ML20063D463

Site Preparation Activities Rept

ML20063D463
Person / Time
Site:	Clinch River
Issue date:	06/30/1982
From:	ENERGY, DEPT. OF
To:
Shared Package
ML20063D461	List: ML20063D460 ML20063D463
References
NUDOCS 8207020199
Download: ML20063D463 (138)

Text

_ _ _ _ _

CLINCH RIVER j BREEDER REACTOR PLANT l rd l SITE PREPARATION i ACTIVITIES REPORT  ;

l l

JUNE 1982 l i

i l

J

, 4833&Ef;(;g .

eJ

• 9 I

s; [ '> .

s,, 6 s

S.rsex g!&p> h:;L. s CLINCH RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLANT h. , c- i.?>?

3 M Q A;;w:: &,;,R o ~p?ue '

I tN)bbM'Mb$[NN 2I4' b *N N/ N b k Eh,jfjh.g hA#ygYh - pgg;!

s wn. > .<4 4 9.y . e . < 3 g g ;p p g g g g g r w .. # St h / 4 8h L!

8207020199 820701 PDR ADOCK 05000537 0 PDR l

CLINCH RIVER  !

(

BREEDER REACTOR PLANT i 4

i SITE PREPARATION i ACTIVITIES REPORT l l

JUNE 1982 l l

l l l

l 1

l

f.AGA Iv SUhWARY AND CCNCLUSICNS 1-1 1.0 INTRCDUCTICN .

1-1 1.1 Purpose of Report 1.2 Objective and Scope of Froposed Activities 1-2 1.3 Construction Planning and Scheduling 1-3 2-1 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND STA7US Site Location and Laycut 2-1 2.1 2-4 2.2 Local Demography 2-8 2.3 Local Land / Water Use 2-11 2.4 Histcrical and Archaeological Feaivres Histcrical Features 2-12 2.4.1 2-12 2.4.2 Archaeological Features 2.5 Site Geology and Hydrology 2-15 2.5.1 ' Geology 2-15 2-16 2.5.2 Hydrology 2-17 2.6 Ecology ,

2-17 2.6.1 Terrestrial Ecology 2-17 2.6.1.1 Fl ora 2-23 2.6.1.2 Threatened or Endangered Fauna 2-25 2.6.1.3 Reconnaissance Survey, August 1980 Aquatic Ecology 2-26 2.6.2 2-30 l 2.6.2.1 Endangered Species 2-31 2.6.2.2 Reconnaissance Survey, August 1980 2.7 Site Investigations 2-33 i

2-33 2.7.1 Site Berings 2-35 2.7.2 Seismic Surveys l 2.7.3 Metecrological Data Collection 2-35

^

3-1 3.0 DESCRIPTICN OF ACTIVITIES 3.1 General Site Clearing and Grading 3-2 3-6 3.2 Excavation fer Foundations 3-10 3.3 Temporary Plant Facilities l

l I

's 3-14 3.4 Other Activities 3.4.1 Permanent Access Read 3-14 3.4.2 Raltreac Spur 3-14 3.4.3 Construction Parking Area 3-16 3-16 3.4.4 Tempcrary Reads 3-16 3.4.5 Centracters' Werk and Storage Area Buried Water Pipe 3- 17 3.4.6 3-17 3.5 Constructicn Utilities 3 -17 3.5.1 Electric Pcwer , ,

3 - 17 3.5.2 Ccmpressed Air 3-18 3.5.3 Water System 3-18 3.5.4 Raw Water Use 3-18 3.5.5 Fire Protection 3-19 3.5.6 Sanitary Facilities 3.6 Permanent Main Survey Centrol Lines 3-20 and Bench Marks 3.7 Quarry and Stockpile Areas 3-20 3.8 Cost of Site Preparation and Excavation 3-22 4-1 4.0 ENVIRCNMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PRE =ARATION Impacts on Ecology, Land Use, soll and Wate~r Rescurces 4-1 4.1 Impact on Terrestrial Ecolcgy 4-1 4.1.1 4-8 4.1.2 Impact on Aquatic Ecology Impact en Land Use 4-10 4.1.3 4-12 4.1.4 Impact on Soils Impact en Water Resources 4-16 4.1.5 9 "

4.2 Solid and Liquid Waste Disposal 4-19 Sanitary and Other Waste Treatment and Precessing 4-20 4.3 4-22 4.4 Impact en Histcrical and Archaeological Features Impact en Aesthetic Values 4-23 4.5 4-25 4.6 Identification of Unique er Special Hazards Economic and Social Effects of Proposed Activities 4-26 4.7 4-33 4.8 Site Preparation Activities impact Control Measures 5-1 5.0 RECRESSABILITY OF IMPACTS General Site Clearing, Grading and Excavation 5-2 5.1 5-3 5.2 Temporary Pl ant Facil ities 5.3 Access Rcad, Railroad, Spur Line, 5-4 and Barge Unicading Facility 5-4 5.4 Construction Utilities 5-5 5.5 Main Centrol Cevices and Benchmarks 5-5 5.6 Quarry and Crushing Facility Salvage value 5-5 5.7 5-6 5.8 Summary II ,

6-1 6.0 FCRECLOSURE CF ALTERNATIVES 6.1 CRBRP Design 6-1 6-1 6.2 Site Ut!!!zation 7-1 7.0 EFFECT OF DELAY CN PUBLIC INTEREST Overall LMFBR Program Benef its 7-2 7.1 7-5 7.1.1 Base Research and Development Program Benef its 7-8 7.1.2 Large Develcpmental Plant Benef its 7-9 7.1.3 Fuel Cycl e Program Benef its International Program Consicerations 7-10 7.2 7.3 Monetary Cost of Delay 7-12 7-12 7.3.1 The Appropriations Perspective 7-13 7.3.2 The Economic Perspective 7-14 7.3.3 The Financial Perspective 7-14 7.4 Conclusions ,

8-1

8.0 REFERENCES

~

l III ,

SUMMARY

AND CCNCLUSICNS The Clinch River Breeder Reacter Plant (CRBRP) site has alreacy been well characterized as a result of extensive physical and envircr.= ental studies that have been conducted at the site and its environs since the initial planning phase of the Project in 1972. The activities proposed pursuant to this request consist of clearing and grading, excavation, construction of temporary f acIIItt es and some permanent serv ice f acil ities. Prompt approval and ccmpletion of these activities wculd allcw the Project to progress to construction of permanent, saf ety-related plant structures expeditiously when a Limited Werk Authorization-2 (LWA-2) er a Construction Permit (CP) is granted by the Nuclear Regulatcry Commission (NRC).

A ccmprehensive assessment of the potential impacts of the proposed activities on the CRBRP site indicates that all environmental values will be adequately protected. The NRC Final Environmental State ent (FES)

NUREG-0139, described the environmental impacts of site preparation werk and conditions to assure that such activities are conducted so as to minimize those impacts. The FES concluded that the environmental ef fects of site preparation activities would not be significant. Since the environmental ef f ects of the activities described in this repcrt do not dif f er significantly from those described in the FES, and since recent reconnaissance surveys perfcrmed in 1980 indicated that conditions at the site have not changed significantly from those described in the FES, it folicws that the site preparation activities described herein will not result in significant environmental ef fects.

Prempt undertaking of these activities will not fereclose. consideration of alternative coursos of action. The scope of the proposed activities has been specifically limited to retain the ability to implement any desired plant design changes resulting from NRC safety and environmental reviews.

Further, the appilcant is ecmmitted to restere the site if a decision is subsequently made not to proceed with construction of the CRSRP. Alterne-tive uses of the site wculd not be fereciosed.

1 l

~

Iv f

The CRBRP is a key step in the deveicpment of the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reacter (LMFBR) and is a vital element in f ulfilling the nuclear mission of the Department of Energy (CCE).(0-1) Unf ectunately, the CRSRP has already experienced significant engineering, manuf acturing and construction delays with conccmmitant asscciated cost escalation, largely due to causes external to the Project during the prior Administration. Further del ay of the CRBRP wculd cause additional unnecessary expense and jeopardize the nation's preparedness fcr icnger-term nuclear power needs. The ef fects of perfcrming the site preparation activities described in this report are redressabl e.

The CRBRP project proposes to initiate redressable site preparction and excavation activities at the earliest possible time so that tro maximum benefits to the Project will accrue during fiscal years 1982 and 1983.

Approval by NRC to proceed as proposed can reduce the Project completion schedule by 6-12 months, provide impcrtant Informational benef its, and achieve a substantial cost savings to the taxpayer. .

O e

[ v

9 I.0 INTRODUCTICN 1.1 PURPOSE CF REPCRT The purpose of this document is to support the request of the CRBRP Project f or Nuclear Regulatery Ccmmission (NRC) approval to proceed with certain site preparation activities at the earllest possible time.

