ML19254F744
| ML19254F744 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hartsville  |
| Issue date: | 10/31/1979 |
| From: | TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19254F740 | List: |
| References | |
| HNP-SMR-6, NUDOCS 7911160511 | |
| Download: ML19254F744 (47) | |
Text
,
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY t
HARTSVILLE NUCLEAR PLANTS S_0CI0 ECONOMIC MONITORING AND MITICATION REPORT ilNP - SMR-6 March 31, 1979
=
v
-c a r.
1347 251 Knoxville, Tennessee October 1979 7911160 /d
CONTENTS Page Background and Highlights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . v I. General Status of Employment as of March 31, 1979 . . . . . .. 1 II. General Characteristics of Movers . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . 3 III. Secondary Employment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . .. . . .4 IV. Functional Area Impacts and Mitigation Actions. . .. . . . . . 6 Tables Table 1. Estimates of Population and Population Change. . . . . 5 Table 2. Estimates of Population and Population Change between April 30, 1976 - March 31, 1979 . . . .. . .. . . . 7 Table 3. School Systems' Report of Hartsville Nuclear Plants Direct Impact Students . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 8 Table 4. TVA Education Mitigation Payments. . . . .. . .. . . 9 Table 5. TVA Local Planning Assistance Payments . . . . . . . . 11 Table 6. Traf fic Evaluation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Table 7. Payments to Local Governments. . . . . ... . . . . . 15 Table 8. Summary of TVA Mitigation Expenditures as of March 31, 1979 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 Appendixes Appendix A - Detailed Survey Results Table A- 1. Town of Current Residence. . . . .. . . . . . 20 Table A- 2. Source and Location of Construction Employees. 22 Table A- 3. Distribution of Movers and Associated Popula-tior, by County and Community . . . . . . . . . 23 Table A- 4. Comparison of Survey Results with Projections for Selected Parameters. . . ... . . . . . . 24 Table A- 5. Mover Summary. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 25 Table A- 6. Macon - Employees Living Within the County . . 26 Table A- 7. Smith - Employees Living Within the County . . 27 Table A- 8. Sumner - Employees Living Within the County. . 28
. Table A- 9. Trousdale - Employees Living Within the County . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 29 Table A-10. Wilson - Employees Living Within the County. . 30
, Table A-ll. Davidson - Employees Living Within the County. 31 Table A-12. Carthage - Employees Living Within the City Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 32 Table A-13. Gallatin - Employees Living Within the City Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 33 1347 052
CONTENTS (Continued)
Page Table A-14. liartsville - Employees Living Within the City Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 34 Table A-15. Lafayette - Employees Living Within the City Limits . . . . . . . . . ........ 35 Table A-16. Lebanon - Employees Living Within the City Limits . . . . . . . . . ........ 36 Table A-17. llendersenville - Employees Living Within the City Limits . . . . . . . . . ........ 37 Table A-18. Nashville - Employees Living Within the City Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 38 Appendix B - Secondary Socioeconomic Impact Monitoring of llartsville Nuclear Plant Environmental Impact Area . 39 Appendix C - T:affic Level Defined . . . . . . . ........ 41 Exhibits .
Figure 1 - Towns Containing Construction Employees ....... 43 i34/ JS3 O
BACKGROUND AND HIGHLIGilTS For permits to construct the four-unit Hartsville Nuclear Plants located in Smith and Trousdale Counties, Tennessee, TVA agreed to certain monitoring and mitigation actions to reduce the socioeconomic impact in the area expected to accommodate movers. The impact area is defined as Trousdale, Smith, M . on, Sumner, and Wilson Counties, Tennessee. TVA also agreed to report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the results of the monitoring efforts and mitigation actions taken to accommodate the impacts.
This is the sixth in a series of semiannual reports which will be submitted during construction of the Hartsville project, including three reporting periods following issuance of the operating license for the
, last unit. This report is for the period October 1, 1978, through March 31, 1979.
The employment level on March 31, 1979, was 6,567. The mover rate was 31 percent for a total of 2,003 movers. Projections contained in the e.wironmental impac t statement (EIS) stopped at 5,000 employees, but the mover rate is much lower than would be expected for a workforce of over 6,500 employees. Thirty-four percent of the workf orce was hired f rom the impact counties.
TVA's major mitigation expenditures this period were for employee i
transportation ($306,120) and local governments budgets ($247,360).
TVA's total Hartsville mitigation payments at the end of March were
$4,979,088.
.34/
} 9-J54 V
HARTSVILLE NUCLEAR PLANTS SOCI0 ECONOMIC MONITORING AND MITIGATION REPORT 4
I. General Status of Employment as of March 31, 1979 A survey of all TVA employees as of March 31, 1979, was conducted during May of 1979. The timelag between employment and survey enables employees who moved to make personal adjustments and should provide a better picture of employee distribution, family characteristics, and housing choice. The employment level was 6,567; and a total of 6,308 (96 percent) employees was surveyed. Of those surveyed, 1,924 employees said they had moved for a mover rate of about 31 percent (table A-1). Information on the family status and housing choice was obtained for those who moved (table A-5). The data on movers have been extrapolated on a ratio basis to the total 6,567 employees, which results in an estimated total number of movers of 2,003. Of the total, 1,540 movers located in the five impact counties; and 463 employees moved to other counties. As shown in table A-1 and figure 1, local workers (nonmovers) are commuting to the project from a much more widespread area.
Information on the distribution of both movers and residents is found in tables A-1, A-2, and figure 1. Additional information on the distribution and characteristics of movers is contained in tables A-3 through A-18.
Table A-1 lists the town of current residence. This table is based on
" mailing address" locations instead of jurisdictional locations. All
!347 J55
2 employees are asked to provide a place name even though they may not live within any municipal limits. Figure 1 is based on this table. Table A-3 provides a movers' distribution which is based on city limits for the seven communities to which at least 50 employees moved, t
Table A-2 shows both the origin and location of all employees. The diagonal line of the "From - To" tabulation shows resident employees (no nmove rs) . For example, resident employees f rom Macon County would be found by locating Macon County in the "From" column and going across the table to the "To" column which also reads Macon County. In this survey, 277 residents of Macon County were employed at the end of March 1979.
Movers are shown by any other data in this report. For example, 138 employees moved f rom Other Tennessee Counties to Trousdale County. .
Table A-4 of this report series cor.tains a comparison of the survey results with the projections contained in the environmental impact statement (E1S). However, the projections stopped at 5,000 employees which was near the then projected peak of 5,300. Since this survey covers nearly 6,600 employees, an estimate of what the projections would have been was developed through a regression analysis. This was done by plotting total employment versus percent movers and calculating two "least-squares" lines--one for the employment levels 2,100, 3,800, and 5,000 and the other for those three points plus the 4,900 employment level. Two percentages were calculated for the survey employment level (6,567) and averaged. The result was 68 percent. This was then used in '
table A-4 for comparison purposes.
i347 356
3 The mover rate during this period was 31 percent instead of the projected 68 percent. Sumner County is still receiving the largest share of movers (28 percent) compared with the projected 20 percent. Macon County is receiving the smallest number of movers at 7 percent which is close to the projected 10 percent. The mover distribution to Smith County is low at 10 percent compared with a projected 20 percent. The mover rate to Trousdale County has remained well below that expected with a mover rate of 17 percent again this period compared with a projected 30 percent. Wilson County had a mover distribution of 14 percent compared with the projected 20 percent. Sumner County has received 569 movers compared with 893 that were projected, but the other counties contain f ar f ewer movers than expected. Mover projections were made only for the five impact counties, but 463 employees moved to other counties. Davidson County has received 150 movers. However,171 employees said they moved f rom Davidson County; and 131 of the 171 moved to impact counties.
4 II. General Characteristics of Movers Total Project--Table A-5 contains data on f amily status and character-istics and housing choice for all movers. Table A-4 contains a comparison of the extrapolation of some of these results with projections. As of March 31, 1979, 69 percent of those employees who moved brought their families. The remaining 31 percent moved without their families. School-age children per family averaged 0.8 compcred with the projected 1.0. The total average f amily size was 3.3 compared with the projected 3.0. The survey of housing choice shows 48 percent are living in houses, 23 percent
, in mobile homes, 16 percent in apartments, 6 percent in motel and sleeping rooms, and 7 percent in other accommodations. The "Other" category includes campers, motor homes, and vans.
l34/ 05/
4 Impact Counties and Communities -Data on f amily status and charac teristics and housing choice for movers into each impact county are contained in tables A-6 through A-10 and for movers within the city limits of each of the impact communities in tables A-12 through A-16.
e Other Counties and Communities--One part of the computer program which processes the survey data was designed to print out separate reports for counties and communities other than those identified in the impact analysis when a certain number of movers located there. The level chosen for communities was 50 and counties 100. These were judged to be small enough to serve as an "early warning system" for those jurisdictions if the actual location pattern varied significantly from the projected location pattern. They include Davidson County (150 movers), Henderson-ville (90 movers), and Nashville (77 movers) as shown in table A-3. The detailed survey results are found in tables A-ll, A-17, and A-18.
III. Secondary Employmen t Secondary employment impact is defined as a temporary increase in the trade and service-related resident population which can be attributed to the Hartsville project. If the population increase in a county is greater than that arising directly f rom the project or f rom other primary employ-ment increases, the possibility of secondary employment exists.
This period only Macon County had an increase in population (42) which was more than could be explained by project-related influx and change in >
population associated with other primary employment (see table 1).
During this reporting period (September 30, 1978 - March 31, 1979), Macon County experienced a decrease in nonproject-related primary employment.
