 'lNaterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5): isolated, perched, or. slope wetland (4): headwater.Wetland [1st order perennial or aboveJ (3,-
1~land ~etland >[1"1 acre'(O 1M hal in reservclIr, river, or.per*enn,ai water:>6 f{ (2 m) deep '(5)
Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depreSSions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar,.etc.)*(3)
Gross morph. 'adapCin 'C5 trees >10 in.(25*cin)*dbh*.buttress, multitrurik'stool, stilted, shallow rootsiiip-up: or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological corrmunityw,th global rank (NatureServe) Gl'(10), G2;(5), G3'(3) ruse higherrankwhere r'nix~d rank or qualifierJ Known occurrence state/federal th re atened/endangered spe cies (1 O):other rare species with global rank G 1'( 1 0), G2'@, G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier:] [exclude records whtch are;only -historic"]
D Superior/ehhance-d habitat/use: mgratory songbirdlwaierfov;l (5): in-reservoir buttonbush (4): other fishMildlife management/designation (3)
D Cat. 1 (very' low quality) <1 acre (OA hal AND EITHER >80% cover of Invaslves OR nonv~getated onmned/excavated land (-10)
Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography 6a Wetland vegetation communities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
~
AquatiC bed Emergent Shrub Forest Mudflats 1 Open water <20 acres (8 hal Moss~lehen Other ______ _
6b HOrIZontal (plan view) Interspersion.
sele~ct~~cihO(~~
MOde.ratelY h1 9. h (4) [BR/CM (5)]
M.oderate (3 XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)J Low ( 1 ][BR/CM (2)J None (0) 6c. 'coverage of invasive plants Add or deduct points for coverage.
~
Extenslve'>75% cover (-5)
.Moderate 25-75% cov. er(-3) 1 Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover(O)
Absent (1) 6d Microtopography
'Score all present using*O*to 3 scale.
~
Vegetated hummOCKs/tussocks.
1 Coarse woody debris >15 cm (6 in.)
1 Standing dead'>25 em (10 in.) dbh 1 Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0-Absent or <0:1 ha (025 acre) contiguous acre
[For BRICM <004 ha (Q 1 acre))
1 -
Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation. and is*of moderate quality or comprises a significant part but is of low guality 2 = Present and either comprises a Significant part of wetland's vegetation and ISof moderatequalitv o(comprises a small part andis of high guality 3 -
Present and comprises a significant part or more ofw:etland's vegetation and is of high guality Narratlye Description of Vegetation Quality Low - Low species diversity &Ior dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant natNe species mod = Native, species,are dominant component of.the vegetation, although nonnative*&lor disturbance tolerant native species,can also be present,
'and speCies diversity moderate to moderatelyhigli, but generally wio presence*of rare threatened or endangered species high = Apredciniirianceofriative species with nonnative sp &/oCdisturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp drversity and o'~en'
. but not always the presence of rate threatened or endangered species Mudflat and Ope n Water Class Quality o -
Absent <0 1 ha 10.25 acres) [F or BRICM*<O 04 ha ro 1 acre II 1 -
Low 0.1 to <1 ha (025 10'2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <02 ha (0 1 tei 0 5 acrell 2
Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2 5*to 9.9 acres) [BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acre)J 3
High 4 ha (9.9 acres) or more [BRICM 2 ha (5 acres) ormoreJ Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Low Moderate Modera1e Microtopography Cover Scale 0-Absent 1 -
Present in verv small amounts or if more common of marginal quality 2 -
Present in moderate amounts, but not of.highest quality or in small amounts 'of highest quality 3 -
Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest gualitv High L!::::::=::::::::!!!::::::!=====:!I GRAN D TO TA L (max 1 00 pts)
Refer to.the most recent GRAM Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakpoints between wetland categories at the following address: htlp:ltWWW.epa.S1ate.oh.us/d9N140ri401 html Last revised 200~~4-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative RatingA Site: Bellefonte W006 I Rater(s): J. Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 1 2 12 I Metric 1. Wetland Area (size )
Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. lfan Mei Wopen water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres ma-6 pts.
subtotal (8 ha),,then add only 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wetland size for M etic 1.
Select one size class and assign score.
E] >50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pts)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
Aerial Surve 10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field Survey 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0) 19 11 Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use m-x 14 pts subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 if) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25m to <50 m (82 to <164 it) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 ft to <82 it) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 it) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3) g1igh.
Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 120 131 Metric 3. Hydrology mao 30
.ts subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
5 High pH groundwater (5)
[100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
J Between streamtake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
J Part of wetland/upland (e.g.. forest), complex (1) pSeasonal/intermittent surface water (3)
Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
I Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
El >0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3) 5 Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
S Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3)
E[ ditch E] point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 0 tile (including culvert) 0 filling/grading o dike 0 road bed/RR track o weir 5
dredging stormwater input 0 other 112.5 43.5 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max20 pts.
subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recoverng (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
5 None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6)
[] mowing 0 shrub/sapling removal Recovering (3)
E grazing 5 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal Recent or no recovery (1)
D clearcutting 0 woody debris removal 5 selective cutting 5 sedimentation O farming 5 dredging 4 5 toxic pollutants
[5 nutrient enrichment u101bal this xauo Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 323 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Ratln Site: Bellefonte WOO6 Rater(s): J. Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 12 12 1 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BRfCM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres (8 ha),.then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 ha) of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pts.
subtotal max 14 pis subtotal max 30 pis subtotal Select one size class and assign score.
0>50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pts)
~
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6))
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6)]
3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (004 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Aerial Photos Field Survey Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Selee! only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 11) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25m to <50 m (82 to <164 11) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 11 to <82 11) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10m <<3211) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland. young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources ofwa!er. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~
100-yearfloodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
1 Between streamllake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
1 Part of wetland/upland (e.g.. forest), complex (1)
Seasonalnntermittent surface water (3)
Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or db!. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regula~y inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m <<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3) 0 ditch 0 point source (nonstonmwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 181 tile (including culvert) 181 filling/grading o dike 181 road bed/RR track o weir 0 dredging o stormwater input 0 other 112.5 143.5 1 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pis.
subtotal II 43.5 II subtotal thiS page Lasl revised 2005-04-29 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
~
Excellent (7)
Poor (1) rr=====================91 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (9)
Recovered (6)
Recovering (3)
Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturbances observed o mowing 0 shrub/sapling removal o grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal o clearcutling 0 woody debris removal o selective cutting 0 sedimentation o farming 0 dredging o toxic pollutants 0 nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 323
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte W006 Rater(s): J. Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 subtotal preeous page 18 51.5 Metric.5. Special Wetlands a 0
ýbtotal
- Ifthe documented raw score for Metric 5 is 30 points orhigher. the site isautomatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
rawscore*
Select all that apply. Wrere multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentaItionfor each selection (photos. checklists, maps, resoudce specialist-concurrence, data sources; references, etc).
Bog, fen. wet praire (10): acidophilic veg.. mossy substrate >10 sq.m, sphagnum or othermoss (51 rrucko, organicsoeiliayer (3) sso. forest )wef.
Odor adj. upland) ind. >0.25 acre (0.1 ha): old grovwh (10): mature >10 in.(45 cm) t1bh (5) [exndidei pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep. sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slopewetland (4): headwaterwetland [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland >0.1 acri (0.04 ha) in reservoir, river, or perennial water >6 ft (2 m) deelp (5)
Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar. etc.) (3) 3 s/ios morph adapt, in >5 tre'es >l0 in.(25 cm) dbih buttress, rrultitru nkjstool, stilted, shallow roots/tip-up, or pneumatophores (3) cological comrr*nity with global rank (NatureServe) G1I'l10), G2S(5). C33(3) ruse hidgher rank where mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10): other rare species wth global rank G13'(10). G2*(5). G3(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude records which are only"historic"]
Superior/enhanced habit/adse: mrigratory songbirdfwaterfow (55 in-reservoir buttonbush (4): other fish/wildlife management/designati6n (3)
Cat 1 (very low quality) :<1 acre (0.4 ha) AND EITHER >80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on rmined/excavated land (-10) 112 163.5 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography mae 20 prs subtotal 6a. YVetland vegetation communities.
Score all presenitusing 0 to 3 scale.
,lAquatic bed L) mergent Shrub Wfrest Mudflats Open water <20 acres (8 ha)
Moss/lichen Otner 6b. Horizontal (plan view).interspersion.
Select only one.
H igh.(5.)
Moderately high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3[BR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3))
Low (1)[BR/CM (2)]
U None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage El Extensive>75% cover (-5)
Moderate 2 5-7 5 %/n cover (-3)
LSparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Li Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
[
Absent(1) 6d. Micrbtopography.
Score all present using 0to 3 scale.
V egetated hummocks/tussocks Coarse woody debris >15 cn (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 in.)
dbh 9Amphibian breeding pools ovueueourI i.Fmuilv..UVer :OlOI P = Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre (For BR/CM <0 04 ha (0:1 acre))
1 = Present and either comprises a small.part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comorises a sionificant Part but is of low Quality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate Quality or-comprises a small part and is of high quality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of hiqh quality Narrative Description of Vegetation Quality low = Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Nativesipecies are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o Presence of rare threatened or endanaered soecies high = A predorminance of native species with nonnative sp /oridisturbance tolerant native Sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the Presence of rate, threatened, or endanqered species Mudflat and Open Water Class Quality 0 = Absent <0 1 ha (0.25 acres) [For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 acre))
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to 2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 05 acre)l 2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2 5 to 9.9 acres) rBR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acre))
3 = Hih 4 ha (9.9 acres) or more `BR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetiand for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Low Moderale Moderale High Microtopography Cover Scale 0 = Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more common of maroinal quality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality orin small amounts of highest quality 3 = Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest quality II II II I
I I
I I
I I
I I
U I
63.5 Category 3 1 GRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refer to the most recent PRAM Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakp0onts between wetland categories at the follorwing address hop /Aswr.epa.state.oh.usldsw/4dlO401
.html Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 324 Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 324 TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte w006 Rater(s): J.Groton, B. Dimick Date: April 26, 2006 II 43.5 II subtotal pre.f~us page la 151.5 I Metric 5. Special Wetlands I
ma
- , lO pl. I *sublol.1 raw score'
'If thedocurriented raw score for Metric 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is 'automatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
Select all that apply. V'vIlere multiple values apply in row, score row as'single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation,for each selection (photos, checkli'sts, maps, resource specialist*concurrence, data sources; references, etc).
Bog, fen, ""t prairie (10): acidophilic veg.. mossy substrate >10 sq,m, sphagnum or other moss (51 muck, organic.soillayer (3)
Assoc:. forest (wetl. &/or adj. uplan'd) ind. ;>().25 acre (D,l'ha): old grlMlh (10): matu'ro' >18 in (45 em) abh (5) [exdude pi~e plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep. sink, losing/underground stream, cave, Yllaterfa II, rock outcrop/cliff'(S)
Vernal pool (5): isolated, perched, or slope wetland (4): headwater wetland [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wedan d ;>{).1 acre (0,04 ha) In reservoir, river, or perennial water >6*ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or fioodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar, etc.) (3) 3 Gross mo,.ph adapt. in >5 trees.>1 0 in.*(25 cm) dbh: buttress, multitrunklstool, stilted, shallow roots/tip*up, or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological community IMth global rank (NatureServe) Gl'(l D), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mxed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10): other rare species ""th global rank G1'(lD), G2'(5). G3'(3) ruse higher rank lMhere mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude records lMhich are only 'historic"]
D Superior/enhanced habitatJuse: rrigratory songbirdfwaterfow (5r in.reservoir buttonbush (4): other fishMildlife management/designation (3)
D Cat 1 (very low quality) <1 acre (DAha) AND EITHER >80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on rrined/excavated land (.10) 1'12 163.51 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography maK 20 pts subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communiti'es.
Score all present.using 0 to 3 scale.
~
AquatiCbed 1 Emergent Shnub Forest Mudftats 1 Open water <20 acres (8' hal Moss~ichen Other ______ _
6b. Horizontal (plan view),interspersion.
sele~ct ~~ciho(~~
Moderately hig. h (4 )[BRICM (5)]
Moderate (3 XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Low (1) [BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c, Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage
~
Extensive'>75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3) 1 Sparse 5-25% cover (-1 )
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1) 6d, Microtopography, Score all present using O*to 3 scale,
~
Vegetated hummocks/tussocks Coarse woody debris >15 em (6 in.)
1 Standing dead >25 cm (10 in.) dbh 2 Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0-Absent or <0,1 ha (0,25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <004 ha (01 acre)]
1 = Present and either comprises a small.part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comprises a significant part but is of low guality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate guality or comprises a small part and IS of high guality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of high guality Narratlye Descrjption of yegetation Quality low -
Low species diversity &Ior dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Native,species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &lor disturbance tolerant native species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o presence of @re threatened or endangered species high - A predominance of native species with nonnative sp &Iordisturbance tolerant ~atlve sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and o~en' but not always the presence of rate threatened or endangered species Mudflat and Open Water Class Quality 0-Absent <01 ha !o.25 acres) [For BR/CM<O.04 ha!O 1 acre)]
1 -
Low 0,1 to <1 ha (0,25 to 2,5 acres) [BR/CM 0,04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre)]
2 -
Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2 5 to 9.9 acres) [BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (05 to 5 acre)]
3 -
High 4 ha (99 acres) or more [BR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or more]
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Low Moderate Moderate Microtopography Cover Scale 0-Absent 1 -
Present in very small amounts Or if more common of marginal guality 2 -
Present in mode@te amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest guality 3 -
Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest guality High 1!:::::====:!!i:::::::!!==::!IGRAND TOTAL (max 100 pts)
Refe! to the most recent ORA M Score CaJtH8110n Report for the scoring breakpoll"lts between wetland categories al the followi1g address' http"/fwww.epa.st8te.oh.us/dsw/401f401.html Last revised 2005.c4*29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W007 I Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 911/09 I 1 I 1 I M tri 1 W e l a n A r a ( i z )
Notes*:B PJCM
= adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. lfan Metric 1. WetLand Area (si open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres max 6 pis subtotal (8 ha), then add only 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wetland size for Metric 1.
Select one size class and assign score.
>50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pts)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field GPS data 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
10.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0)
I4 1 I Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use ma& 14 bts.
subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WiDE Buffers average 50 m (1648) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 mto <50 m (82 to <164 if) around wetland perimeter (4)
ARROW. Buffers average 10 m (o<25 m (321640l)<o282 ) around wetland perimeter (1)
RY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 ti2) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LI LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3) igh. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 117 122 Metric 3. Hydrology max 30 pos subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater (5)
- 100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
Il Between streamAake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
lPart of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
SeasonalAntermittent surface water (3)
[]Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
EI Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
LI >0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
LI Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
]0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
U Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3)
C1 ditch 0
point source (nonstormwater) l Recent or no recovery (1)
[
tile (including culvert)
C] filling/grading o dike 0 road bed/RR track O weir dredging o stormwater input E0 other -
19 31 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pts subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1)
L] None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6)
E] mowing 5 shrub/sapling removal
[]Recovering (3)
[] grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal
[
Recent or no recovery (1)
[] clearcutting 0 woody debris removal I
selective cutting Osedimentation 3L farming 0 dredging 3 1 toxic pollutants
[]nutrient enrichment subtotal this page Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 325 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quanlltatlve Ratln Site: Bellefonte; WOO7 Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9/1/09 11 11 I Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BRlCM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberla~d Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres (8 ha)"then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pis subtotal 15 max 14 pts.
subtotal max 30 pts subtotal 19 131 max 20 pts subtotal II 31 II subtotal thiS page Last revised 200S-04-29 Select one size class and assign score.
~
>50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pts) 25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6)]
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6)]
3 to <10 acres (1.210 <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.0410 <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Field GPS data Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WtDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 ft) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 ft) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 ft to <82 ft) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10m <<32 ft) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland. young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATEL Y HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial. open pasture, row cropping. mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~100-year ftoodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
, Between stream/ake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
, Part of wetland/upland (e.g.. forest), complex (1)
SeasonalAntermiltent surface water (3)
Part of ripanan or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4>>)
<0.4 m <<16 in) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovering (3) 0 ditch 0 point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 181 tile (including culvert) 0 filling/grading o dike 0 road bed/RR track o weir 0 dredging o stormwater input 0 other Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
~
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (9)
Recovered (6)
Recovering (3)
Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturbances observed D mOwing 0 shrub/sapling removal o grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal o clearcutting 0 woody debris removal o selective cutting 0 sedimentation o farming 0 dredging o toxic pollutants 0 nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 325
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W007 Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9101109 w=
subtotal previous page 10 13 Metric 5. Special Wetlands
,If the documented raw score for Metnc5 is 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered aCategory 3 wetland.
raws.ore' Select all that apply. Where multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps, resource specialist concurrence, data'sources, references, etc).
]Bso, ten, wet praitie (:
acidophilicreg., mossy substrate >10 sqin, sphagnum or other moss (m):muck, organic sil layer (3)
Assoc, forest (wed. 8/or adj. upland) ind. >0.25 acre (0.1 ha): old groth (10): mature >18 in. (45 cm) dbh (5) [exdude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature sacs as spring/seep, sink. losing/underground stream, cave. waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5): isolated, perched, or sdope wetland (4): headwater wetland [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wedand '0.1 acre (0.04 ha)in reservoir, river, or perennial water'S0 ft(2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depressons (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar, etc.) (3)
Gross morph. adaptfin >5 trees >10 in. (25 cm) dbh: buttressi,mulfitruhlk/stool,.stilted, shallow roots/tl-p or pneumnato~phores (3)
Ecological communitywith global rank (NatureServe) Gt1(t0). G20(5), G3'(3) Fuse higher rankwhere mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10)(:other rare species with global rank GIt(t0), G2-(5). G3'(3)
Eruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude recordswwhich are only historic")
Superi/rlenhanced habitat/use: migratory songbirdM/aterfow (51 in-reservoir buttonbush (4): other fishmildlife management/designation (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality): <1 acre (04 ha) AND EITHER >80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on mined/excavated land (- 10) 13 134 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pts subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
SAquatic bed
_lJ Emergent 1 Shrub I Forest LIMudllats Open water <20 acres (8 ha)
Mossifichen. Other 5b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Select only one.
High (5)
Moderately high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3))
Low (1) [BR/CM (2)]
None (0)
Sc. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage Extensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1) 6d. Microtopography.
Score all present using O0to 3 scale, SVegetated hummocks/tussocks.
Coarse woody debris >15 rm (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 in ) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0l Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <004 ha (01: acre))
1 = Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate oualitv or comorises a Sionificanl part but is of low qualitv 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part oflwetland's vegetation and is of moderate aualitv or comorises a small sart and is of hioh quality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more ofwetland's vegetation and is of high Qualid Narrative Descriotion of Vegetation Quality low = Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Native species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high. but generally w/o oresenceaof rare threatened or endanoered soecies high = Apredominance of native species:with rnonnative sp &/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent orvirtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the presence of rate threatened or endanoered soecies Mudftat and Open Water Class Quality 0 = Absent <0 1 ha (0.25 acres) IFor BR/CM <0 04 ha(0 1 acre))
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to2.5 acres) (BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre))
2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha 12.5 to 9.9 acres) [BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acre)]
3 = Hioh 4 ha (9.9 acres) or'more rBR/CM 2 ha t5 acres) or more)
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion I
U' I
I I
U I
I I
I I
U I
I I
None G Low Low Moderale Moderale High Microtopography Cover Scale 0 = Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more common of marginal quality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of hiohest oualitv 3 = Present in moderate or oreater amounts rand of hiohest quality 34=categ GRAND TOTAL
[0-29 = Category 1. low quality: 30-59 = Category 2, moderage quality: 60-ent (max 100 pts) 100 = Category 3. superior qualityl Reter to the mosr reoent ORAC Scoe Calirto Repor fo the scorng breakpoints be neen wetland categories at the tettowing address:
ksp://ews.epa.etate.oh.us/uss40/40t/
1 html Last revised 2006-04-29 326 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 326 TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W007 Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9101/09 11 31 II subtotal pre.'ious page 10 131 I Metric 5. Special Wetlands 1 mO*' 10 P'S 1 subtotal
'If the documented raw score for Metric 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered a'Category 3 wetland row*scor.'
Select all that apply. V\\ihere multiple values apply in row,score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checkli'sts, maps, resource specialist concurrence, data'sources, references, etc).
Bog, fen, "",t prairie (10); acidophilic veg., mossy substrate >10 sqm, sphagnum or other moss (5);, muck, organic soil layer (3)
Assoc forest (wed. Blor adj. upland) indo >0.25 acre (0.1 hal; old grQV\\(h (10); mature >18 in. (45 cm) dbh (5) [exdudepine plantationJ Sens~ve geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcr~plcliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope "",dand (4); headwaterwedand [1 st order perennial or aboveJ (3)
Island wedand >0.1 acre (0.04 hal in reservoir, nver, or perennial water.>6 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or ftoodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scor, etc,) (3)
Gross morph adapt.'in >5 trees >10 in. (25 ern) dbh: buttress,,multitrunklstool,.stilted, shallow roots/tip-up, or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological community with global rank (NatureSelY8) Gl'(10), Gi(5). G3'(3) ['use higher rankwhe;e mixed rank Dr qualifierJ Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (1 O)::other rare species wth global rank Gl'( 10), G2'(5), G3'(3)
['use higher rank where mixed rank or qualifierJ [exclude records which are only "historic"J DSuperior/enhanced habitat/use mgratory songbirdlwaterfaw (5) in-reservoir buttonbush (4); other fishmldlife management/designation (3)
D Cat. 1 (very low quality), <1 acre (OA hal AND EITHER >80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on mned/excavated land (-10)
L..13:::::""r.1'~1~34~..... 1 MetricS. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography
-max 20 pIs subtotal 5a. Wetland vegetation communities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
~
Aquatiebea 1 Emergent 1 Shrub 1 Forest Mudftats open water <20 acres (8 hal Moss~lehen. Other ______ _
5b, Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Select only one
~
Hi9h (5)
MOde.ratelY high (4 )[BR/CM (5)J Moderate (3 XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)J 1 Low (1 ) [BR/CM (2)J None (0) 5e, Coverage of invasive plants, Add or deduct pOints for coverage
~
Extensive >75% cover (-5J Moderate 25-75% cover (-3) 1 Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1) 5d. Microtopography.
Score all present using O'to 3 scale,
~
Vegetated hummocksltuss'ocks, Coarse woody debris >15 em (5 in.)
Standing dead>25 cm (10 in) dbh Amphibian breeding pools 34=Category 2 Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0-Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) conttguous acre
[For BRICM <0 04 ha (01 acre))
1 -
Present and either comprises a small part of wetland' 5 vegeta1ion and is of moderate guality or corlwrises a significant part but is of low guality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate guality or comprises a small part and is of high quality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of hiqh gualitv Narratlye Description of Vegetation Quality low -
Low species diversity &lor dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant nativ e 'species mod = Native,species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &lor disturbance tolerant native species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately hign, but generally wlo presence'of @re threatened or endangered species high = A predominance of native species.with nonnative sp &Ior disturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the presence of @te threatened or endangered species MUdflat and Open Water Class Quality a -
Absent <01 ha !o.25 acres)[ForBR/CM <0 04 ha!O 1 acrell 1 -
Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to 2.5 acres) [BR/CM 004 to <0,2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre)!
2 -
Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2.5 to 9.9 acres) [BRICM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acrell 3
High 4 ha (9.9 acres) or'more [BR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or more!
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None LoVi Low Moderale Moderate Microtopography Cover Scale o
Absent 1 -
Present in very small amounts or if more co'mmon of marginal guality 2 -
Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest guality 3
Present in moderate or greater amounts 'and of highest guality
[0-29 =,Category 1, low quality: 30-59 = Category 2, moderage.quality: 50-100 = Category 3, superior qualityJ GRAND TOTAL
~;;::::;:;:;::::;:;::::::::;:;;;;;::;;:;:~ (max 100 ptS)
Refer to the most recent ORAM Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakpoints between wetland categories at the following address' http:lA-vww.epa.S1ate.oh.us/dswf401/401 hlml Last revised 2005~-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W008 Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 911109 1 2 12 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size )
Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. Iran open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres max 6 pts.
subtotal (8 ha), then add.only 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wetland size for Metric 1.
Select one size class and assign score.
>50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pts)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field GPS data 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0) 12 1E I
I Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use
- m.
14 pts subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WlDE Buffers average 50 m (164 ft) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 ft) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 I1 to <82 t) around wetland perimeter (1)
EVERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 it) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shnjbland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 117 19 Metric 3. Hydrology max 30 pts.
subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater (5) 100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
[lJ Between stream'lake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
,,Part of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
SeasonalAntermittent surface water (3)
U Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
IPerennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
F] Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
U >0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
, Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
U0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
U Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
[None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3)
EI ditch El point source (nonstormwater) l Recent or no recovery (1)
E] tile (including culvert)
El filling/grading
[I dike
[
road bed/RR track o] weir E] dredging 0 stormwater input El other 11 J 30 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development
- m. 20 pits subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
U Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4) air (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
E] None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed SRecovered (6)
[] mowing 0l shrub/sapling removal H Recovering (3)
C] grazing 0l herbaceous/aquatic bed removal Recent or no recovery (1)
IE clearcutting 0l woody debris removal
[] selective cutting 0 sedimentation El farming
[]dredging E] toxic pollutants El nutrient enrichment subtotal this page Last revised 2005-04.29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 327 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Ralln Site: Bellefonte; WOOS Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9/1/09 12 12 I Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BRlCM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. Iran open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres (8 hal, then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pt5.
subtotal max 14 pts subtotal max 30 pIs.
subtotal max 20 pts subtotal II 30 II subtotal thiS page Last reYlsed 200~04*29 Select one size class and assign score.
~
>50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pts) 25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6>>)
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6>>)
3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5>>)
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Field GPS data Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WlDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 il) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 il) around weiland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10m to <25 m (32 il to <82 il) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m <<32 il) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. UrtJan, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5>>)
Between streamJIake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5))
Part of wetland/upland (e.g.. forest), complex (1)
SeasonalAntermittent surface water (3)
Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or db!. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularty inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4>>)
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4>>)
<0.4 m <<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2>>)
Seasonally satunated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovering (3)
D ditch D point source (nonstonmwater)
Recent or no recovery (1)
D tile (including culvert)
D filling/grading D dike 181 road bed/RR track D weir D dredging D stormwater input D other Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
~
~~I~~n~J~~)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
D None or none apparent (9)
III Recovered (6)
B Recovering (3)
Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturtJances observed D mowing D shrub/sapling removal D gnazing D herbaceous/aquatic bed removal D clearcutting D woody debris removal D selective cutting D sedimentation D farming D dredging D toxic pollutants D nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 327
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W008 Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9/01/09 II hE subtotal previous page 10 130ot Metric 5. Special Wetlands so If the documented raw score for Metrc 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
raws sore' Select all that apply. Where multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos.checklists, maps, resource specialist-concurrence, data sources, references, etc).
Bog, fen, wet prairie (10); acidophilicveg., mossy substrate >10 sq m. sphagnum or other moss (5): muck. organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. forest (wetl. S/or adj. upland) ind. >0.25 acre (0.1 ha); old groswh (10): mature >10 ins (45 cd) d:h (5) [exdclde pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope wetand (4); headwaterw eteand [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wefland >0.1 acre (0.04 ha) in reservoir, river, or perennial water >6 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar, etc.) (3)
Gross morph adapt.'in ?5 trees >10 in. (25 cm) dbh: buttress, multitrunk/stool, stilted, shallow roots/tip-up, or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological corrmrunity with global rank (NatureServe) G0)(10), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10); osher rare species Wth global rank GI')10(, G2'(5), G3Y(3 E"use higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude recordswhich are onty"historic']
Super/erenhanced habitat/dse: migratory songbird,,aterfoWi (51 is-reservoir buttonbush (4); other fishodldlife rranagement/designaaon (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality): <1 acre (0.4 ha) AND EITHER >40% cover of invasives OR novegetated o0 rrined/excavated land (-10)
S1 31 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pts subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
I Aquatic bed mergent 1 Shrub Forest Mudflats Open water <20 acres (8 h0 )
Moss/tichen Other-6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Select only one High (5)
Moderately high (4) (BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
Low (1) [BR/CM (2)]
1L None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage.
E xtensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover(0)
Absent (1) 6d. Microtopography.
Score all present using 0'to 3 scale.
1Vegetated hummocks/tussocks oarse woody debris >15 cm (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 in )dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover.Scale 0 = Absent or <0. 1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre rFor BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 acre)i 1 = Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comprises a sianificant oart but is of low Quality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality, or comorises a small oart and is of high quality 3 > Present and comprises a significant part or more ofwetland's vegetation nn is nl f hin nr Iiri I
I!
I I
II II II U
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Narrative Description of Vegetation Quality low = Low species diversito/&/or dominance of nonnabve or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Nadve species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o Presence of rare: threatened or endangered species high = A predominanceof native species with nonnative sp 4/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent orvirtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always, the presence of rate, threatened, or endangered Species Mudflat and Ooen Water Class Quality 0 = Absent <0 1 ha (0 25 acres) (For BR/CM <0 04 ha (0 1 acre)]
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to 2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 05 acre)l 2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (25 to9 9 acrese (BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acre)l 3 = Hiah 4 ha (9.9 acres) or more IBR/CM 2 ha (5 acres I or more]
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion 0
None Low Low Moderate Moderate High Microtopography Cover Scale 0 = Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts orif more common ofmaroinal oualitv 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest quality 3 = Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest guality 31=Categ r GRAND TOTAL
[0-29 = Category 1. low quality: 30-59 = Category 2. moderage quality. 60-ete (max 100 pts) 100>= Categoriry 3. suerior quarity oatr t
o te=re cn CRlAMi Scoe Cairto Repor fo te scoring breakpoints betweesretlard categories at tho followinrg address:
kap://sus.epa.sratv.oh.us/Osur 0/O t051.html Last revised 2005-04-29 328 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 328 TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9/01/09 10 130 1 Metric 5, Special Wetlands I
mao, 10 piS I.sublolal
'If the documented raw score for Metnc 5 IS 30 points or higher. the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
rowscore' Select all that apply. V\\I1ere multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos,'checklists, maps, resource spedalist*concur'rence, data sources, references, etc).
BDg, fen, "",t prairie (10); acidDphilic veg.. mossy substrate >10 sqm, sphagnum Dr Dther mDSS (5); muck, Drganic soil layer (3)
ASSDc. fDre~ (wetl. BlDradj. upland) indo >0.25 acre (0.1 hal; Did griw.th (10); mature >18 in. (45 cin) dbh (5) [exdudepine plantation]
Sensitive geDIDgic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pDDI (5); iSDlated, perched, Dr slDpe 1III8tland (4); headwater wetland [I st DrdeCperennial Dr abDve] (3)
Island wetland >0.1 acre (0.04 hal in reservoir, river, or perennial water >6 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel Dr fiDodplain/terrace depressiDns (floDdplaln PDDI, SIDugh, DxbDW, meander scar,.etc.) (3)
Gross mDrph adapt.'in ~5 trees >10 in. (25 em) dbh buttress, multitruilklstDDI, stilted, shallDw roDtS/tIP-Up, or pneumatDphDres (3)
Ecological comrrunity ~th global rank (NatureServe) Gl'(l 0), G2'(5), G3~(3) ["use higher rank where mixed rank Dr qualifier]
Known Dccurrence state/federal thneatened/endangered species (10); other rare species "'th global rank GI'(lo), G2'(5), G3'(3)
["use higher rank where mixeq rank or qualifier] (exclude records which are only "histonc'1 8
SuperiDr/enhanced habitat/use: mgratory songbirdlwaterfm (5. in-reservoir buttDnbush (4); other fishllMldlife management/designation (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality)* <1 acre (oA hal AND EITHER >80% cDver Df invasives OR nDnvegetated Dn mned/excavated land (-10)
L-1'1~~1 ~3~1 ~I Metric 6, Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pts subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities Score all present using 0 to 3 scale
~
AquatiCbed 1 Emergent I Shrub Forest Mudftats Open water <20 acres (8 hal Moss~ichen Other ______ _
6b. HOrizontal (plan view) interspersion.
sele~ct~~cihO(~~
Moderately high (4) [BRICM (5)]
Moderate (3 XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
1 Low (1) [BRICM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct pOints for coverage.
~
Extensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cov. er (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover (-1 )
Nearly absent <5% cover(O)
Absent (1) 6d. Microtopography.
Score all present using 0'10 3 scale.
~
vegeta.ted hummocksitusSOC. ks' Coarse woody debris >15 em (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 In) dbh Amphibian breeding pools 31 =Category 2 Vegetation Com munityCo ver.Scale 0-Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <004 ha (01 acrel!
'1 -
Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate guality or comprises a significant part but is of low quality 2 = Present and either comprises a Significant part of wetland's vegetation and iS9f mo.derate quality or comprises a small part and is of hiqh guality 3 = Present and comprises a Significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and IS of high guality Narratiye Description of Vegetation quality low -
Low speCies diversity &Ior dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Native species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &Ior disturbance toierant native species can also be present,
'and spedes diversity moderate to moderately hign, but generally wlo presence of rare* threatened or endangered species high - A predominance 'of native spedes with nonnative sp &Ior disturbance toierant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the presence of rate threatened or endangered species MUdflat and Open Water Class qualltv o
Absent <01 ha (Q 25 acres)[ForBR/CM <0 04 ha (Q 1 acre)]
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to 2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acrel]
2 -
Moderate 1 to <4 ha 12 5 to 99 acres) [BR/CM 0.2 to. <02 ha 10.5 to 5 acrel]
3 -
High 4 ha 19.9 acres) or more [BR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion 0
None Low Low Moderate Moderate M i crotopo grap hy Cover Seal e 0-Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more co'mmon of marginal guality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest guality 3 -
Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest quality
[0-29 = Category 1., low quality: 30-59 = Category 2, moderage quality,60-100 = Category 3, superior quality]
High GRAND TOTAL
~~:::::=::::::::::::::::~~~ (max 100 ptS)
Refer to the most recent ORA M Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakpoints between wetland categories at the following address' http://www.epa.Sfate.oh.us/dswf401/401.html Last revised 20.05-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
,I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W009 I Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 911109 12 1
Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres ma. 6 pts subtotal (8 ha), then add only 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wetland size for Metric 1.
Select one size class and assign score.
[]>50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pts)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
h25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field GPS data 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0) 12 12Z I Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use max 14 pts.
subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 if) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 ft) around wet(and perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 It to <82 ft) around wetland perimeter (1)
[]VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 ft) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 117 19 Metric 3. Hydrology max 30 pts subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater (5)
- J 100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
' Between streamrIake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
l] Pa rt of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
Seasonalitntermittent surface water (3)
[]Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
IPerennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
[I >0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
[]Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4)]
l 0.4to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
_Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovenng (3)
[
ditch El point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1)
Q tile (including culvert) filling/grading o dike 5 road bed/RR track O weir E] dredging o stormwater input 0l other 11 30 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pts
- subtota, 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovedng (2)
ýj Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
E] None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6)
Ijmowing flshrub/sapling removal H Recovering (3)
I grazing I] herbaceous/aquatic bed removal Recent or no recovery (1)
[] clearcutting 0l woody debris removal I selective cutting 0l sedimentation i i farming 0l dredging 30 toxic pollutants El nutrient enrichment subtota this page Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 329 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Ralln Site: Bellefonte; WOOS Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9/1/09 12 12 I Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BRlCM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres (8 hal, then add only 0 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pts subtotal max 14 pis.
subtotal max 30 pis subtotal max 20 pts subtotal II 30 II subtotal thiS page Last revised 200!)-04-29 Select one size class and assign score.
D >50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pts)
§ 25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6))
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6>>)
3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5>>)
§ 0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Field GPS data Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
W1DE. Buffers average 50 m (164 11) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <16411) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 ft to <82 ft) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m <<3211) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW. 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland. young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATEL Y HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial. open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~100-year ftoodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5))
1 Between streamllake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) [unless BR/CM primary source (5))
1 Part of wetland/upland (e.g.. forest), complex (1)
Seasonal~ntermittent surface water (3)
Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4>>)
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
Seasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4))
<0.4 m <<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2>>)
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovering (3)
Il!:I ditch 0 point source (nonstonmwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 0 tile (including culvert) 0 filling/grading o dike 0 road bed/RR track o weir 0 dredging o stormwater input 0 other Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
~
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
D None or none apparent (9)
III Recovered (6)
B Recovering (3)
Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturbances observed o mowing 0 shrub/sapling removal o grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal o clearcutting 0 woody debris removal o selective cutting 0 sedimentation o farming 0 dredging o toxic pollutants 0 nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 329
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W009 Ratei(s): Britta Dimick I Date: 9/01/09 subtotal previous page 10 130 -
Metric 5. Special Wetlands u
ito the documented raw score for Metric 5 is 30 points or higher, the site islautomatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
raw score Select all that apply..Ahere multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps, resource specialist-concurrence, data sources, references, etc).
5Bog. fen, wet prairie (10): acidophilicueg. wossy substrate >10 sqi.m sphagnum orocther moss (5): muckorgasic soil layer (3)
Assoc. forest (wetl &/or adj. upland) inoc >0.25 acre (0.1 ha). old growth (tO)t mature >18 in).(45 cm) dbh (5) [exdude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5):.isolated, perched, or slope wetland (4): headwaterwedand [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wedand >0 1 ace (0.04 ha) in reservoir, river, or perennial water >6 ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or floodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar, etc.) (3)
Gross monph, adlapt in >5.trees >1l0 in. (25 cm) dbh: buttress, multitrunlk/stool. stilted, shallow roeo~,itp-up, or aneumratophores (3)
Ecological comrriernity with global rank (NatureServe) GI"(10), G2'(5). G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10):'other rare species with global rank GI*(I0), G2*(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude records which are onlyfhistoric")
S uperior/enhanced habitat/use: rrigratory songbird/Aaterfowl (5t in-reservoir buttonbush (4): other fish/Wldlife managemenrdesignation (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality): <1 acre (0.4 ha) AND EITHER >80%o cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on mrined/excavated land (-t1) 1 31 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pts.
subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
Aquatic bed I
mergent I Shrub Forest Mudflots MOpen water <20 acres (8 ha)
M oss.4iehen. Other 6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion Select only one.
High (5)
Moderately.high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3)[BR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3))
ow (11 [BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage.
E* tensive >75%.cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75%cover (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1) 6d Microtopography.
Score all present using 0"to 3 scale.
SVegetated hummocks/tussocks Coarse woody debris >15 cm (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 in.) dbh nAmphibian breeding pools vegetation Communia i-over Scale 0 = Absent or <0.1. ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 acre)l 1 = Present and either comprises a small part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or comprises a significant oart but is of low Quality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate qualitv, or comprises a small part and is of high quality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more ofwetland's vegetation and is if hish qualitv Narrative Description of Vegetation Quality low = Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Native species aredominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o oresence'of rare threatened or endangered species high = Apredominance of native species with nonnative sp'/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the Presence of rate, threatened, or endangered species Muctflat and Open Water Class Quality 0 = Absent <0 1 ha (0.25 acres) [For BR/CM.<0 04 ha (01 acre)]
1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to'2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 i to 0 5 acre)l 2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2 5 to 9.9 acres) (BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5 to 5 acre))
3 = Hiah 4 ha (9.9 acrest or more FBR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion II I
I I
I II II I
I I
U I
I I
I None Low Low Moderate Moderale High Micirotopooraphy Cover Scale 0 = Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more common of marainal quality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of hiohest quality 3 = Present in moderate or greater amounts and of hiohest quality 31=Categ GRAND TOTAL
[0-29 = Category 1. low quality: 30-59 = Category 2, moderage quality: 60-eferhmosjre1ma x0 10 p ts)>
Category 3, superior wn ualityl Ree totemos Peen RAM Scr Calbrto Repor frte ascoring breakiponrts betweenwretlarid categories at the following address:
hrop:/PAas.epe.atate.oh.us/oso/dtt/40r.hitm]
Last revised 2005-04-29 330 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 330 TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Ratet(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9101/09
.subtotal preiious page 10 130 1 Metric 5. Special Wetlands 1 mao" I 0 pts 1 subtotal
'If the documented raw score for Metric 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is'automatically considered a Category 3 wetland r.... core*
Select all that apply.,'Mlere multiple values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos, checklists, maps, resource specialist*concurrence, data sources, references, etc).
BogJen, wet prairie (10): acidophilic veg, mossy substnite >10 sq.m, sphagnum or, other moss,(5): muck, organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. foreSt (wetl &lor adj.' upland) incl. >0,25 acre (0, I hal: old groVllh' (10):' mature >18 in.. (45 cm) dbh (5J.[exdude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, \\l\\laterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5): isolated, perched, or slope wetland (4): headwaterwetland [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland ~ 1 acre (0,04 hal in reservoir, river, or perennial water >6 It (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or ftoodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar, etc.) (3)
Gross morph. adapt'. in >5 trees >10 in. (25 ern) dbh: buttress, multitnunklstool, stilted, shallow rootsltip.up, or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological community "..;tI; global rank (NatureServe) Gl'(1 0), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higherrank where mixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (IO):'otherrare species with global rank Gl"(10), G2"(5), G3"(3)
["use higher rank>Mhere mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude records>Mhich are on~'hlstoric"]
D Superior/enhanced habitat/use: mgratory Songbirdlwaterfaw.(5) in.reservoir buttonbush (4): other fishlWldlife managementlde~gnation (3)
Deat. 1 (very low quality) <1 acre (04 hal AND EITHER >80% cover of inva~ves OR nonvegetated on mned/excavated land (*10)
~1'1=~1~3~1~ Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pIS.
subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities Score all present uSing 0 to 3 scale,
~
AquatiC bed I Emergent I Shrub Forest Mudflats Open water <20 acres (8 hal MossAichen. Other ______ _
6b. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion sele~ct ~~~:~tIYhi9h (4) [BRICM (5)]
Moderate (3 )[BRICM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
1 Low (1 )[BRICM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants Add or deduct pOints for coverage.
~
Extensive >75%*cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75%'Cover (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover [-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1) 6d Microtopography Score all present using O'to 3 scale,
~
vegetated hummocks/tussocks Coarse woody debns >15 cm (6 in)
Standing dead >25 ern (10 in.) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover Scale 0-Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 acre )l 1 = Present and either comprises a small part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality or compnses a siQnificant part but is of low Quality 2 -
Present ana either comprises a significant part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate guality or comprises a small part and is of high guality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of high guality Narratlye Descrjption of Vegetation quality low -
Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Native,species are'domlnant component of the vegetation, although nonnative &/or disturbance tolerant native species. can also be present.
and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally wlo presence'of rare threatened or endangered species high - A predominance of native species with nonnative sp'&/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often bUt' not alwavs the presence of rate threatened or endangered species MUdflat and Open Water Class quality 0-Absent <0 1 ha (0.25 acres)[For BR/CM'<O 04 ha (0 1 acrell 1 -
Low 0.1 to <1 ha (025 to'2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acrell 2 = Moderate 1to <4 ha (2 5 to 9.9 acres) [BRICM 0.2 to <02 ha (05 to 5 acre)]
3 = High 4 ha (99 acresl or more [BRICM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion None Low Low Moderate Moderate Microtopography Cover Scale 0-Absent 1 -
Present in verY small amounts or if morecommori of marginal Quality 2 -
Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highesl guallty 3 -
Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest guality
[0-29= Category 1, low quality: 30-59 = Category 2, moderage quality: 60-100 = Category 3, superior quality]
High 31=Category 2 GRAND TOTAL
~~:::=::::;:::;:::;::::::::;:;;:;;::::;:;;:~(max 100 ptS)
Refer to the most recent ORA M Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakpoints be!INeen wetland categories at the followi1g address: hnp:lfw..I.t.N.epa.stat8.oh.us/dsw/401/401.html Last revised 200~~4*29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W010 I Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 911109 1 2 12 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size )
Notes: BR/CM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. It an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflats) is >20 acres max 6 pts.
subtotal (8 ha), then add oaly 0.5 acre (0.2 ha) of it to the wetland size for Metric 1.