The CRBRP Project submitted an Environmental Report in October 1974 and a Preliminary Safety Analysis Report in April 1975. These were filed under NRC Cocket Nc. 50-537. These initi al submittal s were supplemented with anendments to both documents. Folicwing NRC staf f review, a Final Environmental Statement (FES) was issued by the NRC in February 1977(I-II in which it was concluded, "In the event the applicant is permitted to proceed with site preparation under a Limited Werk Authorization, it is the staf f's opinion that the environmental impacts of such werk wculd not be significant."(1-2) In March 1977, the NRC issued a Site Sultabi.lity Report (SSR) Il-3) which contained the folicwing conclusion, "In determining the acceptability of the CRBRP site, the staf f has considered the folicwing f actors: population density and use characteristics of the site environs, including the exclusion area, Icw population zone, and population center distance; and, physical characteristics of the site, including seismology, metecrology, geology, and hydrology. The staf f concludes that the above characteristics of the Clinch River site are acceptable."Il-43 in addition, the NRC's June 1982 update of the SSR also confirms the March 1977 SSR conclusions.II-33 l

The scope of the proposed site preparation activlTies is generally l

described below in Section I.2. The proposed schedule and sequence of these activities is provided in Section 1.3. Folicwing a description of the site (Section 2.0) and a mere detailed description of the proposed activities relevant to CRBRP site preparation and excavation (Section 3.0),

an in-depth assessment of the envircnmental Impact of these activities is provided (Section 4.0). The extent to which redress of any adverse environmental ef f ects f rom these proposed activities can be achieved is then addressed (Section 5.0), along with whether fereclosure of 1-1 .

alternatives could result fecm the proposed activities (Section 6.0).

Finally, the overriding publIc Interest fcr avoiding additional delay in initiating CRBRP preparation activities is described (Section 7.0).

1.2 CBJECT!VE AND SCCFE CF PRCPOSED ACTIVITIES As will be discussed in Section 7, the CRBRP is a key demonstration project in the deveicpment of the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reacter (LMFER) and is a vital element in fulfilling the nuclear mission of the Department of Energy (DOE).(1-5) In 1981, the Congress enacted the Omnibus Budget Reconcillation Act of 1981(I-6) which continued the authorization for the Project and set the stage fer additional fund _ing. The Conference Repcrt acccmpanyIng this Iegisiation(t-7) explicitly states the intent of Ccngress that the Project is a key step in the development of the LMFBR, and that the Project must be constructed in a timely and expeditious manner, so that a decision on the ccmmercialIzation and deployment of breeder reacters can be made on the basis of Information obtained in the operation of the plant.

The objective of the proposed activities is to prepare the Site for a majcr construction program. Completion of these preliminary activities will result in a significant time saving in the project-ccmpletion schedule and will advance the date by which the objectives of the demonstration project can be acccmpi Ished.

To meet this objective, it is requested that certain site-preparation activities be authert ed including the folicwing items:

A. Clearing and Grubbing - Areas to be cleared and grubbed will include those required fer roads, railroads, tempcrary construction f acilities, parking lot, main plant, cooling towers, switchyards, stcrage areas, on-site quarry, runof f treatment ponds, concrete batching and mixing plant, and barge unicading f acilIty.

B. Earthwcrk - Earthwcrk w!!I include excavation, backfIlI and grading for reads and railroads, concrete batching and mixing plant, parki ng l ot, mai n pl ant, ccol ing tcwers, switchyards, stcrage 1-2 ,

r areas, the temporary construction f acilities and buildings, runcf f treatment ponds, and quarry cperaticns.

C. Temporary Construction Facil ities - Temporary construction f acil l-ties will be prepared cr constructed, as required, to acccmmodate management, craf t l abor, and the use of equipment and material for the project. Services to be installed will include water, sewerage, telephones, power, fire protection and compressed air. A barge f acility fcr unicading heavy equipment will also be constructed during this period.

D. Other Construction Activities - A suitable access road to the Site will be constructed. A railroad spur from the existing railroad at DOE's Oak Ridge Gasecus Dif fusion Plant will be extended to the plant site. A construction parking area will be prepared. Tempo-rary roads will be built to provide access to the construction areas f rem the permanent access road, the barge unicading f acil ity, -

and the quarry. Underground circulating water piping and emergency plant service water piping will be installed and backfilled.

These activities are discussed in more detail in Section 3. Since the FES was issued in February 1977, the scope of planned site preparation activi-ties has not significantly changed.

1.3 CCNSTRUCTICN PLANNING AND SCHECULING The planning and scheduling of construction activities for the CRBRP de-pends en the date when site werk is initiated. Because of delays already incurred in initiating site wcrk, the, engineering and design work is well advanced and the site preparation activities are on the critical path fcr ccmpleting pl ant constructicn. Engineering design activities have been scheduled to support early site preparations activities and to avoid a discentinuity in construction pending further authcrization from NRC (LWA-2 cr CP) to ccmmence saf ety-related construction. The sequence of construction operations to be perfcrmed is shown in Figure 1-1. These activities are discussed in =cre detail in Section 3.0.

1-3 ,

WEEK 0 50 100 lllll1IIIIl11IIIIllllI

\/ PRELIMINARY SITE PREPARATION AUTilORIZATION--August 1.1982 lllll i SITE Engr. Clearing, Grubbing & Excavation PREPARATION _ ,

,,s S

4 ACCESS ROAD " " ' ' " * .*"

& RAILROAD (.) 3 CONSTRUCTION Engr. Erection

BUILDINGS g Delimy ()

Procure

" "' '" O P"'"'"

uUARRY , e#**""'"'"a -

L-i Engr. Delivery Assemble & Qual. Operate BATCH PLANT t.) g g p BARGE Dredging

• UNLOADING Delv. Const. / ol>erate FACILITY (.)- -

-(.)  ! f(.) L, SEWAGE inst 11 operate TREATMENT b*

(*) 8 FACILITY 1

• ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY. TO BE CONDUCTED DURING AUGUST TO MARCH PERIOD TO PRECLUDE INTERFERENCE WITH FISH SPAWNING, IF NECESSARY.

Figure 1-1. Site Preparation Schedule ,

The initial werk consists of clearing and grubbing, folicwed by stripping of topsoll and stockpiling it. Runof f treatment ponds, spoil and stockpil e areas will be prepared. Overburden will then be remcved and placed in the designated fill er spoil areas. This will permit the initi ation of the construction of tempcrary f acilitles and the excavations fcr the plant structures. Folicwing excavation of the associated areas, the quarry and crushing pl ant, stockp i l e, laydown and parking areas and a concrete batch-Ing and mixing plant will be constructed. Railroad f acilities, a berge unicading f acility, access roads, a water supply line and a temperary building will be provided in a timely fashion as part of the site prepara-tion activities. The sewage treatment f acility will be Installed and beccme operational near the end of the site preparation activity.

The schedule in Figure 1-1 is based on August 1, 1982, as the date when the site preparaticn activities described herein are authorized. Without NRC approval to proceed'at this time, it is estimated that under an expedited schedule, an LWA might be issued by early 1983 (NRC st,af f estimated on June 24, 1982 befcre the ACRS CRERP Sub-ccmmittee that an LWA-I could be issued by June 1983). On a mere conservative basis, the LWA approval might be issued six months later. Accordingly, an August 1,1982 approval by the NRC to proceed with early site preparation werk can recuce the Project construction schedule by 6 to 12 months.1 Fcr ease of comparison, a savings of 12 months has been used as the baseline number throughout this report.

As discussed in mere detail in Section 7, earlier ccmpletion of the Project will result in substantial information and progranmatic benef its to the overall LMFBR Program.

I lf the staff estimate is ccrrect, grant of this request could result in a scheduled savings of 10-16 months.

1-5

9 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION AND STATUS A description of CRSRP site characteristics is providad herein which focuses on those features relevant 1o proposed site preparation activities.

Mcre detailed site Inf crmation bearing on pl ant construction and operation can be fcund in the CRSRP. Environmental Repcrt and Preliminary Saf ety Analysis Repcrt which were submitted to the Nuclear Regulatcry Ccmmission

~

under Docket No. 50-537 and which formed the basis for NRC's issuance of the Final Environmental Statenent (FES) (NUREG-0319) and the Site Sultability Report (SSR) and its June 1982 update. The impact assessments provided in Section 4 of this repcrt demonstrate that since the issuance of the FES and the SSR, nothing has cccurred on this site which wculd alter the f avorable conclusions reached in these documents.