I3A7 358
Table 1 ESTIMATES OF PO;ULATIO:I A' D POPULATIC'!I CHANGE FOR MACO:7, SMIT 9, SU'.'ITR, TROJSDALE, AfD WIISON COLCTIIES, TE:.CTESSEE FOR MOITITCRIl:3 SECO:CARY SOCIOECO!!Q4IC IMPACTS OF HAICSVILLE NUCLEAR PIE"2 CO:GTRUCTION SEPTE'EER 30, 1978 - MARCII 31, 1479 Remainder of Population Population Change in Change in Project Nonproject Related Change in Population Change in Estimate Esti ate Population Estinate* Related Population Population as of Possible from Other Pop 11ation 9/30/78 3/31/79 9/30/78 - 3/31/79 9/30/78 - 3/31/79 3/31/79 Pri ary Fctioyment Unexclained Macon County 15,364 15,506 142 loo 42 0 42 Smith County 13,376 13,298 -78 131 - - -
Sumner County 80,643 80,638 -5 330 - - -
Trousdale County 5,238 5,171 -67 181 - - -
Wilson 49,321 49,543 222 145 77 1,041 o
- TVA Enployee Surveys.
Population estimates by Co== unity Economics Projects Group.
Con unity Econocics Projects Group 8/17/79 4%
hh v
VI
6 Table 2 shows the application of our monitoring process applied to the peried f rom April 30, 1976, to March 31, 1979. The results of the analysis show that the only county in which population change cannot be totally explained is Macon County. During this three-year period, the population .
of Macon County increased almost 2,000 persons while employment of Macon County residents declined. This decline in employment was felt both in primary and secondary sectors. It appears that the methodology which we are using in monitoring the Hartsville project provides reasonable results only when the change in the resident population and the change in resident employment are directly related. This opposite relationship observed in Macon County at this point defied explanation. The decline in employment in Macon County does, however, eliminate the possibility that any secondary employment ef fect of the llartsville project was felt in that county.
IV. Functional Area Impacts and Mitigation Actions Education--Monitoring direct impact on education continued to occur primarily through reports f rom the seven school districts and the Tennessee Department of Education. School districts and the department submit reports in October and May of each school year showing the names of students whose parents are employed at the Hartsville Nuclear Plants , the school previously attended, school and grade in which enrolled, and essential attendance and transportation information. A summary of school districts reports for spring of 1979 is shown in table 3. All school districts reported less direct impact student enrollment than anticipated with the exception of Sumner which exceeded the 320 projected number of '
direct impact students for school year 1978-79 by 16. This additional impact upon Sumner County's school system will be alleviated by proposed funds in reserve..][ ] Q
Table 2 ESTDIATES OF POPULATIO:I IJD POPJUtTIO!! CHfdME FOR MACON, SMITH, SU'CTER, TROUSDALE, A'TD L'IIEO:I COL": TIES, TE .TESSEE FOR MOUITORING SECONDARY SOCIoECCi!OMIC IMPACTS OF HART 3VILLE NUCLEAR PLA!!T CONSTRUCTIO'l APRIL 30, 1976 - MARCH 31, 1979 Remainder of Population Population Chance in Change in Project Nonproject Related Change in Population Change in Estirate Estimate Population Estimate
- Related Population Population as of Possible from other Population h/30/76 3/31/79 h/30/76 - 3/31/79 4/30/76 - 3/31/79 3/31/79 Primary E=nley=ent Unexclained Macon County 13,602 15,506 1,904 4c2 1,502 0 1,502 Smith County 12,643 13,298 655 466 189 2,484 -
Su=ner Ccunty 69,544 80,638 n ,094 1,650 9,444 30,780 - Trousdale County 5,232 5,171 -61 758 - - - Wilson County 45,709 49,543 3,834 764 3,889 18,504 -
- TVA Et::ployee Surveys.
Population estimates by Comunity Economics Projects Group
~
CA Co== unity Economics Projects Group A 8/21/79 % c-.s u
8 Table 3 SCHOOL SYSTEMS REPORT OF HARTSVILLE NUCLEAR PLANTS DIRECT LMPACT STUDENTS March 31, 1979 School Number of Children Number of Children System of Local Residents of Movers Total Smith County 223 21 244 Sumner County 438 336 774 Treusdale County 191 86 277 Wilson County 157 58 215 Macon County 224 122 346 Lebanon City 89 71 160 Watertown City 10 5 15 TOTAL 1,332 699 2,031 TVA, the Tennessee Department of Education, and the seven local school districts in the impact area continue to operate under agreements for alleviating impacts on local school districts. Under these agreements, TVA provides funds for classrooms and schoolbuses. Education mitigation payments this period totaled $64,590.61 (see table 4). All school systems in the Hartsville Nuclear Plants project area are eligible to participate in School Assistance in Federally Affected Areas, Title I, Public Law 81-874 programs for fiscal year 1979. Wilson County became eligible for the first time in fiscal year 1978; Macon County in fiscal year 1977; Trousdale County in fiscal year 1976; Smith County, Sumner County, and bhf
9 Lebanon city were eligible and participated prior to fiscal year 1975. Since fiscal year 1976, all school systems in the area heve experienced significant increases in the number of students claimed. The number of students claimed by the four participating school systems in fiscal year 1976 was 983. In fiscal 1977, 1,573 students were claimed by the five participating school systems. In fiscal year 1978, the six participating school systems claimed 2,467 students; and in fiscal year 1979, the number of students reported at this time is 3,026. Almost two-thirds of this increase was due to the change in status of children of local residents. According to the school systems in the impact counties and the State Department of Education, TVA is meeting its commitments; and the school systems are able to serve the direct impact students. Table 4 TVA EDUCATION MITIGATION PAYMENTS (October 1, 1978 - March 31, 1979) School Systeg Facilities Buses Total Macon County $28,000.00* -
$28,000.00 Smith County - - -
Sumner County - - - Trousdale County 3,378.01 - 3,378.01 Wilson County 33,212.60 - 33,212.60 Watertown City - - - , TOTAL $64,590.61 (0) $64,590.61
- Reserve Fund.
Note: Public Law 81-874 assistance is available to the school systems te offset additional operating costs. l
10 Housing--The objective of the Hartsville Nuclear Plants housing mitigation program has been to assist in the development of mobile home parks in Macon, Smith, and Trousdale Counties as a base for temporary housing demanded by TVA construction workers. Two hundred and fcrty-three (243) mobile home spaces have been developed through this program. The Shady Grove Mobile Home Park in Hartsville, Tennessee, has 93 spaces . All units are presently occupied. The Hillsdale Mobile Home Park, located approximately seven miles from the 'onstruction site, has 32 of their 70 units presently occupied. The Upper Cumberland Housing Development Corporation, delayed by weather and contractor problems, opened this project in the fall of 1978. Additional employment at the HNP during the spring and summer should improve the occupancy rate for this project. Local Planning and Coordination Assistance--TVA is continuing to assist the local planning commissions affected by this project. Letters of agreement covering half of their cost for Tennessee State Planning Office services for a period from October 1 each year through September 30 of the following calendar year has been executed for the major impact communities. The need for additional assistance to the local planning commissions is evaluated and negotiated on a year-to-year basis as appropriate. A summary of these payments follows in table 5. i347 364 .
11 Table 5 TVA LOCAI PLANNING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS Amount Paid Total Paid Planning Commissions This Period to Date Hartsville-Trousdale County $1,014.52 $ 3,307.90 Smith Cour.ty 687.50 4,625.75 Sumner County - 3.,750.00 Wilson County - 3,750.00 Carthage - 2,402.38 South Carthage - 969.88 Gordonsville - 475.63 Lafayette - 1,221.26 Gallatin 2,231.25 5,512.50 Lebanon 2,975.00 6,725.00 Hendersonville - 3,750.00 Tennessee State Planning Office - 20,000.00 TOTAL $6,908.27 $56,490.30 TVA continues to provide annual support for the Hartsville Project Coordi-nation Committee for prof essional staf f services to the five impact counties. During this period, $25,000 was provided, and the total assistance paid to date is $175,000. In addition, a full time TVA program coordinator is assigned to work with the impact communities, i)h h)
12 Water and Sewer--The water and sewer systems in the impact counties continue to be monitored periodically to determine if these systems are adequate to handle the anticipated mobile home connections. Thus far, the total number of actual movers continues to be smaller than was , originally projected and a large number of novers continue to locate outside the impact area. As a result, the water supply treatment capacities throughout the impact area continue to be more than sufficient to accommodate the inmoving customers. Similarly, the sewer systems, which are generally overloaded only during periods of heavy rainfall, are able to treat the wastes generated by the inmoving construction workers and their families in addition to that of their permanent residents. TVA has assisted and is continuing to assist those communities that have experienced significant temporary adverse water and sewer impacts from inmoving mobile homes of construction workers. The Hillsdale Mobile Home Park, located just across the Macon County line, was initially planned for 150 spaces. However, only 70 spaces with utility connections were constructed and at present 32 are occupied. Originally, $130,000 was allocated to upgrade the Lafayette Wastewater Treatment Plant to accommodate the anticipated 150 new housing units in the town. Hewever, since the Lafayette Sewage Treatment Facility is not now expected to be impacted to this extent because of the construction of the mobile home park, $125,000 of these funds was diverted to provide sewage treatment facilities at the Hill,sdale Mobile Home Park. This
$125,000 was used to provide a non-interest bearing loan to the Upper
- Cumberland Housing and Development Corporation which is to be repaid to TVA in 10 equal annual payments beginning October 1, 1979.