Select one size class and assign score.
>50 acres (>20.2 ha) (6 pts)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 ha) (5) [BR/CM (6)]
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 ha) (4) [BR/CM (6)]
Field GPS data 3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 ha) (3) [BR/CM (5)]
E 0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 ha) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 ha) (1) [BR/CM (2)[
<0.1 acre (0.04 ha) (0)
ZI7 19 Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use max 14 bts.
subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
WI DE. Buffers average 50 m (164 fi) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25 m to <50 m (82 to <164 it) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 ft to <82 it) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10 m (<32 ift) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
LOW. Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATELY HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial, open pasture, row cropping, mining, construction (1) 117 26 Metric 3. Hydrology
-x 30 pt, subtotal 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
High pH groundwater (5)
'1100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) [BR/CM (5)]
I1 Between streamriake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) (unless BR/CM primary source (5)]
LPart of wetland/upland (e.g., forest), complex (1)
Seasonal/fntermittent surface water (3)
[
Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
El Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
S>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3)
Regularly inundated/saturated (3) [BR/CM (4))
U 0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3)]
LSeasonally inundated (2) [BR/CM (4)]
<0.4 m (<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2)]
U Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) [BR/CM (2)]
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (12)I Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3) 0 ditch E5 point source (nonstormwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 5 tile (including culvert) 5 filling/grading o dike
[
road bed/RR track o weir 5
dredging
[
stormwater input 0 other 118 44 Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pts.
subtotal 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recoverng (21
ý Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
EExcellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habitat alteration. Score one or double check and average.
None or none apparent (9)
Check all disturbances observed Recovered (6) 5] mowing
[
shrub/sapling removal H Recovering (3) 5 grazing 5 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal Recent or no recovery (1) 5 clearcutting 5 woody debris removal ol selective cutting 0 sedimentation o farming El dredging o toxic pollutants E] nutrient enrichment subtotal this pag.
Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 331 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix B TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Ralln Site: Bellefonte; W010 Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9/1/09 12 12 1 Metric 1. Wetland Area (size)
Notes: BR/cM = adjusted points for Blue Ridge and Cumberland Mountains. If an open water body (excluding aquatic beds and seasonal mudflatS) is >20 acres (8 hal, then add only a 5 acre (0 2 hal of it to the wetland size for Metric 1 max 6 pts.
subtotal Select one size class and assign score.
~
>50 acres (>20.2 hal (6 pts) 25 to <50 acres (10.1 to <20.2 hal (5) [BR/CM (6>>)
10 to <25 acres (4 to <10.1 hal (4) [BR/CM (6))
3 to <10 acres (1.2 to <4 hal (3) [BR/CM (5>>)
~
0.3 to <3 acres (0.1 to <1.2 hal (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
0.1 to <0.3 acre (0.04 to <0.1 hal (1) [BR/CM (2>>)
<0.1 acre (0.04 hal (0)
Sources/assumptions for size estimate (list):
Field GPS data L::17~~1~9=....I Metric 2. Upland Buffers and Surrounding Land Use max 14 pts.
subtotal max 30 pIs subtotal 2a. Calculate average buffer width. Select only one and assign score. Do not double check.
~
WIDE. Buffers average 50 m (164 11) or more around wetland perimeter (7)
MEDIUM. Buffers average 25m to <50 m (82 to <164 11) around wetland perimeter (4)
NARROW. Buffers average 10 m to <25 m (32 11 to <82 11) around wetland perimeter (1)
VERY NARROW. Buffers average <10m <<32 11) around wetland perimeter (0) 2b. Intensity of surrounding land use. Select one or double check and average.
~
VERY LOW 2nd growth or older forest, prairie, savannah, wildlife area, etc. (7)
LOW Old field (>10 years), shrubland, young 2nd growth forest (5)
MODERATEL Y HIGH. Residential, fenced pasture, park, conservation tillage, new fallow field (3)
High. Urban, industrial. open pasture, row cropping. mining. construction (1)
Metric 3. Hydrology 3a. Sources of water. Score all that apply.
3b. Connectivity. Score all that apply.
~
High pH groundwater (5)
~100-year floodplain (1)
Other groundwater (3) (BR/CM (5>>)
1 Between stream/lake and other human use (1)
Precipitation (1) (unless BR/CM primary source (5>>)
Part of wetland/upland (e.g.. forest), complex (1)
Seasonalnntermittent surface water (3)
Part of riparian or upland corridor (1)
Perennial surface water (lake or stream) (5) 3d. Duration inundation/saturation. Score one or dbl. check & avg.
3c. Maximum water depth. Select only one and assign score.
~
Semi-to permanently inundated/saturated (4)
~
>0.7 m (27.6 in.) (3),
Regularty inundated/saturated (3) (BR/CM (4))
0.4 to 0.7 m (16 to 27.6 in.) (2) [BR/CM (3>>)
Seasonally inundated (2) (BR/CM (4))
<0.4 m <<16 in.) (1) [BR/CM 0.15 to 0.4 m (6 to <16 in.) (2>>)
Seasonally saturated in upper 30 cm (12 in.) (1) (BR/CM (2>>)
3e. Modifications to natural hydrologic regime. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (12)
Recovered (7)
Check all disturbances observed Recovering (3) 181 ditch 0 point source (nonstonmwater)
Recent or no recovery (1) 0 tile (including culvert) 0 filling/grading o dike 181 road bed/RR track D weir D dredging 181 stormwater input 0 other 1-11.;..8;.""...,..... 1...;,4.,.;.4.,.,..... Metric 4. Habitat Alteration and Development max 20 pIs.
subtotal II 44 II subtotal thiS page Last revised 2005-04-29 4a. Substrate disturbance. Score one or double check and average.
~
None or none apparent (4)
Recovered (3)
Recovering (2)
Recent or no recovery (1) 4b. Habitat development. Select only one and assign score.
~
Excellent (7)
Very good (6)
Good (5)
Moderately good (4)
Fair (3)
Poor to fair (2)
Poor (1) 4c. Habilat alteratioo. Score one or double check and average.
fj] None or none apparent (9) o Recovered (6) o Recovering (3) o Recent or no recovery (1)
Check all disturbances observed D mowing 181 shrub/sapling removal o grazing 0 herbaceous/aquatic bed removal o clearcutting 0 woody debris removal D selective cutting 0 sedimentation o farming 0 dredging D toxic pollutants D nutrient enrichment Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 331
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; Woo0 O Rater(s): Britta DiO ick Date: 901109 subtotal preeius page 10 144--]Metric.5. Special Wetlands
[
]If the documented raw score for Meteic 5 is 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered a Category 3 wetland.
ra,,eore Select all that apply,,VMnsmre multipl'e values apply in row, score row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos; checklists, maps,,resource specialistconcurrence, data'sources; references, etc).
Bog, fe n, wet prairie (10); acidophilic veg, mossy substrate >10 sp.m. sphagnum or other moss (5): muck, organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. forest (wet. 8/or tdj. upland) ind. >0:25 acre (0.1 ha): old grow*h (tO): mature t18 in. (45 cm) dbh (5) [e(sodude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope wedand (4): headwater wedland [1st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wedland >8.1 acre (0.04 ha)in reservoir, river, or perennial water >a ft (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel orfloodplain/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow. meander scar. etc.) (3)
Gross morph. adaptiin >5 trees >10] in. (25 cm) dbh: buttress, multitrunk/stoel, stilted. shallow roots/tip-up, or pneumactophores (3)
Ecological commrrunity wth global rank [NatureServe) GC"(1), G2'(5). G3(3) [iuse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier)
Known occurrence state/federal threatened/endangered species (10); other rare species with global rank GI*(1O), G2'(5), G3'(3) ruse higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude recordswhich are only historic"]
Superior/eohanced habitat/use: rtigratory songbird/vdteifovs (5X in-reservoir buttonbush (4): other fishtildlife managememt/designatdon (3)
Cat. 1 (very low quality): >1 acre (0.4 ha) ANO EITHER >8O% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on nined/excavated land (- 10) 16 150 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography mae 20 pis subtotal 6a. Wetland vegetation communities.
Score all present using 0 to 3 scale.
SAqua tic bed El Emergent Shrub gl reet Mudflats Open water <20 acres (8 ha)
Mosslichen Otherpw c
S Sb. Horizontal (plan view) interspersion.
Select only one.
High'(5)
Moderately high (4) [BR/CM (5)]
Moderate (3XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)1 Low (1) [BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct points for coverage.
Extensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3)
Sparse 5-25% cover (-1)
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1) 6d. Microtopography.
Score.all present using 0 to 3 scale.,
IVegetated hummocks/tussocks Coarse woody debris >15 cn (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 in.) dbh Amphibian breeding pools vPelJt~Uuo,, rnlrrriurely..uveur ocalo 0 = Absent or <0.1 ha (0.25 acre) contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 acre)]
1 = Present and either comprises a smallpart ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality, or comprises a sionificant oart but is of low quality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part ofwetland's vegetation and is of moderate oualitv, or'comprises a small Part and is of high quality 3 = Present and comprses a significant part or more ofwetland's vegetation and is of high quality Narrative Description of Vegetation Quality low = Low species diversity &/or dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Nabive.species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative.&/or disturbance tolerant native species-can also be present, and species diversity moderate to moderately high, but generally w/o oresence of rare threatened or endanaered soecies high = A predominance of native species with nonnative sp 4/or disturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not always the presence of rate threatened or endanaered soecies Mudflat and Open Water Class Quality 0 = Absent <0.1 ha (0.25 acres) (For BR/CM <0.04 ha (0 1 acretl 1 = Low 0.1 to <1 ha (0.25 to2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (01 to 0 5 acre)t 2 = Moderate 1 to <4 ha (2. 5to 9.9 acres) tBR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (0.5'to 5 acrefl 3 = Hiah 4 ha (9:9 acres) o/more rBR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or morel Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree of Interspersion
,I U
II II II U
I I
I I
I I
I I
0 None Low Low Moderate Moderate High Micratopography Cover Scale 0 =Absent 1 = Present in very small amounts or if more common of marginal quality 2 = Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of highest quality 3 = Present in moderate or oreater amounts and of highest quality 50=cate GRAND TOTAL(
0-29 = Category 1. low quality: 30-5 = Category 2. moderage quality: 60-( mT O T A L e
r c 1 0 0
.= C a te g o r y 3.s u p e rio r q ua lity ]
Refer totne neost receer GRAM Scoec Caibrtio Repor fo thascoring breakporrts betwenmerland categories at the follmin~g address: http://Aaaepa.state.oh.us/deue401/401.html Last revised 2005-04-29 332 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 332 TVARAM Field Form Quantitative Rating Site: Bellefonte; W0010 Rater(s): Britta Dimick Date: 9101109 II 44 II subtotal pr~ious page 10 144 I Metric 5. Special Wetlands I
mO" 1 0 pts I subtotal
'If the documented raw score for Metric 5 IS 30 points or higher, the site is automatically considered a Categ'ory 3 wetland.
rowscor.'
Select all that apply.,V\\h1ere,multiple values apply in row, score-row as single feature with highest point value. Provide documentation for each selection (photos~ checklists, map's"resoLirce spedalist*concurrence, data 'sources, references, etc).
Bog, fen, ""t prairie (10); acidophilic veg., mossy substrate >10 sq.m, sphagnum or other moss (5); muck, organic soil layer (3)
Assoc. foreSt (wetl,&/or adj. upland) indo >{L25 acre (0,1 hal; old grOWh (10); maMe >18 In. (45 em) iJbh(5) [e"dude pine plantation]
Sensitive geologic feature such as spring/seep, sink, losing/underground stream, cave, waterfall, rock outcrop/cliff (5)
Vernal pool (5); isolated, perched, or slope ""lIand (4); headwater weiland [1 st order perennial or above] (3)
Island wetland >0,1 acre (0,04 hal in reservoir, river, or perennial water >6 Ii (2 m) deep (5)
Braided channel or ftoodplaln/terrace depressions (floodplain pool, slough, oxbow, meander scar, etc.) (3)
Gross rnorph adapr::in >5 trees >10 in. (25 em) dbh buttress, multitrunklstool, stilted, shallow rootS/tip-up, or pneumatophores (3)
Ecological comrrunity "",th gl~bal rank (NatureServe) Gl'(1 0), G2'(5), G3'(3) ['use higher rank where nixed rank or qualifier]
Known occurrence state/federal th re atened/endangered spe cies (1 0); other rare species ""til global rank G 1'( 1 0), G2'(5). G3'(3)
('use higher rank where mixed rank or qualifier] [exclude records which are only 'historic'l 8
Superior/enhanced habitat/use: mgratory songbirdtwateftow (5~ in-reservoir buttonbush (4); other fiShMildlife.management/designatiOn (3)
Cat 1 (very low quality)' <1 acre (oA hal AND EITHER >80% cover of invasives OR nonvegetated on mned/excavated land (-10)
~16==---1 ~5~o~1 Metric 6. Plant Communities, Interspersion, Microtopography max 20 pIS subtotal 6a, Wetland vegetation communities Score all present using 0 to 3 scale
~
AquatlC bed 1 Emergent Shrub Forest Mudftats Open water <20 acres (8 hal Moss~lchen Other ______ _
6b. Honzontal (plan view) interspersion.
sele~ct ~~ciho(~~
MOde,ratelY high (4) [BRICM (5)]
Moderate (3 XBR/CM (5)]
Moderately low (2) [BR/CM (3)]
1 Low (1 ) [BR/CM (2)]
None (0) 6c. Coverage of invasive plants.
Add or deduct pOints for coverage
~
Extensive >75% cover (-5)
Moderate 25-75% cover (-3) 1 Sparse 5-25% cover (-1 )
Nearly absent <5% cover (0)
Absent (1) 6d, Microtopography, Score,all present using '0 to 3 scale"
~
vegetated,hum mocks/tussocks Coarse woody debris >15 em (6 in.)
Standing dead >25 cm (10 in) dbh Amphibian breeding pools Vegetation Community Cover,Scale 0-Absent or <0, 1 ha (0,25 acre).contiguous acre
[For BR/CM <004 ha (Q 1 acrel]
1 = Present and either comprises a small,part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate guality or comprises a significant part but is of low Quality 2 = Present and either comprises a significant part of wetland's vegetation and is of moderate quality orcomprises a small part and is of hiqh quality 3 = Present and comprises a significant part or more of wetland's vegetation and is of high quality Narratjye Description or yegetation Quality low -
Low spedes diversity &Ior dominance of nonnative or disturbance tolerant native species mod = Native,species are dominant component of the vegetation, although nonnative* &lor disturbance tolerant native species_can also be present, and spedes diversity moderate to moderately,high, but generally w/o presence of rare threatened or endangered species high - A predominance of native spedes with nonnative sp &Iordisturbance tolerant native sp absent or virtually absent, and high sp diversity and often but not alwavs the presence of rate threatened or endangered species MUdflat and Open Water Class Quality 0-Absent <0.1 ha(Q25 acres)[ForBR/CM <0.04 ha (Q 1 acrell 1 -
Low 0.1 to <1 ha (025 to 2.5 acres) [BR/CM 0.04 to <0.2 ha (0 1 to 0 5 acre)]
2 -
Moderate 1 to <4 ha (25'to 99 acres) [BR/CM 0.2 to <02 ha (05'to 5 acre))
3 -
High 4 ha (99 acresl or more [BR/CM 2 ha (5 acres) or more]
Hypothetical Wetland for Estimating Degree or Interspersion None Low
- Low, Moderate Moderate Microtopography Cover Scale 0-Absent 1 -
Present in verv small amounts or if moreco'mmon of marginal quality 2 -
Present in moderate amounts, but not of highest quality or in small amounts of hiqhest guality 3
Present in moderate or greater amounts and of highest quality
[0-29 = Category 1, lowquality: 30-59 = Category 2, moderage quality: 60-100 = Category 3, superior quality]
High 50=Category 2 GRAND TOTAL
~~:;::::::;:::::;::;:;:;:;:;;~:;:;:::M (m ax 1 00 ptS)
Refer to the most recent ORAM Score Calibration Report for the scoring breakpoints between wetland categories at the followr,9 address' http:J~.epa.state.oh.us/dSoH/401/J,Ol.html Last revised 2005-04-29 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix C Appendix C - Vital Signs Reservoir Fish Assemblage Index (RFAI) Scores Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 333 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix C Appendix C - Vital Signs Reservoir Fish Assemblage Index (RFAI) Scores Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 333
Page intentionally blank I
,I I
I I
I I
I I
Page intentionally blank I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix C Table C-1.
Individual Metric Scores and the Overall RFAI Scores Downstream (TRM 390.0) and Upstream (TRM 393.0) of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Spring 2009 Spring 2009 TRM 390.0 TRM 393.0 Metric Gear Type Obs Score Obs Score A. Species richness and composition
- 1. Number of species
- 2. Number of centrarchid species (less micropterus)
- 3. Number of benthic invertivore species
- 4. Number of intolerant species 21 Species 6 Species Black Crappie Bluegill Green Sunfish Redbreast Sunfish Redear Sunfish Warmouth 2 Species Freshwater drum Logperch 3
26 Species 6 Species Black Crappie Bluegill Longear Sunfish Redbreast Sunfish Redear Sunfish Warmouth 3
5 1 Species Freshwater drum 1
I I
0 Species 2 Species 1
Skipjack Herring Longear Sunfish
- 5. Percent tolerant individuals Electrofishing 72.7%
Bluegill 51.5%
Largemouth Bass 13.3%
Spotfin Shiner 2.2%
Gizzard Shad 2.0%
Redbreast Sunfish 2.0%
Bluntnose Minnow 1.1%
Common Carp 0.4%
Green Sunfish 0.2%
41.0%
Longnose Gar 19.4%
Common Carp 11.2%
Largemouth Bass 5.2%
Bluegill 4.5%
Gizzard Shad 0.7%
73.6 %
Bluegill 54.5%
Largemouth Bass 8.9%
Gizzard Shad 3.4%
Common Carp 3.2%
0.5 Spotfin Shiner 2.8%
Redbreast Sunfish 0.3%
Western Mosquitofish 0.3%
Bluntnose Minnow 0.1%
Yellow Bullhead 0.1%
17.2%
Gizzard Shad 7.0%
Longnose Gar 5.7%
0.5 Common Carp 1.9%
Largemouth Bass 1.4%
Bluegill 0.6%
Brown Bullhead 0.6%
0.5 Gill Netting 1.5
- 6. Percent dominance by one species Electrofishing Gill Netting Electrofishing 51.5%
Bluegill 54.5%
1.5 Bluegill 1.5 49.0%
1.5 Yellow Bass 0.5 22.4%
Yellow Bass
- 7. Percent non-native species 12.4%
Inland Silverside 11.6%
Common Carp 0.4%
Yellow Perch 0.4%
11.2%
Common Carp 11.2%
3.5%
Common Carp 3.2%
0.5 Yellow Perch 0.3%
2.5%
0.5 Common Carp 1.9%
Grass Carp 0.6%
0.5 0.5 Gill Netting Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 335 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix C Table C-1.
Individual Metric Scores and the Overall RFAI Scores Downstream (TRM 390.0) and Upstream (TRM 393.0) of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Spring 2009 Spring 2009 TRM 390.0 TRM 393.0 Metric Gear Type Obs Score Obs Score A. Species richness and composition
- 1. Number of species 21 Species 3
26 Species 3
- 2. Number of centrarchid 6 Species 6 Species species (less micropterus)
Black Crappie Black Crappie Bluegill Bluegill Green Sunfish 5
Longear Sunfish 5
Redbreast Sunfish Redbreast Sunfish Redear Sunfish Redear Sunfish Warmouth Warmouth
- 3. Number of benthic invertivore 2 Species 1 Species species Freshwater drum 1
Freshwater drum Logperch
- 4. Number of intolerant species o Species 2 Species 1
Skipjack Herring Longear Sunfish
- 5. Percent tolerant individuals Electrofishing 72.7%
73.6%
Bluegill 51.5%
Bluegill 54.5%
Largemouth Bass 13.3%
Largemouth Bass 8.9%
Spotfin Shiner 2.2%
Gizzard Shad 3.4%
Gizzard Shad 2.0%
Common Carp 3.2%
Redbreast Sunfish 2.0%
0.5 Spotfin Shiner 2.8%
0.5 Bluntnose Minnow 1.1 %
Redbreast Sunfish 0.3%
Common Carp 0.4%
Western Mosquitofish Green Sunfish 0.2%
0.3%
Bluntnose Minnow 0.1 %
Yellow Bullhead 0.1%
Gill Netting 41.0%
17.2%
Longnose Gar 19.4%
Gizzard Shad 7.0%
Common Carp 11.2%
Longnose Gar 5.7%
Largemouth Bass 5.2%
0.5 Common Carp 1.9%
1.5 Bluegill 4.5%
Largemouth Bass 1.4%
Gizzard Shad 0.7%
Bluegill 0.6%
Brown Bullhead 0.6%
- 6. Percent dominance by one Electrofishing 51.5%
54.5%
species Bluegill 1.5 Bluegill 1.5 Gill Netting 22.4%
49.0%
Yellow Bass 1.5 Yellow Bass 0.5
- 7. Percent non-native species Electrofishing 12.4%
3.5%
Inland Silverside 11.6%
Common Carp 3.2%
Common Carp 0.4%
0.5 Yellow Perch 0.3%
0.5 Yellow Perch 0.4%
Gill Netting 11.2%
2.5%
Common Carp 11.2%
0.5 Common Carp 1.9%
0.5 Grass Carp 0.6%
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 335
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table C-1 (Continued)
Spring 2009 TRM 390.0 TRM 393.0 Metric Gear Type Obs Score Obs Score
- 8. Number of top carnivore species 8 Species Black Crappie Flathead Catfish Largemouth Bass Longnose Gar Spotted Bass Spotted Gar White Bass Yellow Bass 9 Species Black Crappie Flathead Catfish Largemouth Bass Longnose Gar Skipjack Herring Spotted Bass Spotted Gar White Bass Yellow Bass 5
B. Trophic composition
- 9. Percent top carnivores Electrofishing 15.7%
Largemouth Bass 13.2%
Yellow Bass 1.5%
Spotted Gar 0.6%
Spotted Bass 0.4%
Gill Netting 64.2%
Yellow Bass 22.5%
Longnose Gar 19.3%
White Bass 6.1%
Largemouth Bass 5.2%
Spotted Bass 4.5%
Black Crappie 3.6%
Flathead Catfish 3.0%
11.7%
Largemouth Bass 8.9%
2.5 Spotted Bass 1.4%
Yellow Bass 1.0%
White Bass 0.3%
Black Crappie 0.1%
73.9%
Yellow Bass 49.0%
Spotted Bass 8.4%
Longnose Gar 5.7%
White Bass 4.5%
2.5 Flathead Catfish 2.5%
Black Crappie 1.3%
Largemouth Bass 1.3%
Skipjack Herring 0.6%
Spotted Gar 0.6%
12.3%
Channel Catfish 5.4%
Gizzard Shad 3.3%
2.5 Common Carp 3.2%
Bluntnose Minnow 0.1%
Yellow Bullhead 0.1%
20.4%
Blue Catfish 7.6%
1.5 Gizzard Shad 7.0%
Channel Catfish 3.2%
Common Carp 1.9%
Brown Bullhead 0.6%
2.5 2.5 I
I II It il II I
I I
I I
It I
- 10. Percent omnivores Electrofishing 9.0%
Channel Catfish 5.5%
Gizzard Shad 2.0%
Bluntnose Minnow 1.1%
Common Carp 0.4%
2.5 Gill Netting 23.9%
Common Carp 11.2%
Blue Catfish 7.5%
Channel Catfish 4.5%
Gizzard Shad 0.7%
C. Fish abundance and health 1.5
- 11. Average number per run Electrofishing Gill Netting 36.1 13.4 4.1%
0.5 1.5 1.5 47.8 15.7 8.1%
0.5 1.5 0.5
- 12. Percent anomalies Electrofishing Gill Netting 0.0%
2.5 1.3%
2.5 Overall RFAI Score 35 34 Fair Fair 336 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table C-1 (Continued)
Spring 2009 Metric
- 8. Number of top carnivore species B. Trophic composition
- 9. Percent top carnivores
- 10. Percent omnivores C. Fish abundance and health TRM 390.0 Gear Type Obs 8 Species Black Crappie Flathead Catfish Largemouth Bass Longnose Gar Spotted Bass Spotted Gar White Bass Yellow Bass Electrofishing 15.7%
Largemouth Bass 13.2%
Yellow Bass 1.5%
Spotted Gar 0.6%
Spotted Bass 0.4%
Gill Netting 64.2%
Yellow Bass 22.5%
Longnose Gar 19.3%
White Bass 6.1 %
Largemouth Bass 5.2%
Spotted Bass 4.5%
Black Crappie 3.6%
Flathead Catfish 3.0%
Electrofishing 9.0%
Channel Catfish 5.5%
Gizzard Shad 2.0%
Bluntnose Minnow 1.1%
Common Carp 0.4%
Gill Netting 23.9%
Common Carp 11.2%
Blue Catfish 7.5%
Channel Catfish 4.5%
Gizzard Shad 0.7%
- 11. Average number per run Electrofishing 36.1 Gill Netting 13.4
- 12. Percent anomalies Electrofishing 4.1%
Gill Netting 0.0%
Overall RFAI Score TRM 393.0 Score Obs 5
2.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 1.5 1.5 2.5 35 Fair 9 Species Black Crappie Flathead Catfish Largemouth Bass Longnose Gar Skipjack Herring Spotted Bass Spotted Gar White Bass Yellow Bass 11.7%
Largemouth Bass 8.9%
Spotted Bass 1.4%
Yellow Bass 1.0%
White Bass 0.3%
Black Crappie 0.1 %
73.9%
Yellow Bass 49.0%
Spotted Bass 8.4%
Longnose Gar 5.7%
White Bass 4.5%
Flathead Catfish 2.5%
Black Crappie 1.3%
Largemouth Bass 1.3%
Skipjack Herring 0.6%
Spotted Gar 0.6%
12.3%
Channel Catfish 5.4%
Gizzard Shad 3.3%
Common Carp 3.2%
Bluntnose Minnow 0.1%
Yellow Bullhead 0.1 %
20.4%
Blue Catfish 7.6%
Gizzard Shad 7.0%
Channel Catfish 3.2%
Common Carp 1.9%
Brown Bullhead 0.6%
47.8 15.7 8.1%
1.3%
336 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Score 5
2.5 2.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 2.5 34 Fair I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix C Table C-2.
Individual Metric Scores and the Overall RFAI Scores Downstream (TRM 390.0) and Upstream (TRM 393.0) of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Summer 2009 Summer 2009 TRM 390.0 TRM 393.0 Metric Gear Type Obs Score Obs Score A. Species richness and composition
- 1. Number of species 20 Species
- 2. Number of centrarchid species (less micropterus)
- 3. Number of benthic invertivore species
- 4. Number of intolerant species 7 Species Black Crappie Bluegill Longear Sunfish Redbreast Sunfish Redear Sunfish Warmouth White Crappie 1 Species Freshwater drum 1 Species Longear Sunfish 3
23 Species 7 Species Black Crappie Bluegill Green Sunfish 5
Longear Sunfish Redbreast Sunfish Redear Sunfish Warmouth 1 Species 1
Freshwater drum 2 Species Skipjack Herring Longear Sunfish 3
5 1
1
- 5. Percent tolerant individuals Electrofishing 59.7%
Largemouth Bass 20.6%
Bluegill 14.7%
Western mosquitofish 10.0%
Gizzard Shad 5.7%
Spotfin Shiner 4.1%
Golden Shiner 2.3%
Common Carp 1.4%
Redbreast Sunfish 0.6%
White Crappie 0.3%
63.3 %
Bluegill 22.2%
Largemouth Bass 11.8%
Gizzard Shad 11.7%
Spotfin Shiner 8.9%
Golden Shiner 7.4%
Longnose Gar 0.7%
Yellow bullhead 0.2%
Redbreast Sunfish 0.2%
Green Sunfish 0.2%
38.4%
Longnose Gar 17.4%
Gizzard Shad 10.5%
0.5 Largemouth Bass 8.1%
Common Carp 2.3%
0.5 Gill Netting 41.0%
Longnose gar 14.0%
Common Carp 13.0%
Gizzard Shad 9.0%
Largemouth Bass 3.0%
Bluegill 2.0%
0.5
- 6. Percent dominance by one species Electrofishing 20.5%
Largemouth Bass 25.4%
2.5 Spotted Gar 2.5 Gill Netting
- 7. Percent non-native species Electrofishing Gill Netting 17.0%
Channel Catfish 3.1%
Inland Silverside 1.7%
Common Carp 1.4%
13.0%
Common Carp 13.0%
26.7%
1.5 Channel Catfish 2.0%
Inland Silverside 2.0%
0.5 1.5 1.5 0.5 3.5%
0.5 Common Carp 2.3%
Yellow Perch 1.2%
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 337 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Appendix C Table C-2.
Individual Metric Scores and the Overall RFAI Scores Downstream (TRM 390.0) and Upstream (TRM 393.0) of Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Summer 2009 Summer 2009 Metric A. Species richness and composition
- 1. Number of species
- 2. Number of centrarchid species (less micropterus)
- 3. Number of benthic invertivore species
- 4. Number of intolerant species TRM 390.0 Gear Type Obs 20 Species 7 Species Black Crappie Bluegill Longear Sunfish Redbreast Sunfish Redear Sunfish Warmouth White Crappie 1 Species Freshwater drum 1 Species Longear Sunfish
- 5. Percent tolerant individuals Electrofishing 59.7%
Largemouth Bass 20.6%
Bluegill 14.7%
Western mosquitofish 10.0%
Gizzard Shad 5.7%
Spotfin Shiner 4.1 %
Golden Shiner 2.3%
Common Carp 1.4%
Redbreast Sunfish 0.6%
White Crappie 0.3%
Gill Netting 41.0%
Longnose gar 14.0%
Common Carp 13.0%
Gizzard Shad 9.0%
Largemouth Bass 3.0%
Bluegill 2.0%
- 6. Percent dominance by one Electrofishing 20.5%
species Largemouth Bass Gill Netting 17.0%
Channel Catfish
- 7. Percent non-native species Electrofishing 3.1 %
Gill Netting Inland Silverside 1.7%
Common Carp 1.4%
13.0%
Common Carp 13.0%
TRM 393.0 Score Obs 3
5 1
1 0.5 0.5 2.5 1.5 0.5 0.5 23 Species 7 Species Black Crappie Bluegill Green Sunfish Longear Sunfish Redbreast Sunfish Redear Sunfish Warmouth 1 Species Freshwater drum 2 Species Skipjack Herring Longear Sunfish 63.3 %
Bluegill 22.2%
Largemouth Bass 11.8%
Gizzard Shad 11.7%
Spotfin Shiner 8.9%
Golden Shiner 7.4%
Longnose Gar 0.7%
Yellow bullhead 0.2%
Redbreast Sunfish 0.2%
Green Sunfish 0.2%
38.4%
Longnose Gar 17.4%
Gizzard Shad 10.5%
Largemouth Bass 8.1 %
Common Carp 2.3%
25.4%
Spotted Gar 26.7%
Channel Catfish 2.0%
Inland Silverside 2.0%
3.5%
Common Carp 2.3%
Yellow Perch 1.2%
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 337 Score 3
5 1
1 0.5 0.5 2.5 1.5 1.5 0.5
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table C-2 (Continued)
Summer 2009 TRM 390.0 TRM 393.0 Metric Gear Type Obs Score Obs Score
- 8. Number of top carnivore species 7 Species Black Crappie Flathead Catfish Largemouth Bass Longnose Gar Spotted Bass Spotted Gar White Crappie 8 Species Black Crappie Flathead Catfish Largemouth Bass Longnose Gar Spotted bass Skipjack Herring Spotted Gar Yellow Bass 5
B. Trophic composition
- 9. Percent top carnivores Electrofishing 42.0%
Largemouth Bass 20.9%
Spotted Gar 19.5%
Black Crappie 0.8%
Flathead Catfish 0.4%
White Crappie 0.4%
Gill Netting 45.0%
Flathead Catfish 15.0%
Longnose Gar 14.0%
Spotted Bass 7.0%
Spotted Gar 4.0%
Largemouth Bass 3.0%
Black Crappie 2.0%
38.5%
Spotted Gar 25.4%
Largemouth Bass 2.5 11.8%
Longnose Gar 0.7%
Black Crappie 0.4%
Flathead Catfish 0.2%
48.8%
Longnose Gar 17.4%
Flathead Catfish 10.4%
Spotted Bass 9.3%
2.5 Largemouth Bass 8.1%
Black Crappie 1.2%
Skipjack Herring 1.2%
Yellow Bass 1.2%
20.5%
Gizzard Shad 11.6%
Golden Shiner 7.4%
Channel Catfish 1.3%
Yellow Bullhead 0.2%
41.9%
Channel Catfish 0.5 26.7%
Gizzard Shad 10.6%
Blue Catfish 2.3%
Common Carp 2.3%
2.5 I
I I
I I
3 I
2.5
- 10. Percent omnivores Electrofishing 12.6%
Gizzard Shad 5.8%
Channel Catfish 3.1%
Golden Shiner 2.3%
Common Carp 1.4%
2.5 I
Gill Netting 41.0%
Channel Catfish 17.0%
Common Carp 13.0%
Gizzard Shad 9.0%
Blue Catfish 2.0%
C. Fish abundance and health 0.5
- 11. Average number per run Electrofishing Gill Netting 19.5 10.0 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 29.9 8.6 1.3%
3.5%
0.5 0.5 2.5 1.5
- 12. Percent anomalies Electrofishing Gill Netting 2.4%
6.0%
Overall RFAI Score 30 35 Poor Fair I
I I
338 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table C-2 (Continued)
Summer 2009 Metric
- 8. Number of top carnivore species B. Trophic composition
- 9. Percent top carnivores
- 10. Percent omnivores C. Fish abundance and health TRM 390.0 Gear Type Obs 7 Species Black Crappie Flathead Catfish Largemouth Bass Longnose Gar Spotted Bass Spotted Gar White Crappie Electrofishing 42.0%
Largemouth Bass 20.9%
Spotted Gar 19.5%
Black Crappie 0.8%
Flathead Catfish 0.4%
White Crappie 0.4%
Gill Netting 45.0%
Flathead Catfish 15.0%
Longnose Gar 14.0%
Spotted Bass 7.0%
Spotted Gar 4.0%
Largemouth Bass 3.0%
Black Crappie 2.0%
Electrofishing 12.6%
Gizzard Shad 5.8%
Channel Catfish 3.1 %
Golden Shiner 2.3%
Common Carp 1.4%
Gill Netting 41.0%
Channel Catfish 17.0%
Common Carp 13.0%
Gizzard Shad 9.0%
Blue Catfish 2.0%
- 11. Average number per run Electrofishing 19.5 Gill Netting 10.0
- 12. Percent anomalies Electrofishing 2.4%
Gill Netting 6.0%
Overall RFAI Score Score 3
2.5 2.5 2.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 30 Poor 338 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement TRM 393.0 Obs 8 Species Black Crappie Flathead Catfish Largemouth Bass Longnose Gar Spotted bass Skipjack Herring Spotted Gar Yellow Bass 38.5%
Spotted Gar 25.4%
Largemouth Bass 11.8%
Longnose Gar 0.7%
Black Crappie 0.4%
Flathead Catfish 0.2%
48.8%
Longnose Gar 17.4%
Flathead Catfish 10.4%
Spotted Bass 9.3%
Largemouth Bass 8.1%
Black Crappie 1.2%
Skipjack Herring 1.2%
Yellow Bass 1.2%
20.5%
Gizzard Shad 11.6%
Golden Shiner 7.4%
Channel Catfish 1.3%
Yellow Bullhead 0.2%
41.9%
Channel Catfish 26.7%
Gizzard Shad 10.6%
Blue Catfish 2.3%
Common Carp 2.3%
29.9 8.6 1.3%
3.5%
Score 5
2.5 2.5 2.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 2.5 1.5 35 Fair I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
n-
,-1W M
1=1 M
M, M, A
Table C-3.
Comparison of RFAI Scores From Autumn Sampling Conducted During 1993-2008 as Part of the Vital Signs Monitoring Program in Guntersville Reservoir Location Site 1993 1994 1996 1998 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Average Inflow TRM 424 36 46 42 34 28 46 42 38 34 38 Cn Inflow TRM 410 34 32 34 32 38 30 28 33 Inflow TRM 405 38 40 32 36 34 32 24 35 CD RR Transition TRM 42 35 38 32 41 34 33 36 37 36 m
375.2 0
Forebay TRM 350 45 38 48 41 42 36 41 44 35 41
- 3 Downstream of BLN 3
Transition TRM 390 Spring 2009 Summer 2009
_0 35 30 Cl) 9Upstream of BLN CD 3
Transition TIRM 393 Spring 2009 Summer 2009 34 35 Note: Spring and summer 2009 RFAI scores from sites located upstream and downstream of BLN are also included for comparison. RFAI Scores: 12-21 (Very Poor); 22-31 (Poor); 32-40 (Fair); 41-50 (Good); or 51-60 (Excellent) 0 CD X)
---~~-----~--------
0 OJ
~
(f) c "0
"0 CD 3
CD
- J iii m
- J
~.
0
- J 3
CD
- J -
~
3 "0
OJ
~
(f) -
OJ CD 3
CD
- J -
w w
CD Table C-3.
Comparison of RFAI Scores From Autumn Sampling Conducted During 1993-2008 as Part of the Vital Signs Monitoring Program in Guntersville Reservoir Location Site 1993 1994 1996 1998 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 ' Average l
Inflow TRM 424 36 46 42 34 28 46 42 38 34 38 Inflow TRM 410 34 32 34 32 38 30 28 33 Inflow TRM 405 38 40 32 36 34 32 24 35 Transition TRM 42 35 38 32 41 34 33 36 37 36 375.2 Forebay TRM 350 45 38 48 41 42 36 41 44 35 41 Downstream of BLN Transition TRM 390 Spring 2009 Summer 2009 35 30 Upstream of BLN Transition TRM 393 Spring 2009 Summer 2009 34 35 Note: Spring and summer 2009 RFAI scores from sites located upstream and downstream of BLN are also included for comparison. RFAI Scores: 12-21 (Very Poor); 22-31 (Poor); 32-40 (Fair); 41-50 (Good); or 51-60 (Excellent)
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table C-4.
Individual Metric Ratings and Overall RBI Scores for Upstream and Downstream Sampling Sites Near Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Guntersville Reservoir, Spring 2009 Spring 2009 Downstream Upstream TRM 389 TRM 393.7 Metric Obs Rating Obs Rating
- 1. Average number of taxa 10.4 5
8.3 3
- 2. Proportion of samples with long-lived organisms 1
5 0.9 5
- 3. Average number of EPT taxa 1
3 0.9 3
- 4. Average proportion of oligochaete individuals 12.7 3
9.1 5
- 5. Average proportion of total abundance comprised by the 76.5 3
76 3
two most abundant taxa
- 6. Average density excluding chironomids and oligochaetes 250.9 1
214.1 1
- 7. Zero-samples - proportion of samples containing no 0
5 0
5 organisms Reservoir Benthic Index Score 25 25 Good Good I
I I
£ I
I I
340 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table C-4.
Individual Metric Ratings and Overall RBI Scores for Upstream and Downstream Sampling Sites Near Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Guntersville Reservoir, Spring 2009 Spring 2009 Downstream Upstream TRM 389 TRM 393.7 Metric Obs Rating Obs Rating
- 1. Average number of taxa 10.4 5
8.3 3
- 2. Proportion of samples with long-lived organisms 1
5 0.9 5
- 3. Average number of EPT taxa 1
3 0.9 3
- 4. Average proportion of oligochaete individuals 12.7 3
9.1 5
- 5. Average proportion of total abundance comprised by the 76.5 3
76 3
two most abundant taxa
- 6. Average density excluding chironomids and oligochaetes 250.9 214.1 1
- 7. Zero-samples - proportion of samples containing no 0
5 0
5 organisms Reservoir Benthic Index Score 25 25 Good Good 340 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix C Table C-5.
Average Mean Density per Square Meter of Benthic Taxa Collected at Upstream and Downstream Sampling Sites Near Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Guntersville Reservoir, Spring 2009 Downstream Upstream TRM 389 TRM 393.7 Taxa Mean Density Mean Density Turbellaria Tricladida Planariidae Dugesia tigrina 2
2 Annelida Oligocheata Lumbriculidae 1
Naididae 2
Ophidonais serpentina 1
Tubificidae 112 111 Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri 14 2
Branchiura sowerbyi 1
Hirudinea Rhynchobdellida Glossiphoniidae Helobdella stagnalis 2
Crustacea Amphipoda Corophiidae Apocorophium lacustre 5
Crangonyctidae Crangonyx sp.
5 8
Gammaridae Gammarus sp.
31 63 Talitridae Hyalella azteca 2
Insecta Odonata Anisoptera Gomphidae Gomphus sp.
1 Libellulidae 1
Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis sp.
5 Ephemeridae Hexagenia limbata <10mm 8
1 Hexagenia limbata >10mm 101 47 Trichoptera Leptoceridae 3
1 Oecetis sp.
3 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 341 I
Appendix C I
Table C-S.