2.1 SITE LCCATICN AND LAYCUT The site location and laycut are discussed in Section 2.1 of NRC's FES.

The Clinch River Site is located in east central Tennessee in the eastern part of Rcane Ccunty (see Figure 2-1). Knoxvil le, Tennessee, is located approximately 22 miles east of the Site. C' tf es located within a 10-mile radius (see Figure 2-2) of the Site are Lenoir City, about 8.5 miles southeast; Kingsten, 7 miles west; Harriman, 9,.5 miles west-ncrthwest; and Oak Ridge, 9 miles northeast. Distances are in radial miles from the center of the Site. Although the Site is technically within the city limits of Oak Ridge, it is located in the scuthwestern pertion of undevelcped property cwned by the U.S. Government and is in the cusicdy of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). Location of the Site with respect to its proximity to population centers, railroads and highways within a 10-mile radiur is shown in Figure 2-2.

l The Site is Iccated on a peninsula fermed by a meander of the Clinch River between river miles 14.5 and 18.6. It is bounded on the ncrth and east by CCE's Oak Ridge Reservation. Of the 1,364 acres within the Site boundaries, approximately 292 acres (21%) will be required fer construction of the Clinch River Breeder Reacter Plant (CRSRP) and related f acilities such as l

l 2-1 l

I

g\ CAMP 9 ELL s

SCOTT FENTRESS UNION GRAINGER MORGAN ANDERSON ISITE JEFFERSON H RRIMAN OGE KNOXVILLC

• KINGST0fJ CUMBERLAND ROANE SEVIER LENOIR CITY LO DON BLOUNT <

BLEOSCE /

RHEA .~

,~

s

+ MCMINN MONROE ,'

4 l

~

/ '

c .~ '

N POLK 20 g 0 !O

] IH W l SCALE OF MILES

,..__.. ----------...._.e_'-_-..7.d K Y.

' v^

MO i

t

'8A8MVILL E ' KNOxylLLE

~

/

- %s T N N ..P.**

ARK.,[ k, ~ N.C.

~ ~ ~ ,~ q -- - S-~ .- .. . . - -

o .

Figure 2-1. Location of Clinch River Site in Relation to Counties and State 2-2

r N

I ^

NNW NNE

. l \s OAK MORGAN , ( RIDGE NW COUNTY \V , NE g --. - '

t \_

% / \

souhEEN ROANE COUNTY f

\

ANDERSON ocoun i ,/ \ COUNTY C#EEK 4 *

~

WNW y , ,/ '

- ' , \ ENE

\l HARRIMAN Y ,!

h .

'.- g A

., \, KNOX

\.. g.cg* .

,, COUNTY-W ~

(5g W ,

"'w" E

N N~' , 73 KibGSTON 7C g'

\

ROANE COUNTY 70 WSW -.. . ESE

>$t % ,

il g / LOOOON COUNTY SW

?

'f$" SE l i LEGENO ,f SSW .[

, SSE ,

APPROX. DOE SOUNDARY b

/

7//////M] GASEOUS OlFFUSION PLANT O 5

' '.Y '-

" ORNL

~

SCALE CF MILES i

l Figure 2-2. Location Of Site with respect to Urban Centers, Railroads and Highways within a 10-Mile Radius Of the Site l

2-3 ,

r

e roads, railrcads and utility anc transmission line corriders. The Reacter dbntainment Building and its support buildings will cccupy abcut seven acres. Estimates of the amount of c:reage required f cr varicus site preparation activities are given in Section 3.1 and Table 3-1.

A portion of the Site to the ncrth of the plant, between Bear Creek Rcad and Grassy Creek, has been set aside for industrial development and is .

called the Clinch River Consolidated Industrial Park (CRCIP).

Approximately 112 acres will be cccupied by the CRCIP and the remaining acreage of the 1364 acre Site will be available to TVA for future uti l ization. Figure 2-3 shows the plant's f acilities in relation to the Site and the CRCIP.

Grade fer the main plant has been established nominally at 815 feet above mean sea level (MSL), placing it 74 feet above the mean Clinch River water level of 741 feet MSL.

Steep limestene ridges, hills and knobs are characterrstic features of the region. In the Site area, Chestnut Ridge is dominant, cresting at about elevation 1,100 feet. A fleedplain borders the western side and the southern tip of the peninsula, but is essentially absent from the eastern border. There are no perennial streams at the Site; flow along valleys and gullies occurs only af ter periods of heavy rainf all . Figure 2-4 is a topographical map of the region; an aerial view, taken February 25, 1981, is presented in Figur e 2-5.

2.2 LCCAL CEMCGRAPHY Local demcgraphy is discussed in Section 2.I of NRC's FES.

Within five miles of the plant site there are no significant population concentrations. Approximately one-third of this area ecmprises land cwned by the U.S. Government and in the custcdy of COE cr TVA (including the Clinch River Site) and is within the city limits of Oak Ridge. Mcwever, two-thirds of the resident population of Oak Ridge is Iccated beyond the 10-mile radius.

2-4

s.m,.s w ,. c.; y

• t ,,,,

[.

s \. ,,,,,, ,"

re.

,. ,Q*a' ,' -

' t% w

~

- f. .. , .*... g Q',..V a

6, * * - -

IP r <

w . ,+~%

..u.x a -.s,.,

. - %.,m-;;'N g'"*L ** D ervg g ,,,~ W c Ar e ~

.w # ,  %.u.

.. ...a

.. .. .a m f ,. . .

' C w ,* \, aw z. m, '

1..erm y'

A Ie p< %. '$'.

7 's M(y,~ .

.- \ ..

• v( ,,%

N

\ N.

a

<ji

~

y ,

s *

,y g .s

j ', ,{

/

ro -x

.ys g

/

/

j

/ / s *,,

t } r

• < 'lss

, 9

' ~.

. - 7 r .am ,x. / / . y ER

?

e - Cu %' m .cs.c3 . 3. .

.w. . . . . . _ .

/v\  %*% ,s

,A L'

* * *~. ,y* * . .,su y- , -e f r

~

~**2 ,..,,s%.~ w ca. 'r

- ~ .

,q w

. ,,.e. ee m .. s. ..

/' + /

ss w ,, - . .s.LA '* 3D"*I

,'LU , .