I34/ 066
13 TVA has recently completed a supplement to the nuclear plant water supply contract with the town of Hartsville to provide Jor the installation of approximately 6,200 additional feet of eight-inch waterline to help relieve low pressures which occasionally occur in the Shadv Grove Mobile Home Park and the elementary school on Lock Six Road caused by the relatively high water demands at the nuclear plant construction site. The town has selected a contractor who is now in the process of installing this waterline. No impact mitigation payments for water and sewer were made during the reporting period. However, TVA will continue to monitor the water and sewer systems in the impact counties to determine their capability to handle the mover impacts as they occur. Health and Medical Services--TVA's health mitigation payments amounted to $17,637 this period. TVA paid $1,557 to the Mid-Cumberland Regional Health Department for a portion of the salary of an envilocmentalist, $3,999 to the Upper Cumberland Regional Health Department for one-half the salary of a public health nurse, and $12,081 for ambulance services in Trousdale County. The primary health care center at Hartsville was taken over '.n mid-December, 1978, by a private, nonprofit organization and mitigation assistance was discontinued at that time. TVA will continue to assess the health needs of the five-county Hartsville area; however, it is not anticipated that significant additional expenditures will be needed. 134/ 06/
14 Traffic--In accordance with an agreement between TVA and the Tennessee Department of Transportation, the department has been supplying TVA with traf fic counts for 12 locations on a quarterly basis beginning in October 1975. With approximately 6,600 employees, peak-hour traf fic on liighway' ' ' 25 has increased from 120 vehicles per hour (VPH) to 540 VPil east of the site and f rom 120 VPII to 1,350 VPH west of the site. The peak-hour traf fic volume west of the site is exceeding the allowable volume for level of service D operation of the highway (see appendix C) . As expec ted, this peak volume occurs during the af ternoon shif t change. In an effort to mitigate the peak-hour traffic volumes, TVA is continuing the mass transportation system (commuter buses and vans) and 30-minute shift differential between plants A and B. Volumes for other key highway segments are shown in table 5 and are well below the allowable volumes for level of service D operation. Table 6 TRAFFIC EVALUATION (October 1975 - March 1979) Number of TVA Vehicles During Commuter Peak Hour * - Traffic 1975 1979 liighway 25 East of Plant 120 540 480 liighway 25 West of Plant 120 1,350 1,280 liighway 25 West of Hartsville 290 1,000 820 liighway 25 West of 231 Junction 210 580 350 - Ilighway 231 South of 25 Junction 150 400 280 liighway 231 North of Lebanon 150 370 230
*The current peak hour occurs during the 3-4 p.m. hour. 1347 0~68
15 Employee Transportation--Five new buses were added this period for a total of 15. Two of the buses serve the Hermitage - Mt. Juliet communities, and the remaining three serve Lafayette, Portland, and Manchester. The number of van pools remains steady at 155. About one-half (47 percent) of the employees on the day shif t are rid l,g vans or buses to work. We estim'.te the TVA sponsored van pools and buses are keeping over 950 cars off the road. TVA's expenditures this period for employee transportation was $306,120. Local Government Budgets--The impact on the budgets of local governments in the Hartsville construction project impact area is measured on an annual basis. Projected project-related expenses are compared to projected project-related revenues to determine whether deficits will occur. TVA executes contracts with local governments to provide payments to cover the amounts r deficits that are projected. Payments fromicthese contracts made to local governments during this period are as follows: Table 7 PAYMENTS TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS (September 30, 1978 - March 31, 1979) City of Hartsville $ 98,699 City of Gallatin 35,600 City of Lafayette 561 City of Carthage 3,800 Trousdale County 88,000 Macon County 20,700
$247,360 m
i34/ J69
16 A more detailed monitoring and accountability plan has been implemented by TVA. In this plan, a study has been made of the increases in revenues and expenditures of the local governments in the years before the project started. The results of this study are compared to the increases in revenues and expenditurec in the years af ter the Hartsville project started to help determine both the negative and positive impacts on the local governments' budgets in the impact area. The results of this plan were used in the latest period in negotiating contracts with local government of ficials in the Hartsvi' project impact area. Local Recruitment and Training--A total of 2,256 workers were from the five-county impact area and 970 were from Davidson County. This indicates that local recruitment and training initiatices are continuing to be successful in reducing overall socioeconomic impact within the five counties. The steamfitter training program has graduated 56 trainees who have filled jobs at the Hartsville Nuclear Plants. The boilermaker training program has 29 trainees; 18 have graduated and a e working at the Hartsville Nuclear Plants. These two programs were developed to help meet the demand for highly skilled craftsmen in critical skill manpower shortage areas and to lessen TVA's construction mover impact. Trainees in these programs are from the 16-county recruitment area. Recreation--Community recreation impacts were monitored and an assessment of local needs was continued in the impact area during this reporting period. A recreation planner is continuing to work with the program I34/ 070
17 coordinator and local officials to moLitor impacts and provide assistance. TVA is providing technical and financial assistance for facility and program development. Hopefully, this assistance will result in long-term benefits to impacted communities as well as alleviate temporary impacts. Although no financial assistance was provided, several requests were received for facility and program improvements during the reporting period. It is expected that some financial assistance will be given during the next reporting period after budget approval. Technical assistanJe was provided to vari. ,mmunities, including several site planning projects, consultation - .ville-Trousdale County for establishing a f ull-time parks anc' ' _ation program, and study of potential for a countywide recreation program in Sumner County. Summary of Mitigatian Expenditures--In the functional areas of mitigation. TVA has made pa;.nents totaling $4,979,088. As noted in table 8, the major expenditures this reporting period were for employee transportatica ($306,120) and local governments ($247,360). i34/ J7)