Average Mean Density per Square Meter of Benthic Taxa Collected at Upstream and Downstream I
Sampling Sites Near Bellefonte Nuclear Plant, Guntersville Reservoir, Spring 2009 Downstream Upstream I
TRM 389 TRM 393.7 Taxa Mean Densit Mean Densit Turbellaria I
Tricladida Planariidae Dugesia tigrina 2
2 I
Annelida Oligocheata Lumbriculidae 1
I Naididae 2
Ophidonais serpentina Tubificidae 112 111 I
Limnodrilus hoffmeisteri 14 2
Branchiura sowerbyi Hirudinea I
Rhynchobdellida Glossiphoniidae Helobdella stagnalis 2
I Crustacea Amphipoda Corophiidae Apocorophium lacustre 5
I Crangonyctidae Crangonyx sp.
5 8
Gammaridae I
Gammarus sp.
31 63 Talitridae Hyalella azteca 2
I Insecta Odonata Anisoptera I
Gomphidae Gomphus sp.
1 Libellulidae I
Ephemeroptera Caenidae Caenis sp.
5 I
Ephemeridae Hexagenia limbata <1 Omm 8
Hexagenia limbata >10mm 101 47 I
Trichoptera Leptoceridae 3
1 Oecetis sp.
3 I
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 341 I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte SiteI Table C-5. (Continued)
Downstream Upstream TRM 389 TRM 393.7 Taxa Mean Density Mean Density Diptera Chironomidae Ablabesmyia annulata 9
3 Ablabesmyia rhamphe 1
Axarus sp.
3 Chironomus sp.
15 9
Coelotanypus sp.
233 64 Cricotopus sp.
1 Cryptochironomus sp.
3 5
Dicrotendipes neomodestus 2
1 Epoicocladius sp.
4 2
Paracladopelma sp.
4 2
Polypedilum halterale sp.
27 28 Procladius sp.
5 3
Stictochironomus caffrarius 124 77 Tanytarsus sp.
2 Coleoptera Elmidae Dubiraphia sp.
1 Hydrophilidae Berosus gp.
1 Mollusca Gastropoda Lymnophila Ancylidae Ferrissia rivularis 1
Mesogastropoda Hydrobiidae Amnicola sp.
1 Birgella subglobosa 2
1 Pleuroceridae Pleurocera canaliculata 3
16 Viviparidae Campeloma decisum 4
Bivalvia Veneroida Corbiculidae Corbicula fluminea <10 mm 15 29 Corbicula fluminea >10 mm 72 25 Sphaeriidae Pisidium so.
2 I!
ii II It I
I I
It I
I I
I I
I I
I U
I Unionoida Unionidae Potamilus alatus 1
Density of organisms per m2 804 525 Number of samples 10 10 Total area sampled (M 2) 1.05 1.1 342 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Table C-S. (Continued)
I Downstream Upstream TRM 389 TRM 393.7 Taxa Mean Density Mean Density I
Diptera Chironomidae Ablabesmyia annulata 9
3 I
Ablabesmyia rhamphe 1
Axarus sp.
3 Chironomus sp.
15 9
Coelotanypus sp.
233 64 I
Cricotopus sp.
Cryptochironomus sp.
3 5
Dicrotendipes neomodestus 2
I Epoicocladius sp.
4 2
Paracladopelma sp.
4 2
Polypedilum halterale sp.
27 28 I
Procladius sp.
5 3
Stictochironomus caffrarius 124 77 Tanytarsus sp.
2 I
Coleoptera Elmidae Dubiraphia sp.
I Hydrophilidae Berosus gpo Mollusca I
Gastropoda Lymnophila Ancylidae I
Ferrissia rivularis Mesogastropoda Hydrobiidae I
Amnicola sp.
Birgella subglobosa 2
Pleuroceridae I
Pleurocera canaliculata 3
16 Viviparidae Campelomadecisum 4
I Bivalvia Veneroida Corbiculidae I
Corbicula fluminea <10 mm 15 29 Corbicula fluminea >10 mm 72 25 Sphaeriidae I
Pisidium sp.
2 Unionoida Unionidae I
Potamilus alatus 1
Density of organisms per m2 804 525 Number of samples 10 10 I
Total area sampled (m2) 1.05 1.1 342 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
Nm l
on 1
W s M M
M a
o
- 01111, m
m-e M
01111 11
-go Table C-6.
Comparison of RBI Scores from Autumn Sampling Conducted During 1994-2008 as Part of the Vital Signs Monitoring Program in Guntersville Reservoir Cn CD CD B.
0 CD C')
CD Location Site 1994 1996 1998 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Averager Inflow TRM 420 21 27 23 25 25 21 23 29 24-Inflow TRM 408 23 21 21 19 29 25 27 24 Inflow TRM 406.7 23 23 23 27 27 27 27 25 Transition TRM 375.2 33 33 33 31 31 29 29 25 31 Forebay TRM 350 27 35 35 23 25 35 23 17 28 Downstream of BLN Transition TRM 389 Spring 2009 25 Upstream of BLN Transition TRM 393.7 Spring 2009 25 Note: Spring 2009 RBI scores from sites located upstream and downstream of BLN are also included for comparison.
RBI Scores: 7-12 (Very Poor); 13-18 (Poor); 19-23 (Fair); 24-29 (Good); or 30-35 (Excellent)
CD
=3 9:)
0 OJ
- l' (j) c 1:J 1:J ro 3.
CD
- J -
~
m
- J
~.
0
- J 3
CD
- J -
~
3 1:J OJ
(') -
(j) fii -
CD 3
CD
~
Table C-6.
Comparison of RBI Scores from Autumn Sampling Conducted During 1994-2008 as Part of the Vital Signs Monitoring Program in Guntersville Reservoir Location Site 1994 1996 1998 2000 2001 2002 2004 2005 2006 Inflow TRM 420 21 27 23 25 25 21 23 Inflow TRM 408 23 21 21 19 29 Inflow TRM 406.7 23 23 23 27 27 Transition TRM 375.2 33 33 33 31 31 29 29 Forebay TRM 350 27 35 35 23 25 35 23 Downstream of BLN Transition TRM 389 Spring 2009 25 Upstream of BLN Transition TRM 393.7 Spring 2009 25 Note: Spring 2009 RBI scores from sites located upstream and downstream of BLN are also included for comparison.
RBI Scores: 7-12 (Very Poor); 13-18 (Poor); 19-23 (Fair); 24-29 (Good); or 30-35 (Excellent) 2007 2008 29 25 27 27 27 25" 25 31 17 28
tIentionally blank irllentiollally blank
Appendix D Appendix D - Power System Operations Environmental Protection Procedures Right-of-Way Vegetation Management Guidelines Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 345 I
I I
I Ii I
I I
I I
I I*
I I
I I
I I
I Appendix D - Power System Operations Environmental Protection Procedures Right-of-Way Vegetation Management Guidelines Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Appendix D 345
Page intentionally blank Page intentionally blank I
I
- 1
'I
\\1
,I
~I'
,I I
,I I
I' I
,I
,I I
I I
I
Appendix D Tennessee Valley Authority Environmental Protection Procedures Right-of-Way Vegetation Management Guidelines 1.0 Overview A. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) must manage the vegetation on its rights-of-way and easements to ensure emergency maintenance access and routine access to structures, switches, conductors, and communications equipment. In addition, TVA must maintain adequate clearance, as specified by the National Electrical Safety Code, between conductors and tall-growing vegetation and other objects. This requirement applies to vegetation within the right-of-way as well as to trees located off the right-of-way.
B. Each year TVA assesses the conditions of the vegetation on and along its rights-of-way.
This is accomplished by aerial inspections, periodic field inspections, aerial photography, and information from TVA personnel, property owners, and the general public. Important information gathered during these assessments includes the coverage by various vegetation types, the mix of plant species, the observed growth, the seasonal growing conditions, and the density of the tall vegetation. TVA also evaluates the proximity, height, and growth rate of trees adjacent to the right-of-way that may be a danger to the line or structures.
C. TVA right-of-way specialists develop a vegetation reclearing plan that is specific to each line segment and is based on terrain conditions, species mix, growth, and density.
2.0 Right-of-Way Management Options A.
TVA uses an integrated vegetation management approach. In farming areas, TVA encourages property owner management of the right-of-way using low-growing crops.
In dissected terrain with rolling hills and interspersed woodlands, TVA uses mechanical mowing to a large extent.
B. When slopes become hazardous to farm tractors and rotary mowers, TVA may use a variety of herbicides specific to the species present with a variety of possible application techniques. When scattered small stands of tall-growing vegetation are present and access along the right-of-way is difficult or the path to such stands is very long, herbicides may be used.
C. In very steep terrain, in sensitive environmental areas, in extensive wetlands, at stream banks, and in sensitive property owner land use areas, hand clearing may be utilized.
Hand clearing is recognized as one of the most hazardous occupations documented by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. For that reason, TVA is actively looking at better control methods, including use of low-volume herbicide applications, occasional single tree injections, and tree growth regulators (TGRs).
D. TVA does not encourage tree reclearing by individual property owners because of the high hazard potential of hand clearing, possible interruptions of the line, and electrical safety considerations for untrained personnel that might do the work. Private property owners may reclear the right-of-way with trained reclearing professionals.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 347 I
I I
I I
I
'I I
I I
I I
I I
If I,
I I
1.0 Overview Tennessee Valley Authority Environmental Protection Procedures Right-ot-Way Vegetation Management Guidelines Appendix D A. The Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) must manage the vegetation on its rights-of-way and easements to ensure emergency maintenance access and routine access to structures, switches, conductors, and communications equipment. In addition, TVA must maintain adequate clearance, as specified by the National Electrical Safety Code, between conductors and tall-growing vegetation and other objects. This requirement applies to vegetation within the right-of-way as well as to trees located off the right-of-way.
B. Each year TVA assesses the conditions of the vegetation on and along its rights-of-way.
This is accomplished by aerial inspections, periodic field inspections, aerial photography, and information from TVA personnel, property owners, and the general public. Important information gathered during these assessments includes the coverage by various vegetation types, the mix of plant species, the observed growth, the seasonal growing conditions, and the density of the tall vegetation. TVA also evaluates the proximity, height, and growth rate of trees adjacent to the right-of-way that may be a danger to the line or structures.
C. TVA right-of-way specialists develop a vegetation reclearing plan that is specific to each line segment and is based on terrain conditions, species mix, growth, and density.
2.0 Right-of-Way Management Options A.
TVA uses an integrated vegetation management approach. In farming areas, TVA encourages property owner management of the right-of-way using low-growing crops.
In dissected terrain with rolling hills and interspersed woodlands, TVA uses mechanical mowing to a large extent.
B. When slopes become hazardous to farm tractors and rotary mowers, TVA may use a variety of herbicides specific to the species present with a variety of possible application techniques. When scattered small stands of tall-growing vegetation are present and access along the right-of-way is difficult or the path to such stands is very long, herbicides may be used.
C. In very steep terrain, in sensitive environmental areas, in extensive wetlands, at stream banks, and in sensitive property owner land use areas, hand clearing may be utilized.
Hand clearing is recognized as one of the most hazardous occupations documented by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. For that reason, TVA is actively looking at better control methods, including use of low-volume herbicide applications, occasional single tree injections, and tree growth regulators (TGRs).
D. TVA does not encourage tree reclearing by individual property owners because of the high hazard potential of hand clearing, possible interruptions of the line, and electrical safety considerations for untrained personnel that might do the work. Private property owners may reclear the right-of-way with trained reclearing professionals.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 347
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site E. Mechanical mowers not only cut the tall saplings and seedlings on the right-of-way, they I
also shatter the stump and the supporting near-surface root crown. The tendency of resistant species is to resprout from the root crown, and shattered stumps can produce a multistem dense stand in the immediate area. Repeated use of mowers on short cycleI reclearing with many original stumps regrowing in thepabove manner can create a single species thicket or monoculture. With the original large root system and multiple stems, the resistant species can produce regrowth at the rate of 5-10 feet in a year. In years I
with high rainfall, the growth can reach 12-15 feet in a single year. These dense, monoculture stands can become nearly impenetrable for even large tractors. Such stands have low diversity and little wildlife food or nesting potential and become a property owner's concern. Selective herbicide application may be used to control monoculture stands.
F. TVA encourages property owners to sign an agreement to manage rights-of-way on their land for wildlife under the auspices of "Project Habitat," a joint project by TVA, BASF, and wildlife organizations, e.g., National Wild Turkey Federation, Quail Unlimited, and Buckmasters. The property owner maintains the right-of-way in wildlife food and cover I
with emphasis on quail, turkey, deer, or other wildlife. A variation used in or adjacent to developing suburban areas is to sign agreements with the developer and residents to plant and maintain wildflowers on the right-of-way.
G. TVA places strong emphasis on managing rights-of-way in the above manner. When the property owners do not agree to these opportunities, TVA must maintain the right-of-way in the most environmentally acceptable, cost-effective, and efficient manner possible.
3.0 Herbicide Program I
A. TVA has worked with universities (such as Mississippi State University, University of Tennessee, Purdue University, and others), chemical manufacturers, other utilities, U.S.
Department of Transportation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) personnel to explore options for vegetation-control. The results have been strong recommendations to use species-specific, low-volume herbicide I
applications in more situations. Research, demonstrations, and other right-of-way programs show a definite improvement of rights-of-way treated with selective low-volume applications of new herbicides using a variety of application techniques and timing. Table 1 below identifies herbicides currently used on bare ground areas on TVA rights-of-way and in substations. Table 3 identifies TGRs that may be used on tall trees that have special circumstances that require trimming on a regular cycle. The rates of application utilized are those listed on the USEPA-approved label and consistent withi utility standard practice throughout the Southeast.
3I.
i 348 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site E. Mechanical mowers not only cut the tall saplings and seedlings on the right-of-way, they also shatter the stump and the supporting near-surface root crown. The tendency of resistant species is to resprout from the root crown, and shattered stumps can produce a multistem dense stand in the immediate area. Repeated use of mowers on short cycle reclearing with many original stumps regrowing in the"above manner can create a single species thicket or monoculture. With the original large root system and multiple stems, the resistant species can produce regrowth at the rate of 5-10 feet in a year. In years with high rainfall, the growth can reach 12-15 feet in a single year. These dense, monoculture stands can become nearly impenetrable for even large tractors. Such stands have low diversity and little wildlife food or nesting potential and become a property owner's concern. Selective herbicide application may be used to control monoculture stands.
F. TVA encourages property owners to sign an agreement to manage rights-of-way on their land for wildlife under the auspices of "Project Habitat," a joint project by TVA, BASF, and wildlife organizations, e.g., National Wild Turkey Federation, Quail Unlimited, and Buckmasters. The property owner maintains the right-of-way in wildlife food and cover with emphasis on quail, turkey, deer, or other wildlife. A variation used in or adjacent to developing suburban areas is to sign agreements with the developer and residents to plant and maintain wildflowers on the right-of-way.
G. TVA places strong emphasis on managing rights-of-way in the above manner. When the property owners do not agree to these opportunities, TVA must maintain the right-of-way in the most environmentally acceptable, cost-effective, and efficient manner possible.
3.0 Herbicide Program 348 A. TVA has worked with universities (such as Mississippi State University, University of Tennessee, Purdue University, and others), chemical manufacturers, other utilities, U.S.
Department of Transportation, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and U.S. Forest Service (USFS) personnel to explore options for vegetation'control. The results have been strong recommendations to use species-specific, low-volume herbicide applications in more situations. Research, demonstrations, and other right-of-way programs show a definite improvement of rights-of-way treated with selective low-volume applications of new herbicides using a variety of application techniques and timing. Table 1 below identifies herbicides currently used on bare ground areas on TVA rights-of-way and in substations. Table 3 identifies TGRs that may be used on tall trees that have special circumstances that require trimming on a regular cycle. The rates of application utilized are those listed on the US EPA-approved label and consistent with utility standard practice throughout the Southeast.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
'I I
I
'I:
I I
I
'I I
I II:
I I
I I'
Appendix D Table 1 - Herbicides Currently Used on TVA Rights-of-Way Trade Name Accord Arsenal Chopper Escort Garlon Garlon 3A Krenite S Pathfinder II Roundup Roundup Pro Spike 20P Transline Active Ingredients Glyphosate/Liquid Imazapyr/Liquid/Granule Imazapyr/RTU Metsulfuron Methyl/Dry Flowable Triclopyr/Liquid Triclopyr/Liquid Fosamine Ammonium Triclopyr/RTU Glyphosate/Liquid Glyphosate Tebuthiuron Clopyralid/Liquid Label Signal Word Caution Caution Caution Caution Caution Danger Caution Caution Caution Caution Caution Caution Table 2 - Preemergent Herbicides Currently Used for Bare Ground Areas on TVA Rights-of-Way and Substations Trade Name Sahara SpraKil SK-26 Topsite Active Ingredients Diuron/Imazapyr Tebuthiuron and Diuron Diuron/Imazapyr Label Signal Word Caution Caution Caution Table 3 - Tree Growth Regulators (TGRs) Currently Used on TVA Rights-of-Way Trade Name Profile 2SC TGR Active Ingredients TGR-paclobutrazol Flurprimidol Label Signal Word Caution Caution B. The herbicides listed in Tables 1 and 2 and TGRs listed in Table 3 have been evaluated in extensive studies in support of registration applications and label requirements. Many have been reviewed in the USFS vegetation management environmental impact statements (EISs), and those evaluations are incorporated here by reference (USFS 1989a, 1989b, 2002a, and 2002b). Electronic copies can be accessed at http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/planning/documents/veqmqmt/. The result of these reviews has been a consistent finding of limited environmental impact beyond that of control of the target vegetation. All the listed herbicides have been found to be of low environmental toxicity when applied by trained applicators following the label and registration procedures, including prescribed measures, such as buffer zones, to protect threatened and endangered species.
C. Low-volume herbicide applications are recommended since research demonstrates much wider plant diversity after such applications. There is better ground erosion protection, and more wildlife food plants and cover plants develop. In most situations, there is increased development of wild flowering plants and shrubs. In conjunction with Draft Environmental Impact Statement 349 I
I I,
I I
I I,I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Table 1 - Herbicides Currently Used on TVA Rights-of-Way Trade Name Accord Arsenal Chopper Escort Garlon Garlon 3A Krenite S Pathfinder II Roundup Roundup Pro Spike 20P Transline Active Ingredients Glyphosate/Liquid Imazapyr/Liquid/Granule Imazapyr/RTU Metsulfuron Methyl/Dry Flowable Triciopyr/Liquid Triciopyr/Liquid Fosamine Ammonium Triclopyr/RTU Glyphosate/Liquid Glyphosate Tebuthiuron Clopyralid/Liquid Appendix D Label Signal Word Caution Caution Caution Caution Caution Danger Caution Caution Caution Caution Caution Caution Table 2 - Preemergent Herbicides Currently Used for Bare Ground Areas on TVA Rights-of-Way and Substations Trade Name Sahara SpraKil SK-26 Topsite Active Ingredients Diuron/lmazapyr Tebuthiuron and Diuron Diuron/l mazapyr Label Signal Word Caution Caution Caution Table 3 - Tree Growth Regulators (TGRs) Currently Used on TVA Rights-of-Way Trade Name Profile 2SC TGR Active Ingredients TGR-paclobutrazol Flurprimidol Label Signal Word Caution Caution B. The herbicides listed in Tables 1 and 2 and TGRs listed in Table 3 have been evaluated in extensive studies in support of registration applications and label requirements. Many have been reviewed in the USFS vegetation management environmental impact statements (EISs), and those evaluations are incorporated here by reference (USFS 1989a, 1989b, 2002a, and 2002b). Electronic copies can be accessed at http://www.fs.fed.us/r8/planning/documents/vegmgmtl. The result of these reviews has been a consistent finding of limited environmental impact beyond that of control of the target vegetation. All the listed herbicides have been found to be of low environmental toxicity when applied by trained applicators following the label and registration procedures, including prescribed measures, such as buffer zones, to protect threatened and endangered species.
C. Low-volume herbicide applications are recommended since research demonstrates much wider plant diversity after such applications. There is better ground erosion protection, and more wildlife food plants and cover plants develop. In most situations, there is increased development of wild flowering plants and shrubs. In conjunction with Draft Environmental Impact Statement 349
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site herbicides, the diversity and density of low-growing plants provide control of tall-growing species through competition.
D. Wildlife managers often request the use of herbicides in place of rotary mowing in order to avoid damage to nesting and tunneling wildlife. This method retains ground cover year-round with a better mix of food species and associated high-protein insect populations for birds in the right seasons. Most also report less damage to soils (even when compared with rubber-tired equipment).
E. Property owners interested in tree production often request the use of low-volume applications rather than hand-or mechanical clearing because of the insect and fungus problems in damaged vegetation and debris left on the right-of-way. The insect and fungus invasions, such as pine tip moth, oak leaf blight, sycamore and dogwood blight, etc., are becoming widespread across the nation.
F. Best management practices (BMPs) governing application of herbicides are contained within A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for I
Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities (Muncy 1999), which is incorporated by reference. Herbicides can be liquid, granular, or powder and can be applied aerially or by ground equipment and may be selectively applied or broadcast, depending on the site requirements, species present, and condition of the vegetation. Water quality considerations include measures taken to keep herbicides from reaching streams whether by direct application or through runoff of or flooding by surface water. "Applicators" must be trained, licensed, and follow£ manufacturers' label instructions, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) guidelines, and respective state regulations and laws.
5 G. When herbicides are used, their potential adverse impacts are considered in selecting the compound, formulation, and application method. Herbicides that are designated "Restricted Use" by USEPA require application by or under the supervision of applicators i
certified by the respective state control board. Aerial and ground applications are either done by TVA or by contractors in accordance with the following guidelines identified in TVA's BMPs manual (Muncy 1999):
- 1. The sites to be treated are selected and application directed by the appropriate TVA official.
- 2. A preflight walking or flying inspection is made within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> prior to applying herbicides aerially. This inspection ensures that no land use changes have occurred, that sensitive areas are clearly identified to the pilot, and that buffer zones are maintained.
- 3. Aerial application of liquid herbicides will normally not be made when surface wind
£ speeds exceed 5 miles per hour, in areas of fog, or during periods of temperature inversion.
- 4. Pellet application will normally not be made when the surface wind speeds exceed 10 miles per hour or on frozen or water-saturated soils.
- 5. Liquid application is not performed when the temperature reaches 95 degrees Fahrenheit or above.
350 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 350 herbicides, the diversity and density of low-growing plants provide control of tall-growing species through competition.
D. Wildlife managers often request the use of herbicides in place of rotary mowing in order to avoid damage to nesting and tunneling wildlife. This method retains ground cover year-round with a better mix of food species and associated high-protein insect populations for birds in the right seasons. Most also report less damage to soils (even when compared with rubber-tired equipment).
E. Property owners interested in tree production often request the use of low-volume applications rather than hand-or mechanical clearing because of the insect and fungus problems in damaged vegetation and debris left on the right-of-way. The insect and fungus invasions, such as pine tip moth, oak leaf blight, sycamore and dogwood blight, etc., are becoming widespread across the nation.
F. Best management practices (BMPs) governing application of herbicides are contained within A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities (Muncy 1999), which is incorporated by reference. Herbicides can be liquid, granular, or powder and can be applied aerially or by ground equipment and may be selectively applied or broadcast, depending on the site requirements, species present, and condition of the vegetation. Water quality considerations include measures taken to keep herbicides from reaching streams whether by direct application or through runoff of or flooding by surface water. "Applicators" must be trained, licensed, and follow manufacturers' label instructions, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) guidelines, and respective state regulations and laws.
G. When herbicides are used, their potential adverse impacts are considered in selecting the compound, formulation, and application method. Herbicides that are designated "Restricted Use" by USEPA require application by or under the supervision of applicators certified by the respective state control board. Aerial and ground applications are either done by TVA or by contractors in accordance with the following guidelines identified in TVA's BMPs manual (Muncy 1999):
- 1. The sites to be treated are selected and application directed by the appropriate TVA official.
- 2. A preflight walking or flying inspection is made within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> prior to applying herbicides aerially. This inspection ensures that no land use changes have occurred, that sensitive areas are clearly identified to the pilot, and that buffer zones are maintained.
- 3. Aerial application of liquid herbicides will normally not be made when surface wind speeds exceed 5 miles per hour, in areas of fog, or during periods of temperature inversion.
- 4. Pellet application will normally not be made when the surface wind speeds exceed 10 miles per hour or on frozen or water-saturated soils.
- 5. Liquid application is not performed when the temperature reaches 95 degrees Fahrenheit or above.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I
,I
'I t
I, I
,I I
I I
I I
I.
I I
I I
I
Appendix D
- 6. Application during unstable, unpredictable, or changing weather patterns is avoided.
- 7. Equipment and techniques are used that are designed to ensure maximum control of the spray swath with minimum drift.
- 8. Herbicides are not applied to surface water or wetlands unless specifically labeled for aquatic use. Filter and buffer strips will conform at least to federal and state regulations and any label requirements. The use of aerial or broadcast application of herbicides is not allowed within a streamside management zone (SMZs) (200 feet minimum width) adjacent to perennial streams, ponds, and other water sources.
Hand application of certain herbicides labeled for use within SMZs is used only selectively.
- 9. Buffers and filter strips (200 feet minimum width) are maintained next to agricultural crops, gardens, farm animals, orchards, apiaries, horticultural crops, and other valuable vegetation.
- 10. Herbicides are not applied in the following areas or times: (a) in city, state, and national parks or forests or other special areas without written permission and/or required permits, (b) off the right-of-way, and (c) during rainy periods or during the 48-hour interval prior to rainfall predicted with a 20 percent or greater probability by local forecasters, when soil active herbicides are used.
H TVA currently utilizes Activate Plus, manufactured by Terra, as an adjuvant to herbicides to improve the performance of the spray mixture. Application rates are consistent with the USEPA-approved label. The USFWS has expressed some concern on toxicity effects of surfactants on aquatic species. TVA is working in coordination with Mississippi State University and chemical companies to evaluate efficacy of additional low-toxicity surfactants, including L1700 as manufactured by Loveland Industries, through side-by-side test plots in the SMZs of area transmission lines.
TVA currently uses primarily low-volume applications of foliar and basal applications of Accord (glyphosate) and Accord- (glyphosate) Arsenal (imazapyr) tank mixes.
Glyphosate is one of the most widely used herbicidal active ingredients in the world and has been continuously the subject of numerous exhaustive studies and scrutiny to determine its potential impacts on humans, animals, and the environment.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 351 I
I I
Appendix D
- 6. Application during unstable, unpredictable, or changing weather patterns is avoided.
- 7. Equipment and techniques are used that are designed to ensure maximum control of the spray swath with minimum drift.
- 8. Herbicides are not applied to surface water or wetlands unless specifically labeled for aquatic use. Filter and buffer strips will conform at least to federal and state regulations and any label requirements. The use of aerial or broadcast application of herbicides is not allowed within a streamside management zone (SMZs) (200 feet minimum width) adjacent to perennial streams, ponds, and other water sources.
Hand application of certain herbicides labeled for use within SMZs is used only selectively.
- 9. Buffers and filter strips (200 feet minimum width) are maintained next to agricultural crops, gardens, farm animals, orchards, apiaries, horticultural crops, and other valuable vegetation.
- 10. Herbicides are not applied in the following areas or times: (a) in city, state, and national parks or forests or other special areas without written permission and/or required permits, (b) off the right-of-way, and (c) during rainy periods or during the 48-hour interval prior to rainfall predicted with a 20 percent or greater probability by local forecasters, when soil active herbicides are used.
H TVA currently utilizes Activate Plus, manufactured by Terra, as an adjuvant to herbicides to improve the performance of the spray mixture. Application rates are consistent with the USEPA-approved label. The USFWS has expressed some concern on toxicity effects of surfactants on aquatic species. TVA is working in coordination with Mississippi State University and chemical companies to evaluate efficacy of additional low-toxicity surfactants, including Ll700 as manufactured by Loveland Industries, through side-by-side test plots in the SMZs of area transmission lines.
I.
TVA currently uses primarily low-volume applications of foliar and basal applications of Accord (glyphosate) and Accord- (glyphosate) Arsenal (imazapyr) tank mixes.
Glyphosate is one of the most widely used herbicidal active ingredients in the world and has been continuously the subject of numerous exhaustive studies and scrutiny to determine its potential impacts on humans, animals, and the environment.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 351
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 4.0 References Muncy, J. A. 1999. A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities, revised edition. Edited by C. Austin, C. Brewster, A. Lewis, K. Smithson, T. Broyles, and T. Wojtalik. Norris: Tennessee Valley Authority, Technical Note TVA/LR/NRM 92/1.
U.S. Forest Service. 1989a. Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volumes I and II. Southern Region Management Bulletin R8-MB-23, January 1989. Atlanta, Ga.: USDA Forest Service.
1989b. Vegetation Management in the Appalachian Mountains Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volumes I and I1. Southern Region Management Bulletin R8-MB-38, July 1989. Atlanta, Ga.: USDA Forest Service.
2002a. Vegetation Management in the Appalachian Mountains Final Environmental Impact Statement Supplement. Southern Region Management Bulletin R8-MB-97A, October 2002. Atlanta, Ga.: USDA Forest Service.
2002b. Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Final Environmental Impact Statement Supplement. Southern Region Management Bulletin R8-MB-98A, October 2002. Atlanta, Ga.: USDA Forest Service.
Revision April 2008 I
I I
'I 3
I
£ I
I I
3 II II I
I I
I 352 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site 4.0 References Muncy, J. A. 1999. A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities, revised edition. Edited by C. Austin, C. Brewster, A. Lewis, K. Smithson, T. Broyles, and T. Wojtalik. Norris: Tennessee Valley Authority, Technical Note TVAlLRlNRM 92/1.
u.S. Forest Service. 1989a. Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volumes I and II. Southern Region Management Bulletin R8-MB-23, January 1989. Atlanta, Ga.: USDA Forest Service.
---. 1989b. Vegetation Management in the Appalachian Mountains Final Environmental Impact Statement, Volumes I and II. Southern Region Management Bulletin R8-MB-38, July 1989. Atlanta, Ga.: USDA Forest Service.
---. 2002a. Vegetation Management in the Appalachian Mountains Final Environmental Impact Statement Supplement. Southern Region Management Bulletin R8-MB-97A, October 2002. Atlanta, Ga.: USDA Forest Service.
---. 2002b. Vegetation Management in the Coastal Plain/Piedmont Final Environmental Impact Statement Supplement. Southern Region Management Bulletin R8-MB-98A, October 2002. Atlanta, Ga.: USDA Forest Service.
Revision April 2008 352 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I.
I II I,)
II I
I I'
I I:
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix E Appendix E - Tennessee Valley Authority Environmental Quality Protection Specifications for Transmission Line Construction Draft Environmental Impact Statement 353 Appendix E - Tennessee Valley Authority Environmental Quality Protection Specifications for Transmission Line Construction Draft Environmental Impact Statement Appendix E 353
I I
I I
I I)
£
£ F",
ntentionally blank Intentionally blank I
I I
I I:
I I
I I
I' I,
I I
I I:
I, I
I I
Appendix E Tennessee Valley Authority Environmental Quality Protection Specifications for Transmission Line Construction
- 1. General - Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and/or the assigned contractor shall plan, coordinate, and conduct operations in a manner that protects the quality of the environment and complies with TVA's environmental expectations discussed in the preconstruction meeting. This specification contains provisions that shall be considered in all TVA and contract construction operations. If the contractor fails to operate within the intent of these requirements, TVA will direct changes to operating procedures.
Continued violation will result in a work suspension until correction or remedial action is taken by the contractor. Penalties and contract termination will be used as appropriate.
The costs of complying with the Environmental Quality Protection Specifications are incidental to the contract work, and no additional compensation will be allowed. At all structure and conductor pulling sites, protective measures to prevent erosion will be taken immediately upon the end of each step in a construction sequence, and those protective measures will be inspected and maintained throughout the construction and right-of-way rehabilitation period.
- 2. Regulations - TVA and/or the assigned contractor shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental and antipollution laws, regulations, and ordinances related to environmental protection and prevention, control, and abatement of all forms of pollution.
- 3. Use Areas - TVA and/or the assigned contractor's use areas include but are not limited to site office, shop, maintenance, parking, storage, staging, assembly areas, utility services, and access roads to the use areas. The construction contractor shall submit plans and drawings for their location and development to the TVA engineer and project manager for approval. Secondary containment will be provided for fuel and petroleum product storage pursuant to 29CFR1 910.106(D)(6)(iii)(OSHA).
- 4. Equipment - All major equipment and proposed methods of operation shall be subject to the approval of TVA. The use or operation of heavy equipment in areas outside the right-of-way, access routes, or structure, pole, or tower sites will not be permitted without permission of the TVA inspector or field engineer. Heavy equipment use on steep slopes (greater than 20 percent) and in wet areas will be held to the minimum necessary to construct the transmission line. Steps will be taken to limit ground disturbance caused by heavy equipment usage, and erosion and sediment controls will be instituted on disturbed areas in accordance with state requirements.
No subsurface ground-disturbing equipment or stump-removal equipment will be used by construction forces except on access roads or at the actual structure, pole, or tower sites, where only footing locations and controlled runoff diversions shall be created that disturb the soil. All other areas of ground cover or in-place stumps and roots shall remain in place. (Note: Tracked vehicles disturb surface layer of the ground due to size and function.) Some disking of the right-of-way may occur for proper seedbed preparation.
Unless ponding previously occurred (i.e., existing low-lying areas), water should not be allowed to pond on the structure sites except around foundation holes; the water must Draft Environmental Impact Statement 355
'J I
I I
I I
I' I
I I
.1 I
'1 I
I I
'I
.1 J
Tennessee Valley Authority Environmental Quality Protection Specifications for Transmission Line Construction Appendix E
- 1. General-Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and/or the assigned contractor shall plan, coordinate, and conduct operations in a manner that protects the quality of the environment and complies with TVA's environmental expectations discussed in the preconstruction meeting. This specification contains provisions that shall be considered in all TVA and contract construction operations. If the contractor fails to operate within the intent of these requirements, TVA will direct changes to operating procedures.
Continued violation will result in a work suspension until correction or remedial action is taken by the contractor. Penalties and contract termination will be used as appropriate.
The costs of complying with the Environmental Quality Protection Specifications are incidental to the contract work, and no additional compensation will be allowed. At all structure and conductor pulling sites, protective measures to prevent erosion will be taken immediately upon the end of each step in a construction sequence, and those protective measures will be inspected and maintained throughout the construction and right-of-way rehabilitation period.
- 2. Regulations - TVA and/or the assigned contractor shall comply with all applicable federal, state, and local environmental and antipollution laws, regulations, and ordinances related to environmental protection and prevention, control, and abatement of all forms of pollution.
- 3. Use Areas - TVA and/or the assigned contractor's use areas include but are not limited to site office, shop, maintenance, parking, storage, staging, assembly areas, utility services, and access roads to the use areas. The construction contractor shall submit plans and drawings for their location and development to the TVA engineer and project manager for approval. Secondary containment will be provided for fuel and petroleum product storage pursuant to 29CFR191 0.1 06(O)(6)(iii)(OSHA).
- 4. Equipment - All major equipment and proposed methods of operation shall be subject to the approval of TVA. The use or operation of heavy equipment in areas outside the right-of-way, access routes, or structure, pole, or tower sites will not be permitted without permission of the TVA inspector or field engineer. Heavy equipment use on steep slopes (greater than 20 percent) and in wet areas will be held to the minimum necessary to construct the transmission line. Steps will be taken to limit ground disturbance caused by heavy equipment usage, and erosion and sediment controls will be instituted on disturbed areas in accordance with state requirements.
No subsurface ground-disturbing equipment or stump-removal equipment will be used by construction forces except on access roads or at the actual structure, pole, or tower sites, where only footing locations and controlled runoff diversions shall be created that disturb the soil. All other areas of ground cover or in-place stumps and roots shall remain in place. (Note: Tracked vehicles disturb surface layer of the ground due to size and function.) Some disking of the right-of-way may occur for proper seedbed preparation.
Unless ponding previously occurred (i.e., existing low-lying areas), water should not be allowed to pond on the structure sites except around foundation holes; the water must Draft Environmental Impact Statement 355
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site be directed away from the site in as dispersed a manner as possible. At tower or structure sites, some means of upslope interruption of potential overland flow and diversion around the footings should be provided as the first step in construction-site preparation. If leveling is necessary, it must be implemented by means that provide for continuous gentle, controlled, overland flow or percolation. A good grass cover, straw, gravel, or other protection of the surface must be maintained. Steps taken to prevent increases in the moisture content of the in-situ soils will be beneficial both during construction and over the service life of any structure.
- 5. Sanitation - A designated TVA or contractor representative shall contact a sanitary contractor who will provide sanitary chemical toilets convenient to all principal points of operation for every working party. The facilities shall comply with applicable federal, state, or local health laws and regulations. They shall not be located closer than 100 feet to any stream or tributary or to any wetland. The facilities shall be required to have proper servicing and maintenance, and the waste disposal contractor shall verify in writing that the waste disposal will be in state-approved facilities. Employees shall be notified of sanitation regulations and shall be required to use the toilet facilities.
- 6. Refuse Disposal - Designated TVA and/or contractor personnel shall be responsible for daily inspection, cleanup, and proper labeling, storage, and disposal of all refuse and debris produced by his operations and by his employees. Suitable refuse collecting facilities will be required. Only state-approved disposal areas shall be used. Disposal containers such as dumpsters or roll-off containers shall be obtained from a proper waste disposal contractor. Solid, special, construction/demolition, and hazardous wastes as well as scrap are part of the potential refuse generated and must be properly managed with emphasis on reuse, recycle, or possible give away, as appropriate, before they are handled as waste. Contractors must meet similar provisions on any project contracted by TVA.
- 7. Landscape Preservation - TVA and its contractors shall exercise care to preserve the natural landscape in the entire construction area as well as use areas, in or outside the right-of-way, and on or adjacent to access roads. Construction operations shall be conducted to prevent any unnecessary destruction, scarring, or defacing of the natural vegetation and surroundings in the vicinity of the work.
- 8. Sensitive Areas Preservation - Certain areas on site and along the right-of-way may be designated by the specifications or the TVA engineer as environmentally sensitive.
These areas include but are not limited to areas classified as erodible, geologically sensitive, scenic, historical and archaeological, fish and wildlife refuges, water supply watersheds, and public recreational areas such as parks and monuments. Contractors and TVA construction crews shall take all necessary actions to avoid adverse impacts to these sensitive areas and their adjacent buffer zones. These actions may include suspension of work or change of operations during periods of rain or heavy public use; hours may be restricted or concentrations of noisy equipment may have to be dispersed. If prehistoric or historic artifacts or features are encountered during clearing or construction operations, the operations shall immediately cease for at least 100 feet in each direction, and TVA's right-of-way inspector or construction superintendent and Cultural Resources Program shall be notified. The site shall be left as found until a significance determination is made. Work may continue elsewhere beyond the 100-foot perimeter.
356 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site be directed away from the site in as dispersed a manner as possible. At tower or structure sites, some means of upslope interruption of potential overland flow and diversion around the footings should be provided as the first step in construction-site preparation. If leveling is necessary, it must be implemented by means that provide for continuous gentle, controlled, overland flow or percolation. A good grass cover, straw, gravel, or other protection of the surface must be maintained. Steps taken to prevent increases in the moisture content of the in-situ soils will be beneficial both during construction and over the service life of any structure.
- 5. Sanitation - A designated TVA or contractor representative shall contact a sanitary contractor who will provide sanitary chemical toilets convenient to all principal points of operation for every working party. The facilities shall comply with applicable federal, state, or local health laws and regulations. They shall not be located closer than 100 feet to any stream or tributary or to any wetland. The facilities shall be required to have proper servicing and maintenance, and the waste disposal contractor shall verify in writing that the waste disposal will be in state-approved facilities. Employees shall be notified of sanitation regulations and shall be required to use the toilet facilities.
- 6. Refuse Disposal - Designated TVA and/or contractor personnel shall be responsible for daily inspection, cleanup, and proper labeling, storage, and disposal of all refuse and debris produced by his operations and by his employees. Suitable refuse collecting facilities will be required. Only state-approved disposal areas shall be used. Disposal containers such as dumpsters or roll-off containers shall be obtained from a proper waste disposal contractor. Solid, special, construction/demolition, and hazardous wastes as well as scrap are part of the potential refuse generated and must be properly managed with emphasis on reuse, recycle, or possible give away, as appropriate, before they are handled as waste. Contractors must meet similar provisions on any project contracted by TVA.
- 7. Landscape Preservation - TVA and its contractors shall exercise care to preserve the natural landscape in the entire construction area as well as use areas, in or outside the right-of-way, and on or adjacent to access roads. Construction operations shall be conducted to prevent any unnecessary destruction, scarring, or defacing of the natural vegetation and surroundings in the vicinity of the work.
- 8. Sensitive Areas Preservation - Certain areas on site and along the right-of-way may be designated by the specifications or the TVA engineer as environmentally sensitive.
These areas include but are not limited to areas classified as erodible, geologically sensitive, scenic, historical and archaeological, fish and wildlife refuges, water supply watersheds, and public recreational areas such as parks and monuments. Contractors and TVA construction crews shall take all necessary actions to avoid adverse impacts to these sensitive areas and their adjacent buffer zones. These actions may include suspension of work or change of operations during periods of rain or heavy public use; hours may be restricted or concentrations of noisy equipment may have to be dispersed. If prehistoric or historic artifacts or features are encountered during clearing or construction operations, the operations shall immediately cease for at least 100 feet in each direction, and TVA's right-of-way inspector or construction superintendent and Cultural Resources Program shall be notified. The site shall be left as found until a significance determination is made. Work may continue elsewhere beyond the 100-foot perimeter.
356 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I, I
I I
I I
,I I'
I' I
I, I
I I
I
Appendix E
- 9. Water Quality Control - TVA and contractor construction activities shall be performed by methods that will prevent entrance or accidental spillage of solid matter, contaminants, debris, and other objectionable pollutants and wastes into flowing caves, sinkholes, streams, dry watercourses, lakes, ponds, and underground water sources.
The clearing contractor will erect and (when TVA or contract construction personnel are unable) maintain best management practices (BMPs) such as silt fences on steep slopes and adjacent to any stream, wetland, or other water body. Additional BMPs may be required for areas of disturbance created by construction activities. BMPs will be inspected by the TVA field engineer or other designated TVA or contractor personnel routinely and during periods of high runoff, and any necessary repairs will be made as soon as practicable. BMP inspections will be conducted in accordance with permit requirements. Records of all inspections will be maintained on site, and copies of inspection forms will be forwarded to the TVA construction environmental engineer.