a

... *2h8 *

~~~~",

/ e

, f .. :. c.e * -**

4 P  ;..~* * - . . . . . . . . ,

RWER C,.,9-

/

2.*~ w :s. .

' j.J-CUNCHsqcs:r~gq REL .

~ ..%. ,

.7

.ru.w. m .-.

es e ,../

/ ,i nzsr TED ARE!*l ,,#

(pgoT* C

,is.

Ns -% a'6 i

.w.

</ *'?

/ ,e/ ,,- 9 3 f N s

.g-ag..

E,.L X-: ~- L.f , .., ..r -

aw e..,y. d. ' .

g*,2* m., - .- 3 N-

. i1;I~ _ , sAj, , s

,..<. r f , s. .. *

~* .

l. = ~ r.- u,.. .

.,,.,..e ;f .

ht %,f,.

\ ~I, ..s:w>-- <

(.. _ _m-, +

-. ._ . c a r

,- ,. /f t.,

(. ..,

w=wd :ys . s a . ,- .,

i m.,. a. , _z 'sfs.....

8 N. x

/

e <~~~"l<

is\3, .\

\

// . .

i c%**, '. .

. ~

1: #

!l h~f.~3(s'*&37;,./ Y;':'%

~. s .

6,

.. 1

/ t 3

n )

'.....' 3,

+

v l q >

- . _l j/ *i

.,...>...4.{\1)

- s ,

i y T

.' \.

Figurg g_3* pI nt Location on the Clinch River Site 2-5

1 a

l

. 1 i

I x.

- m.

. n- ,

,p e w.--.

s . ., r . - -

((hM. ~ y a s I,

/ i' . ?;I '

~ h[./ r.

[=

,.h

- f ($'A'~$r'-.MMhhfy$,

~

Rh%:nlf'klhf's-' dWW4. % hMf{Why

- q, )

y y,f h WlG +  %

\\ lh

/ O 'd

. ..:,,,,... & 9 ,' '.. u $ .... M...Gk.9/.; ,!: sd.. ,j;

/'"c

.r. . . . ,.

f,s%s'

' , $ ,'i g? _e_-

em . -

m

}) .I ($;h n .:

's

,.5 l -

b- f v' ./j, <' -Qh ['s y,,d k

\ \ p.-m-J ,fx.p--/ -.g?'G i.I.:.'i)

' / / I,?c,' *- ~

%.)/

' f'f , ' b s < 'G h ,

/' 6 s .'-

j. ,. /iv -

Q s  ; ,-

c> , s -A 3' ,l 0 ;r

• g -

,.-<) 2 e -

. @ \ ^5 .\. =::\ J9 / *

'f .

Y j Kr i, ,+l,,,,&.  : ,)-fMe 1l

.Q 45m,nsh p _. - $ bu \

E

_ y . af />"**'~ ~ CL{?_CHn r llp'l'/_q4 at

/ ~ ' ' ~ ' * " "

A[d L i /m;ff!(-;-fg

~

"~ ' '

-]

-5 :-

4,;

~ m /lw y..  ;

=~~'

n_.

m g;., ,

. e..p 8,

\ Q s Qs. >'

y~h:~c . = ~

- m .,,.. .

f ' 4 ,,--

t. . .

,,/ y n G,_ : vre t A B g ,%

G-L

.Q.hlV 3 ,' R E ' _ .V , ', .,% .l- jf Q U l' f ;q/ & ,3. : 4y$ \ Q gx p % Q" ,

f> wp^{(;s fr'QLWW 4

h. ,. -  ;.__ my- .~. , L ( c P -'l f.% %.g g , ,.

g

..; r w.' g.t , . p. ,,,_ "p u -

_ v4 p~ecy'r~u, s -

w- . .-=. s

,t

,.r M-_#'.

..:- -  %,s.

~ , . . ,

3, 3 4l:

e n

/ i

..a ;y

x. 3: , ,& p% ' %,e.q.' .'/3%./*

s/ -

y

)v 37: f5,ge@t,x  ? yM Reso.hPq .gd N4  : , .%e@

'Y* '

hf ,

n ,. .Y Y fb

,[k

? -f l g I _

~A JQ-/ f $ ~

~

Figure 2-4 Topography of the CRBRP Site 2-6

or 14 5  % 1

~ '

? $ -

'e.h. nf: mph_.gjag'y Mg.i% s :.* 4@4 y

_f.-

y

%-: -! Gah 9 r* . . . py fmM% '1

,%V % ';eMQ Eh ' i~ h I4 .,- t*[h

'W ~ g$xts{t i- a $;? j :f.'hMB  :,.4 . w' i A

}gi.- c *yM Q$M ,$'

h. $

4-u

.$ 9: , ,-

~ ; . ., . . ..

toi,, a-l g o,

-~b'Y L.' ~

• N,.

t L

X, <

~ (c&&hki"&&E;%r}.i.' AtWN'

~

.- :, . .m~.W+: _

e

,{.

.A.n. sw s.

W/ . > am $ ,

't a.

C..j. ,.

m' N kh kI q.m?'k 3 N-J a.'%r a' 3%%w$[if a&maba%p/e Pn$htfe

$1

. .,5, '

.+ - 3 a j i

g # -- f,b. .Ye .. .

. . . .

i

• i - d

.spu e p3 x(A=c .

ph.w' hh$,Qi N4,) i, # # '

[i, NM. E .

iCj c.C-p f( , sq-l 6 -'

Yf -

5

)- '* %).+ w j'?k 3t I

m :.;.o . w .

=s l$ 2' l \,3

%.yy.ar.,p.,7'4t',,AnQe

<4 <j

~

h

-y --eg'gf pw . Q> ,, .!, 3 .4h kl. g

- i dh-c 2n 4 R 6 t fi,f  % 2 y T,

?- ~: > * , Y.

f W.h[-9,.}.p.  %&qgyW_g>f 4-( ~,~ & p,g@fj,.. c. - u&

>'.*;fs n.:p P ,

,Q, , uy ;g s..~f'ty'b,kt.%'f,g -'{ .fr~'A .m.

EEk3,[NbhNNh>$i$Nd Figure 2-5. Aerial View of the Clinch River Site 2-7

Most of the transient population near the Site is due to industrial j activities in the area. In addition, some recreational activities add to the transient popul ation. Within a ene-mile radius there is one  ;

infrequently used access and bank fishing area located at the end of a dirt road. There are two similar use areas in the one-to-three-mile range. A 30-unit commercial camping and day use area is located about 3.5 miles southeast of the Site. The maximum number of people (at any time) at this campsite was 80 in 1980 and is projected to be 100 in 1990. A 100-unit commercial camping site has been develope'd on the Caney Creek snbayment near Clinch River Mlle (CRM) 17, approximately 1.5 miles from the southeast ,

boundary of the Site. The maximum number of people at this campsite in 1980 was 270 and is projected to be 340 in 1990. Activities at the ,

campsite include fishing, boating and swimming. A smal l stock-car race-track, located about three miles east southeast of the plant site is used only 1-2 days per week f or only a part of the year and had a peak-hour use in 1980 of 6000 persons. The TVA Melton Hil l Dam is locatad approximately 4.9 miles east of the Site. The recreational area at this f acility had a peak-hour use of approximately 890 persons in 1980 and is projected to have a peak-hour use of approximately 980 in 1990.

Two large industrial activities are located within five miles of the plant -

site. The Oak Ridge Gaseous Dif fusion Plant, with 5600 employees, is about three miles north-northwest. The Oak Ridge National Laboratory, with .

approximately 5100 employees, is about four miles east-northeast of the site.

h 2.3 LOCAL LAND / WATER USE  ;

i I

Within a two-mile radius of the Site, the area consists primarily of woodl and; hcwever, smal l f arms and residences are scattered throughout the ars5 south of the Clinch River. Figure 2-6 shcws the f arms, dwel l ings, ,

! Industries and wooded areas within a two-mile radius of the Site. '

One small industrial f acIIIty is located on a 33-acre parcel of land in the Clinch River Consolidated Industrial Park (CRCIP) abcut one and one-hal f ,

i 2-8

,n --.- -

N NNN ,e -W. M NNE t . : . *. - -

pl.M.;y.2@,.c@. C.Mi.i'J . .. . l.;K s c hsC-c-?c1- ,.n

- v- s.Q-h- - . . .t-W <*". .m . .*. *- * .**.' Ed-f-t-: ,,; .

wn.

Nw

. ~' -

' 4W!:~k@ep;6..

99.

M ' 7,

.- <:;Ar6%  %*ih M FE c @W1TE h y, w

As' p. , W &+;.m.; p,..;;; %ys y.?f %o $ g}i, q M

,- - ,-- i .

< .6 r.-c e swwhd9dj._

.VWG.4diff7. ~

Q'hfhE nc

,-~4*n,gg!6#5)di$p.thsd.t's,IW

hS5 ae hi$$$$ G

. :. . ,/A'+GC-

~.w-a x.:p.~:uW . ..

s v.r..,.

. e .-

.f aNwFgy J. - , g.s.3., .., y[ ; T@u .eyx ag$'??' .dT.s,.:U3.

i s, A-..vg,eg a,@c.,-a.

g $g$g1gy.w . yyy: u .e,.c 3 gse* P E,'%:.:. 3M

. . w~Z F, &n

• L-

..e m'.C_cp' c. :- c . C. . .h, - ..

~.~. M ,J; ' '~.;;;

1. .,c

@Vi'.,.,,,r-M .

%g@7n.s. ,4cD:% . . ...<cg?

t... '-kj ,@,lW*<cc'p't.W

- c. .M '"

s

% vz  :.

S.W.# . . .-. s?

i dM C. 4Mt :qdh. /? '

['. * * : "'teh2;1'k:

.N :s k.6.i (NWc- ::d

$mp$..:T// SM$- . . ..-w > f d.9!. : +. $ ,N::.

kens $hM*'sh'$Qi k%Ik:.

? s: M-mph)IMW5$M%.h\

• 5

.j

'.%$ ~~E'D.5~:(- .%,ht.-s-@bY

- g.

$+5h!s%."G?Cb-<A - ce M N T@y:$'%c m,:Q' .' g$.d.. cch eg'facQ

• Q7GW7w+q s t .,7Ny[ysc6c4 [:w.sf

~'y'y "

eTg QY'.p k

M0pe df .'* r :.:h . 2 N:W f.-V 69w% '. yff.,:,,.y*-@. a . 3 cyy.xe e

. i .

i usw

ntB5 .

QF-

. Q.!;,.- M:ly.';;9 . ,htUN6 dN.W-WK-T-): g W , ; Y< r, ,g :4,k.j-f ..

Eac ..

, , g*We:'.0 y~S . ,w - ev - : ces Np . s

-* b. : - -

-g > e * -

r.5' . <Ne l e$n'5Y uc% *lu'}u :y f .- n.$f.

rgrx.m.'r* h'b b bi.-:$g$-f, f , w'  : w nxw~-

< . - c.,w quxl?n' ..sh x

.'-r < ..

<-s s2R d.t*~p ".:..-.- Qw.2*.

w ' -Q -

p -

-at.q,,;z, m. . c ' .- -

.h.'w$.s. v:.d. - .te Ww. cc e

n*nc.;;- -.

sw %??n,,%.,.u-g.n.k,~.:.?.. M ... -' k.. . . < ' , . . s c.=.~.sa :c .- .

mesa

' e -3$,. .,R ., . .

S" er;,3c(egP.h. =pg. . 't.*e-

~~

ne . n

• av sir

w. m .,. V,.

. ed.e

..@a g.3.

yn~y. r s ec

e. # -

3

vers.,

cu.se ssw d,,.

-en ..gcgr#a/.

a. . ,

2,..

sse a .

.3 w % ac2 s s w :s .c 3 Figure 2-6. Farms, Owellings, Industries and Wooded Areas Within a 2-Mile Radius of the Site 2-9 L

miles north of the center of the pl ant site. The company, Eagl e-Pitcher incustries, employs 30 pecple and is engaged in the f abrication of neutron abscrbers f cr power reactcrs and f uel elements f er test reacters.(2-1) The remainder of the 112 acre Industrial park is currently undeveloped. It should be noted that the two projects indicated in Section 4.1 of the 1977 FES; CENTAR (a prcposed centrif uge errichment plant) and Exxon's proposed f uel reprocessing pl ant, Indicated as being concurrent with CRBRP, have been cancelled. Two other construction projects in progress at the time of the 1977 NRC assessment: modification to' the Kingston Steam Plant and construction of the Watts Bar Nuclear Pl ant, are now virtual ly ccmpleted.

It should be noted that the Kcppers "synf uels" project (located about 2.5 miles west-ncrthwest of the Site) is presently under consiceration, but its status is uncertain.