18 Table 8 SUIDIARY OF TVA MITIGATION EXPENDITURES AS OF MARCH 31, 1979 Expenditures Expenditures This Period To Date Education S 64,591 $ 1,440,759 Housing -- 423,000 1 Local Planning and Coordination Assistance 31,908 231,021 2 Water and Sewer 125,000 2 380,000 Health 17,637 108,772 Local Governments 247,360 591,853 Employee Transportar. ion 306,120 1,803,683 TOTAL $792,616 94,979,088
- 1. Includes $60,000 interest-bearing loan.
- 2. Includes $125,000 noninterest-bearing loan.
1347 072
.i ,
APPENDIXES 1347 i)73 e 8
20 Appendix A Detailed Survey Resul ts TABLE A-1 FULLDW UP $URVEY TOWN Of CUkRLNT R E S I D F t.C E RUN DATE 08/06/79 HARTSVILLE NUCLEAx TLAhi EtiPLOYE t 5 RU;4 T I ME 00054L AC11VE IMPLCYtF5 03-31-79 REPORT 2 MOVED TO ALRfADY TOWN TOWN IN TOWh TUTAL POPULATION ALEXANDRIA TN 9 43 52 600 BAX1Ek TN 10 69 79 1,314 CAFlHAGL TN 89 157 246 2,491 C00hfVILLE IN 28 100 128 17, e t. 0 CRU55VILLE TN 13 53 66 5,301 CALLA 11h TN 31 3 420 733 13,302 00kDrh5VILLE 1N 9 37 46 601 HAR15V]LLE IN 336 255 591 2,243 H EN DI R 5t '4 V I L L E Th 98 173 271 28,000 LAFAYET1E TN 124 207 331 2,5c3 Li t t.NDie 1N 232 279 511 12,492 MANCHESTER TN 6 29 35 6,8t9 MUNTIRLY l fi 5 6 11 2,351 MURIRFE5 BORD lfs 16 50 66 28,700 NA 5ttVI L LE IN 84 612 696 469,000 P 0 k 1 L A tid I t; 16 70 66 3,001 FFD bill L I N G SPRINGS IN 10 60 70 956 5H11HVILLE T l4 9 143 152 3,702 SPARIA TN 10 13 23 4,930 WE$1MORILAND IN 21 70 91 1,423 lif TilPAGE TN 24 61 85 400 CA51All/N $PRIN05 TN 52 27 89 150 C O T i t!!il!!N N T ri 5 18 23 100 DI X1tN SPRlhG5 TN 43 31 74 100 ILM,000 IN 7 15 22 100 000D1 E 115 V I L L E T ra 12 65 77 7,541 HE RV il ACI TN 8 28 36 6,000 LANLASTLR IN 7 8 15 150 MAD 150N IN 21 101 122 21,500 MOUhl JULlEi TN 30 60 110 1,500 - I1LD HICKURY TN 11 62 73 6,000 P L L t,5 A.N T Sil L D E I ts 15 32 47 150 F I D D L E l l'.N TN ti 16 24 100 Slt VIR POINT lh 5 16 21 150 WAILATUrN T ri 5 32 37 1,06) l't! I i t Hil'J5[ TN 8 13 21 1 , 3(15 5(0115%ILLI KY 6 69 95 3,5h4 1DMPl.II,5V I L L E hv 5 21 26 2,207
$UB10TAL 1720 35i.1 5201 A t t.0llD Th 1 11 12 1,917 C f L I!. A Th 4 19 23 1,370 Cil A k L nT I L Th 3 6 9 610 13 0 074
21 TABLE A-1, PAGE 2 IDLLOW LP SURVEY T O Wt. O F f uh E t til R f 5 ! D E t;CE- FUN DAll 08/06/79 HAFTSVILLE NOClfAR PL ANT f t'PLOYE E 5 R Uti TIFE 080940 ACTIVE Lt4PLGYEES 03-31-79 ktPORT 2 FUVL) TI) ALREADY TOWM 10kn 1 14 TOWN TUTAL POPULATION CLAEV5VILLE Th 2 12 14 44,900 DICK 50h TN 3 8 11 16,377 DUklLLTCWN IN 1 26 27 329 FAILVitW TN 3 6 9 1,925 F P A7.L L i h Th 1 6 7 11,298 G A 1:;f 500R0 Tri 4 43 47 1,101 GFFlN PRIER Th 1 35 36 2,279 LA Vi 4 GriE TN 3 15 18 5,209 LIPIFTY TN 2 28 30 332 MC M l h'i V I L L E TN 2 7 9 11,610 k10GI10P Tri 1 6 7 81U 5HfLtVVILLE TN O 11 11 11,900 SM Y h t. A TN 1 11 14 5,69H 5 F k II.G F IE L D TN 3 29 32 9,720 TULLfHUMA Til 2 6 P 15,577 kUDLIURY IN 4 23 27 2,087 A".1 I F C il TA 3 13 16 900 ASHLAND C17Y TN 3 17 20 2,027 AUL UF !ii tiW N Th 1 7 8 213 P E U 5ti (FEEK TN 2 22 24 230 EUFir-LU VALLEY TN 1 15 16 100 Clit 51!;UT MUJND TN O 10 10 125 C h l' 5 5 P L A lti s Tii 1 9 10 261 CONLL5UN Th 1 11 12 25,500 til C hV AN IN 3 22 25 200 JC L L Ilirl Th 1 29 30 9LO HD55 TN 3 12 15 200 PE GR AM T id 2 6 8 774 kHlif5 CREEK TN 2 7 9 200 kHI11LYVILLE IN 2 6 8 50 LOFL if;G GRE EN KY 1 11 12 39,400 F E A f.hllh KY 2 9 11 7,176 GLA5Gnw KY 1 5 6 11,900 ADULPHUS KY 2 17 19 250 FOUf.TAlh RUN KY 3 7 10 123 SUBICTAL 77 543 620 - D illE R 127 280 407 TOTAL RESPUMSL5 1924 4384 6308 HNP WilRhFORCE TOTAL 6567 03-31-79 - 1347 075
TABLE A-2 FULLOW UP 50RVFY SCURCt AND LDCAll0N OF C ON51 R UC T I ON EMPLUVEE5 R JP) DATE 08/06/79 H ARISVILLE NUCLEAR PLANT RUM TIME 081039 ACTIVE EMPLOYEE 5 03-11-79 REPORT 4 GTHER OTHER OTHER
------------ -lMPACI C00 hilt 5-------- RE'. TEN 4. KENTUCKV FECM --- it ikOU50 Alt SMITH MACCM $UPNER hlL5DN LAVID50N CUUNTIES COUNilE5 COUNT IE 5 UTHER (4) 10TAL 1ROU5 DALE til 256 6 4 14 7 1 3 291 SMllH til 8 361 5 1 9 1 5 2 1 393 MA(DN (1) 3 2 2 17 4 5 1 1 293 SUMNfk (Il 11 7 11 P76 3 14 4 3 1 1 937 blL5fA III 8 e 10 307 e 6 5 442 DAV1050h til 12 21 3 61 34 932 1R 23 2 1103 UTHfE s'E(GulilNC (CUN (2) IC 25 10 16 8 12 944 17 3 1045 DTHEb IN. (rbNilt5 (1) 13/ to 43 le8 101 45 44 341 1 14 979 4 11 L 4 30 61 GItia nY. CuLsilts 131 i %
ALAEA4A 31 9 10 (4 29 10 3 3 1 2e 188 4 2 4 14 ARFAN575 3 1 3 5 4 2 1 6 35 Gt05017 9 2 3 6 4 1 2 1 1 16 "155I551FFI 1 2 2 1 4 6 2 1 le NORTP ( A 61<L I N A I 2 2 1 1 i e SOUTH CAktLINA ~. s3 ?2 35 127 51 39 24 27 e7 4E5 (p; OTHf6 5f Alt 5 Jh. 1372 1353 421 37 12 .- 6306 m s, *** IUTAL 591 $44 407 1369 664 Q * :15 i? A (GUNT4 '%4 N,TE: DA T A LN DIAGONAL IN01(#TES NON=UVt95 WITH THE EXCEETirN OF *r ' Cys all ktcaulrING COUNTY (2) 1ENNE 55E t (CUNinE5: CANh0N. CLAY. LEAALB. JACK 5GN. F UT N AM , RDBER153N. RUIHERF3RD RENTUCAY C GUNi l E 5 : ALLth. MONRLE, 514P50N
- 13) ALL COUNilf 5 IN RihiUCFY Ahb it hNt 55tf 01 HEE THAN F f ( k e l i l NT, (LUNilf5 [
(4) -UTHER" INCLUOL5 NON-RESPON5t5 LE LRR0NE005 RE SPONSE 5 F .w C U R a f N T t r i.' t s 5.
23 Table A-3 Hartsville Nuclear Plants Distribution of Movers and Associated Population by County and Community March 31, 1979 Percent Number of of Population Influx County Movers Movers S ch o o l- A ,>,e Total Trousdale 17 350 123 758 Smith 10 199 94 466 Macon 7 143 103 402 Sumner 28 569 369 1,605 Wilson 14 279 167 764 Other Counties 23 463 233 1,147
?
Total 100' 2,003 1,089 5,042 Community Carthage 3 53 13 102 Gallatin 9 184 85 500 llartsville 12 238 57 450 Ilendersonville 5 90 59 232 Lebanon 5 94 42 226 Lafayette 3 60 ;l 1.78 9 Nashville __4_ 77 26 162 Total 41 796 333 1,850
- 1. Numbers extrapolated.
- 2. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding.
- 3. Within municipal limits. l } f j' ,
24 Table A-4 Hartsville Nuclear Plants Comparison of Survey Results with Projections for Selected Parameters Employment Level - 6,567 Projected Surveyed Number Movers 4,466 2,003 Percent Movers 68 31 School-Age Children 2,903 1,089 School-Age Children / Family 1.0 0.8 Total Population 8,709 5,142 Percent Number Percent Number Movers with Families 65 2,903 69 1,390 Movers without Families 35 1,563 31 613 Percent Number Percent Number llousing Choice: Houses 31 1,384 48 965 Mobile Homes 47 2,099 23 451 Apartments 18 804 16 320 Motel and Sleeping Rooms 4 179 6 130 Other 0 0 7 __137 Total 100 4,466 100 2,003 Percent Number Percent Number Distribution by County: Davidson 0 0 - 7 150 Trousdale 30 1,340 17 350 Smith 20 893 10 199 Macon 10 447 7 143 Sumner 20 893 28 569 Wilson 20 893 14 279 Other Counties 0 0 16 313 Total 100 4,466 100 2,003
- 1. Numbers extrapolated.
- 2. Percentages may not add to 100 because of rounding. l34[ ][8
25 TABLE A-5 FULLud UP SUEVIY WORKLES kHU MDVf D lhlO HARTSVILLE NUCLIAR P L A!!T AELA PAGI 019 RUN DAlt OP/06/79 M U V f' R
SUMMARY