Acceptable measures for disposal of waste oil from vehicles and equipment shall be followed. No waste oil shall be disposed of within the right-of-way, on a construction site, or on access roads.
- 10. Turbidity and Blockinq of Streams - Construction activities in or near SMZs or other bodies of water shall be controlled to prevent the water turbidity from exceeding state or local water quality standards for that stream. All conditions of a general storm water permit, aquatic resource alteration permit, or a site-specific permit shall be met including monitoring of turbidity in receiving streams and/or storm water discharges and implementation of appropriate erosion and sediment control measures.
Appropriate drainage facilities for temporary construction activities interrupting natural site drainage shall be provided to avoid erosion. Watercourses shall not be blocked or diverted unless required by the specifications or the TVA engineer. Diversions shall be made in accordance with TVA's A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities.
Mechanized equipment shall not be operated in flowing water except when approved and, then, only to construct crossings or to perform required construction under direct guidance of TVA. Construction of stream fords or other crossings will only be permitted at approved locations and to current TVA construction access road standards. Material shall not be deposited in watercourses or within stream bank areas where it could be washed away by high stream flows. Appropriate U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and state permits shall be obtained.
Wastewater from construction or dewatering operations shall be controlled to prevent excessive erosion or turbidity in a stream, wetland, lake, or pond. Any work or placing of equipment within a flowing or dry watercourse requires the prior approval of TVA.
- 11. Clearingq - No construction activities may clear additional site or right-of-way vegetation or disturb remaining retained vegetation, stumps, or regrowth at locations other than the structure sites and conductor setup areas. TVA and the construction contractor(s) must provide appropriate erosion or sediment controls for areas they have disturbed that have previously been restabilized after clearing operations. Control measures shall be Draft Environmental Impact Statement 357 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix E
- 9. Water Quality Control - TVA and contractor construction activities shall be performed by methods that will prevent entrance or accidental spillage of solid matter, contaminants, debris, and other objectionable pollutants and wastes into flowing caves, sinkholes, streams, dry watercourses, lakes, ponds, and underground water sources.
The clearing contractor will erect and (when TVA or contract construction personnel are unable) maintain best management practices (BMPs) such as silt fences on steep slopes and adjacent to any stream, wetland, or other water body. Additional BMPs may be required for areas of disturbance created by construction activities. BMPs will be inspected by the TVA field engineer or other designated TVA or contractor personnel routinely and during periods of high runoff, and any necessary repairs will be made as soon as practicable. BMP inspections will be conducted in accordance with permit requirements. Records of all inspections will be maintained on site, and copies of inspection forms will be forwarded to the TVA construction environmental engineer.
Acceptable measures for disposal of waste oil from vehicles and equipment shall be followed. No waste oil shall be disposed of within the right-of-way, on a construction site, or on access roads.
- 10. Turbidity and Blocking of Streams - Construction activities in or near SMZs or other bodies of water shall be controlled to prevent the water turbidity from exceeding state or local water quality standards for that stream. All conditions of a general storm water permit, aquatic resource alteration permit, or a site-specific permit shall be met including monitoring of turbidity in receiving streams and/or storm water discharges and implementation of appropriate erosion and sediment control measures.
Appropriate drainage facilities for temporary construction activities interrupting natural site drainage shall be provided to avoid erosion. Watercourses shall not be blocked or diverted unless required by the specifications or the TVA engineer. Diversions shall be made in accordance with TVA's A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities.
Mechanized equipment shall not be operated in flowing water except when approved and, then, only to construct crossings or to perform required construction unaer direct guidance of TVA. Construction of stream fords or other crossings will only be permitted at approved locations and to current TVA construction access road standards. Material shall not be deposited in watercourses or within stream bank areas where it could be washed away by high stream flows. Appropriate U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and state permits shall be obtained.
Wastewater from construction or dewatering operations shall be controlled to prevent excessive erosion or turbidity in a stream, wetland, lake, or pond. Any work or placing of equipment within a flowing or dry watercourse requires the prior approval of TVA.
- 11. Clearing - No construction activities may clear additional site or right-of-way vegetation or disturb remaining retained vegetation, stumps, or regrowth at locations other than the structure sites and conductor setup areas. TVA and the construction contractor(s) must provide appropriate erosion or sediment controls for areas they have disturbed that have previously been restabilized after clearing operations. Control measures shall be Draft Environmental Impact Statement 357
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site implemented as soon as practicable after disturbance in accordance with applicable federal, state, and/or local storm water regulations.
- 12. Restoration of Site - All construction disturbed areas, with the exception of farmland under cultivation and any other areas as may be designated by TVA's specifications, shall be stabilized in the following manner unless the property owner and TVA's engineer specify a different method:
A. The subsoil shall be loosened to a minimum depth of 6 inches if possible and worked to remove unnatural ridges and depressions.
B. If needed, appropriate soil amendments will be added.
C. All disturbed areas will initially be seeded with a temporary ground cover such as winter wheat, rye, or millet, depending on the season. Perennials may also be planted during initial seeding if proper growing conditions exist. Final restoration and final seeding will be performed as line construction is completed. Final seeding will consist of permanent perennial grasses such as those outlined in TVA's A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities. Exceptions would include those areas designated as native grass planting areas. Initial and final restoration will be performed by the clearing contractor.
D. TVA holds the option, depending upon the time of year and weather condition, to delay or withdraw the requirement of seeding until more favorable planting conditions are certain. In the meantime, other stabilization techniques must be applied.
- 13. Air Quality Control - Construction crews shall take appropriate actions to minimize the amount of air pollution created by their construction operations. All operations must be
£ conducted in a manner that avoids creating a nuisance and prevents damage to lands, crops, dwellings, or persons.
- 14. Burninq - Before conducting any open burning operations, the contractor shall obtain permits or provide notifications as required to state forestry offices and/or local fire departments. Burning operations must comply with the requirements of state and local air pollution control and fire authorities and will only be allowed in approved locations I
and during appropriate hours and weather conditions. If weather conditions such as wind direction or speed change rapidly, the contractor's burning operations may be temporarily stopped by the TVA field engineer. The debris for burning shall be piled I
and shall be kept as clean and as dry as possible, then burned in such a manner as to reduce smoke. No materials other than dry wood shall be open burned. The ash and debris shall be buried away from streams or other water sources and shall be in areas I
coordinated with the property owner.
- 15. Dust and Mud Control - Construction activities shall be conducted to minimize the I
creation of dust. This may require limitations as to types of equipment, allowable speeds, and routes utilized. Water, straw, wood chips, dust palliative, gravel, combinations of these, or similar control measures may be used subject to TVA's approval. On new construction sites and easements, the last 100 feet before an access 358 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site implemented as soon as practicable after disturbance in accordance with applicable federal, state, and/or local storm water regulations.
- 12. Restoration of Site - All construction disturbed areas, with the exception of farmland under cultivation and any other areas as may be designated by TVA's specifications, shall be stabilized in the following manner unless the property owner and TVA's engineer specify a different method:
A. The subsoil shall be loosened to a minimum depth of 6 inches if possible and worked to remove unnatural ridges and depressions.
B. If needed, appropriate soil amendments will be added.
C. All disturbed areas will initially be seeded with a temporary ground cover such as winter wheat, rye, or millet, depending on the season. Perennials may also be planted during initial seeding if proper growing conditions exist. Final restoration and final seeding will be performed as line construction is completed. Final seeding will consist of permanent perennial grasses such as those outlined in TVA's A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction and Maintenance Activities. Exceptions would include those areas designated as native grass planting areas. Initial and final restoration will be performed by the clearing contractor.
D. TVA holds the option, depending upon the time of year and weather condition, to delay or withdraw the requirement of seeding until more favorable planting conditions are certain. In the meantime, other stabilization techniques must be applied.
- 13. Air Quality Control - Construction crews shall take appropriate actions to minimize the amount of air pollution created by their construction operations. All operations must be conducted in a manner that avoids creating a nuisance and prevents damage to lands, crops, dwellings, or persons.
- 14. Burning - Before conducting any open burning operations, the contractor shall obtain permits or provide notifications as required to state forestry offices and/or local fire departments. Burning operations must comply with the requirements of state and local air pollution control and fire authorities and will only be allowed in approved locations and during appropriate hours and weather conditions. If weather conditions such as wind direction or speed change rapidly, the contractor's burning operations may be temporarily stopped by the TVA field engineer. The debris for burning shall be piled and shall be kept as clean and as dry as possible, then burned in such a manner as to reduce smoke. No materials other than dry wood shall be open burned. The ash and debris shall be buried away from streams or other water sources and shall be in areas coordinated with the property owner.
- 15. Dust and Mud Control - Construction activities shall be conducted to minimize the creation of dust. This may require limitations as to types of equipment, allowable speeds, and routes utilized. Water, straw, wood chips, dust palliative, gravel, combinations of these, or similar control measures may be used subject to TVA's approval. On new construction sites and easements, the last 100 feet before an access 358 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I.
I I
I:
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix E road approaches a county road or highway shall be graveled to prevent transfer of mud onto the public road.
- 16. Vehicle Exhaust Emissions - TVA and/or the contractors shall maintain and operate equipment to limit vehicle exhaust emissions. Equipment and vehicles that show excessive emissions of exhaust gasses and particulates due to poor engine adjustments or other inefficient operating conditions shall not be operated until corrective repairs or adjustments are made.
- 17. Vehicle Servicing - Routine maintenance of personal vehicles will not be performed on the right-of-way. However, if emergency or "have to" situations arise, minimal/temporary maintenance to personal vehicles will occur in order to mobilize the vehicle to an off-site maintenance shop. Heavy equipment will be serviced on the right-of-way except in designated sensitive areas. The Heavy Equipment Department within TVA or the construction contractor will properly maintain these vehicles with approved spill prevention controls and countermeasures. If emergency maintenance in a sensitive or questionable area arises, the area environmental coordinator or construction environmental engineer will be consulted. All wastes and used oils will be properly recovered, handled, and disposed/recycled. Equipment shall not be temporarily stored in stream floodplains, whether overnight or on weekends or holidays.
- 18. Smoke and Odors - TVA and/or the contractors shall properly store and handle combustible material that could create objectionable smoke, odors, or fumes. The contractor shall not burn refuse such as trash, rags, tires, plastics, or other debris.
- 19. Noise Control - TVA and/or the contractor shall take measures to avoid the creation of noise levels that are considered nuisances, safety, or health hazards. Critical areas including but not limited to residential areas, parks, public use areas, and some ranching operations will require special considerations. TVA's criteria for determining corrective measures shall be determined by comparing the noise level of the construction operation to the background noise levels. In addition, especially noisy equipment such as helicopters, pile drivers, air hammers, chippers, chain saws, or areas for machine shops, staging, assembly, or blasting may require corrective actions when required by TVA.
- 20. Noise Suppression - All internal combustion engines shall be properly equipped with mufflers as required by the Department of Labor's Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. TVA may require spark arresters in addition to mufflers on some engines.
Air compressors and other noisy equipment may require sound-reducing enclosures in some circumstances.
- 21. Damages - The movement of construction crews and equipment shall be conducted in a manner that causes as little intrusion and damage as possible to crops, orchards, woods, wetlands, and other property features and vegetation. The contractor will be responsible for erosion damage caused by his actions and especially for creating conditions that would threaten the stability of the right-of-way or site soil, the structures, or access to either. When property owners prefer the correction of ground cover condition or soil and subsoil problems themselves, the section of the contract dealing with damages will apply.
Revision April 2007 Draft-Environmental Impact Statement 359 I
- 1 I
I
,I
,I I'
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix E road approaches a county road or highway shall be graveled to prevent transfer of mud onto the public road.
- 16. Vehicle Exhaust Emissions - TVA and/or the contractors shall maintain and operate equipment to limit vehicle exhaust emissions. Equipment and vehicles that show excessive emissions of exhaust gasses and particulates due to poor engine adjustments or other inefficient operating conditions shall not be operated until corrective repairs or adjustments are made.
- 17. Vehicle Servicing - Routine maintenance of personal vehicles will not be performed on the right-of-way. However, if emergency or "have to" situations arise, minimal/temporary maintenance to personal vehicles will occur in order to mobilize the vehicle to an off-site maintenance shop. Heavy equipment will be serviced on the right-of-way except in designated sensitive areas. The Heavy Equipment Department within TVA or the construction contractor will properly maintain these vehicles with approved spill prevention controls and countermeasures. If emergency maintenance in a sensitive or questionable area arises, the area environmental coordinator or construction environmental engineer will be consulted. All wastes and used oils will be properly recovered, handled, and disposed/recycled. Equipment shall not be temporarily stored in stream floodplains, whether overnight or on weekends or holidays.
- 18. Smoke and Odors - TVA and/or the contractors shall properly store and handle combustible material that could create objectionable smoke, odors, or fumes. The contractor shall not burn refuse such as trash, rags, tires, plastics, or other debris.
- 19. Noise Control - TVA and/or the contractor shall take measures to avoid the creation of noise levels that are considered nuisances, safety, or health hazards. Critical areas including but not limited to residential areas, parks, public use areas, and some ranching operations will require special considerations. TVA's criteria for determining corrective measures shall be determined by comparing the noise level of the construction operation to the background noise levels. In addition, especially noisy equipment such as helicopters, pile drivers, air hammers, chippers, chain saws, or areas for machine shops, staging, assembly, or blasting may require corrective actions when required by TVA.
- 20. Noise Suppression - All internal combustion engines shall be properly equipped with mufflers as required by the Department of Labor's Safety and Health Regulations for Construction. TVA may require spark arresters in addition to mufflers on some engines.
Air compressors and other noisy equipment may require sound-reducing enclosures in some circumstances.
- 21. Damages - The movement of construction crews and equipment shall be conducted in a manner that causes as little intrusion and damage as possible to crops, orchards, woods, wetlands, and other property features and vegetation. The contractor will be responsible for erosion damage caused by his actions and especially for creating conditions that would threaten the stability of the right-of-way or site soil, the structures,'
or access to either. When property owners prefer the correction of ground cover condition or soil and subsoil problems themselves, the section of the contract dealing with damages will apply.
Revision April 2007 Draft*Environmental Impact Statement 359
iI
,I I
I I
I I
I:
Page intentionally blank I.
I I
'I I'
II I:
1 I
I I
I I
'I
-I I
I Page intentionally blank I
I I
I I
II I
I I
I
Appendix F Appendix F - State-Listed Animal and Plant Species Present in Areas Affected by Transmission Line Work Draft Environmental Impact Statement 361 I
Appendix F I
(I, I
I I
I I
I Appendix F - State-Listed Animal and Plant I
Species Present in Areas Affected by Transmission Line Work
,I I
'I f
I I
I I'
I Draft Environmental Impact Statement 361
Paige ntentionally blank I
I
,I I
I I
I I
I II-Itentionally blank I
I:
I
,I' I
I I
I I~
I
Appendix F Table F-1. State-Listed Aquatic Animal Species Present in Counties Affected Transmission Line Upgrades I
Alabama Georgia Tennessee Common Name I
Scientific Name State Status, State Status, State Status,
_____Rank
,Rank Rank Insects A caddisfly Hydropsyche rotosa RARE, S 1 A caddisfly Hydropsyche simulans RARE, S1 A caddisfly Rhyacophila alabama POTL, S1 A caddisfly Rhyacophila fenestra RARE, S1 A glossosomatid caddisfly Agapetus hessi TRKD, S1 Tennessee clubtail dragonfly Gomphus sandrius TRKD, S1 Snails Anthony's river snail*#
Athearnia anthonyi PROT, S1 END, S1 Armored rocksnail*
Lithasia armigera TRKD, S1S2 Armored snail Pyrgulopsis pachyta PROT, S1 Corpulent hornsnail*
Pleurocera corpulenta TRKD,Si TRKD, S1 Helmet rock snail*
Lithasia duttoniana TRKD, S2 Ornate rocksnail*
Lithasia geniculata TRKD, S3 Owen spring limnephilid Glyphopsyche POTL, -
cadd isfly sequatchie Royal marstonia Pyrgulopsis ogmorhaphe END, S1 Rugose rocksnail Lithasia jayana TRKD, S2 Skirted hornsnail*
Pleurocera pyrenella TRKD,S2 Slabside pearlymussel Lexingtonia dolabelloides PROT, S1 TRKD, S2 Slender campeloma*
Campeloma decampi PROT, S1 Smooth mudalia*
Leptoxis virgata TRKD, S1 Spiny riversnail*
/o fluvialis EXTI, SX TRKD, S2 Spiral hornsnail Pleurocera brumbyi TRKD, S2 Umbilicate river snail Leptoxis subglobosa TRKD, S1 umbilicata Varicose rocksnail*
Lithasia verrucosa TRKD, S3 Warty rocksnail*
Lithasia lima HIST, SH TRKD, S2 Mussels Acornshell Epioblasma haysiana EXTI?, SH Alabama lampmussel#
Lampsilis virescens PROT, S1 Alabama moccasinshell Medionidus acutissimus THR, S1 Epioblasma Angled riffleshell biemarginata EXTI?, SX Birdwing pearlymussel Lemiox rimosus PROT, SX Butterfly*
Ellipsaria lineolata TRKD, S3 Cracking pearlymussel Hemistena lata PROT, SX Cumberland bean Villosa trabalis PROT, SX HIST, SH Draft Environmental Impact Statement 363
'I I
I I
I I
I, I
I I
I
,I I
Appendix F Table F-1. State-Listed Aquatic Animal Species Present in Counties Affected Transmission L*
U d
me 'pgra es
~
,I Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name State Status, State Status,, State Status,
~-
Rank Rank
'I Rank
~"".
Insects A caddisfly Hydropsyche rotosa RARE, S1 A caddisfly Hydropsyche simulans RARE, S1 A caddisfly Rhyacophila alabama POTL, S1 A caddisfly Rhyacophila fenestra RARE, S1 A glossosomatid caddisfly Agapetus hessi TRKD, S1 Tennessee clubtail dragonfly Gomphus sandrius TRKD, S1 Snails Anthony's river snail*#
Athearnia anthonyi PROT, S1 END, S1 Armored rocksnail*
Lithasia armigera TRKD, S1S2 Armored snail Pyrgulopsis pachyta PROT, S1 Corpulent hornsnail*
Pleurocera corpulenta TRKD, S1 TRKD, S1 Helmet rock snail*
Lithasia duttoniana TRKD, S2 Ornate rocksnail*
Lithasia geniculata TRKD, S3 Owen spring limnephilid Glyphopsyche POTL, -
caddisfly sequatchie Royal marstonia Pyrgulopsis ogmorhaphe END, S1 Rugose rocksnail Lithasia jayana TRKD, S2 Skirted hornsnail*
Pleurocera pyrenel/a TRKD, S2 Slabs ide pearlymussel Lexingtonia dolabel/oides PROT, S1 TRKD,S2 Slender campeloma*
Campeloma decampi PROT, S1 Smooth mudalia*
Leptoxis virgata TRKD, S1 Spiny riversnail*
10 fluvialis EXTI, SX TRKD, S2 Spiral horns nail Pleurocera brumbyi TRKD, S2 Umbilicate river snail Leptoxis subglobosa TRKD, S1 umbilicata Varicose rocksnail*
Lithasia verrucosa TRKD, S3 Warty rocksnail*
Lithasia lima HIST, SH TRKD, S2 Mussels Acornshell Epioblasma haysiana EXTI?, SH Alabama lampmussel#
Lampsilis virescens PROT, S1 Alabama moccasinshell Medionidus acutissimus THR, S1 An~led riffles hell Epioblasma EXTI?, SX biemarginata Birdwing pearlymussel Lemiox rimosus PROT, SX Butterfly*
Ellipsaria lineolata TRKD, S3 Cracking pearlymussel Hemistena lata PROT, SX Cumberland bean Vil/osa trabalis PROT, SX HIST, SH Draft Environmental Impact Statement 363
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Alabama Georgia Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name State Status, State Status, State Status,
-Rank Rank Rank Cumberland combshell Epioblasma brevidens PROT, S1 Cumberland moccasinshell Medionidus conradicus PROT, S1 Cumberland monkeyface Quadrula intermedia PROT, S1 END, S1 Cumberland pigtoe Pleurobema gibberum END, S1 Deertoe Truncilla truncata TRKD, S1 Dromedary pearlymussel Dromus dromas PROT, S1 END, S1 Elktoe Alasmidonta marginata EXTI, SX Fine-lined Pocketbook Lampsilis altilis THR, S2 Fine-rayed Pigtoe#
Fusconaia cuneolus PROT, S1 Fluted kidneyshell Ptychobranchus PROT, SX TRKD,$2S3 subtentum Hickorynut Obovaria olivaria EXTI, SX Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus TRKD,S1 fasciolaris Monkeyface*
Quadrula metanevra TRKD,S3 Mucket*
Actinonaias ligamentina TRKD,S2 Narrow catspaw Epioblasma lenior EXTI?, SX Ohio pigtoe Pleurobema cordatum TRKD,S2 Orange-foot Pimpleback Plethobasus cooperianus PROT, S1 END, S1 Painted creekshell Villosa taeniata TRKD,S3 Pale lilliput#
Toxolasma cylindrellus PROT, S1 END, S1 Pheasantshell Actinonaias pectorosa TRKD, S Pink mucket*#
Lampsilis abrupta PROT, S1 END, S2 Pink papershell*
Potamilus ohiensis TRKD,S3 Purple lilliput Toxolasma lividus TRKD,32 Rabbitsfoot Quadrula cylindrica PROT, S1 TRKD,$3 cylindrica Rainbow Villosa iris TRKD, S3 Ring pink Obovaria retusa PROT, S1 Rough pigtoe*
Pleurobema plenum PROT, Sl END, Sl Round hickorynut Obovaria subrotunda TRKD, S2 TRKD, S3 Sheepnose Plethobasus cyphyus PROT, S1 Shiny pigtoe pearlymussel#
Fusconaia cor PROT, S1 Slabside pearlymussel*
Lexingtonia dolabelloides PROT, S1 TRKD, S1 Slippershell mussel Alasmidonta viridis PROT, S1 Snuffbox Epioblasma triquetra TRKD, S1 Southern pigtoe Pleurobema georgianum END, S1 Spectaclecase Cumberlandia PROT, S1 TRKDS2S3 Spectac________ecase______monodonta Spike Elliptio dilatata TRKD, S1 I
I I'
I I
I I
£ I
I I
I I
I a
I I
I 364 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Alabama Georgia Common. Name Scientific Name State Status, State Status, Rank Rank Cumberland combshell Epiob/asma brevidens PROT, S1 Cumberland moccasinshell Medionidus conradicus PROT, S1 Cumberland monkeyface Quadru/a intermedia PROT, S1 Cumberland pigtoe P/eurobema gibberum Deertoe Truncil/a truncata TRKD,S1 Dromedary pearlymussel Dromus dromas PROT, S1 Elktoe A/asmidonta marginata EXTI, SX Fine-lined Pocketbook Lampsilis a/titis THR, S2 Fine-rayed Pigtoe#
Fusconaia cuneo/us PROT, S1 Fluted kidneyshell Ptychobranchus PROT, SX subtentum Hickorynut Obovaria oliva ria EXTI, SX Kidneyshell Ptychobranchus TRKD, S1 fascio/aris Monkeyface*
Quadru/a metanevra TRKD,S3 Mucket*
Actinonaias /igamentina TRKD, S2 Narrow cats paw Epiob/asma /enior EXTI?, SX Ohio pigtoe P/eurobema corda tum TRKD, S2 Orange-foot Pimpleback P/ethobasus cooperianus PROT, S1 Painted creekshell Vil/osa taeniata TRKD, S3 Pale lilliput#
Toxo/asma cy/indrel/us PROT, S1 Pheasants hell Actinonaias pectorosa TRKD, S1 Pink mucket*#
Lampsi/is abrupta PROT, S1 Pink papershell*
Potami/us ohiensis TRKD, S3 Purple lilliput Toxo/asma Iividus TRKD, S2 Rabbitsfoot Quadru/a cy/indrica PROT, S1 cylindrica Rainbow Vil/osa iris TRKD, S3 Ring pink Obovaria retusa PROT, S1 Rough pigtoe*
P/eurobema plenum PROT, S1 Round hickorynut abo varia subrotunda TRKD, S2 Sheepnose P/ethobasus cyphyus PROT, S1 Shiny pigtoe pearlymussel#
Fusconaia cor PROT, S1 Slabs ide pearlymussel*
Lexingtonia do/abel/oides PROT, S1 Slippershell mussel A/asmidonta viridis PROT, S1 Snuffbox Epiob/asma triquetra TRKD, S1 Southern pigtoe P/eurobema georgianum END, S1 Spectaclecase Cumber/andia PROT, S1 monodonta Spike EI/iptio di/atata TRKD, S1 364 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Tennessee State Status, Rank END, S1 END, S1 END, S1 TRKD, S2S3 END, S1 END, S1 END, S2 TRKD, S3 END, S1 TRKD,S3 TRKD, S1 TRKD,S2S3 I
I I
I I
I I
I
- 1 I
I I
I I
I I
-Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name State Status, State Status; State Status, Rank Rank Rank Tan riffleshell Epioblasma florentina walkeri PROT, SX END, Si Tennessee clubshell Pleurobema oviforme TRKD, S1 TRKD, $2S3 Tennessee heelsplitter Lasmigona holstonia TRKD, 51S2 TRKD, S2 Tennessee pigtoe*
Fusconaia barnesiana TRKD, S1 Tuberculed blossom Epioblasma torulosa PROT, SX EXTI, SX pearlymussel torulosa Turgid blossom pearlymussel Epioblasma turgidula EXTI, SX Wavy-rayed Lampmussel Lampsilis fasciola TRKD, $1S2 White heelsplitter Lasmigona complanata TRKD, S2S3 Crayfish A troglobitic crayfish*
Cambarus veitchorum TRKD,Si Chickamauga crayfish Cambarus extraneus THR, S1 ;S2 Troglobitic crayfish*
Cambarusjonesi SPCO,S2 Troglobitic crayfish Procambarus pecki TRKD, S2?
Fish Ashy darter Etheostoma cinereum TRKD, S1 THR, S2S3 Barrens darter Etheostoma forbesi END, S1 Barrens topminnow Fundulus julisia END, S1 Bedrock shiner Notropis rupestris NMGT, S2 Bigeye chub Hybopsis amblops TRKD, S3 RARE, S1S2 Blotched chub Erimystax insignis TRKD,S2 Blotchside logperch Percina burtoni TRKD,Si NMGT, S2 Bluebreast darter Etheostoma camurum TRKD, S Blueside darter Etheostoma jessiae TRKD,S3 Boulder darter Etheostoma wapiti PROT, S1 Chestnut lamprey Ichthyomyzon castaneus TRKD,S2 Coppercheek darter Etheostoma aquali THR, S2S3 Dusky darter Percina sciera RARE, S1 Fantail darter Etheostoma flabellare TRKD, S3 Flame chub Hemitremia flammea TRKD, S3 END, S1 NMGT, S3 Gilt darter Percina evides TRKD,S2 Golden darter Etheostoma denoncourti NMGT, S2 Highfin carpsucker Carpiodes velifer NMGT, S2S3 Longhead darter Percina macrocephala THR, S2 Mountain madtom Noturus eleutherus TRKD,S Northern studfish Fundulus catenatus THR, S1 Ohio lamprey Ichthyomyzon bdellium RARE, S3?
Paddlefish Polyodon spathula PROT, S3 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 365 I
Appendix F
- 1 I*
Alabama Georgia "Tennessee Common Name SCie'ntific Name State Status, State Status;
~tate Status, Rank Rank
-Rank Tan riffleshell Epioblasma florentina PROT, SX END, S1 walkeri I
Tennessee clubshell Pleurobema oviforme TRKD, S1 TRKD, S2S3 Tennessee heelsplitter Lasmigona holstonia TRKD, S1S2 TRKD, S2 I
Tennessee pigtoe*
Fusconaia barnesiana TRKD, S1 Tuberculed blossom Epioblasma torulosa PROT, SX EXTI, SX pearlymussel torulosa I
Turgid blossom pearlymussel Epioblasma turgidula EXTI, SX Wavy-rayed Lampmussel Lampsilis fasciola TRKD, S1S2 White heelsplitter Lasmigona complanata TRKD, S2S3 I
Crayfish A troglobitic crayfish*
Cambarus veitchorum TRKD, S1 Chickamauga crayfish Cambarus extraneus THR, S1;S2 I
Troglobitic crayfish*
Cambarus jonesi SPCO, S2 Troglobitic crayfish Procambarus pecki TRKD, S2?
I Fish Ashy darter Etheostoma cinereum TRKD, S1 THR, S2S3 Barrens darter Etheostoma forbesi END, S1
- 1 Barrens topminnow Fundulus julisia END, S1 Bedrock shiner Notropis rupestris NMGT, S2 Bigeye chub Hybopsis amblops TRKD, S3 RARE, S1S2 Blotched chub Erimystax insignis TRKD,S2 Blotchside log perch Percina burtoni TRKD, S1 NMGT, S2
.1 Bluebreast darter Etheostoma camurum TRKD, S1 Blueside darter Etheostoma jessiae TRKD, S3 Boulder darter Etheostoma wapiti PROT, S1 Chestnut lamprey Ichthyomyzon castaneus TRKD, S2 Coppercheek darter Etheostoma aquali THR, S2S3 I
Dusky darter Percina sciera RARE, S1 Fantail darter Etheostoma flabellare TRKD, S3 Flame chub Hemitremia flam mea TRKD, S3 END, S1 NMGT, S3 1
Gilt darter Percina evides TRKD, S2 Golden darter Etheostoma denoncourti NMGT, S2 Highfin carpsucker Carpiodes velifer NMGT, S2S3 Longhead darter Percina macrocephala THR, S2 Mountain madtom Noturus eleutherus TRKD, S1 I
Northern studfish Fundulus catenatus THR, S1 Ohio lamprey Ichthyomyzon bdellium RARE, S3?
Paddlefish Polyodon spathula PROT, S3 I
I*
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 365
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Alabama Georgia Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name State Status, State Status, State Status, Rank Rank
-Rank Palezone shiner#
Notropis albizonatus PROT, S1 Popeye shiner Notropis ariommus THR, S1 Redband darter Etheostoma luteovinctum NMGT, S4 Redline darter Etheostoma rufilineatum TRKD, S3 River carpsucker Carpiodes carpio TRKD, S2 River darter Percina shumardi TRKD, S3 Rosyface shiner Notropis micropteryx TRKD, S2 Saddled madtom Noturus fasciatus THR, S2 Silver redhorse Moxostoma anisurum TRKD, S2 Silver shiner Notropis photogenis TRKD, S1 Slackwater darter Etheostoma boschungi PROT, S1 Slender madtom Noturus exilis TRKD, S3 Slenderhead darter Percina phoxocephala NMGT, S3 Snail darter Percina tanasi THR, S1 THR, S2S3 Snubnose darter Etheostoma simoterum TRKD, S3 Southern cavefish Typhlichthys PROT, S3 RARE, S1 NMGT, S3 subterraneus Southern redbelly dace Phoxinus erythrogaster TRKD, S3 Spotfin chub Cyprinella monacha EXTI, SH Spring pygmy sunfish Elassoma alabamae PROT, S1 I
Stargazing minnow Phenacobius uranops TRKD, S1 THR, S1 Stonecat Noturus flavus TRKD, S1 Striated darter Etheostoma striatulum THR, S1 Stripetail darter Etheostoma kennicotti TRKD, S3 Tennessee dace Phoxinus tennesseensis NMGT, S3 Tuscumbia darter Etheostoma tuscumbia PROT, S2 Yellowfin madtom Noturus flavipinnis EXTI, SH Species that are known to occur in watersheds directly affected by construction activities are indicated by (*).
Species reported from Jackson County, Alabama are indicated by (#)
Status Codes: THR = Threatened; TRKD = Tracked by state Natural Heritage program; RARE = Listed Rare by the state; NMGT = In Need of Management; PROT = State Protected; SPCO = Listed Special Concern; EXTI = Listed Extirpated or Extinct State Ranks: S1 = Critically Imperiled; S2 = Imperiled; S3 = Vulnerable; SH = Historic; ? = Inexact or Uncertain; SX =
Presumed Extirpated I
I I
I I
I I
,I I
I I
I 366 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Alabama Georgia Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name State Status, State Status,
. State Status, Rank Rank
' ~'.Ra!lk Palezone shiner#
Notropis albizonatus PROT, S1 Popeye shiner Notropis ariommus THR, S1 Redband darter Etheostoma luteovinctum NMGT, S4 Redline darter Etheostoma rufilineatum TRKD,S3 River carpsucker Carpiodes carpio TRKD,S2 River darter Percina shumardi TRKD,S3 Rosyface shiner Notropis micropteryx TRKD,S2 Saddled madtom Noturus fasciatus THR, S2 Silver red horse Moxostoma anisurum TRKD,S2 Silver shiner Notropis photogenis TRKD, S1 Slackwater darter Etheostoma boschungi PROT, S1 Slender madtom Noturus exi/is TRKD,S3 Slenderhead darter Percina phoxocephala NMGT, S3 Snail darter Percina tanasi THR, S1 THR, S2S3 Snubnose darter Etheostoma simoterum TRKD, S3 Southern cavefish Typhlichthys PROT, S3 RARE, S1 NMGT, S3 subterraneus Southern red belly dace Phoxinus erythrogaster TRKD, S3 Spotfin chub Cyprinella monacha EXTI, SH Spring pygmy sunfish Elassoma alabamae PROT, S1 Stargazing minnow Phenacobius uranops TRKD, S1 THR, S1 Stonecat Noturus flavus TRKD, S1 Striated darter Etheostoma striatulum THR, S1 Stripetail darter Etheostoma kennicotti TRKD, S3 Tennessee dace Phoxinus tennesseensis NMGT, S3 Tuscumbia darter Etheostoma tuscumbia PROT, S2 Yellowfin madtom Noturus flavipinnis EXTI, SH Species that are known to occur in watersheds directly affected by construction activities are indicated by (*).
Species reported from Jackson County, Alabama are indicated by (#)
Status Codes: THR = Threatened; TRKD = Tracked by state Natural Heritage program; RARE = Listed Rare by the state; NMGT = In Need of Management; PROT = State Protected; 5PCO = Listed Special Concern; EXTI = Listed Extirpated or Extinct State Ranks: 51 = Critically Imperiled; 52 = Imperiled; 53 = Vulnerable; 5H = Historic; ? = Inexact or Uncertain; 5X =
Presumed Extirpated 366 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
- 1 I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix F Table F-2.
State-Listed Terrestrial Plant Species Known From Within a 5-Mile Vicinity of the Transmission Line Upgrades Alabama Georgia Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name StateStatus State State Status (Rank) tRank)
(Rank)
Chalk Maple Acer leucoderme SPCO(S3)
Sweetflag Acorus calamus SLNS(S1)
Yellow Giant-hyssop' Agastache nepetoides SLNS(S1)
SPCO(S1)
Roundleaf Serviceberry Amelanchier sanguinea THR(S2)
Price's Potato-bean Apios priceana SLNS(S2)
END(S2)
Spreading Rockcress Arabis patens END(S1)
American Spikenard Aralia racemosa SLNS(S1)
Bradley's Spleenwort Asplenium bradleyi SLNS(S2)
Wall-rue Spleenwort Asplenium ruta-muraria SLNS(S2)
American Hart's-tongue Asplenium scolopendrium SLNS(S1)
END(S1)
Fern2 var. americanum Maidenhair Spleenwort Asplenium trichomanes SLNS(S2S3)
Spreading False-foxglove Aureolaria patula SPCO(S3)
Nuttall's Rayless Golden-Bigelowia nuttallii SLNS(S3) rod Mountain Bitter Cress Cardamine clematitis THR(S2)
Sedge Carex hirtifolia SPCO(S 1$2)
Sedge Carex purpurifera SLNS(S2)
Alabama Lipfern Cheilanthes alabamensis SLNS(S3)
Pink Turtlehead Chelone lyonii SLNS(S1)
Yellowwood Cladrastis kentukea SLNS(S3)
Leather-flower Clematis glaucophylla END(S1)
Morefield's Leather-flower' Clematis morefieldii SLNS(S1)
Wister Coral-root Corallorhiza wisteriana SLNS(S2)
Woodland Tickseed Coreopsis pulchra SLNS(S2)
American Smoke-tree Cotinus obovatus SLNS(S2)
SPCO(S2)
Harper's Dodder Cuscuta harperi SLNS(S2)
Pink Lady-slipper Cypripedium acaule SLNS(S3)
S-CE(S4)
Large Yellow Lady's-slipper Cypripedium pubescens SLNS(S3)
Tennessee Bladderfern Cystopteris tennesseensis SLNS(S2)
Leafy Prairie-cloverz Dalea foliosa SLNS(S1)
END(S2S3)
Bog Oat-grass Danthonia epilis SPCO(S1$2)
Tall Larkspur Delphinium exaltatum EN D(S2)
Dwarf Larkspur' Delphinium tricorne SPCO(S2?)
Small's Stonecrop7 Diamorpha smallii SLNS(S3)
END(S 1S2)
American Beakgrain Diarrhena americana SLNS(S2)
Dutchman's Breeches' Dicentra cucullaria SLNS(S2)
Panic-grass Dichanthelium acuminatum SPCO(S1) ssp leucothrix Northern Bush-honeysuckle Diervilla lonicera THR(S2)
Mountain Bush-honeysuckle Diervilla sessilifolia var.
THR(52) rivularis THR(S2)
Spotted Mandarin Disporum maculatum SLNS(S1)
Wolf Spikerush Eleocharis wolfli END(S1)
Common Horsetail Equisetum arvense SLNS(S2)
Wahoo Euonymus atropurpureus SLNS(S3)
Creeping Aster Eurybia surculosa SLNS(S1)
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 367 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix F Table F-2.
State-Listed Terrestrial Plant Species Known From Within a 5-Mile Vicinity of the T
L*
U d
ransmlsslon Ine 'pgra es Alabama ~
~ -
Scientific Name State~Status State State Status (Rank):
Status (Rank)
(Rank)
~ - ~ ~
Chalk Maple Acer leucoderme SPCO(S3)
Sweetflag Acorus calamus SLNS(S1 )
Yellow Giant-hyssop Agastache nepetoides SLNS(S1)
SPCO(S1)
Roundleaf Serviceberry Amelanchier sanquinea THR{S2)
Price's Potato-bean Apios priceana SLNS(S2)
END(S2)
Spreading Rockcress Arabis patens END(S1 )
American Spikenard Aralia racemosa SLNS(S1 )
Bradley's Spleenwort Asplenium bradleyi SLNS(S2}
Wall-rue Spleenwort Asplenium ruta-muraria SLNS(S2)
American Hart's-tongue Asplenium scolopendrium SLNS(S1 )
END(S1 )
Fern2 var. americanum Maidenhair Spleenwort Asplenium trichomanes SLNS(S2S3)
Spreading False-foxglove Aureolaria patula SPCO(S3)
Nuttall's Rayless Golden-Bigelowia nuttallii SLNS(S3) rod Mountain Bitter Cress Cardamine c/ematitis THR(S2)
Sedge Carex hirtifolia SPCO(S1S2)
Sedge Carex purpurifera SLNS(S2)
Alabama Lipfern Cheilanthes alabamensis SLNS(S3)
Pink Turtlehead Chelone Iyonii SLNS{S1)
Yellowwood C/adrastis kentukea SLNS(S3)
Leather-flower Clematis glaucophylla END(S1)
Morefield's Leather-flower" Clematis morefieldii SLNS(S1)
Wister Coral-root Corallorhiza wisteriana SLNS(S2)
Woodland Tickseed Coreopsis pulchra SLNS(S2)
American Smoke-tree Cotinus obovatus SLNS(S2)
SPCO(S2)
Harper's Dodder Cuscuta harperi SLNS(S2)
Pink Lady-slipper Cypripedium acaule SLNS(S3)
S-CE(S4)
Large Yellow Lady's-slipper Cypripedium pubescens SLNS(S3)
Tennessee Bladderfern Cystopteris tennesseensis SLNS(S2)
Leafy Prairie-clover" Dalea foliosa SLNS(S1 )
END(S2S3)
Bog Oat-grass Danthonia epilis SPCO(S1S2)
Tall Larkspur Delphinium exaltatum END(S2)
Dwarf Larkspur 1
Delphinium tricorne SPCO(S2?)
Small's Stonecrop Diamorpha smallii SLNS(S3)
END(S1S2)
American Beakgrain Diarrhena americana SLNS(S2)
Dutchman's Breeches 1 Dicentra cucullaiia SLNS(S2)
Panic-grass Dichanthelium acuminatum SPCO(S1 )
ssp leucothrix Northern Bush-honeysuckle Diervilla lonicera THR(S2)
Mountain Bush-honeysuckle Diervi/la sessilifolia var.
THR(S2) rivularis Spotted Mandarin Disporum maculatum SLNS(S1 )
Wolf Spikerush Eleocharis wolfii END(S1 )
Common Horsetail Equisetum arvense SLNS(S2)
Wahoo Euonymus atropurpureus SLNS(S3)
Creeping Aster Eurybia surculosa SLNS(S1 )
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 367
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Alabama Georgia Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name State Status State State Status (Rank)
Stank)
(Rank)
American Columbo' Frasera caroliniensis SLNS(S2)
Fragrant Bedstraw Galium uniflorum SPCO(S1)
Dwarf Huckleberry Gaylussacia dumosa THR(S3)
Yellow Jessamine Gelsemium sempervirens SPCO(S1S2)
Pale Avens Geum virginianum SLNS(S1)
Manna-grass Glyceria acutiflora SPCO(S2)
Florida Hedge-hyssop Gratiola floridana END(S1)
Carolina Silverbell Halesia carolina SLNS(S2)
Eggert's Sunflower Helianthus eggertii SPCO(S3)
White-leaved Sunflower Helianthus glaucophyllus SLNS(SH)
Featherfoil Hottonia inflata SPCO(S2)
Goldenseal Hydrastis canadensis SLNS(S2)
S-CE(S3)
Creeping St. John's-wort Hypericum adpressum END(S1)
Barrens St. Johnswort' Hypericum sphaerocarpum SPCO(S1)
Narrow Blue Flag Iris prismatica THR(S2S3)
Butler's Quillwort Isoetes butleri SLNS(S2)
Appalachian Quillwort Isoetes engelmannii SLNS(S3)
Small Whorled Pogonia Isotria medeoloides END(S1)
Large Whorled Pogonia Isotria verticillata SLNS(S2)
Twinleaf Jeffersonia diphylla SLNS(S2)
Butternut Juglans cinerea THR(S3)
Fleshy-fruit Gladecress 2 Leavenworthia crassa SLNS(S1)
Leavenworthia exigua var.