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers operates the locks at Melton Hill Dam and keeps logs of all barge traf fic. Commercial traf fic passing through the Melton Hill Dam Locks average approximately 5000 tons annually for the years 1966 through 1980 and carry primarily steel products. Ncne of this traf fic contains explcsive, toxic cr hazardous material . There have been no accidents involving barges repcrted near the CRBRP Site.

Ten public water supplies withdrawing water from surf ace sources and two additional supplies with auxiliary intakes are located within a 20-mile radius of the Site. The c!csest of these is located approximately 9.7 radial miles frem the Site and draws its water from the Tennessee River at River Mll e 601.3. There are fifteen Industrial water supplies within a 20-mile radius of the Site. The closest of " lese, DOE's K-25 water treatment pl ant (Bear Creek Rcad Filtration Plant), is located 1.6 miles downstream from the Site at Clinch River Mile 14.4 This supply is used to provide potable water at the Oak Ridge Gasecus Dif fusion Plant, the CRCIP at the ncrth end of the Site property and the CRBRP plant site during construction and operation.

2-10

Clinch River water is not known to be used fcr irrigation in the vicinity of the Site. Cne f arm, bcrdering the river in the scuthwest secter, has an auxiliary pumping system to supply vater f rcm the river to livesicck during periods of Icw groundwater supply.

Most of the develcpment in the area has been rural residential and it hec not been econcmically feasible to use pubile water supplies for every residence. Thus, many Individual wells are found in the area; 110 wells and springs are located within two miles 'of the Site. However, all of these wells are located south of the Clinch River. The Clinch River bounds the Site groundwater system en three sides and is a groundwater sink for the system. Chestnut Ridge appears to represent the ncrthern boundary fer the groundwater system of the entire peninsula, ac can be seen in Figure 2-4. Olscharge frem the aquifer system goes directly into the river er into streams which ficw into the river. Because the meander of the river is a majcr tcpographic f eature set down in bedrock, (2-2) it is unlikely that any grounowcter ficw could pass beneath the rivec.

Clinch River sediments near er below the discharge of White Oak Creek (CRM 20.8) have been extensively studied fcr mere than 20 years. The data from these studies have been incorpcrated into the CRERP Envircnmental Repcrt (Chapter 2.8.3) since the application was criginally docketed. While the radioactivity in these sediments exceeds natural background it/els, the potential radiation exposures which could result fran its presence, cr as a result of its disturbance by CRERP activities, are insignificant.

2.4 HISTCRICAL AND ARCHAECLCGICAL FEATURES None of the surveys conducted since NRC's 1977 issuance of the FES have un-covered any new histcrical er archaeological features which wculd af fect impact the conclusions reached in the FES, Sections 2.3 and 4.2.1.

Most recently, the Tennessee State Histcr ical Preservation Of f icer stated in a letter dared May 17, 1982, that af ter his of fice's investigation of 2-11

the Project cccumentaticn, the conclusion was reached that the project as presently planned will not af fect any properties included in er eligible for inclusien in the National Register of Histcric Places. (2-56) 2.4.1 HISTCRICAL FEATURES in October 1972 and January 1973 a search was made for structures and sites of historical significance within the 1364 acre Site boundary. The Investigation was led by Dr. Geral d F. Schreedl, Research Assistant Prof essor, and Dr. Prentice M. Themas, Jr., Assistant Professer of Anthropology, frcm the Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee.

Four Eurc-American f armsteads (40RE120, -121, -122 and -123) and a histcric cemetery (a0RE119), shown in Figure 2-7, were located and recorded.

The Hensley cemetery is located on the southern tip of the peninsula outside the construction perimeter, it is a fenced 75-fcot-squcre area containing five marked graves. Because the cemetery is of some Iccal historical significance, it will be preserved. The Hensley family will retain the right of access to visit the cemetery.

None of the above sites er structures has histcrical significance that would qualify fer inclusion in the National Register.(2-3) Detailed photographs and drawings have been completed f er each site and preservation of these sites, other than the cemetery, is not required.

. A search was made fer other structures er sites that may have been missed due to the dense vegetation on the Site, in addition, land maps and county records, such as documents on file at the McClung Museum at the University of Tennessee, were reviewed.(2-4) Several new sites were Iccated, photo-graphed and recorded. Ncne of these sites wculd require preservation.

2.4.2 ARCHAE 0 LOGICAL FEATURES A 1972 archaeological survey concentrated on locating, testing and eval ua-ting the six archaeological sites (40RE104, -105, -106, -107, -108 and

-124) criginally recorded during a 1941 survey. Several test pits were 2-12

_E E.ac ,8 g -,s :54ct.t s TE

. 50 /

d 1.SOHt EOLOG:Ct.L s TE

. . . 3 0'A E3 L:NE -

\

E -ens.E( C E V E79Y gh , g\b /

\ y

/

e,

/

~ M ,' . d / s+ .....

y V, g 40RE123 40tE122

$.' O \

s 40tE1214 i

% \+ -

I40RE104!

• ?""=*=

+ ,_ ....

• pfnuee ssunos~ 7 ,,, ,

s'  :- _

v4

• 40tE108 - + u.i. is PLANT (#

1. /..

SITE

) &

h g 5107 40 \

C ,' i c ,

~

O 8 40R Og \ {

• MlEYCEM ERY 41121105

"'w 16 e 40RE119

%,'+ ,!:\~~.....r M .s

\.5 40RE124 -

U 1 -

.g s #4'e g 40tE106 e

X Mile 17 9 e d. -

eP i

' 60 o w i s#

9 stp sCAtt Of WRES Figure 2-7. Archaeological and Historical Sites 2-13

l excavated at each of these sites, but diagnostic cultural materials were recovered only frcm tne burial ecund and the two midden (ref use) locations

( 40RE124, -107 and -108, respectively) . These materials indicated the presence of significant archaeological rescurces and the need fcr further study and excavaticn of these three sites. The locations of the six archaeological sites are shown in Figure 2-7. All of the identi fied sites of potential archaeological significance lie cutside the area of construction.

An agreement was signed in 1973 between the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Department of Anthropology, University of Tennessee, based on the research prcposal, " Salvage Archaeology in the Clinch River Liquid Metal Fast Breecer Reactcr Pl ant Area."(2-5) The werk included excavation and detailed study of sites 40RE107, -108 and -124, completion of necessary laboratcry analyses folicwing the field excavations and publications of a descriptive and interpretive repert.

Field excavations began in October 1973 on the burial bound (site 40RE124),

another suspected mcund f eature near the lake bank (40RE129), and the midden areas (40RE107 and -108), and were completed in several stages by April 30, 1975. Labcratcry analyses such as washing, cataloging, processing and analy:Ing the volume of cultural renains, human skeletal remains, f aunal remains and botanical specimens are ccmplete. The final report en the CRBRP archaeological excavations, including site maps, drawings and photographs, is in progress.

An archeological survey of the site was ccmpleted in 1982. The conclusion of this werk was that there are no sites within the area of impact that qualify fer inclusien in the National Register of archeological and histcrical pl aces.

A mere detailed description of these archaeological and histcrical f eatur es of the site can be fcund in Section 2.3 of the CRSRP Environmental Repcrt.

2-14 .

2.5 SITE GECLOGY AND HYCRCLCGY 2.5.1 GE0 LOGY The site geology is discussed in Section 2.4 of the FES and is summarized belcw.

Foundation investigations were conducted at the Clinch River Breeder Reacter Plant (CRBRP) Site during the periods of February 1972 to March 1972, October 1972 to December 1972, May 1973 to June 1973, September 1973 to April 1974, September 1976 to June 1977, and January 1982 to April 1982.