REPORT IF ACTIVE EMPLOYLES 03-31-79 RUN TIML 080925 Wi1H 101AL CHILDRE.N CHILDREfa MOVERS CHILDREN N L'M ii[ R l t. IN MOVERS WITH IN OF GRADI H I Gli W I T t'0 U T TUTAL FAMILY SCI:CUL Cill LDF E N SCHUCL SCHOUL FAMILY MOVLR5 ANNUAL E MPL(lYf E 5 HOUSE OWi.E 0 236 123 330 157 55 Ill 254 HOUSE k [ f.1 E D 44 13 39 16 5 15 59 AP AR1tif t;1 RENIfD 45 6 19 7 1 59 104 MufslLI HUEE R E P. I L D 4 3 6 4 0 10 14 MOBill HCFL UnNID 28 6 19 5 2 14 42 $LlEPING FUOM 1 1 2 2 0 5 6 HultL 1 0 1 0 0 4 5 O1HER 9 3 5 3 2 10 19 10TAL 368 155 421 194 65 135 503 HOUklY [MPLOYEES HOUSE OWNI O 299 167 479 225 93 12 311 HOUSE REATED 239 108 316 158 42 64 303 A P A R liil f. I R I hii D 106 29 I!6 40 7 97 203 M his l L t li n t'. E R E f4T t O 117 45 136 58 18 89 206 MUf ILt tiGPF U dNI D 128 53 161 76 27 43 171 SL[IPIf:6 RUOM 9 3 10 7 0 27 36 Hull L 17 4 10 4 0 61 78 DTHER 52 20 61 24 8 61 113 101AL 967 429 1259 592 195 454 1421 ALL [ Mi'L O YI E 5 HOUSE U.!NID 535 290 809 382 148 30 565 HOUSE KEN 1tD 2 ti 3 121 355 174 47 79 362 A P A R i t'.I a i R i l.T E D 151 35 1(' S 47 8 156 307 NUDILI liGt t REN1LD 121 48 142 62 18 99 220 f; U t' l li HLPI bvNFD 156 59 I t< 0 81 29 57 213 SLLEPihL k utP4 IH 4 12 9 0 32 42 MUitt la 4 11 4 0 65 C3 01 til k t.1 23 66 27 10 71 132 TOTAL 1335 5f: 4 1610 7F6 260 589 1924 I347 379
26 TABLE A-6 F0LLUd UP SURVEY WORKERS kHU MUVt D lii10 NART5VILLE NUCLEAW PLANT AREA PAGE 006 MACOA EUN UAT E 03/06/79 EMPLOYE E5 L I VIf.G W11HIN Tile COUNTY TOTAL REPORT IH ACTIVE EMPLOYEE 5 03-31-79 KUN TIME 080925 WITH TOTAL CHILDREN CHI L DR E fi MOVERS CH IL DRI N NUMOER IN IN MOVIR5 WITH I fl 0F GRADE HIGH W11HOUT TOTAL FA?!LY SCHOOL Clillok E Pl SCHOOL SCH00L FAMILY MliV E R S AhhUAL EMPLOYEE 5 HOUSE DWi4 ED 8 4 9 6 0 0 8 HUUSE R E f.1 E D 2 2 3 2 0 0 2 APARTMEllT RENTED 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 fiUBILE H 0it h RENTED 1 0 1 U- 0 1 2 MUPILI IluME OWNED 2 0 0 0 0 2 4 SLEEPING N00M MUTEL Differ TOTAL 14 6 13 8 0 3 17 HOUkLY EMPLOYEE 5 HCUSE DWNED 34 18 57 36 7 1 35 HOUSE R E fd I E D 11 5 22 8 6 2 13 APARTMFNT RENTED 3 1 3 2 0 1 4 MCI'ILE HEFE FENTED 22 9 26 11 4 10 32 MGEILE HOPE UdNED 17 10 20 11 4 7 24 SLEEPlf.G EDOM 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 PUTEL 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 OTHER 4 2 3 2 0 4 8 TUTAL 91 45 131 70 21 29 120 ALL EMPLOYEES HOUSE DWfl E D 42 22 66 42 7 1 43 HOUSE E Ef4 TE D 13 7 25 10 6 2 15 AFARTMENT RENTED 4 1 3 2 0 1 5 fd C . l L F H O M E REhTED 23 9 27 11 4 11 34 MLTILE HO*E OWP ED 19 10 20 11 4 9 28 SLEEPIf4G E00M 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 MOTEL 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 OTHER 4 2 3 2 0 4 8 TUTAL 105 51 144 78 21 32 137 1347 080
27 TABLE A-7 FULLOd UP SURVEY WORKLR5 WMD MOV[D I f.10 HART 5VILLE NUCLLAR PLANT AREA PAGE 007 S M I T t4 RUN DATE D8/06/79 E MPLOYE LS LIVING WI TH lft Tlf t COUNTY TOTAL kEPORT 10 ACTIVE EMPLOYEE 5 03-31-79 RUN TIME 030925 , k' l iti 101AL Cil l L D R E ta CHILDREF. MOVER 5 C ill L DR l y t4UMffR I f4 IN MOVER $ W ITit If4 Of GRADE tilGH W I TiiD U T TUTAL FAMILY S CliCD L Ctt I L DRE N SCif D O L SCHOUL FAMILY MllV E R S ANilUAL E MPLOYE E 5 H 0 tl5 E U W i;L D 6 5 13 6 4 1 7
~
HOU5E F EN1E D 4 1 2 0 1 3 7 A P A R I Hi t.1 R I f4 T E D 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 1100 l l [ tlut t R E f.1 E D 1 1 2 2 0 3 4 MutslLt If ut'l UnNFD 7 2 2 0 2 2 9 5 Li f P lf.0 E00H 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 M ull- L UTHfA 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 10 TAI 18 9 19 10 7 14 32 ff uUR L Y EMPLOYEES HoliS E UdhID 31 18 40 21 12 2 33 HUUSL R I N T E. D 32 11 32. 12 2 ti 40 A P A R T M I .'l T R i fl1 E D 2 0 2 0 0 5 7 MO(ILt it LN L KENTID 11 2 5 2 0 15 26 MUPILt HimE U d i4 E D 27 11 30 17 5 10 37 S L i t P i t4 i< D O M 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 M illI L 1 1 1 1 0 3 4 01 til k 3 1 3 1 0 2 5 T ill t. L 107 44 113 54 19 52 159 ALL EMPLOYfE5 HOU$f CW fs f D 37 23 53 29 16 3 40 110U50 > [ Nil D 36 32 34 12 3 11 47 A P A R 11'.i t4 T k l f;i l D 2 0 2 0 0 F- 10 HOFILL NtTt 4tNTtD 12 3 7 4 0 18 30 M liF I L L HIm[ (IWPED 34 13 32 17 7 12 46 5 L I L P l f.G EDLM 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Mullt 1 1 1 1 0 3 4 UTHER 3 1 3 1 0 3 6 Tl!I AL 125 53 132 64 26 66 191 1347 081
28 TABLE A-8 IULLud UP 5 tf RV E Y WORKERS 14HD MOVE D IN1D HAR15VILLE :UCLEAk PLAMT AREA PAGE 008 SUMNER RUN DATE 03/06/79 EMPLOYEE 5 LIVIf;G W I lil l N THE C UUf4T Y TOTAL AEP0kI l 'd ACTIVE E M PL tlV E E S 03-31-79 RUN TIME 380925 FITH TUTIL CHIL0kFN CHILDREN HUVERS C if l L D,t [ N NLM!sER IN I f4 MOVIR5 WITH IN OF GRADE IIIGH WITHOUT TOTAL FAMILY 5th00L CH I LDRE N SCH00L SCHOUL FAHILY HHVLRS A f1N U A L E MPL OYE E S HLU5E OWNED 140 72 205 93 36 13 153 Hut 5E RENTED 15 7 17 9 4 6 21 apt Rifif N T R L f4TED 21 5 13 6 1 . 24 45 MLPILI HOME RENTED 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 MutILE ttG '.E OWNE0 9 1 8 1 0 2 11 SLEEPILG RUGH 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 MOTEL 1 0 1 0 0 1 2 UTHER 2 0 0 0 0 2 4 TOTAL 139 P6 245 110 41 51 240 HilPPLY EMPLOYEES HGH5E CWNED 38 50 151 66 21 3 91 H u t'S t R E tit E D 57 31 86 44 15 14 71 AP Ar.IPINT G E NT E D 39 14 43 23 3 20 59 900ILL HCHE R E tlT E D 11 5 13 7 1 10 21 M Cf.I L F llDriE Ddf4ED 19 7 22 12 3 7 26 S L E E P ! f,G RUDM 3 1 2 2 0 5 8 tidlEL 5 0 4 0 0 9 14 (ITHLR 9 4 9 4 2 8 17 TOTAL 231 112 330 158 45 76 307 ALL EMPLOYEES HOUSE OWNED 228 122 356 159 57 16 244 HOU5L RENTLD 72 38 103 53 19 20 92 APARTMINT RENTED 60 19 56 29 4 44 104 HCfILE HOPE RENTED 12 6 14 8 1 11 23 MLDILE HOPE OWNE0 28 3 30 13 3 9 37
$LEEPihG F00H 3 1 2 2 0 7 10 M(iTEL 6 0 5 0 C 10 16 UTHER 11 4 9 4 2 10 21 TOTAL 420 198 575 268 86 127 547
!347 382
29 TABLE A-9 F U L L t'W UP SilRV E Y WORKERS kHU MOVE D 17.1 b HART 5VILLE huCLEAR PLANT AREA PAGE 009 TROU5 DALE kUN DATE 08/06/79 E M PL OYE I S L I VI NT, WITHIN Tilf CDUMTY TOTAL REPORT l ti ACTIVE EHFLOYEE5 03-31-79 RUN TIML 080925 WITH TOTAL LHILChth CHILDREN MOVERS CHILDFEN N t'M B E R IN IN MOVER 5 hITH IN OF GRADE HIGH W I T it0 U T TtiT A L FAMILY SCh00L CH ILDFE N SCHCUL SCliOUL FAMILY MuVt F 5 ANNUAL E MPLOYE E S HOUS[ CWNLD 9 3 11 3 0 0 9 HGU5l FINTED 6 1 5 1 0 1 7 APARTM[H1 RENTED 6 1 1 1 0 11 17 M D E' l L I H G t'l R F t.I f u O O O O O 4 4 M Uti l L L tiOML U n t. F 0 6 2 6 3 0 7 13 $LLLPING RODM 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 MUILL 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 OlliL R 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 TUTAL 27 7 23 8 0 27 54 HOURLY EMPL OY E F 5 HUtl5 E OWNLD 20 6 24 6 5 1 21 HOUSE RE NT! D 25 17 36 21 8 9 34 APAklMEN1 kENTLD 16 2 3 1 1 29 45 HOCILE HLP[ RENTED 46 16 59 23 10 39 85 HUBILL tiut t UkhtC 32 16 48 20 9 11 43 SLFfPlhG OUUM 3 1 4 2 , 0 7 10 MOTEL 5 1 3 1 0 15 20 Olll[ R 6 3 10 3 0 16 24 TOTAL 155 62 187 77 33 127 282 ALL EMPLUYLES HOUS[ CPNiD 29 9 35 9 5 1 30 HUU50 RENTED 31 I fs 41 22 8 10 41 APAR1MEl:T R F l:T E D 22 3 4 2 1 40 62 MODILE H u r' t E E f;T E D 46 16 59 23 10 43 89 MDEILL liUPE UeNLD 38 18 54 23 9 IP 56 SLtt Plf;G ROOM 3 1 4 2 0 9 12 Mil f t L 5 1 3 1 0 16 21 OT iit R 0 3 10 3 0 17 25 1 DIAL 102 09 210 .85 33 154 336 1347 083