Glade Cress exigua THR(S2)
SPCO(S3)
Michaux Leavenworthia Leavenworthia uniflora SLNS(S2)
Slender Blazing-star Liatris cylindracea
-THR(S2)
Canada Lily Lilium canadense THR(S3)
Michigan Lily Lilium michiganense THR(S3)
Wood Lily Lilium philadelphicum END(S1)
Mountain Honeysuckle Lonicera dioica SPCO(S2)
Yellow Honeysuckle Lonicera flava THR(S1)
Fraser Loosestrife Lysimachia fraseri END(S2)
Mohr's Barbara's Buttons Marshallia mohrii THR(S2)
Broadleaf Barbara's-buttons Marshallia trinervia THR(S2S3)
Broadleaf Bu nchflower Melanthium latifolium END(S1$2)
False Helleborne Melanthium parviflorum SLNS(S1S2)
American Pinesap Monotropa hypopithys SLNS(S2)
Nestronia Nestronia umbellula END(S1)
Alabama Snow-wreath Neviusia alabamensis SLNS(S2)
Hairy False Gromwell Onosmodium hispidissimum END(S1)
One-flowered Broomrape Orobanche uniflora SLNS(S2)
Great Yellow Wood-sorrel Oxalis grandis SLNS(S1)
American Ginseng Panax quinguefolius S-CE(S3S4)
Large-leaved Grass-of-Parnassia grandifolia SPCO(S3) parnassus Monkey-face Orchid Platanthera integrilabia SLNS(S2)
END(S2S3)
Greek Valerian Polemonium reptans SPCO(S1)
Tennessee Leafcup Polymnia laevigata SLNS(S2S3)
Carolina Rhododendron Rhododendron minus SLNS(S2)
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I i
I I
368 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Alabama".
Common Name Scientific Name State Status (Rank).
American Columbo Frasera caroliniensis SLNS(S2)
Fragrant Bedstraw Galium uniflorum Dwarf Huckleberry Gaylussacia dumosa Yellow Jessamine Gelsemium sempervirens Pale Avens Geum virginianum SLNS(S1)
Manna-grass Glyceria acutiflora Florida Hedge-hyssop Gratiola floridana Carolina Silverbell Halesia carolina SLNS(S2)
Eggert's Sunflower Helianthus eggertii White-leaved Sunflower Helianthus glaucophyl/us SLNS(SH)
Featherfoil Hottonia inflata Goldenseal Hydrastis canadensis SLNS(S2)
Creeping St. John's-wort Hypericum adpressum Barrens St. Johnswort 1 Hypericum sphaerocarpum Narrow Blue Flag Iris prismatica Butler's Quillwort Isoetes butteri SLNS(S2)
Appalachian Quillwort Isoetes engelmannii SLNS(S3)
Small Whorled Pogonia Isotria medeoloides Large Whorled Pogonia Isotria verticil/ata SLNS(S2)
Twinleaf Jeffersonia diphyl/a SLNS(S2)
Butternut Juglans cinerea Fleshy-fruit Gladecress" Leavenworthia crassa SLNS(S1 )
Glade Cress Leavenworthia exigua var.
exigua Michaux Leavenworthia Leavenworthia uniflora SLNS(S2)
Slender Blazing-star Liatris cylindracea Canada Lily Lilium canadense Michigan Lily Lilium michiganense Wood Lily Lilium philadelphicum Mountain Honeysuckle Lonicera dioica Yellow Honeysuckle Lonicera flava Fraser Loosestrife Lysimachia fraseri Mohr's Barbara's Buttons Marshal/ia mohrii Broadleaf Barbara's-buttons Marshallia trinervia Broadleaf Bunchflower Melanthium latifolium False Helleborne Melanthium parviflorum SLNS(S1S2)
American Pinesap Monotropa hypopithys SLNS(S2)
Nestronia Nestronia umbel/ula Alabama Snow-wreath Neviusia alabamensis SLNS(S2)
Hairy False Gromwell Onosmodium hispidissimum One-flowered Broomrape Orobanche uniflora SLNS(S2)
Great Yellow Wood-sorrel Oxalis grandis SLNS(S1)
American Ginseng Panax quinquefolius Large-leaved Grass-of-Parnassia grandifolia parnassus Monkey-face Orchid Platanthera integrilabia SLNS(S2)
Greek Valerian Polemonium reptans Tennessee Leafcup Polymnia laevigata SLNS(S2S3)
Carolina Rhododendron Rhododendron minus SLNS(S2) 368 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Georgia State Status (Rank)
SPCO(S1)
THR(S2)
THR(S2)
SPCO(S1)
Tennessee State Status (Rank)
SPCO(S1)
THR(S3)
SPCO(S1S2)
SPCO(S2)
END(S1)
SPCO(S3)
SPCO(S22 S-CE(S3)
END(S1 )
THR(S2S3)
END(S1)
THR(S3)
SPCO(S3)
THR(S2)
THR(S3)
THR(S3)
END(S1)
SPCO(S2)
THR(S1)
END(S2)
THR(S2S3)
END(S1S2)
END(S1 )
END(S1 )
S-CE(S3S4)
SPCO(S3)
END(S2S3)
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix F Alabama Georgia Tennessee Alaama state Common Name Scientific Name State Status Statu State Status
~Status (Rank)
(Rank)
(Rank)
Granite Gooseberry Ribes curvatum SLNS(S2)
THR(S1)
Prickly Gooseberry Ribes cynosbati SLNS(S1S2)
Rose-gentian' Sabatia capitata END(S2)
Gibbous Panic-grass Sacciolepis striata SPCO(S1)
Pussy Willow Salix humilis SLNS(S2S3)
Green Pitcher Plantz Sarracenia oreophila SLNS(S2)
Sunnybell Schoenolirion croceum SLNS(S2)
Large-flowered Skullcap1 Scutellaria montana THR(S2)
THR(S2)
Chaffseed2 Schwalbea americana E-P(SX)
Nevius' Stonecrop Sedum nevii SLNS(S3)
END(S1)
Ovate Catchfly Silene ovata END(S2)
Cumberland Rosinweed Silphium brachiatum SLNS(S2)
Compass-plant Silphium laciniatum THR(S2)
Bog Goldenrod Solidago uliginosa SLNS(SH)
Virginia Spiraea Spiraea virginiana END(S2)
THR(S1)
Great Plains Ladies'-tresses Spiranthes magnicamporum END(S1)
SPCO(S1)
Mountain Camellia Stewartia ovata SLNS(S2S3)
Southern Morning-glory Stylisma humistrata THR(S1)
Smooth Blue Aster Symphyotrichum laeve var.
SLNS(S1) concinnum Limestone Fame-flower Talinum calcaricum SPCO(S3)
Fame-flower' Talinum mengesli THR(S2)
Appalachian Bristle Fern Trichomanes boschianum THR(S1S2)
Lance-leaf Trillium Trillium lancifolium END(S1)
Southern Red Trillium Trillium sulcatum SLNS(S1)
Horse-gentian Triosteum angustifolium SLNS(S1)
Canada Violet Viola canadensis SLNS(S2)
Eggleston's Violet' Viola egglestonii SPCO(S2)
Three-parted Violet Viola tripartita var. tripartita SPCO(S2S3)
Virginia Chainfern Woodwardia virginica SPCO(S2)
Death-camas Zigadenus leimanthoides THR(S2)
Status Codes: END = Endangered; E-P = Endangered - Possibly Extirpated; THR = Threatened; RARE = Rare; SLNS = Listed by the state of Alabama, but not assigned a status; SPCO = Special Concern; S-CE =Special Concern-Commercially Exploited Rank Codes: S1 = Extremely rare and critically imperiled in the state with 5 or fewer occurrences, or very few remaining individuals, or because of some special condition where the species is particularly vulnerable to extirpation; S2 = Very rare and imperiled within the state, 6 to 20 occurrences; S3 = Rare or uncommon with 21 to 100 occurrences; S4 = Apparently secure; SX = Presumed extirpated; S#S# = Denotes a range of ranks because the exact rarity of the element is uncertain (e.g., S1S2); ? = Denotes uncertainty in exact rarity of the element.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 369 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix F Georgia Alabama Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name State Status State State Status Statu*s (Rank)
(RaQk)
(Rank)
Granite Gooseberry Ribes curvatum SLNS(S2)
THR(S1 )
Prickly Gooseberry Ribes cynosbati SLNS(S1S2)
Rose-gentian Sabatia capitata END(S2)
Gibbous Panic-grass Sacciolepis striata SPCO(S1)
Pussy Willow Salix humilis SLNS(S2S3)
Green Pitcher Planf Sarracenia oreophila SLNS(S2)
Sunnybell Schoenolirion croceum SLNS(S2)
Large-flowered Skullcap Scutellaria montana THR(S2)
THR(S2)
Chaffseed" Schwalbea americana E-P(SX)
Nevius' Stonecrop Sedum nevii SLNS(S3)
END(S1)
Ovate Catchfly Silene ovata END(S2)
Cumberland Rosinweed Silphium brachiatum SLNS(S2)
Compass-plant Silphium laciniatum THR(S2)
Bog Goldenrod Solidago uliginosa SLNS(SH)
Virginia Spiraea Spiraea virginiana END(S2)
THR(S1)
Great Plains Ladies'-tresses Spiranthes magnicamporum END(S1 )
SPCO(S1)
Mountain Camellia Stewartia ovata SLNS(S2S3)
Southern Morning-glory Stylisma humistrata THR(S1)
Smooth Blue Aster Symphyotrichum laeve var.
SLNS(S1) concinnum Limestone Fame-flower Talinum calcaricum SPCO(S3)
Fame-flower Talinum mengesii THR(S2)
Appalachian Bristle Fern Trichomanes boschianum THR(S1S2)
Lance-leaf Trillium Trillium lancifolium END(S1)
Southern Red Trillium Trillium sulcatum SLNS(S1)
Horse-gentian Triosteum angustifolium SLNS(S1 )
Canada Violet Viola canadensis SLNS(S2)
Eggleston's Violet Viola egglestonii SPCO(S2)
Three-parted Violet Viola tripartita var. tripartita SPCO(S2S3)
Virginia Chainfern Woodwardia virginica SPCO(S2)
Death-camas Zigadenus leimanthoides THR(S2)
Status Codes: END = Endangered; E-P = Endangered - Possibly Extirpated; THR = Threatened; RARE = Rare; 5LN5 = Listed by the state of Alabama, but not assigned a status; 5PCO = Special Concern; 5-CE =Special Concern-Commercially Exploited Rank Codes: 51 = Extremely rare and critically imperiled in the state with 5 or fewer occurrences, or very few remaining individuals, or because of some special condition where the species is particularly vulnerable to extirpation; 52 = Very rare and imperiled within the state, 6 to 20 occurrences; 53 = Rare or uncommon with 21 to 100 occurrences; 54 = Apparently secure; 5X = Presumed extirpated; 5#5# = Denotes a range of ranks because the exact rarity of the element is uncertain (e.g., S 1 S2); ? = Denotes uncertainty in exact rarity of the element.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 369
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
Table F-3. State-Listed Terrestrial Animal Species Reported From Jackson, I
Limestone, and Morgan Counties, Alabama; Dade, Catoosa, and Walker Counties, Georgia; and Bedford, Coffee, Hamilton, Marion, and m
Sequatchie Counties, Tennessee I
- Tennessee7 Common Name Scientific Name State State State Status Status Status
_(Rank)
(Rank)
(Rank)
Amphibians Barking treefrog Hyla gratiosa
$2 (S3 )2 Green salamander Aneides aeneus PROT (S3)
RARE (S2)
Hellbender Cryptobranchus PROT (32)
RARE (S2)
NMGT (S3) alleganiensis Tennessee cave Gyrinophilus palleucus PROT (32)
TRKD(S1)
THR (S2) salamander Reptiles TLampropeltis triangulum111 Eastern milk snake I triangulum TRKD (S2)
TRKD (S2)
Birds Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis TRKD (S3)
RARE(S3)
END (S2)
Haliaeetus Bald eagle leucocephalus PROT (S3)
NMGT (S3)
Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulea TRKD(S1)
TRKD(S3)
NMGT (S3)
Osprey Pandion haliaetus PROT (S5)
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus PROT(SH)
END ($1)
END(S1)
Red-cockaded Picoides borealis PROT (S2)
END (S2) woodpecker Swainson's warbler Limnothlypis swainsonii TRKD (S3)
TRKD (S3)
NMGT (S3)
Mammals Allegheny woodrat Neotoma magister TRKD (S3)
NMGT (S3)
Common shrew Sorex cinereus TRKD(S2)
NMGT (S4)
Eastern big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii PROT(S2)
RARE(S3)
NMGT (S3)
NMGT Eastern small-footed bat Myotis leibii TRKD(S1)
TRKD(S2)
($2S3)
Gray bat Myotis grisescens PROT (S2)
END (Si)
END (S2)
Indiana bat Myotis sodalis PROT (S2)
END (S)
END (S)
Invertebrates Beetle Batriasymmodes TRKD (S3) spelaeus Blowing cave beetle Pseudanophthalmus TRKD (51) ventus Nickajack cave beetle Pseudanophthalmus TRKD (S1) nickajackensis Duck River cave beetle Pseudanophthalmus TRKD (S1) tullahoma CaecidoteaTRD(1)
Nickajack cave isopod nickajackensis TRKD (S)
Spider, a cave-obligate Nesticus barri TRKD (S3)
State status: END = Endangered; THR = Threatened; TRKD = Tracked by state Natural Heritage program; RARE = Listed Rare by the state; NMGT = In Need of Management; PROT = State Protected 2State ranks: S1 - critically imperiled; S2 - imperiled; S3 - rare or uncommon; S4 - widespread, abundant and apparently secure; and S5 - demonstrably widespread, abundant, and secure. SH=of historical occurrence, i.e.,
known to occur in the past, with the expectation that it may be rediscovered.
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I 370 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Table F-3. State-Listed Terrestrial Animal Species Reported From Jackson, Limestone, and Morgan Counties, Alabama; Dade, Catoosa, and Walker Counties, Georgia; and Bedford, Coffee, Hamilton, Marion, and S
t h* C f
T equa c Ie oun les, ennessee Alabama Georgia Tennessee Common Name Scientific Name
' State State State Status Status Status
~
(Rank).
(Rank)
(Rank)
Amphibians Barking treefrog Hyla gratiosa NMGT (S3)2 Green salamander Aneides aeneus PROT (S3)
RARE (S2)
Hellbender Cryptobranchus PROT (S2)
RARE (S2)
NMGT (S3) alleganiensis Tennessee cave Gyrinophilus palleucus PROT (S2)
TRKD(S1)
THR (S2) salamander Reptiles Eastern milk snake Lampropeltis triangulum TRKD (S2)
TRKD (S2) triangulum Birds Bachman's sparrow Aimophila aestivalis TRKD (S3)
RARE(S3)
END (S2)
Bald eagle Haliaeetus PROT (S3)
NMGT (S3) leucocephalus Cerulean warbler Dendroica cerulea TRKD(S1)
TRKD(S3)
NMGT (S3)
Osprey Pandion haliaetus PROT (S5)
Peregrine falcon Falco peregrinus PROT(SH)
END(S1)
END(S1)
Red-cockaded Picoides borealis PROT (S2)
END (S2) woodpecker Swainson's warbler Limnothlypis swainsonii TRKD (S3)
TRKD (S3)
NMGT (S3)
Mammals Allegheny wood rat Neotoma magister TRKD (S3)
NMGT (S3)
Common shrew Sorex cinereus TRKD(S2)
NMGT (S4)
Eastern big-eared bat Corynorhinus rafinesquii PROT(S2)
RARE(S3)
NMGT (S3)
Eastern small-footed bat Myotis leibii TRKD(S1)
TRKD(S2)
NMGT (S2S3)
Gray bat Myotis grisescens PROT (S2)
END (S1)
END (S2)
Indiana bat Myotis sodalis PROT (S2)
END (S1)
END (S1)
Invertebrates Beetle 8atriasymmodes TRKD (S3) spelaeus Blowing cave beetle Pseudanophthalmus TRKD (S1) ventus Nickajack cave beetle Pseudanophthalmus TRKD (S1) nickajackensis Duck River cave beetle Pseudanophthalmus TRKD (S1) tullahoma Nickajack cave isopod Caecidotea TRKD (S1) nickajackensis Spider, a cave-obligate Nesticus barri TRKD (S3)
State status. END - Endangered, THR - Threatened, TRKD - Tracked by state Natural Heritage program, RARE = Listed Rare by the state; NMGT = In Need of Management; PROT = State Protected 2State ranks: 51 - critically imperiled; 52 - imperiled; 53 - rare or uncommon; 54 - widespread, abundant and apparently secure; and 55 - demonstrably widespread, abundant, and secure. 5H=of historical occurrence, i.e.,
known to occur in the past, with the expectation that it may be rediscovered.
370 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G Appendix G - Sensitive Area Review Process Draft Environmental Impact Statement 371 I
Appendix G I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G - Sensitive Area Review Process I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 371
Page intentionally blank I
I I
I" I
I I
I I
PClge intentionally blank I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix G Sensitive Area Review (SAR) Process This attachment briefly summarizes the environmental compliance review process TVA uses for maintenance and modifications of transmission lines and presents the results of this process, by subject matter area.
Overview of Environmental Compliance Process for Transmission Line Maintenance and Modifications The TVA-Transmission and Power Supply - Transmission Operations and Maintenance (TPS-TOM) organization routinely conducts maintenance activities on transmission lines in the TVA system (TVA Power Service Area). These activities include, but are not restricted to, right-of-way reclearing (removal of vegetation), pole replacements, installation of lightning arrestors and counterpoise, and upgrading of existing equipment. Regular maintenance activities are conducted on a cycle of 3-5 years.
Prior to these activities, the transmission line area (including the right-of-way) is reviewed by technical specialists in the TVA Regional Natural Heritage Project, and TVA Cultural Resources group, to identify any resource issues that may occur along that transmission line. These reviews are conducted on a recurring basis that coincides with the maintenance cycle, to ensure that the most current information is provided to the organizations conducting maintenance on these transmission lines.
The TVA Regional Natural Heritage Project maintains a database of some 30,000+ occurrence records for protected plants, animals, caves, heronries, eagle nests, and natural areas for the entire TVA Power Service Area (PSA), including all 201 counties. All records that are present, or are potentially present, in transmission line right-of-ways are taken into consideration when conducting these transmission line reviews. Wetland information is maintained by TVA Resource Services and includes NWI wetland maps for the entire TVA Power Service Area (PSA). Soil survey maps are also used to identify potential wetland areas. The TVA Cultural Resources group maintains records of known archaeological sites, and routinely gathers information from the seven-state TVA Power Service Area.
Also included in this. document is the explanation of Sensitive Area Review (SAR) Class Definitions and associated table of mapping polygon colors, and the restrictions indicated by those designations.
(Managed Areas) - Managed Areas, Ecologically Significant Sites, and National Rivers Inventory for Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way Managed Areas (MA) are lands held in public ownership that are managed to protect and maintain certain ecological features. Ecologically Significant Sites (ESS) are tracts of privately owned land that are identified by resource biologists as containing significant environmental resources. National River Inventory (NRI) streams are free-flowing river segments that are recognized by the National Park Service as possessing remarkable natural or cuitural values. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement 373 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G Sensitive Area Review (SAR) Process This attachment briefly summarizes the environmental compliance review process TV A uses for maintenance and modifications of transmission lines and presents the results of this process, by subject matter area.
Overview of Environmental Compliance Process for Transmission Line Maintenance and Modifications The TV A-Transmission and Power Supply - Transmission Operations and Maintenance (TPS-TOM) organization routinely conducts maintenance activities on transmission lines in the TVA system (TVA Power Service Area). These activities include, but are not restricted to, right-of-way reclearing (removal of vegetation), pole replacements, installation of lightning arrestors and counterpoise, and upgrading of existing equipment. Regular maintenance activities are conducted on a cycle of 3-5 years.
Prior to these activities, the transmission line area (including the right-of-way) is reviewed by technical specialists in the TV A Regional Natural Heritage Project, and TV A Cultural Resources group, to identify any resource issues that may occur along that transmission line. These reviews are conducted on a recurring basis that coincides with the maintenance cycle, to ensure that the most current information is provided to the organizations conducting maintenance on these transmission lines.
The TVA Regional Natural Heritage Project maintains a database of some 30,000+ occurrence records for protected plants, animals, caves, heronries, eagle nests, and natural areas for the entire TVA Power Service Area (PSA), including all 201 counties. All records that are present, or are potentially present, in transmission line right-of-ways are taken into consideration when conducting these transmission line reviews. Wetland information is maintained by TV A Resource Services and includes NWI wetland maps for the entire TV A Power Service Area (PSA). Soil survey maps are also used to identify potential wetland areas. The TVA Cultural Resources group maintains records of known archaeological sites, and routinely gathers information from the seven-state TVA Power Service Area.
Also included in this document is the explanation of Sensitive Area Review (SAR) Class Definitions and associated table of mapping polygon colors, and the restrictions indicated by those designations.
(Managed Areas) - Managed Areas, Ecologically Significant Sites, and National Rivers Inventory for Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way Managed Areas (MA) are lands held in public ownership that are managed to protect and maintain certain ecological features. Ecologically Significant Sites (ESS) are tracts of privately owned land that are identified by resource biologists as containing significant environmental resources. National River Inventory (NRI) streams* are free-f16wingriver segments that are recognized by the National Park Service as possessing remarkable natural orcultural values. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement 373
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVA Natural Heritage Project maintains a database of all such lands and streams occurring i
within the seven state TVA power service area.
Sensitive area reviews for MA's, ESS's, and NRI streams are completed by utilizing I
computerized mapping graphics software known as ArcMap. If a MA, ESS, and/or NRI stream is located within the 0.5-mile buffer of the subject transmission line, a polygon is drawn that represents the area's boundaries within the buffer. A description of the area that includes contact I
information, restrictions, and the subject transmission line name is listed in the corresponding attribute table.
3 Right-of-way (ROW) maintenance and/or clearing and pole replacement activities are the two areas that are reviewed for the presence of sensitive resources in SARs. If all or any portion of a MA, ESS, and/or NRI stream lies within the buffer of the subject transmission line, a polygon is II drawn depicting the boundary of such areas. Restrictions on proposed activities (Class 0, 1 2, or 3 below) are determined by the type and location of the MA, ESS, and/or NRI streams as well as consultation with the area manager or resource specialist. The class and contact restrictions, definitions, and polygon color for both activities are listed in the included table.
After determining the particular class restriction associated with the area, special instructions or i
comments are added to indicate the importance of the restriction and why it was assigned. For example, when a portion of a national forest is within the 0.5-mile buffer or crossed by the subject transmission line, a Class 3 restriction is assigned and a comment is added indicating the area manager must be contacted and herbicide use is restricted.
Under Categorical Exclusions, transmission line projects such as lightning mitigation, i
counterpoise activities, conveyances, line relocations for state highway department work, and providing delivery points and switches for substations are reviewed for potential impacts to 3
MA's, ESS's, and NRI streams. A three mile radius of the project site(s) is reviewed for MA's, ESS's, and NRI streams that might be affectedby the proposed activity.
(Botany) - State and Federal listed plant restrictions for Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way Botanical assessments are completed for Sensitive Area Reviews (SARs) in order to identify state and federally listed plants that occur within a five mile radius of the transmission line.
Identifying the occurrences gives us the ability to identify habitats within a proposed project area 3
that are sensitive and potentially require restrictions from activities. To identify rare plant and sensitive habitat locations we utilize the TVA Natural Heritage database, aerial photographs and USGS topographical maps.
3 Transmission line SAR activities include right-of-way (ROW) maintenance/re-clearing and pole replacements. The review process for the two activities is different since they potentially impact I
vegetation in different ways. ROW maintenance consists of vegetation clearing with herbicides unless otherwise specified. Herbicides kill all vegetation that is sprayed. Mechanical clearing has less of an impact since many plants can tolerate being cut. Pole replacements potentially I
impact vegetation when vehicles and equipment drive on and in the vicinity of the ROW and the I
374 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site TVA Natural Heritage Project maintains a database of all such lands and streams occurring within the seven state TV A power service area.
Sensitive area reviews for MA's, ESS's, and NRI streams are completed by utilizing computerized mapping graphics software known as ArcMap. If a MA, ESS, and/or NRI stream is located within the O.S-mile buffer of the subject transmission line, a polygon is drawn that represents the area's boundaries within the buffer. A description of the area that includes contact information, restrictions, and the subject transmission line name is listed in the corresponding attribute table.
Right-of-way (ROW) maintenance and/or clearing and pole replacement activities are the two areas that are reviewed for the presence of sensitive resources in SARs. If all or any portion of a MA, ESS, and/or NRI stream lies within the buffer of the subject transmission line, a polygon is drawn depicting the boundary of such areas. Restrictions on proposed activities (Class 0, 1 2, or 3 below) are determined by the type and location of the MA, ESS, and/or NRI streams as well as consultation with the area manager or resource specialist. The class and contact restrictions, definitions, and polygon color for both activities are listed in the included table.
After determining the particular class restriction associated with the area, special instructions or comments are added to indicate the importance of the restriction and why it was assigned. For example, when a portion of a national forest is within the O.S-mile buffer or crossed by the subject transmission line, a Class 3 restriction is assigned and a comment is added indicating the area manager must be contacted and herbicide use is restricted.
Under Categorical Exclusions, transmission line projects such as lightning mitigation, counterpoise activities, conveyances, line relocations for state highway department work, and providing delivery points and switches for substations are reviewed for potential impacts to MA's, ESS's, and NRI streams. A three mile radius of the project site(s) is reviewed for MA's, ESS's, and NRI streams that might be affected by the proposed activity.
(Botany) - State and Federal listed plant restrictions for Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way Botanical assessments are completed for Sensitive Area Reviews (SARs) in order to identify state and federally listed plants that occur within a five mile radius of the transmission line.
Identifying the occurrences gives us the ability to identify habitats within a proposed project area that are sensitive and potentially require restrictions from activities. To identify rare plant and sensitive habitat locations we utilize the TVA Natural Heritage database, aerial photographs and USGS topographical maps.
Transmission line SAR activities include right-of-way (ROW) maintenance/re-clearing and pole replacements. The review process for the two activities is different since they potentially impact vegetation in different ways. ROW maintenance consists of vegetation clearing with herbicides unless otherwise specified. Herbicides kill all vegetation that is sprayed. Mechanical clearing has less of an impact since many plants can tolerate being cut. Pole replacements potentially impact vegetation when vehicles and equipment drive on and in the vicinity of the ROWand the 374 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G soil and the vegetation are disturbed. If there are sensitive plants in the vicinity we recommend different access routes to be taken and we notify individuals of sensitive areas to avoid.
Restrictions are determined by our knowledge of the habitat requirements for rare plants and rare plant communities that occur within the vicinity of the ROW. Once a sensitive area is located a polygon designating the known or likely extent of that occurrence is drawn on an ArcMap electronic topographic map, and appropriate class restrictions are applied (see table of Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas).
(Terrestrial Animals) - State and Federal Protected Terrestrial Animal restrictions for Sensitive Area Reviews (SARs) conducted in support of Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way The TVA Regional Natural Heritage Program keeps track of state and federal protected species reported from the seven-state region. The terrestrial animal portion of the data base includes all listed birds (breeding and large wintering aggregations), mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. In addition to specific species of animals, the terrestrial portion of the database also includes records of heronries and caves as they often are used by multiple species.
Each SAR project is reviewed for the presence of protected terrestrial animals. A 1-mile radius of the project site(s) is typically reviewed for each proposed activity along transmission lines.
Once an occurrence is located a polygon designating the known or likely extent of that occurrence is drawn on an ArcMap electronic topographic map (see included maps), and appropriate class restrictions are applied (see included table of Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas). Special comments or instructions accompany each entry as appropriate. For instance, if a cave is located along a powerline corridor schedule for vegetative maintenance, a 200-foot buffer is indicated around the opening of the cave and a "Hand Clearing Only" restriction is applied within the buffer. If the cave is used by a summer or hibernating colony of bats, appropriate time restrictions, as designated in specific recovery plans for each species, are also applied.
(Aquatic Animals) - State and Federal Protected Aquatic Animal restrictions for Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way The TVA Regional Natural Heritage Program keeps track of state and federal protected species reported from the seven-state region. Aquatic animal occurrence records are maintained and updated by TVA Heritage staff on a regular basis.
Each SAR project is reviewed for the known or likely occurrence of protected aquatic animals in streams in or adjacent to the transmission line right-of-way. A 10 mile buffer around the transmission line being reviewed is examined to determine the likely occurrence of protected aquatic animals. Once an occurrence is located, appropriate class restrictions are applied and the appropriate colored polygon is drawn around the resource area on an ArcMap electronic topographic map (see included maps and table of Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas). All transmission line maintenance activities are currently conducted using Best Management Practices as outlined in Muncy (1999). Special comments or Draft Environmental Impact Statement 375 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G soil and the vegetation are disturbed. If there are sensitive plants in the vicinity we recommend different access routes to be taken and we notify individuals of sensitive areas to avoid.
Restrictions are determined by our knowledge of the habitat requirements for rare plants and rare plant communities that occur within the vicinity of the ROW. Once a sensitive area is located a polygon designating the known or likely extent of that occurrence is drawn on an ArcMap electronic topographic map, and appropriate class restrictions are applied (see table of Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas).
(Terrestrial Animals) - State and Federal Protected Terrestrial Animal restrictions for Sensitive Area Reviews (SARs) conducted in support of Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way The TVA Regional Natural Heritage Program keeps track of state and federal protected species reported from the seven-state region. The terrestrial animal portion of the data base includes all listed birds (breeding and large wintering aggregations), mammals, reptiles, and amphibians. In addition to specific species of animals, the terrestrial portion of the database also includes records of heronries and caves as they often are used by multiple species.
Each SAR project is reviewed for the presence of protected terrestrial animals. A I-mile radius of the project site(s) is typically reviewed for each proposed activity along transmission lines.
Once an occurrence is located a polygon designating the known or likely extent of that occurrence is drawn on an ArcMap electronic topographic map (see included maps), and appropriate class restrictions are applied (see included table of Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas). Special comments or instructions accompany each entry as appropriate. For instance, if a cave is located along a powerline corridor schedule for vegetative maintenance, a 200-foot buffer is indicated around the opening of the cave and a "Hand Clearing Only" restriction is applied within the buffer. If the cave is used by a summer or hibernating colony of bats, appropriate time restrictions, as designated in specific recovery plans for each species, are also applied.
(Aquatic Animals) - State and Federal Protected Aquatic Animal restrictions for Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way The TV A Regional Natural Heritage Program keeps track of state and federal protected species reported from the seven-state region. Aquatic animal occurrence records are maintained and updated by TV A Heritage staff on a regular basis.
Each SAR project is reviewed for the known or likely occurrence of protected aquatic animals in streams in or adjacent to the transmission line right-of-way. A 10 mile buffer around the transmission line being reviewed is examined to determine the likely occurrence of protected aquatic animals. Once an occurrence is located, appropriate class restrictions are applied and the appropriate colored polygon is drawn around the resource area on an ArcMap electronic topographic map (see included maps and table of Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas). All transmission line maintenance activities are currently conducted using Best Management Practices as outlined in Muncy (1999). Special comments or Draft Environmental Impact Statement 375
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site U
instructions (including designation of specific Streamside Management Zones) accompany each I
entry as appropriate.
II (Wetlands) - Wetlands Review for Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way 3
Prior to the performance of any maintenance activities in TVA transmission line ROWs, office-level reviews are conducted by Natural Heritage wetland biologists. This review includes review of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map, county soil surveys, and TVA photos of i
transmission line structures. Potential wetland areas, not indicated on the NWI map, are identified based on interpretation of topographic features, water bodies, soils information, TVA photos and proximity to NWI features. All NWI wetlands or potential wetland areas are superimposed as layers on an ArcMap electronic topographic map (see included maps). These ArcMap images are sent to the client accompanied by the Wetlands ROW and Pole Replacement Guidelines and an Excel spread sheet which lists areas that have been included with the NWI data as areas of potential wetlands and what guidelines are to be used.
The NWI wetlands are indicated (in dark blue outline) on the ArcMap drawings for both the ROW and a 1-mile diameter buffer area around the ROW. Potential wetland areas are identified (in dark pink outline) in the ROW, but are not identified in the buffer area, parts of which may be used for ROW access. If the access route follows an existing road that does not require any repair or upgrading, no further wetland reviews are needed. Repair and upgrading includes, but is not limited to grading, fill addition, new or upgraded stream crossings, and vegetation 3
removal. If a new or upgraded access route is necessary, environmental reviews of those particular access areas are conducted as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
3 The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) data was compiled using high-altitude aerial photography, some of which is now over 15 years old, with very limited field verification.
3 Because of this, some of the NWI data may be inaccurate. The limitations of the NWI data are considered in the performance of ROW maintenance and pole replacement to avoid accidental wetland impacts. Since there could be wetlands present for which no map evidence or other data 3
currently exists, maintenance crews remain alert to such things as water on the surface of the ground, soil saturation, the type of vegetation growing in an area, and evidence of present, seasonal or temporary flooding.
In the absence of a ground survey by a wetlands specialist to determine wetland presence and location for ROW reclearing or pole replacements, Best Management Practices, as described in I
Muncy (1999), and TPS Environmental Quality Specifications for ROW Construction and Maintenance are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts (see attached Wetlands Guidelines for ROW and Pole Replacement). These techniques would be implemented in all 1
locations where NWI wetlands and potential wetland areas are indicated on the project maps submitted by the TVA Natural Heritage staff.
U 376 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site instructions (including designation of specific Streamside Management Zones) accompany each entry as appropriate.
(Wetlands) - Wetlands Review for Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way Prior to the performance of any maintenance activities in TVA transmission line ROWs, office-level reviews are conducted by Natural Heritage wetland biologists. This review includes review of the National Wetland Inventory (NWI) map, county soil surveys, and TVA photos of transmission line structures. Potential wetland areas, not indicated on the NWI map, are identified based on interpretation of topographic features, water bodies, soils information, TV A photos and proximity to NWI features. All NWI wetlands or potential wetland areas are superimposed as layers on an Arc Map electronic topographic map (see included maps). These ArcMap images are sent to the client accompanied by the Wetlands ROWand Pole Replacement Guidelines and an Excel spread sheet which lists areas that have been included with the NWI data as areas of potential wetlands and what guidelines are to be used.
The NWI wetlands are indicated (in dark blue outline) on the ArcMap drawings for both the ROWand a I-mile diameter buffer area around the ROW. Potential wetland areas are identified (in dark pink outline) in the ROW, but are not identified in the buffer area, parts of which may be used for ROW access. If the access route follows an existing road that does not require any repair or upgrading, no further wetland reviews are needed. Repair and upgrading includes, but is not limited to grading, fill addition, new or upgraded stream crossings, and vegetation removal. If a new or upgraded access route is necessary, environmental reviews of those particular access areas are conducted as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
The National Wetland Inventory (NWI) data was compiled using high-altitude aerial photography, some of which is now over 15 years old, with very limited field verification.
Because of this, some of the NWI data may be inaccurate. The limitations of the NWI data are considered in the performance of ROW maintenance and pole replacement to avoid accidental wetland impacts. Since there could be wetlands present for which no map evidence or other data currently exists, maintenance crews remain alert to such things as water on the surface of the ground, soil saturation, the type of vegetation growing in an area, and evidence of present, seasonal or temporary flooding.
In the absence of a ground survey by a wetlands specialist to determine wetland presence and location for ROW reclearing or pole replacements, Best Management Practices, as described in Muncy (1999), and TPS Environmental Quality Specifications for ROW Construction and Maintenance are implemented to avoid and minimize potential impacts (see attached Wetlands Guidelines for ROWand Pole Replacement). These techniques would be implemented in all locations where NWI wetlands and potential wetland areas are indicated on the project maps submitted by the TVA Natural Heritage staff.
376 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I
Appendix G Site-specific recommendations for ROW reclearing include the following:
Depending on site conditions, Level B tree-cutting guidelines, or methods CM-2, CM-3, CM-4, or CM-5 may be used for tree clearing (Muncy 1999). These methods specify techniques for tree clearing and removal that are selected based on wetland hydrology and condition in order to avoid and minimize wetland impacts.
According to method CM-6 (Muncy 1999), if the wetland is a scrub-shrub, emergent, or grazed wetland, there should be no equipment entry, and minimal intrusion by all mechanized equipment.
For aerial or ground herbicide application, use is restricted to those herbicides that are EPA-approved for use in aquatic areas.
If possible, mechanical clearing should be conducted when the ground is dry or minimally saturated. Ruts should be minimized to avoid altered hydrologic patterns, soil compaction, and disruptions in vegetation regeneration.
Specific recommendations for pole replacement activities include the following:
Entry of vehicles or heavy equipment in wetlands should be avoided when possible.
If entry is unavoidable, appropriate measures such as mats and low-ground pressure equipment should be used.
Impacts to vegetation should be avoided or minimized.
In addition, certain activities that may occur during pole replacement in wetlands are regulated under Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) #12 authorizes certain activities related to utility line construction and contains conditions to ensure that impacts to wetlands are minimal. Section 401 gives states the authority to certify whether activities permitted under Section 404 are in accordance with state water quality standards (Strand, 1997). A qualified TVA or TVA contract wetlands specialist would be required to delineate the wetland(s) and provide the wetland determination data forms which are required for inclusion in the permit application. TVA also follows Executive Order 11990 which requires all federal agencies to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands, in carrying out the agency's responsibilities.
Potential impacts to wetlands resulting from right-of-way maintenance activities include vegetation damage, soil compaction and erosion, sedimentation, and hydrologic alterations.
These impacts are avoided or minimized during TVA maintenance operations by following the recommendations of the guidelines presented above and implementing all relevant Best Management Practices. In addition, the appropriate permits are obtained if required for the specific activity.
(Cultural) - Cultural Resource Reviews Related to Operations and Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way Draft Environmental Impact Statement 377 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G Site-specific recommendations for ROW reclearing include the following:
Depending on site conditions, Level B tree-cutting guidelines, or methods CM-2, CM-3, CM-4, or CM-5 may be used for tree clearing (Muncy 1999). These methods specify techniques for tree clearing and removal that are selected based on wetland hydrology and condition in order to avoid and minimize wetland impacts.
According to method CM-6 (Muncy 1999), if the wetland is a scrub-shrub, emergent, or grazed wetland, there should be no equipment entry, and minimal intrusion by all mechanized equipment.
For aerial or ground herbicide application, use is restricted to those herbicides that are EPA-approved for use in aquatic areas.
If possible, mechanical clearing should be conducted when the ground is dry or minimally saturated. Ruts should be minimized to avoid altered hydrologic patterns, soil compaction, and disruptions in vegetation regeneration.
Specific recommendations for pole replacement activities include the following:
Entry of vehicles or heavy equipment in wetlands should be avoided when possible.
If entry is unavoidable, appropriate measures such as mats and low-ground pressure equipment should be used.
Impacts to vegetation should be avoided or minimized.
In addition, certain activities that may occur during pole replacement in wetlands are regulated under Sections 404 and 401 of the Clean Water Act. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
Nationwide General Permit (NWP) #12 authorizes certain activities related to utility line construction and contains conditions to ensure that impacts to wetlands are minimal. Section 401 gives states the authority to certify whether activities permitted under Section 404 are in accordance with state water quality standards (Strand, 1997). A qualified TV A or TV A contract wetlands specialist would be required to delineate the wetland(s) and provide the wetland determination data forms which are required for inclusion in the permit application. TVA also follows Executive Order 11990 which requires all federal agencies to minimize the destruction, loss, or degradation of wetlands, and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands, in carrying out the agency's responsibilities.
Potential impacts to wetlands resulting from right-of-way maintenance activities include vegetation damage, soil compaction and erosion, sedimentation, and hydrologic alterations.
These impacts are avoided or minimized during TV A maintenance operations by following the recommendations of the guidelines presented above and implementing all relevant Best Management Practices. In addition, the appropriate permits are obtained if required for the specific activity.
(Cultural) - Cultural Resource Reviews Related to Operations and Maintenance Activities in TVA Transmission Line Rights-of-Way Draft Environmental Impact Statement 377
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site U
Regulatory Background I
The National Historic Preservation Act of 1979 (NHPA) made historic preservation a statutory and regulatory responsibility of federal government agencies and established procedures to be followed for historic preservation. Generally speaking, any TVA action involving construction and/or ground disturbing activity is subject to NHPA. The concepts "historic property" and "undertaking" are critical underpinnings of the Act. The NHPA defines historic property as "any I
prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places." The Secretary of the Interior is the Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places ("the National Register"), which is maintained I
by the National Park Service. Much of the regulatory language of the Act describes the processes by which districts, sites, buildings, or structures are assessed for listing in the National Register. An undertaking is "a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direst or indirect jurisdiction of a Federal Agency."
Section 106 of the NHPA requires TVA to 1) consider the effect of its actions on historic I
properties and 2) allow the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation an opportunity to comment on the action. Section 106 involves four steps: 1) initiate the process; 2) identify historic properties; 3) assess adverse effects; and 4) resolve adverse effects. One of the main responsibilities of TVA Cultural Resources is to carry out these four steps. In a nutshell, the process involves documentary research and field reconnaissance for identifying cultural resources (such as artifacts, sites, or historic structures); determining whether any identified cultural resources are eligible for listing on the National Register, and therefore should be considered "historic properties"; assessing whether a proposed undertaking will cause adverse 3
affects to any historic properties; and recommending ways to resolve adverse effects, namely avoidance or mitigation. This process is carried out in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer of the state in which the undertaking takes place and with any other 3
interested consulting parties including federally recognized Indian tribes.
The construction, maintenance, and operation of TVA transmission lines all constitute 3
undertakings and as such are subject to the NHPA and its implementing regulations at 36CFR800. Examples of maintenance activities associated with transmission lines are spraying herbicides and replacing individual poles. Such activities are reviewed by TVA Cultural 3
Resources staff on a case-by-case basis using the Sensitive Area Review (SAR) procedure. The purpose of an SAR Cultural Resources review is to identify whether the undertaking has any potential for adverse effects on cultural resources such as historic structures or buried prehistoric i
sites. If the undertaking does have potential for adverse effects, then procedures for avoidance or mitigation of the effects are put into place.