These bcrings have been directed primarily to the completion of the grid pattern initiated by TVA in 1972 to define the Site geoicgy, investigate sinkhole developments occurring in the general Site vicinity, and Iccate the optimum location and bearing elevation for the Nuclear Island including associated static and dynamic foundation design parameters. Other geclogic studies included a detailed literature review,(2-6 thru 2-15) surface mapping, remote sensing, seismic ref raction and related geophysical cross-hole and up-hole surveys, and a test grouting pregram.

Rock in the immediate vicinity of the Site is comprised of two majcr geologic units, the Knox Group and Chickamauga Group. Scattered rcck outcrops occur in the central pertion of the Site; hcwever, the rock is generally covered by a veneer of residual soll, except in the southern portion of the peninsula and near the river where ancient terrace and recent alluvial soils have been deposited.

Terrace deposits fcrm a veneer over pertions of the site. This materlal is high-level alluvium deposited by the Clinch River when stream levels were much higher than at the present. Such deposits are general ly regarded by geologists as Pleistocene er PIIccene. Terrace ceposits consist mainly of crange and red silty clay with thin layers of rcunded quartz, chert and quart:Ite gravel. A number of bcrings and test pits penetrated the entire 2-15

thickness of terrace materials, which was f cund to range between 1.5 and 19.5 feet. Alluvium underlies the Clinen River ficodplain. One of the bcrings penetrated this deposit, enccuntering sand and clay to a deptn of about 32 feet.

2.5.2 HYCROLOGY Topography of the Site is characterized by a series of parallel ridges separated by long, narrow valleys extending in a ncrtheast-southwest direction. There are no perennici streams en the Site; however, after a heavy rain, surf ace water ficws from the ridges into valleys and gullies which drain into the river. The Clinch River drainage area is 3,368 square miles at CRM 17.8 and 3,380 square miles at CR'4 15.5(2-16) It is not anticipated that construction of the CRSRP will alter the drainage pattern of the Site, in general, movement of groundwater (see FES Section 2.5.2) occurs in a

~

direction normal to the groundwater contcurs. At the Site, movement is generally frcm tcpographically high areas.to tcpegraphically low areas; however, this pattern is modulated by the extent of weathering of the bedrock aquifers. Ultimately the Clinch River acts as a sink to which all groundwater at the Site migrates. There are instances in carbonate rock terrains in which weathering in topographically high areas is so deep that interchanges between adjacent valleys ssparated by these topographic highs may occur. ( 2-17 ) Such situations are conducive to impcrtant reversals of groundwater ficw. No evicence of such deep weathering action has been encountered at the Site. Scund rock was encountered in the core of the ridges at elevations higher than the adjacent valley flecrs. Thus, at the Site, the maJcr ridges may be regarded as approximate IccaTions of ground-water divides. Reversals in direction of ficw which may cccur because of the rather large fluctuations of the groundwater table will be local in extent and will not represent a diversion of groundwater frcm cne majcr groundwater basin to another. The Clinch River itsel f may act as a source of groundwater recharge during those perleds when the river is subject to a 2-16 -

rapid increase in stage. During such periods, water will ficw from the river into the equifer. This reverse ficw will occur until a new condition of dynamic equilibrium within the groundwater system is, established.

2.5 ECCLOGY Ecology of the Site and the surrounding area is presented in this section.

The Site, which is similar to the surrounding area in geology, soil composition and overstcry vegetation, consists of mostly fcrested land on shalicw inf ertil e soll overl ying shale and dol,omiti c rock f ermations.

Numerous, ccmprehensive ecological studies have been conducted by the Oak Ridge Naticnal Laboratcry (ORNL), located nearby. Where appropriate, CRNL studies have been cited to supplement the on-site data. All of the data taken to date confirm the conclusions reached in Section 2.7 of the 1977 FES.

2.6.1 TERRESTRIAL ECCLOGY ,

2.6.1.1 FLCRA s

The tract of land, referred to as the Site in this report, was fccmerly part of the Oak Ridge Reservation (CRR). It was transferred to TVA in March 1968. Since that time, the pcrtion of the Site not used f or l

Industrial purposes has been managed mostly for fcrest production and used for ecological and biological research. Mcwever, the Site was marked fer industrial develcpment and the area could not be expected to remain undeveloped.

Fcrest management for the CRR was begu,n in 1947 with ref orestation of approximately 4,300 acres with approximately 9 million pine seedl i ngs. ( 2-10 ) Species and percentage of area planted were: shcrt-leaf l pine (Pinus echinata), 40%, loblolly pine, (Pinus +eeda) 30%; eastern white pine, (Pinus strebus) 20% and Virginia pine (Pinus virniniana) 10% . ( 2- 18 )

A timber inventcry of the CRR forest was made by TVA in ic61 and a forest

! management program Instituted at the Oak Ridge National Laboratcry in 1964.(2-18) Management plans f er long-range cbjectives and short-range f

I 2-17

plans were made in 1965 fcr the pericd 1965-70, in 1970 fcr the period 1970-75, in 1977 for the period 1976-80.(2-18) and in 1981 fcr the pericd 1981-05.

The Site consists mostly of moderate to heavily wceded areas. An overstery vegetation map is provided in Figure 2-8 with a list of species indicated in Tabl e 2-1. Although the land was originally forested, extensive clearing took place as a result of population settlement and cultivation; the entire Site appears to have been logged and/cr pastured. Since cultivation of the land ceased in 1942,(2-18) adequate time has elapsed for natural succession from field to forest in these areas.

Between 1948 and 1954, 411 acres of the Site were planted with varicus pine species.(2-19) This land has been maintained as a plantation, with little er no hardwood growing there. Elsewhere on the Site where the fcrest land has remained undisturbed, succession has cccurred frem Virginia pine (Pinus virciniana) and eastern red cedar (Junicerus virciniana) covering to hardwood-pine-cedar ferests. Even when hardwced becem'es predeminant, scme pine remains.

Af ter an exhaustive site search and collection of nearly 600 plant specimens f rcm the Site, three rare and ten unusual species were observed and/cr collected. The rare species include black snakercot (Cimicifuca rubifolia Kearney), ginseng (Penax cuincuefolium Linnaeus) and Carey's saxi f rage (Saxi f reca carevena Gray) .(2-20,2-21) The three species were preliminarily listed as rare er threatened, (2-20,2-21) but are not expected to be listed of ficially as tnreatened.(2-22) Confirming the infermation reported in the FES Section 2.7.1.1, other than the above listed species, no rare er endangered plant species have been repcrted on the Site.

The ten unusual but not rare plant species on the CRSRP Site include Adam-and-Eve crchid (Aclectrum hvemale (Muhenberg ex Wil ldenow) Terrey),

Wister's coral foot (Corallerhiza wisteriana Conrad), southern buckthorn (9urella tvcioides (L.) Perscon), common adder's tongue (Ochicclessum vulcatum L.), LI:ard's tall (saururus cernous L.), Vasey's trillium 2-18

l l l

I COMPARTMENT e 13 CM PARTPt!NT 4 l+

!k

-e

~

, .. *L 12. .

g,-(jf.E  !;

is I ,

- 33 m '5 D '

Wi.? es , :

is

["

^

y x

fm s' -

o-e

,4 s 13 3 ,e l

• 2 t - 3Z

,, [

l },

, c.

+*

Io si a ... ,

.l

,.--+..s---.--- _, _

=-4-.,...-.,=,,,g-._._-.-

O l

,? \ .

'.f a N ,, 23w' w% * ..x ,, -ei.

^4 m.  ?*

A.? h.1" ' c

. ,. 2 ,

, e, ., / ,

.. . e -

.,', /8

'? NN% ' g..

u

.% ~

• if  %

N ..@- ...-> ,3 ,s ir N.), , e v

.x -

ze -

4:1 ,,

s . .. *#

4 ( . . .

'i~j~ ' ' , i J a 2 2. ' , -

40

'" S Note: Crosshatched area is the 4

e/ .- impacted area.

M Figure 2.8. SITE STUDY AREAS AND OVERSTORY VEGETATION (See Table 21 for Legend. Alphabetic letters designate

study areas.)

i 2-19