30 TABLE A-10 FI'LL 11W UP $URVEY W0kKE RS WHO MOVE D INTO HART 5VILLE NUCLEAR PLANT ARIA PAGE 010 dlL50N RUN DATE 0r/06/79 EMPLOYFES L I V ! t.5 W11Hlf, THE COUNTY TOTAL REPORT 10 ACTIVE EMPLOYEE 5 03-31-19 RUN TIME UH0925 WITH TOTI.L CHILDREN CHILDREN HOVERS CHILDREM H UMl' E R IN IN MOVIRS mlTH IN OF GRADE HIGH WilbuUT TUTAL F Alt I L Y S Cit PO L CH I L DR E f1 SCHUDL SCHOUL FAMILY MOVERS ANNUAL EMPLOYE05 HOUSE UWNED 00 31 75 37 10 3 63 HOUSL R E t4 T E D 7 1 4 3 0 5 12 A P A R T M E tJ T RENTED 8 0 3 0 0 8 16 M 0 t- I L t HLME R E t!T L D 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 MublLE HOME UdNED 3 1 3 1 0 1 4 SLtEP!f.G ROOM 1 1 2 2 0 0 1 Mu1EL 0 0 0 0 0 : 1 D illE R 6 3 5 3 2 0 6 TUTAL 85 37 92 46 12 19 104 HOURLY EM PL O Y E ES HOU5t CWNED 33 19 54 25 15 % 33 H005L kENTED 31 13 56 22 6 6 37 APtRTMINI RENTED 20 7 20 7 2 14 34 M L'F I L E HCME RENTED 12 6 13 8 0 6 18 McEILE HUME OWNED 10 3 15 8 2 5 15 5LEEPING ADON MUTEL 2 1 1 1 0 13 15 UTHER 8 3 14 2 4 4 12 IUTAL 116 52 173 73 29 48 164 ALL f Mi'LOYE E S HOUSE f:W NI D 93 50 129 62 25 3 96 HUUSE PEhTED 38 14 60 25 6 11 49 APAR16. INT RENTED 28 7 23 7 2 22 50 MOEILI HCME RtNTED 12 6 13 8 0 7 19 MGFILt itCME UdNED 13 4 18 9 2 6 19 SL E E P IP.G ROOM i 1 2 2 0 0 1 HDTEL 2 1 1 1 0 14 16 01HER 14 6 19 5 6 4 la TOTAL 201 69 265 119 41 67 268 1347 084
31 TABLE A-11 F (2 L L t' d UP SURVEY WORAERS Wil0 MGvfD I f;10 HART 5VILLE f;U C li t h P L A!4 T AREA P t.G F 018 3 AVID 50f4 PUN D t.i t Or/06/79 E!1PL UYE E 5 L IVi h5 L I Til l P; Tht COUNTY - Illi AL F f POR T lt AETIVt LMPLOYtES U 3 7 's F ut: TIME O liO 9 2 5. F I T't IGT/L Cit ! L D R L t. Cilit DR EN PUVER$ Cill L Dk E N t4 0 M t' I R 1 11 IN MOVfR5 h 1161 Ill UI GRADE l11011 blTh0UT TUTAL F *. H I L Y S til PO L CH I L D F L li SCHOUL SCHUUL FAPILY MLVER$ ANNUAL E MPLUYE E 5 HUUSL DhNtD 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 HUtf5I Rtt;TED 2 0 2 0 0 0 2 A P A k i r.! N T R E llT f D 4 0 0 0 0 10 14 MCEILF HOPf R E fil l D MCFILE HUMI UWNED SLiEPING FUDM Milit L ti l HE R 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 IUTAL 8 0 3 0 0 15 23 IIUU4LY EMPLOYEES HOUSL l'W NI D 19 12 25 13 8 2 21 h0USL R I N 110 31 13 30 17 2 7 38
- f. P t f T F I N T R t t; T E D 17 3 7 2 1 17 34 id PD I L E HOPL GENTED 6 2 6 2 0 0 6 MLtlLt HL t'E DaNED 3 1 4 1 0 2 5 5LtIPif.G FOUM 1 1 3 3 0 3 4 ilu i t L 1 1 1 1 0 3 4 U TI'F R 3 1 4 2 0 6 9 Tilt AL 81 34 t0 41 11 40 121 ALL EMPLOYEES HOU5f UWNID ?! 12 26 13 8 2 23 H005L R ENT L D 33 13 32 17 2 7 40 APAF1KtNT R E f4 T f D 21 3 7 2 1 27 48 MIillLt H C t'.E R E f; T E D 6 2 6 2 0 0 6 Mill. l L L H ol' E U n t!E D 3 1 4 1 0 2 5 5 LEE PING F00M 1 1 3 3 0 3 4 tt u1I t i 1 1 1 0 3 4 UIHER 3 1 4 2 0 11 14 TUTAL 69 34 63 41 11 55 144 I347 385
32 TABLE A-12 FULLud UP SUEVEY WOR 4ERS WHO HOVE D If410 HARTSVILLE huCLEAR PLANT AREA PAGE 001 CAR 1FAGE PUN DATE 08/06/79 EMPLOYEES LIVING WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS kEPOR1 1A AETIVE EMPLOYEE 5 03-31-79 RUN TIME 080925 hl1H TOTAL CHILbkEls CHILDREN HOVERS CHILOREN NLith ER IN IN MOVERS WI Til i f4 0F GRADE H IGli WIThubi T L'T A L FAMILY S CliDU L CHILDkEN SCHOUL SCHOOL FAMILY MOVEk5 ANNUAL EMPLOYEES HOUSE UWri! D 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 ff 005f Fi t;T E D 1 1 2 0 1 2 3 A P Ak i H Efi T RENTED 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 M 0111 L E HlM RENTED H bf'i l L E ilD'il OWNED 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 SLf! Plf G LOOM 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 HOTEL 111 HE R TOTAL 2 1 2 0 1 6 8 HOURLY EMPLOYE E5 1:005 f DW P.t D 3 2 5 4 1 0 3 HOUSE F E f.1 E D 5 2 5 3 0 2 7 APARIMINI R i fil E D 1 0 0 0 0 4 5 HurlLE H u". E R E f:T E D 3 0 1 0 0 5 8 M0blLi HCt:F DWNfD 5 2 4 2 0 6 11 SLELPIAG kODH 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 MultL 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 OTHER 2 1 3 1 0 1 3 10TAL 2D 8 19 11 1 23 43 ALL EMPLUYEE5 HOUSE owl;E D 3 2 5 ', 1 1 4 HOUSI FEN 1ED 6 3 7 3 1 4 10 APAR1HtN1 RENTED 1 0 0 0 0 6 7 M uril t i HOPE R L f; T E D 3 0 1 0 0 S 8 M blt l L t t ib t '. E U W h E D' 6 2 4 2 0 6 12 SLitPING ROOM 0 0 0 0 0 5 S M01EL 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 Olif E R 2 1 3 1 0 1 3 101AL 22 9 21 11 2 20 51 134/ 386
33 TABLE A-13 f it L L ila UP SURVEY WOR K E R 5 Will: HilVE D it 10 HART 5VILLE f.U C L E A R P L Atil arf A PAGE 002 GALLAllte R U f; Dt.T F O t / O t,/ 7 9 f"PLOYE E 5 LIVIH5 W I Tit ill THE CI!Y llM115 REPURI 1A M TIVL LMPLOYLL5 03-31-79 R ut! TIME 080925 tilth TOTAL Cil l L D R [ fi Ctfl L OR[ fl Mtivf k5 ClilL Db f N F4 t M 14ER IN IN MOVER 5 blitt IN li f (.R AD E ti l G H e 11140 UT TUTAL F A:t l L Y S C t.CO L CHILDhEN S C Hlitil SClluut FAPILY MHV! R S ANhuAL t MI LUYE I 5 itOU5L l'W rit D 37 13 43 17 4 S 42 HOUSE k I i;1 t D 6 3 6 2 2 1 7 APtklett.T RthTLD 7 .1 4 1 0 5 12 f t Ul' I l l H L t' E R f f1T I D 0 G 0 0 0 1 1 P hi IL t lilt'r OdhED 5 0 3 0 0 1 6 S L t ! P i t:G FUGH 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 MUIll 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 OIHf R TOTAL 55 17 56 20 6 16 71 if GUR L Y [MPLOYEE5 HOUS[ IfWhlD 31 16 54 15 10 2 33 l' U U 51 R f f.T f D 24 12 34 14 7 '. 28 A P A R i t' f M T RENTED 16 4 12 4 0 7 23 M Lt I L t itCPE R E lit E D 2 1 2 1 0 3 5 M D L' l L E HUHF UWNEC 3 1 4 0 2 0 3 S L I I P i r4G kUUH 2 1 2 2 0 1 3 P l? i L L 2 0 0 0 0 4 6 D ili[ R 3 1 1 1 0 2 5 inial E3 36 109 37 19 23 106 ALL EMPLOYIE5 HUU5t (lh N L D 68 29 97 32 14 7 75 H ull5 f Rf Nit 0 30 15 40 16 9 5 35 APARTMtt;T RENTED 23 S 16 5 0 12 35 MOBILI il0Pt RfhifD 2 1 2 1 0 4 6 MitF IL t H t!t' E UWNED 8 1 7 0 2 1 9 5Li[ PING ROUH 2 1 2 2 0 3 5 MUTEL 2 0 0 0 0 5 7 []IHE R 3 1 1 1 0 2 S TUTAL 138 53 165 57 25 39 177 1347 087
34 TABLE A-l+l f 0LLI:W UP SURVEY WORKEk5 kHO MOVfD INTO H AR15V I LL f tiUCLEAR PLANT ARfA PAGE 003 i ART 5VILLE RUN DA1E Ob/06/79 EMPLOYEt5 LIVir4 WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS REPORT 1A AC11VE EMPLOYEE 5 03-31-79 RUN TIML 080925 kl1H 101AL CHILDREN CHILDRth MOVERS CHitCRfM KUMEER IN IN MOVER 5 WITH IN Of GRADE HIGH WITHOUT TUTAL FAMILY S CO CO L Cil l L DRE h SCHCOL SCHOOL FAMIL) MllV ER S ANhUAL EMPLOYEE 5 HOUSE DWNED 4 1 4 1 0 0 4 HDU5I R E tt1[ D 3 0 3 0 0 0 3 APARTMENT RENTED 5 0 0 0 0 11 16 MODILE ItLFL kENTED 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 MUBILL HOME U r/ r4E D 2 1 2 2 0 5 7 S L f. E P l t.G ROOM 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 MOTEL 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Ollit R 10TAL 14 2 9 3 0 23 37 HCURLY E MPLOYE F 5 HOUSE ['WF't D 11 4 11 4 3 1 12 HOU5t R E h1E D 12 8 18 11 4 6 18 A P A k T M i te l RfNIED 16 2 3 1 1 26 44 MODllI 110F E AENTL0 30 9 35 11 3 34 64 MDblii H C t.t U n :< E D 17 8 17 0 4 10 27 SLi t PING FDDM 2 0 0 0 0 5 7 MUTEL 4 1 2 1 0 10 14 OTHLR 1 0 1 0 0 5 6 101AL 93 32 87 36 15 99 192 AL L E MI Lily! E S HtJU5f I, W P. ! D 15 5 15 5 3 1 16 1100$ t AI .IL D 15 0 21 11 4 6 21 APARTPINT RENTED 21 2 3 1 1 39 60 Mild I L t I CI Rt f4Tf D 30 9 35 11 3 3f? 68 MUPILi llOP E UdhED 19 9 19 10 4 15 34 SLFfril;G 1000 2 0 0 0 0 7 9 P 111 [ L 4 1 2 1 0 11 15 O Till R : 0 1 0 0 5 6 TOTAL 107 34 91, 39 15 122 229 l347 088