378 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Regulatory Background The National Historic Preservation Act of 1979 (NHP A) made historic preservation a statutory and regulatory responsibility of federal government agencies and established procedures to be followed for historic preservation. Generally speaking, any TVA action involving construction and/or ground disturbing activity is subject to NHPA. The concepts "historic property" and "undertaking" are critical underpinnings of the Act. The NHP A defines historic property as "any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places." The Secretary of the Interior is the Keeper of the National Register of Historic Places ("the National Register"), which is maintained by the National Park Service. Much of the regulatory language of the Act describes the processes by which districts, sites, buildings, or structures are assessed for listing in the National Register. An undertaking is "a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direst or indirect jurisdiCtion of a Federal Agency."
Section 106 of the NHP A requires TVA to 1) consider the effect of its actions on historic properties and 2) allow the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation an opportunity to comment on the action. Section 106 involves four steps: 1) initiate the process; 2) identify historic properties; 3) assess adverse effects; and 4) resolve adverse effects. One of the main responsibilities of TVA Cultural Resources is to carry out these four steps. In a nutshell, the process involves documentary research and field reconnaissance for identifying cultural resources (such as artifacts, sites, or historic structures); determining whether any identified cultural resources are eligible for listing on the National Register, and therefore should be considered "historic properties"; assessing whether a proposed undertaking will cause adverse affects to any historic properties; and recommending ways to resolve adverse effects, namely avoidance or mitigation. This process is carried out in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer of the state in which the undertaking takes place and with any other interested consulting parties including federally recognized Indian tribes.
The construction, maintenance, and operation of TVA transmission lines all constitute undertakings and as such are subject to the NHP A and its implementing regulations at 36CFR800. Examples of maintenance activities associated with transmission lines are spraying herbicides and replacing individual poles. Such activities are reviewed by TV A Cultural Resources staff on a case-by-case basis using the Sensitive Area Review (SAR) procedure. The purpose of an SAR Cultural Resources review is to identify whether the undertaking has any potential for adverse effects on cultural resources such as historic structures or buried prehistoric sites. If the undertaking does have potential for adverse effects, then procedures for avoidance or mitigation of the effects are put into place.
378 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I a
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G How TVA Cultural Resources Conducts SARs for Transmission Operations and Maintenance Proiects TVA Cultural Resources staff examine topographic maps of the project site for (a) previously recorded archaeological sites in the vicinity of the transmission line corridor; and (b) conditions that suggest high potential for archaeological sites including low slope (< 10%), proximity to major water sources, and lack of modem disturbance. ArcView GIS is used to identify areas with potential for cultural resources. For example, Exhibit 1 is a map generated with this software, which shows areas with slope < 10% (peach) and the distribution of streams (blue).
The decision to do a field review is based on such information along with any information the staff can glean from videos of the transmission line corridors and from still photographs of the project site.
Field reviews are conducted by Cultural Resources staff or by consulting archaeologists, who look for signs of intact, buried prehistoric deposits using surface survey and sub-surface probes (when appropriate). The project is cleared if no artifacts or features identified and if the project site appears to have a low potential for cultural resources. If intact buried deposits containing cultural resources are discovered, an attempt is made to discern whether the site may be potentially eligible for the National Register. A formal assessment of eligibility would not be undertaken during a field review, however. If the site may be eligible, then a Phase I investigation is called for. A Phase I might also be called for there is a high potential for intact buried deposits, even if no artifacts or features were identified during field review. The purposes of a Phase I investigation are to delimit the boundaries of a site, gather additional information relating to the site's eligibility (such as integrity), and assess possible effects to the site from the undertaking.
Avoidance is generally feasible for transmission line maintenance projects when cultural resources are present. ArcView GIS is used to generate a map showing polygons around those cultural resources, representing sensitive areas. Areas that are sensitive from the standpoint of cultural resources are coded Level 2, which indicates restrictions on methods of clearing (no mechanized equipment). These maps are provided to TPS prior to any maintenance activities on the line, so that crew supervisors will be aware of the necessary restrictions. Restrictions are typically called for when a previously recorded cemetery, prehistoric mound, or earthwork occurs within 0.25 miles of the transmission line.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 379 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G How TVA Cultural Resources Conducts SARs for Transmission Operations and Maintenance Projects TVA Cultural Resources staff examine topographic maps of the project site for (a) previously recorded archaeological sites in the vicinity of the transmission line corridor; and (b) conditions that suggest high potential for archaeological sites including low slope << 10%), proximity to major water sources, and lack of modern disturbance. ArcView GIS is used to identify areas with potential for cultural resources. For example, Exhibit 1 is a map generated with this software, which shows areas with slope < 10% (peach) and the distribution of streams (blue).
The decision to do a field review is based on such information along with any information the staff can glean from videos of the transmission line corridors and from still photographs of the project site.
Field reviews are conducted by Cultural Resources staff or by consulting archaeologists, who look for signs of intact, buried prehistoric deposits using surface survey and sub-surface probes (when appropriate). The project is cleared ifno artifacts or features identified and if the project site appears to have a low potential for cultural resources. If intact buried deposits containing cultural resources are discovered, an attempt is made to discern whether the site may be potentially eligible for the National Register. A formal assessment of eligibility would not be undertaken during a field review, however. If the site may be eligible, then a Phase I investigation is called for. A Phase I might also be called for there is a high potential for intact buried deposits, even if no artifacts or features were identified during field review. The purposes of a Phase I investigation are to delimit the boundaries of a site, gather additional information relating to the site's eligibility (such as integrity), and assess possible effects to the site from the undertaking.
A voidance is generally feasible for transmission line maintenance projects when cultural resources are present. ArcView GIS is used to generate a map showing polygons around those cultural resources, representing sensitive areas. Areas that are sensitive from the standpoint of cultural resources are coded Level 2, which indicates restrictions on methods of clearing (no mechanized equipment). These maps are provided to TPS prior to any maintenance activities on the line, so that crew supervisors will be aware of the necessary restrictions. Restrictions are typically called for when a previously recorded cemetery, prehistoric mound, or earthwork occurs within 0.25 miles of the transmission line.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 379
II II Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas for RIGHT-OF-WAY RECLEARING Sensitive Area Reviews Terrestrial Plants (A), Terrestrial Animals (D), and Aquatic Animals (E)
Class Restriction if Sensitive area in ROW Restriction for Sensitive Areas Potentially Polygon Affected when Accessing ROW Color 1
No broadcast spraying. Use one of Not Applicable Yellow the three following alternatives: 1)
Hand or mechanical clearing, 2)
Request field surveys by TVA Heritage staff to determine if suitable habitat for these species exists in the subject area, 3) Selective spraying of herbicides to shrubs or tree saplings less than 12 feet in height.
2 Hand-clearing only. Vehicles and Vehicles and equipment restricted from area Red equipment restricted from area unless unless confined to existing access road.
confined to existing access road.
0 Special circumstance.
Green Wetlands* (C)
Wetlands obtained from National Wetland Inventory data. Refer to "Wetlands ROW and Blue Pole Replacement Guidelines" for restrictions.
Outline 1
Potential wetlands identified by Natural Heritage wetland biologists based on Pink interpretation of topographic features, water bodies, soil surveys and proximity to NWI Outline features. Refer to "Wetlands ROW and Pole Replacement Guidelines" for restrictions.
Natural Areas (B)
Class Call**
Definition Color 1
No Same as Class 1 definition above.
Yellow 2
No Same as Class 2 definition above.
Red 1
Yes Same as Class 1 definition above, and must contact area manager prior to Yellow entering or conducting maintenance in subject area hatching 2
Yes Same as Class 2 definition above, and must contact area manager prior to Red entering or conducting maintenance in subject area.
hatching 3
Yes Must contact area manager prior to entering or conducting maintenance in Neon subject area.
Green none Special circumstance.
Green Archaeology (F)
Class Restriction if Sensitive area in ROW Restriction for Sensitive Areas Potentially Color Affected when Accessing ROW 1
Mechanical clearing must be Vehicles and equipment must be confined to Yellow conducted when the ground is dry and existing access road.
firm. If bulldozer is used, blade must be kept above ground surface to avoid ground disturbance. Material from clearing (timber, brush, and large debris) must be removed from sensitive area.
2 No mechanical clearing. Hand-All vehicles must be low-pressured tire Red clearing only (chainsaws may be used equipment and must be confined to existing but not heavy equipment). Debris from access road.
clearing must be hand-carried out of sensitive area.
- Refer to Wetlands Statement included in this package.
- The "Call" column on the accompanying datasheets is used by Natural Area specialists only.
A blank in the column indicates no call is necessary.
I I"
I I
I I
I I
I I
I U
Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas for RIGHT-OF-WAY RECLEARING Sensitive Area Reviews Terrestrial Plants (A), Terrestrial Animals (D), and Aquatic Animals (E)
Class Restriction if Sensitive area in ROW Restriction for Sensitive Areas Potentially Polygon Affected when Accessin~ ROW Color 1
No broadcast spraying. Use one of Not Applicable Yellow the three following alternatives: 1)
Hand or mechanical clearing, 2)
Request field surveys by TVA Heritage staff to determine if suitable habitat for these species exists in the subject area, 3) Selective spraying of herbicides to shrubs or tree saplings less than 12 feet in height.
2 Hand-clearing only. Vehicles and Vehicles and equipment restricted from area Red equipment restricted from area unless unless confined to existing access road.
confined to existing access road.
0 Special circumstance.
Green Wetlands* (C)
Wetlands obtained from National Wetland Inventory data. Refer to "Wetlands ROWand Blue Pole Replacement Guidelines" for restrictions.
Outline 1
Potential wetlands identified by Natural Heritage wetland biologists based on Pink interpretation of topographic features, water bodies, soil surveys and proximity to NWI Outline features. Refer to "Wetlands ROWand Pole Replacement Guidelines" for restrictions.
Natural Areas (8 Class Call**
Definition Color 1
No Same as Class 1 definition above.
Yellow 2
No Same as Class 2 definition above.
Red 1
Yes Same as Class 1 definition above, and must contact area manager prior to Yellow entering or conducting maintenance in subject area hatching 2
Yes Same as Class 2 definition above, and must contact area manager prior to Red entering or conducting maintenance in subject area.
hatching 3
Yes Must contact area manager priqr to entering or conducting maintenance in Neon subject area.
Green none Special circumstance.
Green Archaeology (F)
Class Restriction if Sensitive area in ROW Restriction for Sensitive Areas Potentially Color Affected when Accessin~ ROW 1
Mechanical clearing must be Vehicles and equipment must be confined to Yellow conducted when the ground is dry and existing access road.
firm. If bulldozer is used, blade must be kept above ground surface to avoid ground disturbance. Material from clearing (timber, brush, and large debris) must be removed from sensitive area.
2 No mechanical clearing. Hand-All vehicles must be low-pressured tire Red clearing only (chainsaws may be used equipment and must be confined to existing but not heavy equipment). Debris from access road.
clearing must be hand-carried out of sensitive area.
- Refer to Wetlands Statement included in this package.
- The "Call" column on the accompanying datasheets is used by Natural Area specialists only.
A blank in the column indicates no call is necessary.
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas for POLE REPLACEMENT Sensitive Area Reviews All Resources Areas (Plants, Natural Areas, Wetlands, Terrestrial Animals, and Aquatic Animals)
Class Restriction Color Botany: Sensitive Botanical resources are known from the area. Details of proposed activities should be submitted to TVA Heritage staff to determine if the proposed activities require restrictions.
Natural Areas: Refer to table accompanying project for restrictions.
1 Wetlands: Potential wetlands identified by Natural Heritage wetland biologists based on Pink interpretation of topographic features, water bodies, soil surveys and proximity to NWI features. Refer to "Wetlands ROW and Pole Replacement Guidelines" for restrictions.
Terrestrial Animals: Refer to table accompanying project for restrictions.
Aquatic Animals: Refer to table accompanying project for restrictions.
Wetlands Wetlands obtained from National Wetland Inventory data. Refer to "Wetlands ROW and Blue Pole Replacement Guidelines" for restrictions.
Outline Archaeology Color Class Restriction Presence of significant below-ground cultural resources is highly likely. Work must be scheduled when ground is dry and firm. Only vehicles with low-pressured tires may be used within sensitive area. If structure is a pole, new poles must be placed in existing 1
holes; if structure is a tower, existing footings must be used for new tower. If guy wires Yellow are used, existing guy wire anchors must be used for new structure. If any of these conditions can not be met, then details of proposed activities (nature of work, date work is to take place) must be submitted to TVA Cultural Resources staff so that a field review can be scheduled.
2 Presence of significant cultural resources is known. Work schedule must be submitted to Red TVA Cultural Resources staff so that a field review can be scheduled.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 381 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix G Class Definitions and Associated Polygon Colors of Sensitive Areas for POLE REPLACEMENT Sensitive Area Reviews All Resources Areas (Plants, Natural Areas, Wetlands, Terrestrial Animals, and Aquatic Animals)
Class Restriction Color Botany: Sensitive Botanical resources are known from the area. Details of proposed activities should be submitted to TVA Heritage staff to determine if the proposed activities require restrictions.
Natural Areas: Refer to table accompanying project for restrictions.
1 Wetlands: Potential wetlands identified by Natural Heritage wetland biologists based on Pink interpretation of topographic features, water bodies, soil surveys and proximity to NWI features. Refer to "Wetlands ROWand Pole Replacement Guidelines" for restrictions.
Terrestrial Animals: Refer to table accompanying project for restrictions.
Aquatic Animals: Refer to table accompanying project for restrictions.
Wetlands Wetlands obtained from National Wetland Inventory data. Refer to "Wetlands ROWand Blue Pole Replacement Guidelines" for restrictions.
Outline Archaeology Color Class Restriction Presence of significant below-grounq cultural resources is highly likely. Work must be scheduled when ground is dry and firm. Only vehicles with low-pressured tires may be used within sensitive area. If structure is a pole, new poles must be placed in existing 1
holes; if structure is a tower, existing footings must be used for new tower. If guy wires Yellow are used, existing guy wire anchors must be used for new structure. If any of these conditions can not be met, then details of proposed activities (nature of work, date work is to take place) must be submitted to TVA Cultural Resources staff so that a field review can be scheduled.
2 Presence of significant cultural resources is known. Work schedule must be submitted to Red TVA Cultural Resources staff so that a field review can be scheduled.
Draft Environmental Impact Statement 381
Page intentionally blank P3ge intentiollally blank U
I I
- 1' I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix H Appendix H - Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction Guidelines Near Streams Draft Environmental Impact Statement 383 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Appendix H Appendix H - Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction Guidelines Near Streams Draft Environmental Impact Statement 383
Pq.ge intentionally blank I
I I
I I
I I
I I
intentionally blank I
I I
I, I
I I
I I
I
Appendix H Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction Guidelines Near Streams Even the most carefully designed transmission line project eventually will affect one or more creeks, rivers, or other type of water body. These streams and other water areas are protected by state and federal law, generally support some amount of fishing and recreation, and, occasionally, are homes for important and/or endangered species. These habitats occur in the stream and on strips of land along both sides (the streamside management zone [SMZ]) where disturbance of the water, land, or vegetation could have an adverse effect on the water or stream life. The following guidelines have been prepared to help Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Transmission Construction staff and their contractors avoid impacts to streams and stream life as they work in and near SMZs.
These guidelines expand on information presented in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities.
Three Levels of Protection During the preconstruction review of a proposed transmission line, TVA Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff will have studied each possible stream impact site and will have identified it as falling into one of three categories: (A) standard stream protection, (B) protection of important permanent streams, or (C) protection of unique habitats. These category designations are based on the variety of species and habitats that exist in the stream as well as state and federal requirements to avoid harming certain species. The category designation for each site will be marked on the plan and profile sheets.
Construction crews are required to protect streams and other identified water habitats using the following pertinent set(s) of guidelines:
(A)
Standard Stream Protection This is the standard (basic) level of protection for streams and the habitats around them.
The purpose of the following guidelines is to minimize the amount and length of disturbance to the water bodies without causing adverse impacts on the construction work.
Guidelines:
- 1. All construction work around streams will be done using pertinent best management practices (BMPs) such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, "Standards and Specifications."
- 2. All equipment crossings of streams must comply with appropriate state permitting requirements. Crossings of all drainage channels, intermittent streams, and permanent streams must be done in ways that avoid erosion problems and long-term changes in water flow. Crossings of any permanent streams must allow for natural movement of fish and other aquatic life.
- 3. Cutting of trees within SMZs must be accomplished by using either hand-held equipment or other appropriate clearing equipment (e.g., a feller-buncher) that would result in minimal soil disturbance and damage to low-lying vegetation. The method will be selected based on site-specific conditions and topography to Draft Environmental Impact Statement 385 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
,I I
I I
Appendix H Tennessee Valley Authority Transmission Construction Guidelines Near Streams Even the most carefully designed transmission line project eventually will affect one or more creeks, rivers, or other type of water body. These streams and other water areas are protected by state and federal law, generally support some amount of fishing and recreation, and, occasionally, are homes for important and/or endangered species. These habitats occur in the stream and on strips of land along both sides (the streamside management zone [SMZ]) where disturbance of the water, land, or vegetation could have an adverse effect on the water or stream life. The following guidelines have been prepared to help Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Transmission Construction staff and their contractors avoid impacts to streams and stream life as they work in and near SMZs.
These guidelines expand on information presented in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities.
Three Levels of Protection During the preconstruction review of a proposed transmission line, TVA Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff will have studied each possible stream impact site and will have identified it as falling into one of three categories: (A) standard stream protection, (8) protection of important permanent streams, or (C) protection of unique habitats. These category designations are based on the variety of species and habitats that exist in the stream as well as state and federal requirements to avoid harming certain species. The category designation for each site will be marked on the plan and profile sheets.
Construction crews are required to protect streams and other identified water habitats using the following pertinent set(s) of guidelines:
(A)
Standard Stream Protection This is the standard (basic) level of protection for streams and the habitats around them.
The purpose of the following guidelines is to minimize the amount and length of disturbance to the water bodies without causing adverse impacts on the construction work.
Guidelines:
- 1. All construction work around streams will be done using pertinent best management practices (8MPs) such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, "Standards and Specifications."
- 2. All equipment crossings of streams must comply with appropriate state permitting requirements. Crossings of all drainage channels, intermittent streams, and permanent streams must be done in ways that avoid erosion problems and long-term changes in water flow. Crossings of any permanent streams must allow for natural movement of fish and other aquatic life.
- 3. Cutting of trees within SMZs must be accomplished by using either hand-held equipment or other appropriate clearing equipment (e.g., a feller-buncher) that would result in minimal soil disturbance and damage to low-lying vegetation. The method will be selected based on site-specific conditions and topography to Draft Environmental Impact Statement 385
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
minimize soil disturbance and impacts to the SMZ and surrounding area. Stumps I
can be cut close to ground level but must not be removed or uprooted.
- 4. Other vegetation near streams must be disturbed as little as possible during 3
construction. Soil displacement by the actions of plowing, disking, blading, or other tillage or grading equipment will not be allowed in SMZs; however, a minimal amount of soil disturbance may occur as a result of clearing operations. Shorelines that have to be disturbed must be stabilized as soon as feasible.
(B)
Protection of Important Permanent Streams 3
This category will be used when there is one or more specific reason(s) why a permanent (always-flowing) stream requires protection beyond that provided by standard BMPs.
Reasons for requiring this additional protection include the presence of important sports fish1 (trout, for example) and habitats for federal endangered species. The purpose of the following guidelines is to minimize the disturbance of the banks and water in the flowing stream(s) where this level of protection is required.I Guidelines:
- 1. Except as modified by guidelines 2-4 below, all construction work around streams I
will be done using pertinent BMPs such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, "Standards and Specifications."
- 2. All equipment crossings of streams must comply with appropriate state (and, at times, federal) permitting requirements. Crossings of drainage channels and I
intermittent streams must be done in ways that avoid erosion problems and long-term changes in water flow. Proposed crossings of permanent streams must be discussed in advance with Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff and may I
require an on-site planning session before any work begins. The purpose of these discussions will be to minimize the number of crossings and their impact on the important resources in the streams.
5
- 3. Cutting of trees within SMZs must be accomplished by using either hand-held equipment or other appropriate clearing equipment (e.g., a feller-buncher) that would result in minimal soil disturbance and damage to low-lying vegetation. Thei method will be selected based on site-specific conditions and topography to minimize soil disturbance and impacts to the SMZ and surrounding area. Cutting of trees near permanent streams must be limited to those required to meet National
.1 Electric Safety Code and danger tree requirements. Stumps can be cut close to ground level but must not be removed or uprooted.
£
- 4. Other vegetation near streams must be disturbed as little as possible during construction. Soil displacement by the actions of plowing, disking, blading, or other tillage or grading equipment will not be allowed in SMZs; however, a minimal amount of soil disturbance may occur as a result of clearing operations. Shorelines that have to be disturbed must be stabilized as soon as possible and revegetated as soon as feasible.
i 386 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site minimize soil disturbance and impacts to the SMZ and surrounding area. Stumps can be cut close to ground level but must not be removed or uprooted.
- 4. Other vegetation near streams must be disturbed as little as possible during construction. Soil displacement by the actions of plowing, disking, blading, or other tillage or grading equipment will not be allowed in SMZs; however, a minimal amount of soil disturbance may occur as a result of clearing operations. Shorelines that have to be disturbed must be stabilized as soon as feasible.
(8)
Protection of Important Permanent Streams This category will be used when there is one or more specific reason(s) why a permanent (always-flowing) stream requires protection beyond that provided by standard BMPs.
Reasons for requiring this additional protection include the presence of important sports fish (trout, for example) and habitats for federal endangered species. The purpose of the following guidelines is to minimize the disturbance of the banks and water in the flowing stream(s) where this level of protection is required.
Guidelines:
386
- 1. Except as modified by guidelines 2-4 below, all construction work around streams will be done using pertinent BMPs such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, "Standards and Specifications."
- 2. All equipment crossings of streams must comply with appropriate state (and, at times, federal) permitting requirements. Crossings of drainage channels and intermittent streams must be done in ways that avoid erosion problems and long-term changes in water flow. Proposed crossings of permanent streams must be discussed in advance with Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff and may require an on-site planning session before any work begins. The purpose of these discussions will be to minimize the number of crossings and their impact on the important resources in the streams.
- 3. Cutting of trees within SMZs must be accomplished by using either hand-held equipment or other appropriate clearing equipment (e.g., a feller-buncher) that would result in minimal soil disturbance and damage to low-lying vegetation. The method will be selected based on site-specific conditions and topography to minimize soil disturbance and impacts to the SMZ and surrounding area. Cutting of trees near permanent streams must be limited to those required to meet National Electric Safety Code and danger tree requirements. Stumps can be cut close to ground level but must not be removed or uprooted.
- 4. Other vegetation near streams must be disturbed as little as possible during construction. Soil displacement by the actions of plowing, disking, blading, or other tillage or grading equipment will not be allowed in SMZs; however, a minimal amount of soil disturbance may occur as a result of clearing operations. Shorelines that have to be disturbed must be stabilized as soon as possible and revegetated as soon as feasible.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I
'I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I, I
I I,
I I
I
Appendix H (C)
Protection of Unique Habitats This category will be used when, for one or more specific reasons, a temporary or permanent aquatic habitat requires special protection. This relatively uncommon level of protection will be appropriate and required when a unique habitat (for example, a particular spring run) or protected species (for example, one that breeds in a wet-weather ditch) is known to occur on or adjacent to the construction corridor. The purpose of the following guidelines is to avoid or minimize any disturbance of the unique aquatic habitat.
Guidelines:
- 1. Except as modified by Guidelines 2-4 below, all construction work around the unique habitat will be done using pertinent BMPs such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, "Standards and Specifications."
- 2. All construction activity in and within 30 meters (100 feet) of the unique habitat must be approved in advance by Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff, preferably as a result of an on-site planning session. The purpose of this review and approval will be to minimize impacts on the unique habitat. All crossings of streams also must comply with appropriate state (and, at times, federal) permitting requirements.
- 3.
Cutting of trees within 30 meters (100 feet) of the unique habitat must be discussed in advance with Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff, preferably during the on-site planning session. Cutting of trees near the unique habitat must be kept to an absolute minimum. Stumps must not be removed, uprooted, or cut shorter than 0.30 meter (1 foot) above the ground line.
- 4. Other vegetation near the unique habitat must be disturbed as little as possible during construction. The soil must not be disturbed by plowing, disking, blading, or grading. Areas that have to be disturbed must be stabilized as soon as possible and revegetated as soon as feasible, in some cases with specific kinds of native plants. These and other vegetative requirements will be coordinated with Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff.
Additional Help If you have questions about the purpose or application of these guidelines, please contact your supervisor or the environmental coordinator in the local Transmission Service Center.
Revision April 2007 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 387 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I J
I
,I
,I I
I I
Appendix H (C)
Protection of Unique Habitats This category will be used when, for one or more specific reasons, a temporary or permanent aquatic habitat requires special protection. This relatively uncommon level of protection will be appropriate and required when a unique habitat (for example, a particular spring run) or protected species (for example, one that breeds in a wet-weather ditch) is known to occur on or adjacent to the construction corridor. The purpose of the following guidelines is to avoid or minimize any disturbance of the unique aquatic habitat.
Guidelines:
- 1. Except as modified by Guidelines 2-4 below, all construction work around the unique habitat will be done using pertinent BMPs such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, "Standards and Specifications."
- 2. All construction activity in and within 30 meters (100 feet) of the unique habitat must be approved in advance by Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff, preferably as a result of an on-site planning session. The purpose of this review and approval will be to minimize impacts on the unique habitat. All crossings of streams also must comply with appropriate state (and, at times, federal) permitting requirements.
- 3. Cutting of trees within 30 meters (100 feet) of the unique habitat must be discussed in advance with Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff, preferably during the on-site planning session. Cutting of trees near the unique habitat must be kept to an absolute minimum. Stumps must not be removed, uprooted, or cut shorter than 0.30 meter (1 foot) above the ground line.
- 4. Other vegetation near the unique habitat must be disturbed as little as possible during construction. The soil must not be disturbed by plowing, disking, blading, or grading. Areas that have to be disturbed must be stabilized as soon as possible and revegetated as soon as feasible, in some cases with specific kinds of native plants. These and other vegetative requirements will be coordinated with Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff.
Additional Help If you have questions about the purpose or application of these guidelines, please contact your supervisor or the environmental coordinator in the local Transmission Service Center.
Revision April 2007 Draft Environmental Impact Statement 387
Comparison of Guidelines Under the Three Stream and Water Body Protection Categories (page 1)
Cn CD)
CD CD 0
CD
_0 CD)
CD Guidelines A: Standard B: Important Permanent Streams C: Unique Water Habitats w1 All TVA construction work around streams 11 Except as modified by guidelines 2-4 Li Except as modified by guidelines 2-4 below, all will be done using pertinent BMPs such as below, all construction work around construction work around the unique habitat will
- 1.
those described in A Guide f6r streams will be done using pertinent BMPs be done using pertinent BMPs such as those Environmental Protection and Best such as those described in A Guide for described in A Guide for Environmental Reference Management Practices for TVA Environmental Protection and Best Protection and Best Management Practices for Construction and Maintenance Activities, Management Practices for TVA TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, BMP "Standards and Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, BMP "Standards and Specifications."
especially Chapter 6, BMP "Standards and Specifications."
Specifications."
11 All crossings of streams must comply with Li All crossings of streams must comply with 0
All crossings of streams also must comply with appropriate state and federal permitting appropriate state and federal permitting appropriate state and federal permitting
- 2.
requirements.
requirements.
requirements.
Li Crossings of all drainage channels, Ei Crossings of drainage channels and L
All construction activity in and within 30 meters Equipment intermittent streams, and permanent intermittent streams must be done in ways (100 feet) of the unique habitat must be approved Crossings streams must be done in ways that avoid that avoid erosion problems and long-term in advance by Environmental Stewardship and erosion problems and long-term changes changes in water flow.
Policy staff, preferably as a result of an on-site in water flow.
Li Proposed crossings of permanent streams planning session. The purpose of this review and Li Crossings of any permanent streams must must be discussed in advance with approval will be to minimize impacts on the allow for natural movement of fish and Environmental Stewardship and Policy unique habitat.
other aquatic life.
staff and may require an on-site planning session before any work begins. The purpose of these discussions will be to minimize the number of crossings and their impact on the important resources in the streams.
O Im M
w O,
M, O
o a
m o
OJ
- 4) en c
"0 "0
CD
- 3 CD
~. -
OJ m
~
< a'
~
- 3 CD
~
Oi
- 3 "0
OJ U en -
OJ -
CD
- 3 CD
~
(.V (Xl (Xl Guidelines D
- 1.
Reference D
- 2.
D Equipment Crossings D
Comparison of Guidelines Under the Three Stream and Water Body Protection Categories (page 1)
A: Standard All TVA construction work around streams D
will be done using pertinent BMPs such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, BMP "Standards and Specifications."
All crossings of streams must comply with D
appropriate state and federal permitting requirements.
Crossings of all drainage channels, D
intermittent streams, and permanent streams must be done in ways that avoid erosion problems and long-term changes in water flow.
D Crossings of any permanent streams must allow for natural movement of fish and other aquatic life.
B: Important Permanent Streams Except as modified by guidelines 2-4 below, all construction work around streams will be done using pertinent BMPs such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, BMP "Standards and Specifications."
All crossings of streams must comply with appropriate state and federal permitting requirements.
Crossings of drainage channels and intermittent streams must be done in ways that avoid erosion problems and long-term changes in water flow.
Proposed crossings of permanent streams must be discussed in advance with Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff and may require an on-site planning session before any work begins. The purpose of these discussions will be to minimize the number of crossings and their impact on the important resources in the streams.
.~.
C: Unique Water Habitats D
Except as modified by guidelines 2-4 below, all construction work around the unique habitat will be done using pertinent BMPs such as those described in A Guide for Environmental Protection and Best Management Practices for TVA Construction and Maintenance Activities, especially Chapter 6, BMP "Standards and Specifications."
D All crossings of streams also must comply with appropriate state and federal permitting requirements.
D All construction activity in and within 30 meters (100 feet) of the unique habitat must be approved in advance by Environmental Stewardship and Policy staff, preferably as a result of an on-site planning session. The purpose of this review and approval will be to minimize impacts on the unique habitat.
en
~
co CD z c
(")
CD OJ..,
mComp-Une m
moe n,
-M me Comparison of Guidelines Under the Three Stream and Water Body Protection Categories (page 2)
CD CD 0
CD C')
C/)
CD CD Guidelines A: Standard B: Important Permanent Streams C: Unique Water Habitats U
Cutting of trees within SMZs must be D
Cutting of trees with SMZs must be 0
Cutting of.trees within 30 meters (100 feet) of accomplished by using either hand-held accomplished by using either hand-held the unique habitat must be discussed in
- 3.
equipment or other appropriate clearing equipment or other appropriate clearing advance with Environmental Stewardship and equipment (e.g., a feller-buncher) that equipment (e.g., a feller-buncher) that Policy staff, preferably during the on-site Cutting would result in minimal soil disturbance would result in minimal soil disturbance planning session. Cutting of trees near the Trees and damage to low-lying vegetation, and damage to low-lying vegetation, unique habitat must be kept to an absolute The method will be selected based on The method will be selected based on minimum.
site-specific conditions and topography site-specific conditions and topography 0
Stumps must not be removed, uprooted, or cut to minimize soil disturbance and impacts to minimize soil disturbance and impacts shorter than 1 foot above the ground line.
to the SMZ and surrounding area.
to the SMZ and surrounding area.
u Stumps can be cut close to ground level D
Cutting of trees near permanent streams but must not be removed or uprooted.
must be limited to those meeting National Electric Safety Code and danger tree requirements.
D Stumps can be cut close to ground level but must not be removed or uprooted.
U1 Other vegetation near streams must be U
Other vegetation near streams must be U
Other vegetation near the unique habitat must disturbed as little as possible during disturbed as little as possible during be disturbed as little as possible during
- 4.
construction.
construction.
construction.
D Soil displacement by the actions of D
Soil displacement by the actions of U
The soil must not be disturbed by plowing, Other plowing, disking, blading, or other tillage plowing, disking, blading, or other tillage disking, blading, or grading.
Vegetation or grading equipment will not be allowed or grading equipment will not be allowed 0
Areas that have to be disturbed must be in SMZs; however, a minimal amount of in SMZs; however, a minimal amount of stabilized as soon as possible and revegetated soil disturbance may occur as a result of soil disturbance may occur as a result of as soon as feasible, in some cases with clearing operations.
clearing operations.
specific kinds of native plants. These and U1 Shorelines that have to be disturbed
[]
Shorelines that have to be disturbed other vegetative requirements will be must be stabilized as soon as feasible.
must be stabilized as soon as possible coordinated with Environmental Stewardship and revegetated as soon as feasible, and Policy staff.
0 CD
- 3.
_17 o
OJ
- P (J)
C "0
"0 co 3
CD
- J 9I m
- J <
~r
- J 3
CD
- J fii 3
"0 OJ
~
(J) -
OJ -
CD 3
CD
~
Guidelines 0
- 3.
Cutting Trees 0
0
- 4.
0 Other Vegetation 0
Comparison of Guidelines Under the Three Stream and Water Body Protection Categories (page 2)
A: Standard B: Important Permanent Streams C: Unique Water Habitats Cutting of trees within SMZs must be 0
Cutting of trees with SMZs must be 0
Cutting of,trees within 30 meters (100 feet) of accomplished by using either hand-held accomplished by using either hand-held the unique habitat must be discussed in equipment or other appropriate clearing equipment or other appropriate clearing advance with Environmental Stewardship and equipment (e.g., a feller-buncher) that equipment (e.g., a feller-buncher) that Policy staff, preferably during the on-site would result in minimal soil disturbance would result in minimal soil disturbance planning session. Cutting of trees near the and damage to low-lying vegetation.
and damage to low-lying vegetation.
unique habitat must be kept to an absolute The method will be selected based on The method will be selected based on minimum.
site-specific conditions and topography site-specific conditions and topography 0
Stumps must not be removed, uprooted, or cut to minimize soil disturbance and impacts to minimize soil disturbance and impacts shorter than 1 foot above the ground line.
to the SMZ and surrounding area.
to the SMZ and surrounding area.
Stumps can be cut close to ground level 0
Cutting of trees near permanent streams but must not be removed or uprooted.
must be limited to those meeting National Electric Safety Code and danger tree requirements.
0 Stumps can be cut close to ground level but must not be removed or uprooted.
Other vegetation near streams must be 0
Other vegetation near streams must be 0
Other vegetation near the unique habitat must disturbed as little as possible during disturbed as little as possible during be disturbed as little as possible during construction.
construction.
construction.
Soil displacement by the actions of 0
Soil displacement by the actions of 0
The soil must not be disturbed by plowing, plowing, disking, blading, or other tillage plowing, disking, blading, or other tillage disking, blading, or grading.
or grading equipment will not be allowed or grading equipment will not be allowed
[J Areas that have to be disturbed must be in SMZs; however, a minimal amount of in SMZs; however, a minimal amount of stabilized as soon as possible and revegetated soil disturbance may occur as a result of soil disturbance may occur as a result of as soon as feasible, in some cases with clearing operations.
clearing operations.
specific kinds of native plants. These and Shorelines that have to be disturbed
[J Shorelines that have to be disturbed other vegetative requirements will be must be stabilized as soon as feasible.
must be stabilized as soon as possible coordinated with Environmental Stewardship and revegetated as soon as feasible.
and Policy staff.
Page intentionally blank Page intentionally Ilk
,I I
I I
I m
I' I
I I
I I
I I
I:
I I
I I.
Glossary GLOSSARY A-weighted decibel (dBA) - A unit of weighted sound pressure level, measured by the use of a metering characteristic and the "A" weighting specified by American National Standard Institute SI.4-1971 (R1 76). (See decibel).
Accident - One or more unplanned events involving materials that have the potential to endanger the health and safety of workers and the public. An accident can involve a combined release of energy and hazardous materials (radiological or chemical) that might cause prompt or latent adverse health effects.
Accident sequence - With regard to nuclear facilities, an initiating event followed by system failures or operator errors, which can result in significant core damage, confinement system failure, and/or radionuclide releases.
Ambient air - The surrounding atmosphere as it exists around people, plants, and structures.
Air quality standards are used to provide a measure of the health-related and visual characteristics of the air.
Archaeological sites (resources) - Any location where humans have altered the terrain or discarded artifacts during either prehistoric or historic times.
Artifact - An object produced or shaped by human workmanship of archaeological or historical interest.
As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) - A concept applied to ensure the quantity of radioactivity released to the environment and the radiation exposure of onsite workers in routine operations, including "anticipated operational occurrences," is maintained as low as reasonably achievable. It takes into account the state of technology, economics of improvements in relation to benefits to public health and safety, and other societal and economic considerations in relation to the use of nuclear energy in the public interest.
Background radiation - Ionizing radiation present in the environment from cosmic rays and natural sources in the Earth; background radiation varies considerably with location.
Baseline - A quantitative expression of conditions, costs, schedule, or technical progress to serve as a base or standard for measurement during the performance of an effort; the established plan against which the status of resources and progress of a project can be measured. For this environmental impact statement, the environmental baseline is the site environmental conditions as they exist or have been estimated to exist in the absence of the proposed action.
Baseload - The minimum amount of electric power or natural gas delivered or required over a given period of time at a steady rate. The minimum continuous load or demand in a power system over a given period of time usually not temperature sensitive.
Baseload capacity - The generating equipment normally operated to serve loads on an around-the-clock basis.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 391 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I*
I I
I I
I I
,I I
.1 Glossary GLOSSARY A-weighted decibel (dBA) - A unit of weighted sound pressure level, measured by the use of a metering characteristic and the "A" weighting specified by American National Standard Institute SI.4-1971(R176). (See decibel).
Accident - One or more unplanned events involving materials that have the potential to endanger the health and safety of workers and the public. An accident can involve a combined release of energy and hazardous materials (radiological or chemical) that might cause prompt or latent adverse health effects.
Accident sequence - With regard to nuclear facilities, an initiating event followed by system failures or operator errors, which can result in significant core damage, confinement system failure, and/or radionuclide releases.
Ambient air - The surrounding atmosphere as it exists around people, plants, and structures.
Air quality standards are used to provide a measure of the health-related and visual characteristics of the air.
Archaeological sites (resources) - Any location where humans have altered the terrain or discarded artifacts during either prehistoric or historic times.
Artifact - An object produced or shaped by human workmanship of archaeological or historical interest.
As Low as Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) - A concept applied to ensure the quantity of radioactivity released to the environment and the radiation exposure of onsite workers in routine operations, including "anticipated operational occurrences," is maintained as low as reasonably achievable. It takes into account the state of technology, economics of improvements in relation to benefits to public health and safety, and other societal and economic considerations in relation to the use of nuclear energy in the public interest.
Background radiation - Ionizing radiation present in the environment from cosmic rays and natural sources in the Earth; background radiation varies considerably with location.
Baseline - A quantitative expression of conditions, costs, schedule, or technical progress to serve as a base or standard for measurement during the performance of an effort; the established plan against which the status of resources and progress of a project can be measured. For this environmental impact statement, the environmental baseline is the site environmental conditions as they exist or have been estimated to exist in the absence of the proposed action.
Baseload - The minimum amount of electric power or natural gas delivered or required over a given period of time at a steady rate. The minimum continuous load or demand in a power system over a given period of time usually not temperature sensitive.
Baseload capacity - The generating equipment normally operated to serve loads on an around-the-clock basis.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 391
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Basemat - Reinforced concrete foundation. The AP1000 basemat meets the functional I
requirements of a building foundation by providing the strength and stability necessary for design loads to transmit safely from the structure onto the underlying rock and soil substrata.
Benthic - Plants and animals dwelling at the bottom of oceans, lakes, rivers, and other surface waters.
Benthic macroinvertebrate - Organisms that are large enough to be seen without the aid of magnification and that live in close association with bottom of flowing and nonflowing bodies of water.
3 Best Management Practices (BMP) - A practice or combination or practices that is determined by a state (or other planning agency) after problem assessment, examination of alternative practices, and appropriate public participation to be the most effective, practicable means of I
preventing or reducing the amount of pollution generated by nonpoint sources to a level compatible with air or water quality goals.
3 Beta particle - A charged particle emitted from the nucleus of an atom during radioactive decay. A negatively charged beta particle is identical to an electron; a positively charged beta particle is called a "positron."
Beta radiation - Consists of an elementary particle emitted from a nucleus during radioactive decay; it is negatively charged, is identical to an electron, and is easily stopped by a thin sheet of metal.
Block groups - U.S. Bureau of the Census term describing a cluster of blocks generally selected to include 250 to 550 housing units.
Blowdown - A maintenance procedure to remove sediment in power plant components.
Burnup - The total energy released through fission by a given amount of nuclear fuel; generally measured in megawatt-days.
CE-QUAL-W2 - Two-dimensional, laterally averaged, hydrodynamic and water quality model for reservoirs Cancer - The name given to a group of diseases characterized by uncontrolled cellular growth with cells having invasive characteristics such that the disease can transfer from one organ to another.
Capacity factor - The ratio of the annual average power production of a power plant to its rated capacity.
Canister - A stainless-steel container in which nuclear material is sealed.
Cladding - The metal tube that forms the outer jacket of a nuclear fuel rod or burnable absorber rod. It prevents the release of radioactive material into the coolant. Stainless steel and zirconium alloys are common cladding materials.
Consumptive water use - The difference in the volume of water withdrawn from a body of water and the amount released back into the body of water.
392 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Basemat - Reinforced concrete foundation. The AP1 000 basemat meets the functional requirements of a building foundation by providing the strength and stability necessary for design loads to transmit safely from the structure onto the underlying rock and soil substrata.
Benthic - Plants and animals dwelling at the bottom of oceans, lakes, rivers, and other surface waters.
Benthic macroinvertebrate - Organisms that are large enough to be seen without the aid of magnification and that live in close association with bottom of flowing and nonflowing bodies of water.
Best Management Practices (BMP) - A practice or combination or practices that is determined by a state (or other planning agency) after problem assessment, examination of alternative practices, and appropriate public participation to be the most effective, practicable means of preventing or reducing the amount of pollution generated by non point sources to a level compatible with air or water quality goals.
Beta particle - A charged particle emitted from the nucleus of an atom during radioactive decay. A negatively charged beta particle is identical to an electron; a positively charged beta particle is called a "positron."
Beta radiation - Consists of an elementary particle emitted from a nucleus during radioactive decay; it is negatively charged, is identical to an electron, and is easily stopped by a thin sheet of metal.