TABLE 2-1 LEGEND FCR FIGURE 2.8 1 Compartment No. 13 Forest Cover Tvoe Acreece Stratum No.

Loblolly pine plantation, 1951 63 1

White pine plantation, 1951 32 2

White pine plantation, 1952 32 3

Virginia pine plantation, 1952 24 4

4 5 Virginia white pine plantation, 1952 6 Shcrtleaf Virginia pine plantation, 1972 13 7 Loblolly pine pl antation, 1954 13 11 8 Virginia pine plantation, 1954 Virginia shortleaf pine plantation, 1954 23 9

Loblolly pine pl antation, 1979 55 10 11 Hybri d popl ar, cottonwcod plantation, 1979 1 Cottonwood plantation, 1979 3 12 Natural pine 31 13 Shortleaf pine, white pine 3 14 48 15 Cedar Cedar, natural pine 28 16 Cedar, red oak, white cak 0 17 Cedar, white oak, red oak 40 18 Cedar, ash, hackberry 13 19 Red cak, shcrtleaf pine 3 20 Rod cak, cedar, poplar 3 21 22 Red cak, white oak , 1 Red oak, white oak, poplar 66 23 24 Scuthern red oak, white oak, cedar 11 Red cak, hickory, popl ar 49 25 '

Red oak, poplar 32 26 27 Southern red oak, poplar, shortleaf pine 6 White cak, red oak, poplar 20 28 2-20

TABLE 2-1 (Continued)

• LEGEND FOR FIGURE 2.8 Compartment No. 13 Forest Cover Tvoe Acreece Stratum No.

White oak, beech 8 29 4

30 Hickory, red oak Poplar, red oak 6 31 37 Popl ar, red oak, hickory, white oak, cottonwood 76 Sweetgum, Virgini a pine, sycamere 10 33 ,

Sweetgum, maple 3 34 Elm, boxelder, ash 9 35 Elm, maple 2 36 Ash, sycamore 6 37 '

Chinkapin oak, ash, red oak 12 38 23

~

39 Ncn Forested Clearcut, cutover 126 40 41 Cemeteries, Honesites, Indian Mound 1 Powerl i ne, Gasl i ne, Right-of-way 55 42 Roads 28 43 1

! 44 Duarry 14 45 Inundated Lana Rivers, Streams and creeks 37 46 0

47 Scette Kill L

o SUBTOTAL 1049 1

i I

2-21 l

TABLE 2-1 (continued)

LEGEND FCR FIGURE 2.8 Compartment No. 14 Stratum Ho. Fcrest Cover Tvoe Acreace 1 Loblolly pl antation, 1948 39 2 Loblolly pl antation, 1949 3 3 Loblolly plantation, 1951 7 4 White pine plantation, 1952 12 5 Lobl ol ly pl antation, 1978 'O 6 Lobiolly plantation, 1979 4 7 White pine, 1979 0 8 Walnut plantation, 1979 2 9 Cottonwced plantation, 1979 0 10 Cottonwcod, sycamere,1979 30 11 Natural pine, shortleaf pine, Virginia pine 16 12 Sweetgum, Virginia pine, shortleaf pine 25 13 Shortleaf pine, Virginia pine, cedar 2 14 Southern red cak, poplar, cottonwced 37 15 Cottonwced, red cak, poplar 57 16 Ash, sweetgum, elm 34 17 Sludge Plot (cottonwced, sycamere) 1 Clear cut 6 18 19 Roads 14 20 Powerlines, Gaslines, Right-of-way 17 21 Non-Ferested Land 0

~

Buildings 4 22 Inundated 5 23 SUBTOTAL 315 TOTAL ACREAGE 1364 2-22

(Trillium vasevi Harbison), l arge twaybl ade (Liner-is litifolia (L.)

Richard), Wild ginger (Asarum cenadense L.), black cchosh (Cimicifoca racercsa (L.) Nuttall) and white bancberry ( Ac+aee cachveoda Ell .) . Of these ten species, lizard's tail, Wlster's coral-rcot, Adam-and-Eve crchid and w il d gi nger are l east common. (2-23,2-24) 2.6.1.2 THREATENED CR ENDANGERED FAUNA

~

Five f aunal species listed as endangered cr threatened by the United States Department of the Interior (2-25) and/or the Tennessee State Wil dlife A literature Resources Ccmmission(2-26) have been observed on the Site.

review and habitat inspection Indicate that ten additional threatened or endangered species may cccur there but have not been observed. Mcwever, each of these threatened er endangered species is widely distributed in the Tennessee area.

mal @ALS Since the issuance of the FES (see FES Section 2.7.1.2) no confirmed

" sighting of endangered memmal species has been repcrted fcr the Site.

Three mammal species listed as endangered (2-25,2-26) known to cccur in the general Site area are the gray bat (Mvotis sodalis), Indiana bat (Myo_t_i.1

. Soda l_I s) and eastern cougar (Felis concolor coucer). A large maternity cave fer the gray bat' cccurs 40 miles southwest of the Site near the Tennessee River; several other maternity caves cccur near the Tennessee River frcm 20 to 60 miles southwest of the Site.(2-27) A cave search and mist-netting survey in August 1974 Indicated the presence many years ago of 500 to 1000 gray bats in a cave on Chestnut Ridge and f urther indicated the absence of f eeding individual s frcm the Site. Hibernating caves for gray bats occur 70 and 130 miles southwest and 90 miles ncrtheast of the Site, all within one week's travel time of the Site based on published traveling speeds.(2-27) Indiana bats dif fer frcm gray bats in that they hibernate in caves in the winter, but raise ycung in hollow trees in the summer.(2-20*2-29) Summer Indiana bat nests are near permanent water bodies, pref erably in dense sycamere, cottonwccd and wil lcw stands. (2-28)

A cave search and mist-netting survey in August 1974 Indicated no droppings 2-23

or captures of Indiana bats on the Site er adjacent water even though the species has been cbserved on CRR.(2-30,31) Individual eastern cougars have been reported frequently on the CRR frca 1975 to the present time, but no hard evidence of their presence is available.(2-22,32) One other mcmmal species less likely to util1:e the Site is the river otter (12 ira canadensis) listed as threatened.(2-26) No primary cr secondary evidence of its presence on the Site was observed.

AVIFAUNA Two endangered and three threatened species have been cbserved on the CIInch River Site. On May 14, 1974, a southern bal d eagl e (Pelleeetus 1.

leucceechelus) listed as endangered (2-25,2-26) was observed on the Site near the Clinch River. The diet of this bird is 99 percent fish. It nests in large trees and utilizes the same nest year af ter year. Nests were observed in the Tennessee River valley 10 miles west of the Site but not on the Site itself.

On May 4, 1974, the American osprey (Pendien helleetus), listed as ondangered,(2-26) was observed catching fish and carrying its prey to a pinnacle on the opposite shore of the Clinch River. No osprey nests have been observed on ORR.(2-22) The American osprey breeds f rcm Ncrthern Alaska south to Baja, California and Senora, east to southern Labrador, Newfoundl and and scuthern Ficrida. It winters from the southern United States south to South America.(2-23)

During the May 1974 survey, Cooper's hawk (Accioiter ecocerli) and sharp-shinned hawk (Acciotter striatus) Indiv idual s were observed. Soth species are listed as threatened.(2-26) The marsh hawk (ncrthern harrier, Circus evaneus), listed as threatened,(2-26) was observed during December 1974 Several other species that are considered endangered cr threatened with extinction may cccur in the general region but have not been observed on the Site. These species and their status include:(2-26,2-34) Berwick's wren (Thrvemenes bewickII, threatened), savannah sparrow (Ammedremos savannarum, threatened), gol den eagl e (Acul t a chrvseetes, endangered),

2-24

Bachman's sparrow (Alecchita eastivalis, endangered), red-cockaded woodpecker (Picoides beraelis, endangered) and peregrine f alcon (Felco cericrinus, endangered).

HERFETCFAUMA On-site surveys and a literature revlew failed to indicate the presence of any herpetof auna species considered endangered or threatened by v e United

~

States Department of the Interior er the State of Tennessee.(2-25,26,35) 2.6.1.3 RECCNNAISSANCE SURVEY, AUGUST 1980 .

A two-day field terrestrial ecology reconnaissance survey was conducted August 27 and 28, 1980.(2-22) The purpose of this survey was to investigate whether any changes of significance had cccurred since the FES was issued. Other than the observations recorded below, essentially no changes had occurred. It was concluded that there wer.c no significant changes to the ecology of the Site.

The limited field ef fert centered upon visually evaluating disturbed lands on the CRBRP site and examining two populations of rare plant species that were observed during the 1974 baseline survey period. The field ef fert also included sampling a shortleaf pine plantation that was established in 1976 and evaluating wildlife population changes on the CRBRP site based en habitat quality, limiting sightings and published data. The sampled shcrtleaf pine plantation was designated "shcrtleaf pine plantation (1976)," to be consistent with CRNL fcrest categories.