35 TABLE A 15 i!!LLt;W UP S L'F.V E Y WORKf k5 WHO MOVI D INTO HART 5VILLE f.UCLftJ P L Alit ARIA P/ GI 004 LAFAYETTE RUf4 L't T E 06/06/79 EMPLOYf E 5 L I V l f;5 k l Tit i fJ THE CITY LIMITS FEPORT 1A ACTIVL EMPLOYEES 03-31-79 RUN TIVE 01.0925 WITH TOTI.L CH I L D R f f. Cill L DR E N MOVERS ChlLDRt1 fiU'4 F E R 1 f4 I fd M3VER5 WITH l t; Of GRADE 11101I WIThUUT TOTAL FAMILY SCHGOL C H I L L' R E f 4 SCHOOL SChuul FAMILY MOVERS A f.f;U A L EMFLOYEE5 H Cll5 E t'W N1 D 5 1 4 2 0 0 S HUU5L F f f41 E D 2 2 3 2 0 0 2 A P A k i M f !J T REfiTED I O O O O U 1 M LT I L E ItUFF kEfJTLD Mit! I t i HUPL U W riE D 5LIEPlf.G F00M MUTEL OTHER TOTAL 8 3 7 4 0 0 8 HCLQ L Y EMPLOYEE 5 H ul'5 0 l'W P. t 0 15 9 29 19 6 1 16 Hhb5L F E f. f E D 4 1 10 2 4 1 5 APA6TMtNT 6FNIED 3 1 3 2 0 1 4 M ti[, I l l HLPE R E ts T E D 13 7 19 8 3 5 18 MCIILt itOML UWNED 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 S L E L P l f,6 v00M 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 MOT [L 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 01HER 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 TOTAL 36 19 62 32 13 14 50 ALL EMPLU)EE5 HOUSE UWrF0 20 10 33 21 6 1 21 H(]U 5 L PENTED 6 3 13 4 4 1 7 APARI"INI R f f4 T f D 4 1 3 2 0 1 5 MD61Lt HIT E R E rlT E D 13 7 19 8 3 ~5 18 MUIILE IlCMf O W P; f D 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 5 L E L P i f.G FOUM 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 MOTEL 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 UIH[R 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 luiAL 44 22 09 36 13 14 58 hhh
36 TABLE A- 16 FOLLud UP $URVEY WORKER 5 WHO MOVED INTO HART 5VILLE NUCLEAR PLANT AREA PAGE 005 LfBAh0h RUN DATE 06/06/79 EMPLOYEES LIVIf.G W11HIN THE C ITY LIMITS kEPORT 1A ACTIVE EMPLOYEE 5 03-31-79 RUN TIME 080925 b:I TH 10TAL E ll l L D E E f. CHILDREN MOVERS CHILDRf N N Le t' P E R Ih IN MOVf R 5 WITH If4 Of GWADE H I Gli klTHOUT TOTAL FAMILY SENDOL CHILDREN SCHUDL SCH00L FAMILY MUVERS A NI.U A L E MPL O YE E 5 HOUSE DWNID 10 3 8 4 1 0 10 HOUSE RENTED 2 1 4 3 0 1 3 APARTMINT refiled 5 0 1 0 0 6 11 HUlilLE HDFf R E f.T E D MODILI Huf f OWNED 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 SLEIPING PullM MUIEL 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 OTHER 4 1 2 1 0 0 4 TOTAL 22 5 15 8 1 9 31 HUURLY IMPLOYEES HUU5E I"4NID 4 2 11 6 2 0 4 HuuSE R E f:l t D 16 8 31 14 5 2 10, APARTlifNT klNi!D 9 2 9 2 1 10 19 M0L(Ill H 0f'l R E r.T I O 2 1 2 1 0 1 3 M uf41 L [ HLME UdNFD 2 0 0 0 0 1 3 S L I E P IfiG A0011 M01FL 2 1 1 1 0 9 11 DillE R 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 10iAL 36 14 54 24 8 23 59 ALL IMPLOYE f 5 HOU$f DWNID 14 5 19 10 3 0 14 HOU$t R E l.1 E D 18 9 35 17 5 3 21 A P A R 1 Mi t:1 RINi[D 14 2 10 2 1 16 30 MODILL H C.5 E REN1tD 2 1 2 1 0 1 3 M U til t i HUf:t UWNFD 3 0 0 0 0 2 S 5 LIE PIf;G E00M MultL 2 1 1 1 0 10 12 O1HE R 5 1 2 1 0 0 5 101AL 58 19 69 32 9 32 90 1347 090
37 TABLE A-17 FCLLOW UP 50kVFY Wi1R AE R S WHO MllVf D thTO 4AkT5VILLE f.UC L E AR P L A f41 AALA PAGE 016 , HENDER5LaVILLE E llN l' t. T t 03/06/79 EltPLO YE F S L IVING hlTHiti CITY LlHITS PfPUk1 10 ACTI%E EMPLOYtf5 03-31-79 kUN llMt 030925 WITH TUTAL CHILDREN fill L DR E f t tillV E R S Cit iL DR E N li L M t. E R IN lil MOVtR$ WITH IN Uf CRADF HIGH W I Tl;UU T Till AL F Att ! L Y 5 L li DU L C H I L D k 0 ll SCHOUL SCHOUL F A lil L Y HUYt R 5 A fiP.U A L E M F L OY E L S HLUSE l'W N I D 5 2 5 2 1 1 6 H Cl! S I k I tilt 0 2 1 2 1 0 0 2 A P t.k T M t t. T R E f4 T E D 12 3 8 4 1 15 27 M llf- I L t H u t' f R E T.T E D M hi Ill H C.M E UWNED SL [ t P If,G ROUM MuliL GIMLR 10TAL 19 6 15 7 2 16 35 HOUPLY E Mi'L O Y L E S HUUSI UWFwfD 13 11 30 17 4 1 14 HOUSE A f t; T E D 5 4 9 6 1 0 5 f P f v i:'.t t4 T R E F. I E D 13 6 20 11 3 10 23 Y.II l L E HLPE R L f:T E D 1 1 3 1 0 0 1 MIDILE HLt t U k t.E D 3 2 3 5 0 0 3 S L f E r i f.G 6 00tl MilI E L 2 0 1 0 0 2 4 UlhER 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 IUTAL 37 24 66 40 8 14 51 ALL I M r'LOYt t 5 HbCSE IiWNID 18 13 35 19 5 2 20 HLLSL R E P. T E D 7 5 11 7 1 0 7
/PARTSitT RENTED 25 9 28 15 4 2.5 50 MGPILt HLVf k i t.T f D 1 1 3 1 0 0 1 MU51Lf HOPE L14NED 3 2 3 5 0 0 3 5LII PIidG kuufi w Gif t 2 0 0 . 1 0 2 4 01tlE R 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 TOTAL 56 30 61 47 10 30 86 1347 391
38 TABLE A-18 I LLL OW UP SURVFY WORKI R$ KHO MOVE D I f410 HART $VILLE NUC)fAR PLANT AEf A PAGI 017 4ASHVilLE RUN DATE Dd/06/79 EMPLOYEES LIVI % V I Tit i fi CITY LIMIT 5 REP 0k1 ID ACTIV! [HPLGYTES 03-31-79 F:UN T IMI 000'325 FITH TOTAL C tf l L D F. I ?; CHILDREN MOVERS Cllll Dk l y ! UMi[R IN I f4 MOVfR5 WITH IN DI GRA0F HIGH WIThDUT TUTAL FAMILY SC t:Ob L CH I L 0 kE ti SCHbut SCHOUL FAMIL) HOVtk5 A h f.U A L FMFLOYEE5 HOU5E bW fil D 2 0 1 0 0 0 2 HOUSI klN1FD A P t. R I M l f. T Ril;if D 1 0 0 0 0 5 6 H 0 f:ll! H0FF wtNTID MulilLI HOPE OWNED SLEL Fll.G kUOM Hu1EL 01 til R 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 101AL 3 0 1 0 0 9 12 H0llR L Y f M PL U YE [ 5 HOUSE Llif t D 7 6 14 8 3 1 8 HDU5f F i f,T E D 20 8 18 11 2 5 2 'i A P t k i tit N T k t ;,T I O 9 0 1 0 0 9 1 44 MUIILE tiLPt F E fit E D 2 1 2 1 0 0 2 HUFILt HI l' E D a'. E D 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 S L f l ' I f,0 LOOM 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 MUTI L 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 011tl R 2 0 1 0 0 2 4 luitt 41 15 37 20 5 21 62 ALL [ MI'L O YI E 5 HOU5L FW r.f D 9 6 15 8 3 1 10 litiv 5 t 5 f f. I[ D 20 8 I t. 11 2 S ?$ A PI,R i f 4 f h I R E f. i f D 10 0 1 0 0 14 24 Hl'til t i H L. E RfNitD 2 1 2 1 0 0 2 MOBILi lici l G a f, F D 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 S L E i P i t' G 6 0 til' O O O O O 2 2 Mult L 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 D ilil R 2 0 1 0 0 0 8 10Ttt 44 15 3M 20 5 30 74 1347 392
39 Appendix B SLCCNDARY SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACT MONITORING OF HARTSV:LLE NUCLEAR PLANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT AREA . Secondary impict is defined as a temporary increase in the trade and service related 2 esident population of the five-county area having an impact on community f acilities and services which can be attributed to the Hartsville const ruction project. TVA's monitering program consists of a three-step procedure during each reporting period for estimating and reconciling population changes for each of the impact area counties. Residential customers of power distributors and school enrollment are used to provide independent estimates of county residential population change during a given reporting period. Population for the beginning of the first reporting period is estimated by applying the procedure outlined in Step I below to the most current estimate of county population provided by.U.S. Bureau of the Census Current Population Reports. Subsequent estimates of population for the start of a reporting period is the TVA-estimate at the end of the previous reporting period and is adjusted each time more current census estimates are availabic. An estimate of secondary impact is made using the following three-steps process. Step I Ratios of school enrollment and residential customers to population is calculated at the beginning of the reporting period for each of the impact area counties. These ratios are applied to the number of residential h9)