Block groups - U.S. Bureau of the Census term describing a cluster of blocks generally selected to include 250 to 550 housing units.
Blowdown - A maintenance procedure to remove sediment in power plant components.
Burnup - The total energy released through fission by a given amount of nuclear fuel; generally measured in megawatt-days.
CE-QUAL-W2 - Two-dimensional, laterally averaged, hydrodynamic and water quality model for reservoirs Cancer - The name given to a group of diseases characterized by uncontrolled cellular growth with cells having invasive characteristics such that the disease can transfer from one organ to another.
Capacity factor - The ratio of the annual average power production of a power plant to its rated capacity.
Canister - A stainless-steel container in which nuclear material is sealed.
Cladding - The metal tube that forms the outer jacket of a nuclear fuel rod or burnable absorber rod, It prevents the release of radioactive material into the coolant. Stainless steel and zirconium alloys are common cladding materials.
Consumptive water use - The difference in the volume of water withdrawn from a body of water and the amount released back into the body of water.
392 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I,
'1 I:
I I
I' I
I I,
Glossary Container - With regard to radioactive wastes, the metal envelope in the waste package that provides the primary containment function of the waste package and is designed to meet the containment requirements of 10 CFR Part 60.
Containment Structure-A gas-tight shell or other enclosure around a nuclear reactor to confine fission that otherwise might be released to the atmosphere in the event of an accident.
Such enclosures are usually dome-shaped and made of steel-reinforced concrete.
Containment design-basis - For a nuclear reactor, those bounding conditions for the design of the containment, including temperature, pressure, and leakage rate. Because the containment is provided as an additional barrier to mitigate the consequences of accidents involving the release of radioactive materials, the containment design-basis may include an additional specified margin above those conditions expected to result from the plant design-basis accidents to ensure that the containment design can mitigate unlikely or unforeseen events.
Conductors - A wire or combination of wires not insulated from one another, suitable for carrying electric current.
Cooling water - Water pumped into a nuclear reactor or accelerator to cool components and prevent damage from the intense heat generated when the reactor or accelerator is operating.
CORMIX - Cornell Mixing Zone Expert System (CORMIX), an EPA-supported mixing zone model for assessment of regulatory mixing zones resulting from steady, continuous point source discharges.
Cultural resources - Archaeological sites, historical sites, architectural features, traditional use areas, and Native American sacred sites.
Cumulative impacts/effects - In an environmental impact statement, the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (Federal or nonfederal), private industry, or individual(s) undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR §1508.7).
Current - The movement of electrons in the conductors or transmission lines.
Decay heat (radioactivity) - The heat produced by the decay of certain radionuclides.
Decay (radioactive) - The decrease in the amount of any radioactive material with the passage of time due to the spontaneous transformation of an unstable nuclide into a different nuclide or into a different energy state of the same nuclide; the emission of nuclear radiation (alpha, beta, or gamma radiation) is part of the process.
Decibel (dB) - A logarithmic unit of sound measurement which describes the magnitude of a particular quantity of sound pressure power with respect to a standard reference value, in general, a sound doubles in loudness for every increase of 10 decibels.
Decibel, A-weighted (dBA) - A unit of frequency-weighted sound pressure level, measured by the use of a metering characteristic and the "A" weighting specified by the American National Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 393 I
I I
I
,I I
I I*
I I
I I
I I
I I
I Glossary Container - With regard to radioactive wastes, the metal envelope in the waste package that provides the primary containment function of the waste package and is designed to meet the containment requirements of 10 CFR Part 60.
Containment Structure-A gas-tight shell or other enclosure around a nuclear reactor to confine fission that otherwise might be released to the atmosphere in the event of an accident.
Such enclosures are usually dome-shaped and made of steel-reinforced concrete.
Containment design-basis - For a nuclear reactor, those bounding conditions for the design of the containment, including temperature, pressure, and leakage rate. Because the containment is provided as an additional barrier to mitigate the consequences of accidents involving the release of radioactive materials, the containment design-basis may include an additional specified margin above those conditions expected to result from the plant design-basis accidents to ensure that the containment design can mitigate unlikely or unforeseen events.
Conductors - A wire or combination of wires not insulated from one another, suitable for carrying electric current.
Cooling water - Water pumped into a nuclear reactor or accelerator to cool components and prevent damage from the intense heat generated when the reactor or accelerator is operating.
CORMIX - Cornell Mixing Zone Expert System (CORM IX), an EPA-supported mixing zone model for assessment of regulatory mixing zones resulting from steady, continuous point source discharges.
Cultural resources - Archaeological sites, historical sites, architectural features, traditional use areas, and Native American sacred sites.
Cumulative impacts/effects - In an environmental impact statement, the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions, regardless of what agency (Federal or nonfederal), private industry, or individual(s) undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (40 CFR §1S0B.7).
Current - The movement of electrons in the conductors or transmission lines.
Decay heat (radioactivity) - The heat produced by the decay of certain radionuclides.
Decay (radioactive) - The decrease in the amount of any radioactive material with the passage of time due to the spontaneous transformation of an unstable nuclide into a different nuclide or into a different energy state of the same nuclide; the emission of nuclear radiation (alpha, beta, or gamma radiation) is part of the process.
Decibel (dB) - A logarithmic unit of sound measurement which describes the magnitude of a particular quantity of sound pressure power with respect to a standard reference value, in general, a sound doubles in loudness for every increase of 10 decibels.
Decibel, A-weighted (dBA) - A unit of frequency-weighted sound pressure level, measured by the use of a metering characteristic and the "A" weighting specified by the American National Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 393
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Standards Institute ANSI Si.4-1983 (RI 594), that accounts for the frequency response of the I
human ear.
Decommissioning - The removal from service of facilities such as processing plants, waste 3
tanks, and burial grounds, and the reduction or stabilization of radioactive contamination.
Decommissioning includes decontamination, dismantling, and return of the area to original condition without restrictions or partial decontamination, isolation of remaining residues, and continuation of surveillance and restrictions.
Decontamination - The actions taken to reduce or remove substances that pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment, such as radioactive or chemical I,
contamination from facilities, equipment, or soils by washing, heating, chemical or electrochemical action, mechanical cleaning, or other techniques.
g Depleted uranium - A mixture of uranium isotopes where uranium-235 represents less than 0.7 percent of the uranium by mass.
Derate - Reduction in operating power production level.
Design-basis accident - For nuclear facilities, information that identifies the specific functions to be performed by a structure, system, or component and the specific values (or ranges of values) chosen for controlling parameters for reference bounds for design. These values may be (I) restraints derived from generally accepted state-of-the-art practices for achieving functional goals; (2) requirements derived from analysis (based on calculation and/or I
experiments) of the effects of a postulated accident for which a structure, system, or component must meet its functional goals; or (3) requirements derived from Federal safety objectives, principles, goals, or requirements.
Design-basis events - Postulated disturbances in process variables that can potentially lead to design-basis accidents.
I Distribution (electrical) - The system of lines, transformers, and switches that connect the transmission network and customer load. The transport of electricity to ultimate use points such as homes and businesses. The portion of an electric system that is dedicated to delivering electric energy to an end user at relatively low voltages.
Dose - The energy imparted to matter by ionizing radiation. The unit of absorbed dose is the i
rad.
Dose equivalent - The product of absorbed dose in rad (or Gray) and a quality factor, which I
quantifies the effect of this type of radiation in fissue. Dose equivalent is expressed in units of rem or Sievert, where 1 rem equals 0.01 Sievert.
Dose rate - The radiation dose delivered per unit time (e.g., rem per year).
Dosimeter - A small device (instrument) carried by a radiation worker that measures cumulative 3
radiation dose (e.g., film badge or ionization chamber).
Drift - Effluent mist or spray carried into the atmosphere from cooling towers.
5 394 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Standards Institute ANSI Si.4-1983 (RI 594), that accounts for the frequency response of the human ear.
Decommissioning - The removal from service of facilities such as processing plants, waste tanks, and burial grounds, and the reduction or stabilization of radioactive contamination.
Decommissioning includes decontamination, dismantling, and return of the area to original condition without restrictions or partial decontamination, isolation of remaining residues, and continuation of surveillance and restrictions.
Decontamination - The actions taken to reduce or remove substances that pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health or the environment, such as radioactive or chemical contamination from facilities, equipment, or soils by washing, heating, chemical or electrochemical action, mechanical cleaning, or other techniques.
Depleted uranium - A mixture of uranium isotopes where uranium-235 represents less than 0.7 percent of the uranium by mass.
Derate - Reduction in operating power production level.
Design-basis accident - For nuclear facilities, information that identifies the specific functions to be performed by a structure, system, or component and the specific values (or ranges of values) chosen for controlling parameters for reference bounds for design. These values may be (I) restraints derived from generally accepted state-of-the-art practices for achieving functional goals; (2) requirements derived from analysis (based on calculation and/or experiments) of the effects of a postulated accident for which a structure, system, or component must meet its functional goals; or (3) requirements derived from Federal safety objectives, principles, goals, or requirements.
Design-basis events - Postulated disturbances in process variables that can potentially lead to design-basis accidents.
Distribution (electrical) - The system of lines, transformers, and switches that connect the transmission network and customer load. The transport of electricity to ultimate use points such as homes and businesses. The portion of an electric system that is dedicated to delivering electric energy to an end user at relatively low voltages.
Dose - The energy imparted to matter by ionizing radiation. The unit of absorbed dose is the rad.
Dose equivalent - The product of absorbed dose in rad (or Gray) and a quality factor, which quantifies the effect of this type of radiation in fissue. Dose equivalent is expressed in units of rem or Sievert, where 1 rem equals 0.01 Sievert.
Dose rate - The radiation dose delivered per unit time (e.g., rem per year).
Dosimeter - A small device (instrument) carried by a radiation worker that measures cumulative radiation dose (e.g., film badge or ionization chamber).
Drift - Effluent mist or spray carried into the atmosphere from cooling towers.
394 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I
'I I
I I
I I
I I
I' I,
Glossary Drinking water standards - The level of constituents or characteristics in a drinking water supply specified in regulations under the Safe Drinking Water Act as the maximum permissible.
Effective dose equivalent - The sum of the products of the dose equivalent received by specified tissues of the body and a tissue-specific weighting factor. This sum is a risk-equivalent value and can be used to estimate the health effects risk to the exposed individual. The tissue-specific weighting factor represents the fraction of the total health risk resulting from uniform whole-body irradiation that would be contributed by that particular tissue. The effective dose equivalent includes the committed effective dose equivalent from internal deposition of radionuclides, and the effective dose equivalent due to penetrating radiation from sources external to the body. Effective dose equivalent is expressed in units of rem or Sievert.
Effluent - A gas or fluid discharged into the environment.
Endangered species - Any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or significant portions of its range. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, establishes procedures for placing species on the Federal lists of endangered or threatened species.
Endangered Species Act of 1973 - The Act requires Federal agencies, with the consultation and assistance of the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce, to ensure that their actions likely will not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species, or adversely affect the habitat of such species.
Engineered safety features - For a nuclear facility, features that prevent, limit, or mitigate the release of radioactive material from its primary containment.
Entrainment - The involuntary capture and inclusion of organisms in streams of flowing water; a term often applied to the cooling water systems of power plants/reactors. The organisms involved may include phyto-and zooplankton, fish eggs and larvae (ichthyoplankton), shellfish larvae, and other forms of aquatic life.
Environment - The sum of all external conditions and influences affecting the life, development, and ultimately the survival of an organism.
Environmental justice - The fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, incomes, and educational levels with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment implies that no population of people should be forced to shoulder a disproportionate share of the negative environmental impacts of pollution or environmental hazards due to a lack of political or economic influence.
Exposure to radiation - The incidence of radiation on living or inanimate material by accident or intent. Background exposure is the exposure to natural background ionizing radiation.
Occupational exposure is the exposure to ionizing radiation that occurs at a person's workplace.
Population exposure is the exposure to a number of persons who inhabit an area.
Exposure pathway - The course a chemical or physical agent takes from the source to the exposed organism. The pathway describes a unique mechanism by which an individual or population is exposed to chemicals or physical agents at or originating from the site. Each exposure pathway includes a source or release from a source, an exposure point, and an exposure route. If the exposure point differs from the source, a transport/exposure medium (e.g., air) is included.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 395 I'
I I
I I
I I
I
'I I
I I
I I
I I
I Glossary Drinking water standards - The level of constituents or characteristics in a drinking water supply specified in regulations under the Safe Drinking Water Act as the maximum permissible.
Effective dose equivalent - The sum of the products of the dose equivalent received by specified tissues of the body and a tissue-specific weighting factor. This sum is a risk-equivalent value and can be used to estimate the health effects risk to the exposed individual. The tissue-specific weighting factor represents the fraction of the total health risk resulting from uniform whole-body irradiation that would be contributed by that particular tissue. The effective dose equivalent includes the committed effective dose equivalent from int'ernal deposition of radionuclides, and the effective dose equivalent due to penetrating radiation from sources external to the body. Effective dose equivalent is expressed in units of rem or Sievert.
Effluent - A gas or fluid discharged into the environment.
Endangered species - Any species which is in danger of extinction throughout all or significant portions of its range. The Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, establishes procedures for placing species on the Federal lists of endangered or threatened species.
Endangered Species Act of 1973 - The Act requires Federal agencies, with the consultation and assistance of the Secretaries of the Interior and Commerce, to ensure that their actions likely will not jeopardize the continued existence of any endangered or threatened species, or adversely affect the habitat of such species.
Engineered safety features - For a nuclear facility, features that prevent, limit, or mitigate the release of radioactive material from its primary containment.
Entrainment - The involuntary capture and inclusion of organisms in streams of flowing water; a term often applied to the cooling water systems of power plants/reactors. The organisms involved may include phyto-and zooplankton, fish eggs and larvae (ichthyoplankton), shellfish larvae, and other forms of aquatic life.
Environment - The sum of all external conditions and influences affecting the life, development, and ultimately the survival of an organism.
Environmental justice - The fair treatment of people of all races, cultures, incomes, and educational levels with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies. Fair treatment implies that no population of people should be forced to shoulder a disproportionate share of the negative environmental impacts of pollution or environmental hazards due to a lack of political or economic influence.
Exposure to radiation - The incidence of radiation on living or inanimate material by accident or intent. Background exposure is the exposure to natural background ionizing radiation.
Occupational exposure is the exposure to ionizing radiation that occurs at a person's workplace.
Population exposure is the exposure to a number of persons who inhabit an area.
Exposure pathway - The course a chemical or physical agent takes from the source to the exposed organism. The pathway describes a unique mechanism by which an individual or population is exposed to chemicals or physical agents at or originating from the site. Each exposure pathway includes a source or release from a source, an exposure point, and an exposure route. If the exposure point differs from the source, a transport/exposure medium (e.g., air) is included.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 395
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site II Fission (fissioning) - The splitting of a nucleus into at least two other nuclei and the release of j
a relatively large amount of energy. Two or three neutrons are usually released during this type of transformation.
Fission products - Nuclei formed by the fission of heavy elements (primary fission products);
also, the nuclei formed by the decay of the primary fission products, many of which are radioactive.
3 Floodplain - The lowlands adjoining inland and coastal waters and relatively flat areas.
Fuel assembly - A cluster of fuel rods (or plates). Also called a fuel element. Approximately 200 1
fuel assemblies make up a reactor core.
Fuel rod - Nuclear reactor component that includes the fissile material.
3.
Gamma rays - High-energy, short-wavelength, electromagnetic radiation accompanying fission and either emitted from the nucleus of an atom or emitted by some radionuclide or fission I
product. Gamma rays are very penetrating and can be stopped only by dense materials (such as lead) or a thick layer of shielding materials.
Habitat - The environment occupied by individuals of a particular species, population, or community.
Hazardous material - A material, including a hazardous substance, as defined by 49 CFR I
§171.8, which poses a risk to health, safety, and property when transported or handled.
Hazardous/toxic air pollutants - Air pollutants known or suspected to cause serious health i
problems such as cancer, poisoning, or sickness, and may have immunological, neurological, reproductive, developmental, or respiratory effects.
I, Hazardous waste - Any solid waste (can also be semisolid or liquid, or contain gaseous material) having the characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, toxicity, or reactivity, defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and identified or listed in 40 CFR Part 261 or by the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Heat exchanger - A device that transfers heat from one fluid (liquid or gas) to another.
5 High Efficiency Particulate Air Filter (HEPA) - A filter used to remove very small particulates from dry gaseous effluent streams.
High(ly) enriched uranium - Uranium that is equal to or greater than 20 percent uranium-235 weight. Many of the fuels discussed in this EIS are based primarily on highly enriched uranium.
Historic resources - Archaeological sites, architectural structures, and objects produced after the advent of written history dating to the time of the first Euro-American contact in an area.
Hybernacula - Places, e.g., caves or other protected areas, where bats hibernate during the winter.
Icthyoplankton - The early life stages offish (eggs and larvae) that spend part of their life cycle as free-floating plankton.
I 396 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Fission (fissioning) - The splitting of a nucleus into at least two other nuclei and the release of a relatively large amount of energy. Two or three neutrons are usually released during this type of transformation.
Fission products - Nuclei formed by the fission of heavy elements (primary fission products);
also, the nuclei formed by the decay of the primary fission products, many of which are radioactive.
Floodplain - The lowlands adjoining inland and coastal waters and relatively flat areas.
Fuel assembly -A cluster of fuel rods (or plates). Also called a fuel element. Approximately 200 fuel assemblies make up a reactor core.
Fuel rod - Nuclear reactor component that includes the fissile material.
Gamma rays - High-energy, short-wavelength, electromagnetic radiation accompanying fission and either emitted from the nucleus of an atom or emitted by some radionuclide or fission product. Gamma rays are very penetrating and can be stopped only by dense materials (such as lead) or a thick layer of shielding materials.
Habitat - The environment occupied by individuals of a particular species, population, or community.
Hazardous material - A material, including a hazardous substance, as defined by 49 CFR
§ 171.8, which poses a risk to health, safety, and property when transported or handled.
Hazardous/toxic air pollutants - Air pollutants known or suspected to cause serious health problems such as cancer, poisoning, or sickness, and may have immunological, neurological, reproductive, developmental, or respiratory effects.
Hazardous waste - Any solid waste (can also be semisolid or liquid, or contain gaseous material) having the characteristics of ignitability, corrosivity, toxicity, or reactivity, defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, and identified or listed in 40 CFR Part 261 or by the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Heat exchanger - A device that transfers heat from one fluid (liquid or gas) to another.
High Efficiency Particulate Air Filter (HEPA) - A filter used to remove very small particulates from dry gaseous effluent streams.
High(ly) enriched uranium - Uranium that is equal to or greater than 20 percent uranium-235 weight. Many of the fuels discussed in this EIS are based primarily on highly enriched uranium.
Historic resources - Archaeological sites, architectural structures, and objects produced after the advent of written history dating to the time of the first Euro-American contact in an area.
Hybernacula - Places, e.g., caves or other protected areas, where bats hibernate during the winter.
Icthyoplankton - The early life stages offish (eggs and larvae) that spend part of their life cycle as free-floating plankton.
396 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I
- 1 I
I I
I I'
I I
I I
I I
I' I
Glossary Impingement - The process by which aquatic organisms too large to pass through the screens of a water intake structure become caught on the screens and are unable to escape.
Interim storage - Safe and secure storage for spent nuclear fuel and radioactive wastes until the materials are treated and/or disposed of).
Ion - An atom that has too many or too few electrons, causing it to be electrically charged; an electron that is not associated (in orbit) with a nucleus.
Ion exchange - A unit physiochemical process that removes anions and cations, including radionuclides, from liquid streams (usually water) for the purpose of purification or decontamination.
Ionizing radiation - Alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays, neutrons, high-speed electrons, high-speed protons, and other particles or electromagnetic radiation that can displace electrons from atoms or molecules, thereby producing ions.
Irradiation - Exposure to radiation.
Isotope - An atom of a chemical element with a specific atomic number and atomic mass.
Isotopes of the same element have the same number of protons, but different numbers of neutrons and 'different atomic masses. Isotopes are identified by the name of the element and the total number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus. For example, plutonium-239 is a plutonium atom with 239 protons and neutrons.
Laydown - Area of construction site used to sort and store construction materials.
Licensee amendment - Changes to an existing reactor's operating license that are approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Light water - The common form of water (a molecule with two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom, H20) in which the hydrogen atom consists completely of the normal hydrogen isotope (one proton).
Light water reactor - A nuclear reactor in which circulating light water is used to cool the reactor core and to moderate (reduce the energy of) the neutrons created in the core by the fission reactions.
Low-level waste - Waste that contains radioactivity, but is not classified as high-level waste, transuranic waste, spent nuclear fuel, or by-product material as defined by Section lie (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Test specimens of fissionable material irradiated for research and development only, and not for the production of power or plutonium, may be classified as low-level waste, provided the concentration of transuranic waste is less than 100 nanocuries per gram. Some low-level waste is considered classified because of the nature of the generating process and/or constituents, because the waste would tell too much about the process.
Macrophyte - An aquatic plant that grows in or near water and is emergent, submergent, or floating.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 397 I
I I
I I
I I
I
- 1
,I I
I I
I I
I I
Glossary Impingement - The process by which aquatic organisms too large to pass through the screens of a water intake structure become caught on the screens and are unable to escape.
Interim storage - Safe and secure storage for spent nuclear fuel and radioactive wastes until the materials are treated and/or disposed of).
Ion - An atom that has too many or too few electrons, causing it to be electrically charged; an electron that is not associated (in orbit) with a nucleus.
Ion exchange - A unit physiochemical process that removes anions and cations, including radionuclides, from liquid streams (usually water) for the purpose of purification or decontamination.
Ionizing radiation - Alpha particles, beta particles, gamma rays, neutrons, high-speed electrons, high-speed protons, and other particles or electromagnetic radiation that can displace electrons from atoms or molecules, thereby producing ions.
Irradiation - Exposure to radiation.
Isotope - An atom of a chemical element with a specific atomic number and atomic mass.
Isotopes of the same element have the same number of protons, but different numbers of neutrons and 'different atomic masses. Isotopes are identified by the name of the element and the total number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus. For example, plutonium-239 is a plutonium atom with 239 protons and neutrons.
Laydown - Area of construction site used to sort and store construction materials.
Licensee amendment - Changes to an existing reactor's operating license that are approved by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Light water - The common form of water (a molecule with two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom, H20) in which the hydrogen atom consists completely of the normal hydrogen isotope (one proton).
Light water reactor - A nuclear reactor in which circulating light water is used to cool the reactor core and to moderate (reduce the energy of) the neutrons created in the core by the fission reactions.
Low-level waste - Waste that contains radioactivity, but is not classified as high-level waste, transuranic waste, spent nuclear fuel, or by-product material as defined by Section lie (2) of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended. Test specimens of fissionable material irradiated for research and development only, and not for the production of power or plutonium, may be classified as low-level waste, provided the concentration of transuranic waste is less than 100 nanocuries per gram. Some low-level waste is considered classified because of the nature of the generating process and/or constituents, because the waste would tell too much about the process.
Macrophyte - An aquatic plant that grows in or near water and is emergent, submergent, or floating.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 397
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Makeup water - Replacement for water lost through drift, blowdown, or evaporation (as in a cooling tower).
Man-rem - Unit of radiation dose to an individual.
I Maximally exposed individual - A hypothetical person who could potentially receive the maximum dose of radiation or hazardous chemicals.
1 Megawatt (MW) - A unit of power equal to 1 million watts. "Megawatt-thermal" is commonly used to define heat produced, while "megawatt-electric" defines electricity produced.
f Millirem - One thousandth of a rem. (See rem)
Minority population - A population classified by the Bureau of the Census as Black, Hispanic, Asian and Pacific Islander, American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and other nonwhite persons, the composition of which is at least equal to or greater than the state minority average of a defined area of jurisdiction.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) - Uniform, national air quality standards established by the Environmental Protection Agency under the authority of the Clean Air Act that restrict ambient levels of criteria pollutants to protect public health (primary standards) or public welfare (secondary standards), including plant and animal life, visibility, and materials.
Standards have been set for ozone, carbon monoxide, particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and lead.
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) - This Act provides that property resources with significant national historic value be placed on the national Register of Historic Places. It does I
not require any permits, but, pursuant to Federal code, if a proposed action might impact an historic property resource, it mandates consultation with the proper agencies.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) - Federal permitting system required for water pollution effluents under the Clean Water Act, as amended.
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) - A list maintained by the Secretary of the I
Interior of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of prehistoric or historic local, state, or national significance under Section 2(b) of the Historic Sites Act of 1935(16 U.S.C. 462) and Section 101(a) (1) (A) of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended.
Nuclear reactor - A device that sustains a controlled nuclear fission chain reaction that releases energy in the form of heat.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) - The Federal agency that regulates the civilian nuclear power industry in the United States.
Nuclide - A species of atom characterized by the constitution of its nucleus and, hence, by the number of protons, the number of neutrons, and the energy content.
I Outfall-The discharge point of a drain, sewer, or pipe as it empties into a body of water.
I I
398 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Makeup water - Replacement for water lost through drift, blowdown, or evaporation (as in a cooling tower).
Man-rem - Unit of radiation dose to an individual.
Maximally exposed individual - A hypothetical person who could potentially receive the maximum dose of radiation or hazardous chemicals.
Megawatt (MW) - A unit of power equal to 1 million watts. "Megawatt-thermal" is commonly used to define heat produced, while "megawatt-electric" defines electricity produced.
Millirem - One thousandth of a rem. (See rem)
Minority population - A population classified by the Bureau of the Census as Black, Hispanic, Asian and Pacific Islander, American Indian, Eskimo, Aleut, and other nonwhite persons, the composition of which is at least equal to or greater than the state minority average of a defined area of jurisdiction.
National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) - Uniform, national air quality standards established by the Environmental Protection Agency under the authority of the Clean Air Act that restrict ambient levels of criteria pollutants to protect public health (primary standards) or public welfare (secondary standards), including plant and animal life, visibility, and materials.
Standards have been set for ozone, carbon monoxide, particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and lead.
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) - This Act provides that property resources with significant national historic value be placed on the national Register of Historic Places. It does not require any permits, but, pursuant to Federal code, if a proposed action might impact an historic property resource, it mandates consultation with the proper agencies.
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) - Federal permitting system required for water pollution effluents under the Clean Water Act, as amended.
National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) - A list maintained by the Secretary of the Interior of districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of prehistoric or historic local, state, or national significance under Section 2(b} of the Historic Sites Act of 1935(16 U.S.C. 462) and Section 101(a) (1) (A) of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended.
Nuclear reactor - A device that sustains a controlled nuclear fission chain reaction that releases energy in the form of heat.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) - The Federal agency that regulates the civilian nuclear power industry in the United States.
Nuclide - A species of atom characterized by the constitution of its nucleus and, hence, by the number of protons, the number of neutrons, and the energy content.
Outfall-The discharge point of a drain, sewer, or pipe as it empties into a body of water.
398 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I'
I
Glossary Peaking capacity - The capacity of facilities or equipment normally used to supply incremental gas or electricity under extreme demand conditions. Peaking capacity is generally available for a limited number of days at a maximum rate.
Peak load - The maximum load consumed or produced by a unit or group of units in a stated period of time.
Pellets - One configuration of the reactive material in a target rod.
Person-rem - The unit of collective radiation dose to a given population; the sum of the individual doses received by a population segment.
Plume - A flowing, often somewhat conical, trail of emissions from a continuous point source.
Plume immersion - With regard to radiation, the situation in which an individual is enveloped by a cloud of radiation gaseous effluent and receives an external radiation dose.
Pressurized water reactor - A light water reactor in which heat is transferred from the core to an exchanger by water kept under pressure in the primary system. Steam is generated in a secondary circuit. Many reactors producing electric power are pressurized water reactors.
Primary system - With regard to nuclear reactors, the system that circulates a coolant (e.g.,
water) through the reactor core to remove the heat of reaction.
Probabilistic risk assessment - A comprehensive, logical, and structured methodology to identify and quantitatively evaluate significant accident sequences and their consequences.
Probabilistic safety assessment - A systematic and comprehensive methodology of determining the risks associated with the operation of a nuclear plant.
Probable maximum flood - The hypothetical flood (peak discharge, volume, and hydrograph shape) that is considered to be the most severe reasonably possible, based on comprehensive hydrometeorological application of Probable Maximum Precipitation, and other hydrologic factors favorable for maximum flood runoff, such as sequential storms and snowmelt.
Probable Maximum Precipitation - The theoretically greatest depth of precipitation for a given duration that is physically possible over a particular drainage area at a certain time of year.
(
Reference:
American Meteorological Society, 1959)
Processing (of spent nuclear fuel) - Applying a chemical or physical process designed to alter the characteristics of the spent fuel matrix.
Radiation - The emitted particles or photons from the nuclei of radioactive atoms. Some elements are naturally radioactive; others are induced to become radioactive by bombardment in a reactor. Naturally occurring radiation is indistinguishable from induced radiation.
Radiation shielding - Radiation-absorbing material that is interposed between a source of radiation and organisms that would be harmed by the radiation (e.g., people).
Radioactive waste - Materials from nuclear operations that are radioactive or are contaminated with radioactive materials, and for which use, reuse, or recovery are impractical.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 399 I
I I
- 1
,I I
,I I
I I
I I
,I I
I I
Glossary Peaking capacity - The capacity of facilities or equipment normally used to supply incremental gas or electricity under extreme demand conditions. Peaking capacity is generally available for a limited number of days at a maximum rate.
Peak load - The maximum load consumed or produced by a unit or group of units in a stated period of time.
Pellets - One configuration of the reactive material in a target rod.
Person-rem - The unit of collective radiation dose to a given population; the sum of the individual doses received by a population segment.
Plume - A flowing, often somewhat conical, trail of emissions from a continuous point source.
Plume immersion - With regard to radiation, the situation in which an individual is enveloped by a cloud of radiation gaseous effluent and receives an external radiation dose.
Pressurized water reactor - A light water reactor in which heat is transferred from the core to an exchanger by water kept under pressure in the primary system. Steam is generated in a secondary circuit. Many reactors producing electric power are pressurized water reactors.
Primary system - With regard to nuclear reactors, the system that circulates a coolant (e.g.,
water) through the reactor core to remove the heat of reaction.
Probabilistic risk assessment - A comprehensive, logical, and structured methodology to identify and quantitatively evaluate significant accident sequences and their consequences.
Probabilistic safety assessment - A systematic and comprehensive methodology of determining the risks associated with the operation of a nuclear plant.
Probable maximum flood - The hypothetical flood (peak discharge, volume, and hydrograph shape) that is considered to be the most severe reasonably possible, based on comprehensive hydrometeorological application of Probable Maximum Precipitation, and other hydrologic factors favorable for maximum flood runoff, such as sequential storms and snowmelt.
Probable Maximum Precipitation - The theoretically greatest depth of precipitation for a given duration that is physically possible over a particular drainage area at a certain time of year.
(
Reference:
American Meteorological Society, 1959)
Processing (of spent nuclear fuel) - Applying a chemical or phy'sical process designed to alter the characteristics of the spent fuel matrix.
Radiation - The emitted particles or photons from the nuclei of radioactive atoms. Some elements are naturally radioactive; others are induced to become radioactive by bombardment in a reactor. Naturally occurring radiation is indistinguishable from induced radiation.
Radiation shielding - Radiation-absorbing material that is interposed between a source of radiation and organisms that would be harmed by the radiation (e.g., people).
Radioactive waste - Materials from nuclear operations that are radioactive or are contaminated with radioactive materials, and for which use, reuse, or recovery are impractical.
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 399
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Radioactivity - The spontaneous decay or disintegration of unstable atomic nuclei, I
accompanied by the emission of radiation.
Radiological - Related to radiology, the science that deals with the use of ionizing radiation to 3
diagnose and treat disease.
Radwaste - Radioactive materials at the end of their useful life or in a product that is no longer useful and requires proper disposal Raw Water - Untreated water from the plant intake supplied to the circulating water system and the service water system to make up for water which has been consumed and discharged I
as part of the system operations.
Reactor - A device or apparatus in which a chain reactor of fissionable material is initiated and n
controlled; a nuclear reactor.
Reactor accident - See "design basis accident; severe accident."
Reactor coolant system - The system used to transfer energy from the reactor core either directly or indirectly to the heat rejection system.
I Reactor core - In a heavy water reactor: the fuel assemblies including the fuel and target rods, control assemblies, blanket assemblies, safety rods, and coolant/moderator. In a light water reactor: the fuel assemblies including the fuel and target rods, control rods, and I
coolant/moderator. In a modular high-temperature gas-cooled reactor: the graphite elements including the fuel and target elements, control rods, and other reactor shutdown mechanisms, and the graphite reflectors.
Reactor facility - Unless it is modified by words such as containment, vessel, or core, the term reactor facility includes the housing, equipment, and associated areas devoted to the operation and maintenance of one or more reactor cones. Any apparatus that is designed or used to sustain nuclear chain reactions in a controlled manner, including critical and pulsed assemblies and research, tests, and power reactors, is defined as a reactor. All assemblies designed to perform subcritical experiments that could potentially reach criticality are also to be considered reactors.
Record of Decision (ROD) - A document prepared in accordance with the requirements of the I
Council on Environmental Quality and National Environmental Policy Act regulations 40 CFR
§1505.2, that provides a concise public record of the decision on a proposed Federal action for which an environmental impact statement was prepared. A Record of Decision identifies the I
alternatives considered in reaching the decision, the environmentally preferable alternative(s),
factors balanced in making the decision, whether all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm have been adopted, and if not, why they were not.
I Regolith - A layer of loose, heterogeneous material covering solid rock.
Repository - A place for the disposal of immobilized high-level waste and spent nuclear fuel in isolation from the environment.
Reprocessing (of spent nuclear fuel) - Processing of reactor-irradiated nuclear materialn (primarily spent nuclear fuel) to recover fissile and fertile material, in order to recycle such I
400 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Radioactivity - The spontaneous decay or disintegration of unstable atomic nuclei, accompanied by the emission of radiation.
Radiological - Related to radiology, the science that deals with the use of ionizing radiation to diagnose and treat disease.
Radwaste - Radioactive materials at the end of their useful life or in a product that is no longer useful and requires proper disposal Raw Water - Untreated water from the plant intake supplied to the circulating water system and the service water system to make up for water which has been consumed and discharged as part of the system operations.
Reactor - A device or apparatus in which a chain reactor of fissionable material is initiated and controlled; a nuclear reactor.
Reactor accident - See "design basis accident; severe accident."
Reactor coolant system - The system used to transfer energy from the reactor core either directly or indirectly to the heat rejection system.
Reactor core - In a heavy water reactor: the fuel assemblies including the fuel and target rods, control assemblies, blanket assemblies, safety rods, and coolant/moderator. In a light water reactor: the fuel assemblies including the fuel and target rods, control rods, and coolant/moderator. In a modular high-temperature gas-cooled reactor: the graphite elements including the fuel and target elements, control rods, and other reactor shutdown mechanisms, and the graphite reflectors.
Reactor facility - Unless it is modified by words such as containment, vessel, or core, the term reactor facility includes the housing, equipment, and associated areas devoted to the operation and maintenance of one or more reactor cones. Any apparatus that is designed or used to sustain nuclear chain reactions in a controlled manner, including critical and pulsed assemblies and research, tests, and power reactors, is defined as a reactor. All assemblies designed to perform subcritical experiments that could potentially reach criticality are also to be considered reactors.
Record of Decision (ROD) - A document prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Council on Environmental Quality and National Environmental Policy Act regulations 40 CFR
§ 1505.2, that provides a concise public record of the decision on a proposed Federal action for which an environmental impact statement was prepared. A Record of Decision identifies the alternatives considered in reaching the decision, the environmentally preferable alternative(s),
factors balanced in making the decision, whether all practicable means to avoid or minimize environmental harm have been adopted, and if not, why they were not.
Regolith - A layer of loose, heterogeneous material covering solid rock.
Repository - A place for the disposal of immobilized high-level waste and spent nuclear fuel in isolation from the environment.
Reprocessing (of spent nuclear fuel) - Processing of reactor-irradiated nuclear material (primarily spent nuclear fuel) to recover fissile and fertile material, in order to recycle such 400 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
'I
'I I:
I*
I I
I I
I I
I.
I I
I
Glossary materials primarily for defense programs or generation of electricity. Historically, reprocessing has involved aqueous chemical separations of elements (typically uranium or plutonium) from undesired elements in the fuel.
Resin - An ion-exchange medium; organic polymer used for the preferential removal of certain ions from a solution.
Risk - In accident analysis, the probability-weighted consequence of an accident, defined as the accident frequently per year multiplied by the dose. The term "risk" also is used commonly in other applications to describe the probability of an event occurring.
Risk assessment (chemical or radiological) - The qualitative and quantitative evaluation performed in an effort to define the risk posed to human health and/or the environment by the presence or potential presence and/or use of specific chemical or radiological materials.
Runoff-The portion of rainfall, melted snow, or irrigation water that flows across the ground surface and eventually enters streams.
Safety Analysis Report (SAR) - A safety document that provides a complete description and safety analysis of a reactor design, normal and emergency operations, hypothetical accidents and their predicted consequences, and the means proposed to prevent such accidents or mitigate their consequences.
Safety Evaluation Report (SER)- A document prepared by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission that evaluates documentation (i.e., technical specifications, safety analysis reports, and special safety reviews and studies) submitted by a reactor licensee for its approval. This ensures that all of the safety aspects of part or all of the activities conducted at a reactor are formally and thoroughly analyzed, evaluated, and recorded.
Seismic Category 1 - Structures, systems, and components that are designed and built to withstand the maximum potential earthquake stresses for the particular region where a nuclear plant is sited.
Scoping - The solicitation of comments from interested persons, groups, and agencies at public meetings, public workshops, in writing, electronically, or via fax to assist in defining the proposed action, identifying alternatives, and developing preliminary issues to be addressed in an environmental impact statement.
Secondary system - The system that circulates a coolant (water) through a heat exchanger to remove heat from the primary system.
Seismicity - The tendency for earthquakes to occur.
Severe accident - An accident with a frequency rate of less than 106 per year that would have more severe consequences than a design-basis accident, in terms of damage to the facility, offsite consequences, or both. Also called "beyond design-basis reactor accidents" for this environmental impact statement.
Shutdown - For a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reactor, that condition in which the reactor has ceased operation and DOE has declared officially that it does not intend to operate it further (see DOE Order 5480.6, - Safely of Department of Energy-Owned Nuclear Reactors).
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 401 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Glossary materials primarily for defense programs or generation of electricity. Historically, reprocessing has involved aqueous chemical separations of elements (typically uranium or plutonium) from undesired elements in the fuel.
Resin - An ion-exchange medium; organic polymer used for the preferential removal of certain ions from a solution.
Risk - In accident analysis, the probability-weighted consequence of an accident, defined as the accident frequently per year multiplied by the dose. The term "risk" also is used commonly in other applications to describe the probability of an event occurring.
Risk assessment (chemical or radiological) - The qualitative and quantitative evaluation performed in an effort to define the risk posed to human health and/or the environment by the presence or potential presence and/or use of specific chemical or radiological materials.
Runoff-The portion of rainfall, melted snow, or irrigation water that flows across the ground surface and eventually enters streams.
Safety Analysis Report (SAR) - A safety document that provides a complete description and safety analysis of a reactor design, normal and emergency operations, hypothetical accidents and their predicted consequences, and the means proposed to prevent such accidents or mitigate their consequences.
Safety Evaluation Report (SER)- A document prepared by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission that evaluates documentation (i.e., technical specifications, safety analysis reports, and special safety reviews and studies) submitted by a reactor licensee for its approval. This ensures that all of the safety aspects of part or all of the activities conducted at a reactor are formally and thoroughly analyzed, evaluated, and recorded.
Seismic Category 1 - Structures, systems, and components that are designed and built to withstand the maximum potential earthquake stresses for the particular region where a nuclear plant is sited.
Scoping - The solicitation of comments from interested persons, groups, and agencies at public meetings, public workshops, in writing, electronically, or via fax to assist in defining the proposed action, identifying alternatives, and developing preliminary issues to be addressed in an environmental impact statement.
Secondary system - The system that circulates a coolant (water) through a heat exchanger to remove heat from the primary system.
Seismicity - The tendency for earthquakes to occur.
Severe accident - An accident with a frequency rate of less than 106 per year that would have more severe consequences than a design-basis accident, in terms of damage to the facility, offsite consequences, or both. Also called "beyond design-basis reactor accidents" for this environmental impact statement.
Shutdown - For a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reactor, that condition in which the reactor has ceased operation and DOE has declared officially that it does not intend to operate it further (see DOE Order 5480.6, - Safely of Department of Energy-Owned Nuclear Reactors).
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 401
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Source term - The estimated quantities of radionuclides or chemical pollutants released to the m
environment.
Spanned - Those areas of high relief where the transmission is high above the canopy such that ROW clearing is not necessary.
Spent nuclear fuel - Fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor following irradiation, the constituent elements of which have not be separated.
Threatened species - Any species designated under the Endangered Species Act as likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Tier - To link to another in a hierarchical chain. An upper-tier document might be programmatic to the entire DOE complex of sites; a lower-tier document might be specific to one site or process.
Transient - A change in the reactor coolant system temperature, pressure, or both, attributed to a change in the reactor's power.output. Transients can be caused by (1) adding or removing neutron poisons, (2) increasing or decreasing electrical load on the turbine generator, or (3) accident conditions Tritium - A radioactive isotope of the element hydrogen with two neutrons and one proton.
Common symbols for the isotope are "H-3" and "T." Tritium has a half-life of 12.3 years.
Underbuilt - When one or more lines are strung on an existing transmission structure.
Uprate - The process of increasing the maximum power level a commercial nuclear power plant may operate.
Uranium - A heavy, silvery-white metallic element (atomic number 92) with several radioactive isotopes that is used as fuel in nuclear reactors.
Vault - A reinforced concrete structure for storing strategic nuclear materials used in national defense or other programmatic purposes, or for disposing of radioactive or hazardous waste.
Wetlands - Land or areas exhibiting the following: hydric soil conditions, saturated or inundated I
soil during some portion of the year, and plant species tolerant of such conditions; also, areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of I
vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
Whole-body dose - With regard to radiation, the dose resulting from the uniform exposure of all organs and tissues in a human body. (Also see effective dose equivalent.)
X/Q (Chi/Q) - The relative calculated air concentration due to a specific air release and I
atmospheric dispersion; units are (seconds per cubic meter). For example (Curies per cubic meter)/(Curies per second)= (seconds per cubic meter) or (grams per cubic meter)/(grams per second) = (seconds per cubic meter).