40 customers and school enrollment at the end of the period. This yields _wo estimates of population change during the reporting period. These two estimates are averaged to produce a single estimate of population change for each of the impact arer counties. Step II Primary employment populatior., taken f rom TVA employee surveys, is subtracted from total adjusted population. If a residual population is derived, the analysis will continue to Step III. Sten III This step comprises an analysis of nonproject related primary employment and its secondary effect to determine what part of the remaining unexplained population change should not be attributed to the project. An estimate of change in total employment in each of the impact area counties during the reporting period is made us.ng monthly data from the " CPS Labor Force Summary" produced by the Tennessee Department of Employment Security. In order to determine that part of the change in total employment which can be attributed to forces other than the construction project, it is necessary to estimate the change in nonproject rela ted employment. Change in nonprojected related primary employment is estimated using a linear interpolation of primary employment as a percent of total employment in 1970 and projected to 1980, as given in the 1974 report by the Tennessee State Planning Office, Tennessee Mitigation, Population Families u lncome, and Manpower Demand Projection to 1990 for Develorment Districts and Ccunties. A ratio of .65 will be applied to the 1347 094
41 change in nonproject related primary employment to determine tha t part of the change in secondary employment which can be considered nonproject related. The total employment change is converted to population using an , average f amily size of three and subtracted from any unexplained population remaining. If no other reason exists for the re-'ining population it will be considered as secondary impact. As results of the 1980 Census of Population or any other special census of census estimates are published, the population base of the impact area counties will be recalibrated. Residential customars, school enrollment, and total population will be recorrelated. Essentially, a new population base will be established from which to measure change throughout the remainder of the monitoring period. 1347 095 . C.,m u n i t '., Economics Proj ec tr. 2/23/77
42 Appendix C TRAFFIC LEVEL DEFINED Level of Service D Level of service D approataes unstable flow, with tolerable operating speeds being maintained though considerably affected by changes in operating conditions. Fluctuations in volume and temporary restrictions to flow may cause substantial drops in operating speeds. Drivers have little freedom to maneuver, and comfort and convenience are low, but c >nditions can be tolerated for short periods of time. Source: Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Board Special Report 87, 1965. 1347 096
O - .~_D y
- c. 3 ; Q ,go~ on( sw w~.aees _y, ci..oe wm-
.t
.g;,_, f ,, ,./'. 2,._ __e _ {f g r_
g}. p_ s j
}g fll * \ ~
y 1-- -.
. . , ,. Y '%Q l { , -- .
a m ,,~ ~ .-l. i- ,
, yt.
i .. J , ,< 5<3.,. ..
.. 3.......... x. , ,-. .c_[, . ., , ,
c, (fj, ; y,,,; ,
+ n 'fv
'\ lj ,/ / q,- /, y ' .~. j, E
}',. ~**--i, / ,- ,
3 ,,
/' }y_,.
t y -,
. .- \
q.".
; ts , , Y. . . .. . . . ... ., / \... , %. ,
j
>s {4. _;. j../
b,.y' } L.y~" jf.---~ "f:.-.n/ .7 &t $, ,/7 ' e- T ' x ~ - h . m, ,, . , M, '. .., L. n .. c .y.a. p ... -
\. .
- l. ~
--, .: 9,.
~ ._...
,. ~. :m x i u
-,~ ,o
-x
.(m, ..,..-4,. v
.= t . 9 -
. , g, _.,____..-- i.. __.. _:. . _')._ . . .
n.. f ._ . r a,&. . . . ,..
;L
. . .. .,., ;x. , g .h
.A~ k .-..... ;. a m, ty ,%s -
, 7.2 x
~
m ee x J.,'/.w. ,. w - %c .. ~. , ,f'- .. /e . .:. .
. ~ . . .>
- m. . - * - ^ . *<
"' J 3 ,
"i \
7>- 't p d,
. m' V J h,,,f
,1 . . . . . ./'*~ ,
. se 4 .
\ ,'y I k,,
.I .
. r ..M El Ay:!M \nr.
- a. 9... ;,yrMc.2 :.
- 4 .... s ,, -3 m,,':f'. M : / l- .. . '( ry --
,-f,,,, u a .
.s.,. ... ., ~i : : , .+ ; 3.;... -i s V.- t o -- -
vs,w .m. %.g . g , w.,. j , ,
"w_
. ,- s 5 s ., ;.- c. q f. 9:.7 . ,-~-- - ,,
( a* # A. *
/'?.fM ; .
" ' " ## -~"4 C
.fy$ \
h.-
.. g .,,,.= sos.
't N' i . . , , ., 4.N. '** M D / 6 *
~ M D ... .-. bc. ..., .
i 7 ,
**" \ n ,. dII. (s '
i j ( *' (M -y I {
- [- M.~ . _ . f .=@/J _. Hs r-t d /
'; i. / ,1 d
' % g".r .=./
Q--.- f ~~~ _ & M ,. N,.M[ s m . NASHVi$ - u . __ , vfMb gNB .. . j. 3L-- _ Y.Y. ._. .. .- .k,$. m d-.._f.h . aE-),- Ex , -
~
[ I r ,~ ,
/
y . N . es n..
+ p r 7C.4
.. ~ wf _..t. - m. y, g ~ ,3
./v . ,
7,.q,.,.$, ,m, s ..
,'~a.m
. g 4 a,
. s ~. 1 ,*
~. e)d , '
. J. . . .. , ,,,.
prr,y. ==
,s
,,, . , . , .., ~~s d ,. 4' N
Se 4_ ,A ,- '-w 1- c. v \-*" '"'$
~ s
- lq
~,
,p.
~ > , -
-. ~ e 3 ,y -- ..
_ .l ; . .s. ,,r .e- -,,.f ~~ .p *. -
.': /
,f
'.~r y) p / _% - ]. L y;
.~
. .;g;i .F .s. e, ,. t ,
m
/- Z .
.u . .r u, ,e
+ .~ y -
- m. . . ,
x - . i: xM A .i: . AEM yn i 'L;'
% lgl sp . I . f -_f
~
s" '._ -.c 7 ' %h. w
- ~.~ X
.. Y $ -
p =Q. k p% t i y& )' .g(/.4 _ tff.w3. i 4,, s -x !..).7.')[. .
~
.._ .i,.. .xw n s
- . ; S y .y:. z ..
&s/Q,~V;k
'o
>&. 7 1 cJ ,..L
. -- i le , g
, - j J -
m,
".+g
\c, y m., s . v.d w,,,,4, a 2
.3, %,/
- 3 e-
.( : ,. , . . J hby ,,
.s 4., Ap~ .a.'(S2 . ~ .[
~
/ I cob O '
v '. w . ..[ f - 4 "'), u/ ' \/ '
.m ~r.-.-]k. .'. . Oq, /} .l r (
f .. .
,,. 2. s ,
e a L, . . nn ..,y Q, ,v.3 ~~n.,w.ya-< ; t ,g,/.,.4,. ..y. ~
.-a y;
u4 N w gGUREI
. N / "'A . 7l -$ r... ..e . % f, i <
- i. ,
f .. ,,, ti y , . / rna,,, ::
\e :'k ,,;..,..\ l s #
,5 HARTSVILLE NUCLEAR PLANT
/ ' A... ...
w l ,.....q i cl '/ ,
' 3 / %:- q g*g**' . "/
'Q'y f M%-T; 'M : ...#
\ J: 7
./.2(:
- r :. . TOWNS CONTAINING CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYEES
_s'f {,]'p!, /, W ., q~ =' A PLANT SITE N ,
.~ (e .,b , y , 3/ .. . ./ . .'...y
, . .P<mmam ' , , ' m 'v-~-6 \
"- s MARCH 1979
,.', \ - ,, . g Q y
\ ., , {.T., 0 s[ . .. . 15 15 30 4
( 1
. ,, ' aaps. ....,/.d.
I a ', f x A.J (- -y, .M
.M 'bg.\ . . (,'
*~~,Y.
,j .
s
, l ,
/. ,i j .
4 .. f..% ,, . Qy s ..o-. , . , SCALE OF MILES f < e ,I -
-j ,< /> ' ' ' - . - *
- .. < t ; ., NOTE TOWNS UNDERLINED CONTAIN EMPLOYEES Ns. /. . ~. ; .{.,,~
l% s - ss .j 3 , c.,a ,- g,,,o}}