402 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site Source term - The estimated quantities of radionuclides or chemical pollutants released to the environment.
Spanned - Those areas of high relief where the transmission is high above the canopy such that ROW clearing is not necessary.
Spent nuclear fuel - Fuel that has been withdrawn from a nuclear reactor following irradiation, the constituent elements of which have not be separated.
Threatened species - Any species designated under the Endangered Species Act as likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.
Tier - To link to another in a hierarchical chain. An upper-tier document might be programmatic to the entire DOE complex of sites; a lower-tier document might be specific to one site or process.
Transient - A change in the reactor coolant system temperature, pressure, or both, attributed to a change in the reactor's power output. Transients can be caused by (1) adding or removing neutron poisons, (2) increasing or decreasing electrical load on the turbine generator, or (3) accident conditions Tritium - A radioactive isotope of the element hydrogen with two neutrons and one proton.
Common symbols for the isotope are "H-3" and "T." Tritium has a half-life of 12.3 years.
Underbuilt - When one or more lines are strung on an existing transmission structu*re.
Uprate - The process of increasing the maximum power level a commercial nuclear power plant may operate.
Uranium - A heavy, silvery-white metallic element (atomic number 92) with several radioactive isotopes that is used as fuel in nuclear reactors.
Vault - A reinforced concrete structure for storing strategic nuclear materials used in national defense or other programmatic purposes, or for disposing of radioactive or hazardous waste.
Wetlands - Land or areas exhibiting the following: hydric soil conditions, saturated or inundated soil during some portion of the year, and plant species tolerant of such conditions; also, areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas.
Whole-body dose - With regard to radiation, the dose resulting from the uniform exposure of all organs and tissues in a human body. (Also see effective dose equivalent.)
X/Q (Chi/Q) - The relative calculated air concentration due to a specific air release and atmospheric dispersion; units are (seconds per cubic meter). For example (Curies per cubic meter)/(Curies per second)= (seconds per cubic meter) or (grams per cubic meter)/(grams per second) = (seconds per cubic meter).
402 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Index INDEX accident.... iv, vii, viii, xii, xiii, 25, 30, 31, 37, 41, 43, 44, 53, 73, 82, 162, 163, 164, 194, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201,202, 203, 204,205, 249, 252, 261,263, 264,265, 269,278, 391,393, 394, 395, 399,400,401,402 air quality..... S-9, iii, iv, xiv, 17, 47, 48, 49, 68, 123, 124,151,160, 164, 165, 167, 261, 358, 391, 398 a irb o rn e re le a se..................................................................................................................
4 3, 18 5 aq uatic reso urce...................................................................................................
22, 77, 2 17, 357 a q uatic re so urces..........................................................................................................
22, 7 7, 2 17 archaeological resource..................................................................................
4, 76,135, 239, 240 area of potential effect.........................................................................
xi, 135, 136, 238, 239, 240 As Low as Reasonably Achievable......................................................
xi, 163, 176,180,186, 391 Babcock & Wilcox.... S-1, S-2, S-5, i, vii, viii, ix, xi, 1, 2, 15, 16, 23, 24, 25, 29, 31, 34, 44, 45, 49, 53, 57, 62, 64, 71,72, 73, 74, 77, 80, 81,82, 83, 84, 86, 87, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101,107, 108, 112, 113,117,118,123,125,127,128,132,133,135,137,139,142, 160,162,163,164,167,169,170,171,172,173,174,175,176,177,178, 180,185,186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191,192,193,194,195,196,197,198,199,200,201,202,203,204, 206, 245, 252, 255, 283 B a s e lin e............................................................................................................................
1 1 6, 3 9 1 Baseload.................................
S-1, S-2, i, 1, 5, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 19, 23, 46, 47, 48, 49, 248, 391 baseload capacity.........................................................................................
1, 2, 1, 9, 46, 48, 39 1 best management practice xi, 60, 75, 80, 108, 114, 123, 127, 128, 212, 215, 230, 231,236, 238, 272,275, 350,352,357, 358, 375, 376, 377, 385, 386, 387, 388, 392 B iological A ssessm ent..............................................................................................
125, 22 1,276 B io lo g ica l O p in io n...........................................................................................................
3, 7 4, 12 5 biota............................ S-9, iv, viii, 68, 97, 168, 169, 177, 178, 215, 216, 223, 247, 248, 249, 251 blowdown.... S-3, S-5, ix, xv, 31, 43, 44, 45, 64, 71, 72, 82, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 99,100,101,127,177,187,283,392,398 Brow ns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN )....................................................................
xi, 46, 50, 51, 190 capacity.... S-1, S-2, i, vii, ix, 1, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, 18, 23, 30, 35, 43, 46, 47, 48, 49, 51, 52, 55, 59, 72, 73, 75, 117, 147, 154,155,156,157,183,188,189,195,196,231,248,257,392, 399 capacity factor.....................................................................
9,10,13,14,18,47,48,49,257,392 chemical... 5, 10, ii, 64, 69, 72, 95, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 108, 118, 127, 128, 131, 153, 154, 155, 157, 180, 187, 216, 223, 245, 246,260, 265, 348, 351,356, 391,394, 395, 397, 398, 399, 401,402 ch e m istry.............................................................................................................
9 9, 10 0, 10 1,2 6 5 Clean W ater Act........................................
xii, 22, 78, 89, 111, 114, 118, 119, 230, 276, 377, 398 Commercial Light Water Reactor (CLWR) xi, 18, 20, 98, 156, 180, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194,206, 240, 270,275 condenser cooling w ater (C C W )...................................................................................
31, 98, 100 Conductor.....................................
55, 59, 217, 220, 238, 241,243, 244,256, 347, 355, 357,393 Containment.... xi, xiii, 24, 25, 35, 36, 37, 41, 43, 44, 73, 141, 162, 173, 185, 200, 201, 202, 205, 355, 393, 395,400 cooling tower2, 4, 5, 17, 23, 25, 30, 31, 32, 35, 43, 44, 45, 53, 62, 71, 72, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89, 91, 92, 94, 95, 98, 99, 100, 101, 123, 124,127,136,137,139,140,142,156,177, 246, 247, 256, 394,398 Cooling Water... 5, xii, xv, 18, 30, 31, 35, 43, 54, 64, 73, 82, 86, 87, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 101, 118, 246, 250, 252,254,256, 393, 395 c o s t o f p o w e r.....................................................................................................................
1, 1 4, 1 5 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 403 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Index INDEX accident.... iv, vii, viii, xii, xiii, 25, 30, 31, 37,41,43,44,53,73,82,162,163,164,194,197,198, 199,200,201,202,203,204, 205, 249,252,261,263,264,265,269, 278, 391, 393, 394, 395,399,400,401,402 air quality..... 5-9, iii, iv, xiv, 17,47,48,49,68,123,124,151,160,164,165,167,261, 358, 391, 398 airborne release.................................................................................................................. 43, 185 aquatic resource................................................................................................... 22, 77, 217, 357 aquatic resources.......................................................................................................... 22, 77, 217 archaeological resource.................................................................................. 4, 76, 135,239,240 area of potential effect......................................................................... xi, 135, 136, 238, 239, 240 As Low as Reasonably Achievable...................................................... xi, 163, 176, 180, 186, 391 Babcock & Wilcox.... 5-1,5-2, S-5, i, vii, viii, ix, xi, 1,2, 15, 16,23,24,25,29,31,34,44,45,49, 53,57,62,64,71,72,73,74,77,80,81,82,83,84,86,87, 91, 92, 93,94, 95,96, 97, 98, 99, 100,101,107,108,112,113,117,118,123,125,127,128, 132, 133, 135, 137, 139, 142, 160,162,163,164,167,169,170,171,172,173,174,175, 176, 177, 178, 180, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 204, 206,245,252,255,283 Baseline............................................................................................................................ 116, 391 Baseload................................. S-1, S-2, i, 1,5,9,10,12,13,14,19,23,46,47,48,49,248,391 baseload capacity......................................................................................... 1, 2, 1, 9, 46, 48, 391 best management practice xi, 60, 75, 80,108,114,123,127,128,212,215,230,231,236,238, 272, 275, 350, 352, 357, 358, 375, 376, 377, 385, 386, 387, 388, 392 Biological Assessment.............................................................................................. 125, 221, 276 Biological Opinion........................................................................................................... 3, 74, 125 biota............................ 5-9, iv, viii, 68, 97,168,169,177,178,215,216,223,247,248,249,251 blowdown.... 5-3, S-5, ix, xv, 31,43,44,45,64,71,72, 82, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91,92,93,94,95,96, 99,100,101,127,177,187,283,392,398 Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant (BFN).................................................................... xi, 46, 50, 51, 190 capacity.... S-1, 5-2, i, vii, ix, 1,6,9,10,11,13,14,15,18,23,30,35,43,46,47,48,49, 51, 52, 55,59,72,73,75,117,147,154,155,156,157,183,188, 189, 195, 196,231,248,257,392, 399 capacity factor..................................................................... 9, 10, 13, 14, 18,47,48,49,257,392 chemical... 5, 10, ii, 64, 69, 72, 95, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 108, 118, 127, 128, 131, 153, 154, 155, 157,180,187,216,223,245,246,260,265,348,351,356, 391, 394, 395, 397, 398, 399, 401,402 chemistry............................................................................................................. 99, 100, 101,265 Clean Water Act........................................ xii, 22, 78, 89, 111, 114, 118, 119, 230, 276, 377, 398 Commercial Light Water Reactor (CLWR) xi, 18, 20, 98, 156, 180, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 194,206,240,270,275 condenser cooling water (CCW)................................................................................... 31, 98, 100 Conductor..................................... 55, 59, 217, 220, 238, 241, 243, 244, 256, 347, 355, 357, 393 Containment.... xi, xiii, 24, 25, 35, 36, 37,41,43,44,73,141,162,173,185,200,201,202,205, 355,393,395,400 cooling tower 2,4, 5, 17, 23, 25, 30, 31, 32, 35, 43, 44, 45, 53, 62, 71, 72, 80, 82, 86, 87, 89, 91, 92,94,95,98,99,100,101,123,124,127,136,137,139, 140, 142, 156, 177,246,247,256, 394, 398 Cooling Water... 5, xii, xv, 18,30,31, 35,43,54,64,73,82,86,87,95,96,97,98, 99, 101, 118, 246,250,252,254,256,393,395 cost of power...................................................... ;.............................................................. 1, 14, 15 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 403
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site I
cultural resource.... v, 47, 48, 53, 56, 57, 209, 238, 239, 262, 265, 266, 273, 356, 373, 377, 378, i
379, 381,393 cumulative effect 6, 8, 19, 65, 67, 86, 94, 108, 112, 117, 118, 119, 123, 124, 127, 128, 133, 136, 137, 151, 155, 230 I
decay....................................
30, 44, 162,163,170,185,186,191,192,196, 392, 393, 396,400 Decibel...........
xii, 140, 141, 393 decom m issioning.............................................................
iv, 17,18,154, 206, 207, 247, 262,394 decom m issioning plan......................................................................................................
206, 207 Department of Energy (DOE)xii, 18, 20, 25, 54, 98, 111, 112, 114, 118, 120, 123, 124, 133, 156, 180, 188, 191, 192, 194, 195, 196,197,206,240, 243, 256, 257, 270, 275,401,402 d e ra te........................................................................................................................................
3 9 4 design basis..........................................................
43, 44,160,164,197,198,199,200,201,400 Detailed Scoping, Estimating, and Planning (DSEP)..............................................
xii, 34, 76, 157 diffuser....................................
S-3, ix, 45, 63, 71, 72, 82, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 274, 283 I
discharge. 2, 5, vii, ix, xii, xiv, 4, 19, 22, 23, 24, 30, 31, 36, 44, 45, 53, 63, 64, 71, 72, 80, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99,101,109,117,118,127,128,131, 167,168,171,173,177,179,180,185,190,192,194,211,242,246,271,274, 283, 357, I
393, 398, 399 d ischa rg e lim it.........................................................................................................
9 7, 98, 9 9, 1 18 dissolved oxygen xii, 78, 79, 90, 93, 94, 215 I
d is trib u to r..............................................................................................................................
5, 7, 8 dose...S-9, iv, vii, viii, xiii, xiv, 30, 63, 68, 162, 163, 164, 167, 168, 169, 170, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176,177,178,179,180,191,192,193,194,197,198,199,200,201,203, 204,206, 247, 251,263, 264, 265, 271,278, 394, 395, 398, 399, 401,402 dose equivalent.................................................................................
175, 176, 200, 394, 395,402 d o s e ra te...........................................................................................................................
1 9 1, 3 9 4 drift........................................................................................
43, 86, 250, 252,256, 35 1,394,398 d ry sto ra g e................................................................................................................
18 9, 19 0,2 0 5 earthquake......................................................
vii, 17, 37, 158, 159, 205, 269, 270, 277, 278, 401 eco no m ic g row th....................................................
............................................ 7, 8, 9, 250, 25 1 effluent.iv, vii, 31, 63, 87, 90, 91, 92, 94, 100, 127, 162, 163, 167, 168, 169, 170, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176,177,178,183,185,196,246,247,251,277,278, 394, 395, 396, 398, 399 emission S-1, S-9, vi, 14, 20, 22, 48, 68, 133, 164, 167, 183, 185, 193, 245, 246, 247, 248, 250, I
251,252, 255, 359, 393, 399, 400 em ploym ent...............................................
S-8, S-11, iii, vii, 67, 70, 143, 144, 145, 148, 240, 276 endangered species..... S-6, S-10, ii, v, xii, 17, 21, 65, 69, 74, 125, 130, 221, 224, 226, 227, 234, I
260,263, 269, 272,277, 369, 370, 385, 386, 395, 402 entrainm ent.............................................................................
6,65,117,118,119,128,246,395 Environmental Impact Statement S-3, xii, xv, 15, 18, 19, 20, 48, 53, 54, 145, 146, 149, 153, 206, 207, 247, 257, 270,275, 278, 396 Environmental Justice.............. S-8, S-11, v, 17, 47, 48, 53, 67, 70, 146, 241, 245, 246, 262, 395 essential raw cooling water (ERCW )..........................................................
xii, 30, 95, 98, 99, 100 Executive Order xii, 22, 109, 110, 111, 112, 122,230,231,241,377 fa r-fie ld........................................................................................................................................
9 4 federally listed...... S-6, S-10, vii, viii, 21, 65, 69, 74, 75, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 219, 221,223, 224, 225, 226, 229, 234, 235, 374 Final Environmental Impact Statement.... xi, xii, xv, 18, 20, 53, 98, 109, 120, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147,148,149,150,151,153,156,180,188,189,190,191,192,193,194,206, 240, 270, 274,275, 352 404 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site cultural resource.... v, 47, 48,53,56,57,209,238,239,262,265,266,273,356,373, 377, 378, 379,381,393 cumulative effect 6,8, 19,65,67,86,94, 108, 112, 117, 118, 119, 123, 124, 127, 128, 133, 136, 137,151,155,230 decay.................................... 30, 44, 162, 163, 170, 185, 186, 191, 192, 196, 392, 393, 396, 400 Decibel................................................................................................................ xii, 140, 141,393 decommissioning............................................................. iv, 17, 18, 154,206,207,247,262,394 decommissioning plan...................................................................................................... 206, 207 Department of Energy (DOE)xii, 18, 20, 25, 54, 98, 111, 112, 114, 118, 120, 123, 124, 133, 156, 180,188,191,192,194,195,196,197,206,240, 243,256, 257,270,275,401,402 derate........................................................................................................................................ 394 design basis..........................................................43, 44, 160, 164, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 400 Detailed Scoping, Estimating, and Planning (DSEP).............................................. xii, 34, 76, 157 diffuser.................................... S-3, ix, 45, 63, 71, 72, 82, 86, 87, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 274, 283 discharge. 2, 5, vii, ix, xii, xiv, 4, 19, 22, 23, 24, 30, 31, 36,44,45, 53, 63, 64, 71, 72, 80, 82, 83, 84,85,86,87,89,90,91,92,93,94,95,96,97,98,99,101, 109, 117, 118, 127, 128, 131, 167,168,171,173,177,179,180,185,190, 192, 194,211,242,246,271,274,283,357, 393, 398, 399 discharge limit......................................................................................................... 97, 98, 99, 118 dissolved oxygen.................................................................................. xii, 78, 79, 90, 93, 94, 215 distributor.............................................................................................................................. 5, 7, 8 dose... S-9, iv, vii, viii, xiii, xiv, 30, 63, 68,162,163,164,167,168,169,170,172,173,174,175, 176,177,178,179,180,191,192,193,194,197, 198, 199,200,201,203,204,206,247, 251,263,264,265,271,278,394,395,398,399,401,402 dose equivalent................................................................................. 175, 176, 200, 394, 395, 402 dose rate........................................................................................................................... 191, 394 drift........................................................................................ 43, 86, 250, 252, 256, 351, 394, 398 dry storage................................................................................................................ 189, 190, 205 earthquake...................................................... vii, 17,37,158,159,205,269,270,277,278,401 economic growth........................................................,.......................................... 7, 8, 9, 250, 251 effluent. iv, vii, 31, 63, 87, 90, 91, 92, 94,100,127,162,163,167,168,169,170,172,173,174, 175,176,177,178,183,185,196,246,247,251,277,278, 394, 395, 396, 398, 399 emission S-1, S-9, vi, 14,20,22,48,68, 133, 164, 167, 183, 185, 193,245,246,247,248,250, 251,252,255,359,393,399,400 employment............................................... S-8, S-11, iii, vii, 67, 70, 143, 144, 145, 148,240,276 endangered species..... S-6, S-10, ii, v, xii, 17,21,65,69,74,125,130,221,224,226,227,234, 260,263,269,272,277,369,370,385,386,395,402 entrainment............................................................................. 6, 65, 117, 118, 119, 128, 246, 395 Environmental Impact Statement S-3, xii, xv, 15, 18, 19,20,48,53,54,145,146,149,153,206, 207,247,257,270,275,278,396 Environmental Justice.............. S-8, S-11, v, 17,47,48,53,67,70,146,241,245,246,262,395 essential raw cooling water (ERCW).......................................................... xii, 30, 95, 98, 99, 100 Executive Order.... ~....................................... xii, 22,109,110,111,112,122,230,231,241,377 far-field........................................................................................................................................ 94 federally listed...... S-6, S-10, vii, viii, 21, 65, 69, 74, 75,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132, 133,219,221,223,224,225,226,229,234,235,374 Final Environmental Impact Statement.... xi, xii, xv, 18,20,53,98, 109, 120, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146,147,148,149,150,151,153,156,180,188,189,190, 191, 192, 193, 194,206,240, 270, 274, 275, 352 404 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
,I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Index Final Environmental Statement S-1, S-2, xii, 1, 2, 4, 6, 17, 19, 23, 24, 44, 49, 52, 74, 77, 86, 98, 102, 108,120,132,142,143,144,146,147,148,149, 150, 151, 158, 159, 160,164,167, 169, 173, 174,180,183,185,188,194,198,201,206, 207, 269, 273, 274 Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)....... xi, xii, 2, 5, 19, 20, 24, 36, 98, 100, 102, 108, 110, 158, 159, 170, 171, 174,180,183,186,187,194,198,199,200,201,274,275,276 fis h p a s s a g e..............................................................................................................................
1 1 8 fission................................................
25, 30, 43, 44,185,192,198, 206, 392, 393, 396, 397, 398 flood............... S-5, ii, xii, 17, 30, 35, 37, 45, 64, 77, 108, 109, 110, 111, 229, 231, 238, 264, 399 flo o d ris k....................................................................................................................
1 0 8, 1 0 9, 1 1 0 floodplain............ S-5, S-10, ii, 22, 64, 69, 108, 109, 110, 111,209, 228, 229, 231,264, 359, 396 fuel assem bly....................................................................................
2,25,4 1,189,190,196, 396 fue l ro d..........................................................................................................
2 5, 4 1, 19 6, 3 9 2, 3 9 6 generating capacity...................................................................................
2, 6, 18, 23, 46, 48, 248 g ray bats...................................................................................................
130, 13 1, 226, 227, 370 groundwater..... S-5, S-10, ii, iv, ix, 17, 64, 69, 102, 103, 106, 107, 108, 111, 155, 209, 210, 211, 212, 215, 261,262,271,272,273, 402 hazardous waste..... 8, 20, 22, 62, 63, 67, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 247, 254, 356,396,402 h e a t d is s ip a tio n...................................................................................................................
4 4, 1 9 3 h e a t lo a d.......................................................................................................
3 0, 3 1, 19 2, 19 3, 19 7 herons.......................................................................................
124,139,169,177,178,220,22 1 housing........................ S-3,S-8, S-11, iii, xiii, 67, 70, 74, 140, 146, 147, 150, 190, 245, 392, 400 hum an health........................................................................................
47, 48, 122,202, 394,40 1 h y b e rn a c u la..............................................................................................................................
3 9 6 hydrotherm al.......................................................................................
ii, 19, 86, 90, 263, 264,266 ic th y o p la n kto n...........................................................................................................................
3 9 6 im pingem ent...................................................................................
6, 65, 118,119,128, 246, 397 in a k e flo w s................................................................................................................................
1 1 8 incom e.......................................................
S-8, S-11, iii, vii, 67, 70, 143, 144, 145, 240, 241,276 in stre am te m pe ra tu re s................................................................................................................
9 1 Integrated Resource Management Plan (IRP).............................
S-1, xii, xiii, 1, 12, 14, 18, 19, 47 Jackson County...... S-1, S-3, vii, 1,2, 20, 74, 102, 109, 119, 122, 125, 126, 129, 130, 132, 133, 135, 142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,161,162,165,167,222,231,234, 270, 271,275, 276,366 Light water reactor.... S-1, S-2, i, ix, xiii, 1, 18, 23, 24, 25, 36, 37, 53, 71, 72, 180, 194, 255, 397, 399, 400 L im e sto n e C o u n ty.................................................
2 12 liquid effluents...................................................................
163, 169, 170, 172, 173, 177, 178, 183 liq u id ra d w a ste..................................................................................................................
18 0, 1 8 3 lo a d fo re c a st...............................................................................................................
2, 7, 8, 9, 4 6 lo w -le v e l ra d w a ste....................................................................................................................
1 8 8 m ic ro b io lo g ic a l......................................................................................................................
9 7, 9 8 m in im u m flo w............................................................................................................................
1 1 7 m ixing zone...........................................................................
63, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 128, 179, 393 M o rg a n C o u n ty.................................................................................................................
2 12, 2 2 7 m u sse l sa n ctua ry..............................................................................................................
2 34,2 3 5 mussels................. 6,65,95,97,98,117,125,126,127,128,222,233,234,235,263,363, 364 National Environmental Policy Act.... S-2, i, vi, xiv, 15, 16, 17, 50, 51, 52, 54, 135, 151, 152, 153, 241,247, 259, 260,261,262,263, 274, 376, 400 National Historic Preservation Act...........................................
xiv, 21, 57, 76, 240, 377, 378, 398 National Register of Historic Places.............................
xiv, 21, 136, 137, 238, 239, 240, 378, 398 National Wetlands Inventory........................................................
xiv, 56, 230, 373, 376, 380, 381 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 405 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Index Final Environmental Statement S-1, S-2, xii, 1,2,4,6, 17, 19,23,24,44,49,52,74,77,86,98, 102,108,120,132,142,143,144,146,147,148,149,150, 151, 158, 159, 160, 164, 167, 169,173,174,180,183,185,188,194,198,201,206, 207, 269,273,274 Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)....... xi, xii, 2, 5, 19, 20, 24, 36, 98, 100, 102, 108, 110, 158, 159,170,171,174,180,183,186,187,194,198,199, 200, 201,274,275,276 fish passage.............................................................................................................................. 118 fission................................................ 25,30,43,44,185,192,198,206,392,393,396,397,398 flood............... S-5, ii, xii, 17,30,35,37,45,64,77,108,109,110,111,229,231,238, 264, 399 flood risk.................................................................................................................... 108, 109, 110 floodplain............ S-5, S-10, ii, 22, 64, 69,108,109,110,111,209,228,229,231,264,359,396 fuel assembly.................................................................................... 2, 25, 41, 189, 190, 196, 396 fuel rod.......................................................................................................... 25, 41, 196, 392, 396 generating capacity................................................................................... 2, 6, 18, 23, 46, 48, 248 gray bats................................................................................................... 130, 131, 226, 227, 370 groundwater..... S-5, S-10, ii, iv, ix, 17, 64, 69, 102, 103, 106, 107, 108, 111, 155, 209, 210, 211, 212,215,261,262,271,272,273,402 hazardous waste..... 8, 20, 22, 62, 63, 67,152,153,154,155,156,157,247,254,356,396,402 heat dissipation................................................................................................................... 44, 193 heat load....................................................................................................... 30, 31, 192, 193, 197 herons....................................................................................... 124, 139, 169, 177, 178,220,221 housing........................ S-3,S-8, S-11, iii, xiii, 67, 70, 74,140,146,147,150,190,245,392,400 human health........................................................................................47, 48, 122,202,394,401 hybernacula.............................................................................................................................. 396 hydrothermal....................................................................................... ii, 19, 86, 90, 263, 264, 266 icthyoplankton........................................................................................................................... 396 impingement................................................................................... 6, 65, 118, 119, 128, 246, 397 inake flows................................................................................................................................ 118 income....................................................... S-8, S-11, iii, vii, 67, 70,143,144,145,240,241,276 instream temperatures................................................................................................................ 91 Integrated Resource Management Plan (IRP)............................. S-1, xii, xiii, 1, 12, 14, 18, 19,47 Jackson County...... S-1, S-3, vii, 1,2,20,74,102,109,119,122,125,126,129,130,132,133, 135,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,161, 162, 165, 167,222,231,234, 270,271,275,276,366 Light water reactor.... S-1, S-2, i, ix, xiii, 1, 18, 23, 24, 25, 36, 37, 53, 71, 72, 180, 194, 255, 397, 399,400 Limestone County......................................... ;........................................................................... 212 liquid effluents................................................................... 163, 169, 170, 172, 173, 177, 178, 183 liquid radwaste.................................................................................................................. 180, 183 load forecast............................................................................................................... 2,7,8,9,46 low-level radwaste.................................................................................................................... 188 microbiological...................................................................................................................... 97,98 minimum flow............................................................................................................................ 117 mixing zone........................................................................... 63, 89, 90, 92, 93, 94, 128, 179, 393 Morgan County................................................................................................................. 212, 227 mussel sanctuary.............................................................................................................. 234,235 mussels................. 6, 65, 95, 97, 98, 117, 125, 126, 127, 128, 222, 233, 234, 235, 263, 363, 364 National Environmental Policy Act.... S-2, i, vi, xiv, 15, 16, 17, 50, 51, 52, 54, 135, 151, 152, 153, 241,247,259,260,261,262,263,274,376,400 National Historic Preservation Act........................................... xiv, 21,57,76,240, 377, 378, 398 National Register of Historic Places............................. xiv, 21, 136, 137, 238, 239, 240, 378, 398 National Wetlands Inventory........................................................ xiv, 56, 230, 373, 376, 380, 381 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 405
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site natural area.... S-6, S-10, ii, v, viii, xv, 17, 53, 56, 65, 69, 132, 133, 139, 231, 232, 233, 235, 236, I
262, 266, 373, 380,381 Noise.S-3, S-7, S-11, iii, v, xiii, 17, 66, 70, 75, 131, 133, 135, 140, 141,142, 240, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 266, 270,277, 359 I
n o n tritia te d...................................................................................................................
ix, 1 8 0, 1 8 2 NPDES permit..........................................
ix, 24, 87, 88, 89, 90, 92, 94, 97, 98, 99, 101,127, 246 nuclear reactor...51, 116,192,204,205,248,251,252,255,256,257,393,396,397,398,399, 400,402 p e a k lo a d..............................................................................................................................
9, 3 9 9 p e a k in g ca p a c ity.......................................................................................................................
3 9 9 p e rm it lim its.......................................................................................................................
1 0 1, 2 4 7 pink m ucket.............................................................................
6, 65, 125, 126,127,128, 222, 364 plume..... 7,63,66,90,92,94,112,114,118,128,139,140,174,175,177,202,246, 247, 261, 264,283, 399 i
p o p u la tio n g ro w th.................................................................................................................. 7, 14 8 p o v e rty le v e l..............................................................................................................................
1 4 5 pressurized w ater reactor...................................................................................
53, 189,190, 399 I
probabilistic safety assessm ent...................................................................
xiv, 56, 108, 202, 373 probable maximum flood..............................................................
S-5, xiv, 64, 109, 110, 111,399 radiation iv, xiii, xiv, 20, 30, 43, 168, 169, 172, 173, 175, 176, 177, 178, 186, 191, 192, 194, 196, I
205, 206, 251,271,278, 391,392,393, 394,395, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400,402 radioactive waste.................. 17, 72,180, 183,.185, 186,193,194,206,247,254,393,397,399 ra d io lo g ica l e ff e ct........................................................................................................................
6 3 radiological im pact...................................................................................
151, 173, 176,193,202 radiological release.................................................................
9,68,118,162,177,194,203,252 radionuclides.....................................
103, 168, 174, 177, 185, 205, 206, 251,393, 395, 397,402 radwaste...................... viii, ix, xiv, 37, 41, 163, 173, 180, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 193,400 raw w ate r..........................................................................................................
30, 4 3, 8 0, 9 8, 100 reactor coolant system (RCS)...................................
25, 30, 37, 41,43, 44, 95, 99,185,400,402 reactor core.....................................................................
25, 37, 43, 194, 195, 396, 397, 399, 400 I
Reservoir Operations Study (ROS)...................................................................
xiv, xv, 19, 20, 275 re s id e n c e..................................................................................................................
14 0, 14 1, 14 2 residential...8, 5, 7,10,46, 67, 105, 109, 123,137,140,141,142,150,212,229,231,237,243, I
273, 359 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act..................................................................
xiv, 21, 153 risk S-2, S-5, ii, xii, xiv, 9, 15, 17, 47, 64, 108, 109, 122, 155, 174, 175, 176, 197, 198, 201, 202, I
203, 204, 205, 231,242,246, 247, 249, 252, 260,264,266, 395, 396, 399, 401 safety S-5, iv, xiv, 17, 18, 24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37, 41, 43, 44, 53, 55, 59, 62, 64, 73, 74, 108, 109, 110, 111, 140,174,175,176,191,197,198,201,202,205,243,244,247,264,266, 347, 359, 386, 389, 391,394,395, 396, 399,400,401 Safety Analysis Report..... xi, xii, xiv, xv, 2, 5, 19, 20, 24, 36, 56, 57, 98, 100, 102, 108, 110, 158, 159, 170, 171, 174,180,183,186,187,194,198,199,200,201,209,238,274,275,276, 373,374,375, 378,401 I
S afety E valuation R eport..................................................................................................
108, 40 1 schools....................................................................................
S -8, iii, 67, 149, 2 12, 24 5, 250, 25 1 security.........................................................................
iv, 17, 32, 35, 71,197,204,205, 206, 249 I
seism ic........................................................................
9, 25, 37, 68, 158, 159, 160, 269, 277, 401 Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SQN)........................
xv, 46, 50, 51, 188, 189, 190, 191, 192, 193, 235 severe accident.........................................................................
197, 201,202, 205, 249,400,401 I
shee pnose m usse l..................................................................................................
6,65,125,128 shipm ent.............................................................
45, 154, 155, 185, 186,188,194,195,196,197 406 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
Single Nuclear Unit at the Bellefonte Site natural area.... S-6, S-10, ii, v, viii, xv, 17, 53, 56, 65, 69, 132, 133, 139, 231, 232, 233, 235, 236, 262, 266, 373, 380, 381 Noise.S-3, S-7, S-11, iii, v, xiii, 17,66,70,75,131,133,135,140,141,142,240,242,243,244, 245, 246, 266, 270, 277, 359 nontritiated................................................................................................................... ix, 180, 182 NPDES permit.......................................... ix, 24, 87, 88, 89, 90, 92, 94, 97, 98, 99,101,127,246 nuclear reactor... 51, 116, 192, 204, 205, 248, 251, 252, 255, 256, 257, 393, 396, 397, 398, 399, 400,402 peak load.............................................................................................................................. 9, 399 peaking capacity....................................................................................................................... 399 permit limits....................................................................................................................... 101, 247 pink mucket............................................................................. 6, 65,125,126,127,128,222,364 plume..... 7, 63, 66, 90, 92, 94,112,114,118,128,139,140,174,175,177,202,246, 247, 261, 264, 283, 399 population growth.................................................................................................................. 7, 148 poverty level.............................................................................................................................. 145 pressurized water reactor................................................................................... 53, 189, 190, 399 probabilistic safety assessment................................................................... xiv, 56, 108, 202, 373 probable maximum flood......................................... *...................... S-5, xiv, 64,109,110,111,399 radiation iv, xiii, xiv, 20, 30,43,168,169,172,173,175,176,177,178,186,191, 192, 194, 196, 205,206,251,271,278,391,392,393,394,395,396,397, 398, 399,400,402 radioactive waste.................. 17, 72,180,183, *185,186,193,194,206,247,254,393,397,399 radiological effect........................................................................................................................ 63 radiological impact.................................................................................... 151, 173, 176, 193, 202 radiological release................................................................. 9, 68, 118, 162, 177, 194, 203, 252 radionuclides..................................... 103, 168, 174, 177, 185,205,206,251,393,395,397,402 radwaste...................... viii, ix, xiv, 37,41,163,173,180,183,184,185,186,187,188,193,400 raw water.......................................................................................................... 30, 43, 80, 98, 100 reactor coolant system (RCS)................................... 25, 30, 37, 41, 43, 44, 95, 99, 185, 400, 402 reactor core..................................................................... 25, 37,43,194,195,396,397,399,400 Reservoir Operations Study (ROS)................................................................... xiv, xv, 19,20,275 residence.................................................................................................................. 140, 141, 142 residential... 8, 5, 7,10,46,67,105,109,123,137,140,141,142,150,212, 229, 231, 237, 243, 273, 359 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.................................................................. xiv, 21, 153 risk S-2, S-5, ii, xii, xiv, 9,15,17,47,64,108,109,122,155,174,175,176,197, 198,201,202, 203,204,205,231,242,246,247,249,252,260,264,266, 395, 396, 399,401 safuty S-5, iv,~v, 17, 18,24,25,30,31,36,37,41,43,44,53,55,59,62,64, 73,74,108,109, 110,111,140,174,175,176,191,197,198,201,202,205, 243, 244, 247, 264, 266, 347, 359,386,389,391,394,395,396,399,400,401 Safety Analysis Report..... xi, xii, xiv, xv, 2, 5,19,20,24,36,56,57,98,100,102,108,110,158, 159,170,171,174,180,183,186,187,194,198,199, 200,201, 209, 238, 274, 275, 276, 373,374,375,378,401 Safety Evaluation Report.................................................................................................. 108, 401 schools.................................................................................... S-8, iii, 67,149,212,245,250,251 security......................................................................... iv, 17,32,35,71,197,204,205,206,249 seismic........................................................................ 9, 25, 37, 68,158,159,160,269,277,401 Sequoyah Nuclear Plant (SON)........................ xv, 46, 50, 51,188,189,190,191,192,193,235 severe accident......................................................................... 197, 201, 202, 205, 249, 400, 401 sheepnose mussel.................................................................................................. 6, 65, 125, 128 shipment.............................................................45, 154, 155, 185, 186, 188, 194, 195, 196, 197 406 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Index solid waste......................................
24, 62, 63,151,152,153,154,155,156,157,187, 206, 396 spent fuel........................
17, 43, 63,188,189,190,191,194,195,196,197,247,254,255,399 state-listed....... 3,6,10,65,69,75,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,219,221,223, 224,225, 226, 229, 234 steam generator..............................
25, 34, 35, 36, 41,45, 62, 71, 72, 95, 96,100,140,141,156 sto ra g e m o d u le.................................................................................................................
19 0, 19 1 surface water...... 5,10,64,69,80,81,94,95,98,108,111,147,179,210,211,212,215,216, 217, 246, 247, 254,256, 350, 351,392,402 s u rfa c ta n ts................................................................................................................................
3 5 1 tax revenue.........................................................................
8,11,67,70,148,151,245,249,251 te m p e ra tu re lim its.................................................................................................................
6 3, 8 9 te rro rist..............................................................................................................................
2 0 4, 2 0 5 the rm a l d ischa rge...............................................................................................
6,5 1,65,94, 116 therm al eff luent.............................................................................................
6, 65, 9 1, 92, 94, 127 threatened and endangered..............................................................
131,260, 261,262, 263, 349 tie rin g.......................................................................................................................................
i, 1 7 to x ic ity.......................................................................................................................
3 4 9, 3 5 1, 3 9 6 transmission..... S-2, S-3, S-10, i, iv, vi, vii, viii, ix, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 10, 12, 17, 23, 35, 41,44, 45, 46, 47, 50, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 69, 71, 74, 75, 110, 124,125,130,131,137,139, 150, 151,152, 209, 211,212,213, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221,223, 224,225, 226, 227, 228, 229, 230, 231,232,234,235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 240, 241,242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 251,253, 256, 260, 262, 264, 270, 272,275, 276, 350, 351,352, 353, 355, 357, 358, 361,363, 367, 373, 374, 375, 376, 377, 378, 379, 383, 385, 387, 393, 394, 402 transportation... iv, xii, 17, 45, 52, 53, 74, 122, 128, 146, 167, 194, 195, 197, 205, 247, 254,260, 263, 264,269, 277, 348 tritium xi, 18, 20, 54, 103, 142, 143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 153, 189, 240, 270, 275,402 turbine building........................................
25, 37, 43, 44, 62, 71, 97,156,162,163,173,174,185 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)...... xv, 21, 74, 112, 120, 125, 128, 129, 131, 132,221, 224, 227, 230, 267, 273, 275, 277, 348, 351 V ital S igns M onitoring P rogram........................................................................................
339, 343 w a ste h e a t.................................................................................................................
3 1, 7 2, 8 6, 94 w a te r in ta ke...........................................................................................................
3 2, 8 1, 1 18, 3 9 7 water supply................ S-5, iii, 10, 19, 53, 64, 77, 78, 86, 108, 147, 179, 215, 268, 273, 356, 395 Watts Bar Nuclear Plant........................................
xv, 17, 46, 50, 51, 52, 118, 127, 180, 188, 275 wetland...... S-3, S-5, S-10, ii, v, vi, ix, 17, 22, 53, 56, 60, 64, 69, 74, 75, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 123, 124,131,217,219,220,227,229,230,233,262,270,273,277,291,347, 351,356, 357, 359, 373, 376, 377, 380, 381,402 W idow s Creek Fossil Plant.................................................................
xv, 54, 81, 93, 94, 118, 119 wildlife.... S-3, S-4, S-6, S-10, ii, v, xv, xvi, 16, 65, 69, 74, 78, 123, 124, 130, 131, 132, 133, 215, 219, 220, 221,226, 230, 232, 233, 234,235, 236, 246, 253,259, 262, 263, 267, 268, 270, 277, 348, 349, 350, 356 w o rkfo rce......................................................................................................
4 5, 62, 14 3, 16 7, 24 5 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 407 I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
Index solid waste...................................... 24, 62, 63, 151, 152, 153, 154, 155, 156, 157, 187, 206, 396 spent fuel........................ 17, 43, 63, 188, 189, 190, 191, 194, 195, 196, 197, 247, 254, 255, 399 state-listed....... 3,6,10,65,69,75,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132, 133,219,221,223, 224,225,226,229,234 steam generator.............................. 25, 34, 35, 36,41,45,62,71,72,95,96,100,140,141,156 storage module................................................................................................................. 190, 191 surface water...... 5, 10,64,69,80,81,94,95,98, 108, 111, 147, 179,210,211,212,215,216, 217,246,247,254,256,350,351,392,402 surfactants................................................................................................................................ 351 tax revenue......................................................................... 8, 11,67,70, 148, 151,245,249,251 temperature limits................................................................................................................. 63, 89 terrorist.............................................................................................................................. 204, 205 thermal discharge............................................................................................... 6, 51, 65, 94, 116 thermal effluent............................................................................................. 6, 65, 91, 92, 94, 127 threatened and endangered.............................................................. 131, 260, 261, 262, 263, 349 tiering....................................................................................................................................... i, 17 toxicity....................................................................................................................... 349, 351, 396 transmission..... S-2, S-3, S-10, i, iv, vi, vii, viii, ix, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7,10,12,17,23,35,41,44,45,46, 47,50,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,69,71,74,75,110, 124, 125, 130, 131, 137, 139, 150,151,152,209,211,212,213,215,216,217,218, 219, 220,221, 223, 224, 225,226, 227,228,229,230,231,232,234,235,236,237,238, 239, 240,241, 242, 243, 244,245, 246,247,248,249, 251,253,256,260,262,264,270,272, 275,276, 350, 351, 352, 353, 355,357,358,361,363,367,373,374,375,376,377, 378,379, 383, 385, 387, 393, 394, 402 transportation... iv, xii, 17,45,52,53,74,122,128,146,167,194,195,197,205, 247, 254, 260, 263,264,269,277,348 tritium xi, 18,20,54,103,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150, 151, 153, 189,240,270, 275,402 turbine building........................................ 25, 37,43,44,62,71,97,156,162,163,173,174,185 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)...... xv, 21, 74,112,120,125,128,129,131,132,221, 224,227,230,267,273,275,277,348,351 Vital Signs Monitoring Program........................................................................................ 339, 343 waste heat................................................................................................................. 31, 72, 86, 94 water intake........................................................................................................... 32, 81, 118, 397 watmsupply................ S-5, iii, 10, 19,53,64,77,78,86,108,147,179,215,268,273,356,395 Watts Bar Nuclear Plant........................................ xv, 17,46, 50, 51, 52, 118, 127, 180, 188, 275 wetland...... S-3, S-5, S-10, ii, v, vi, ix, 17,22,53,56,60,64,69,74,75,111,112,113,114,115, 123,124,131,217,219,220,227,229,230,233, 262,270,273, 277,291, 347, 351, 356, 357,359,373,376,377,380,381,402 Widows Creek Fossil Plant................................................................. xv, 54, 81, 93, 94, 118, 119 wildlife.... S-3, S-4, S-6, S-10, ii, v, xv, xvi, 16,65,69,74,78,123,124,130,131,132,133,215, 219,220,221,226,230,232,233,234,235,236,246, 253, 259,262,263,267, 268, 270, 277, 348, 349, 350, 356 workforce...................................................................................................... 45, 62, 143, 167,245 Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement 407