Most of the site renained essentially.as it was in 1974. Smal l areas disturbed by site investigation activities were partially revegetated by natural succession. Fcrest lands that were thinned, estimated at 550 acres, were moderately disturbed, while an area estimated at 25 acres that was clear-cut and planted with shortleaf pino was substantially changed.

Forest management activities cccurred according to the CCE fcrest management pl an.(2-18) 2-25

The IIzard's tall (Sanrus cernous) plant population consisted of approximately 200 indivicuals at the head of an inlet southwest of the CRBR? (Figure 2-8). The Carey's saxif rage population consisted of three Individuals on a steep slope bcedering the Clinch River east of the CRSR?.

Vegetation data obtained in the shortleaf pine plantation (1976) Indicated low cover, low diversity and mcderate tree growth. Diversity indices were icw as expected fcr a ycung fcrest stand.

Wildlif e activity observed during the survey period was low, due to a severe local drought. Consequently, few species were observed during that survey. Mcwever, published data indicated increasing whitetail deer populations since 1974 fcr CRR, as a result of hunting protection and abundant food. Wild turkeys were repcrted to be present and increasingly In adundant en ORR. Other wildlife populations appeared stable over the Icng-term, based on habitat quality.

^

Bobcat presence en the CRR has been confirmed and the population appears to be Increasing. Eastern ecugar, listed as endangered in the U.S. and Tennessee (2-25,2-26) is a possible CRR resident. Bobcat and eastern cougar, however, have l arge hcme ranges and roam across the reservation.

Populations of wildlife species listed as threatened er endangered in the U.S. and Tennessee (2-25,2-26) were not observed. (2-22) 2.6.2 AQUATIC ECCLOGY Folicwing a baseline aquatic monitcring program of the Clinch River site during the period March 1974 - April 1975, a pre-construction monitcring program was conducted by TVA through Cctcber 1978 in which the status of the non-fisheries biclogical ccmmunit!es was eval uated.(2-36)

The most ccmmen phyteplankten genera found throughout the sampling reach were Melosica, Svnedra, Stecherediscus, Chiemvdemonus, Scenedesmus, Dactvlococcoets, Anacvstis, and Trechelcmenas. General ly the Chrysophytes were dominant mostly during the spring, the Chlcrophyta during the summer, and the Cyanophytes during the f all .

2-26

Sampiing data Indicated that Chrysophytes (diatcms) are the dominent algal group at each of the stations. It clso Indicated that the genus Achnenthas comprises the majcrity of the Chrysophyta ccmmunity, and, as such, a majcrity of the entire periphyton community at times. The autotrophic Index data was highly variable both tempcrarily and spatially.

Samples of Ecplenkten population f n the vicinity of the CRERP site revealed a diverse and abundant f auna throughout the study area, with seasonality a majcr influencing factcr on species cccurrence and abundance.

Rotifers were the predominant coplankton in alI seasons with the exception of April when the Cladocera were the dominant group. Seasonal ef fects on rotifers are quite drematic, with large abundances cccurring in 1975 during the months of May and Octcber fcr scme spec!es and May, AuSust, and September fer others. Five species were primarily responsible for rotifer abundance throughcut the year. Cne species of Cl adocera, cesina lonalrostris, was found on all sampling dates and was the dominant Cladoceran at most stations throughout the year. Benthic macroinvertebrate f auna In the vicinity of the Site, sampled on a monthly basis in 1975 and a seasonal basis in 1976 and 1977, exhibited a population that is not very diverse and also Icw in numbers. in general, the f auna collected Indicate a habitat that is substantial ly "recky" in nature. The taxa collected dif fered extensively frcm those repcrted in 1973; however, this was attributed to dif ferent station locations and habitat types. Bicmass and quantitative estimates Indicate a selectivity of artificial substrates fcr non-molluscan macroinvertebrates.

A classification of alI fish species collected in the CIinch River durIng a l baseline survey conducted between March 1974 and January 1975 is provided in Table 2-2. Olvisicns of fish based upon focd habits include the felicwing groups: pl anktiveres, bottcm feeders, insectiveres and piscivores.(2-37) PIenktiveres composed the most numerous group in the study. This shcws a heavy dependency of the fish ccmmunity on plankton l drif ting downstream frcm the Melten Hil l Reservoi r.(2-37) Threadfin shad, t

emerald shiner, and gi::ard shad were the most abundant species of I planktiveres collected in the Ci tnch River. In general, most of the bottcm f eeders are coniverous. Mcwever, scme subgroups such as the smal imouth l

2-27 L

TABLE 2-2 CLASSIFICATIO': OF FISH - CLINCH RIVER COLLECTED f/ ARCH 23, 1974 - JANUARY 17, 1975 ACCORDING TO FOOD PREFERENCE Number Percentage of Soecies Collected Total Number PLANKTIV0RES Gizzard shad 123 11.3 Threadfin shad 383- 33.8 Golden shiner 6 0.5 Rosefin shiner 1 0.1 Emerald shiner 154 13.6 SUBT0TAL 672 59.3 BOTTOM FEEDERS Mooneye 16 1.4 Carp 33 2.9 Quillback carpsucker 14 ~ 1.2 Northern hogsucker 2 ' O .2 Smallmouth buffalo 11 1.0 River redhorse 6 0.5 Black redhorse 2 0.2 1

Golden redhorse 50 4.4 Freshwater drum 20 1.8 SUBTOTAL 154 13.6 INSECTIVORES Bluntnose minnow 17 1.5 Rock bass 13 1.1 Redbreast sunfish 5 0.4 f Bluegill 79 7.0 Longear sunfish 2 0.2 Redear sunfish -

4 0.3 Logperch 5 0.4 Banded sculpin 7 0.6 Brook silverside 8 0.8 Greenside darter 1 0.1 Silver chub d 0.3 SUBTOTAL 145 12.7 l

< 2-28

9 TABLE 2-2 (Continued) riumter Percentage of Soecies Collected Total Number PISCIV0RES Skipjack herring 74 6.5 Channel catfish 12 1.0 White bass 19 1.7 Striped bass 1 0.1 Spotted bass 14 1.2 Largemouth bass 20 1.3 White crappie 3 0.3 Yellow perch 2 0.2 Sauger 18 1.6 SUBTOTAL 163 14.4 TOTAL 1,134 100.0 e

2-29

- l buf f alo and redhcrse can be classified as selective feeders and tend tcward a diet of mollusks.(2-38'2-39) Insects and other invertebrates ccmpose the diet of insectiveres. S' cst numerous species within this group is the important game fish, the bluegill. Skipjack herring, spotted bass, largemouth bass, sauger and white bass, as important species of piscIveres f eed primarily cn fish, but al so consume insects, crustaceans, and other invertebrates.

~

2.6.2.1 ENDANGERED SPECIES None of the species collected in the vicinity of the Site during the aquatic baseline survey cr by TVA In 1973(2-40) have been designated as an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act.(2-41) A mussel survey was conducted during the months of May and June 1982, from Clinch River Mlle 14.0 to 21.0. During this quantitative survey some fresh water mussels were found but no representatives of threatened or endangered' species were encountered. However, during a study of the spawning habits of sa'uger (see Sec. 2.6.2.2) one mussel specimen of Limosilis Or51culata, which is currently listed as endangered, was discovered at Clinch River Mll e 19.1.

The quantitative mussel survey in the vicinity of the Clinch River Site documents that very few mussels cccur in this reach and Indicates that if Lemosilis Orbiculata is present adjacent to the Project site, it is there in very Icw numbers. As a result of the activities associated with construction and operation of the CRBRP, any population of Lemosilis Orbiculata should not be affected. Furthermcre, since this species has

been encountered at a number of sites in the Tennessee River basin and elsewhere it is evident that the Project activities would not jeopardize the continued existence of the species.

The final report of this survey is currently in preparation and will be available in July 1982.

2-30

The blue sucker, a fish listed as threstened by the State of Tennessee,(2-42) has been collected in Watts Bar Lake en two occasions.

One fish was collected at mile 0.3 cf the Clinch River in 1975,I2'#3) and one was collected in the Tennessee River near Lcudon in 1977.(2-44)

Although habitat in the Clinch River appears suitable fer this species,(2-45,46) no blue suckers have been reported from the river near the Site.

2.6.2.2 RECCNNAISSANCE SURVEY, AUGUST 1980 in August 1980, a limited field reconnaissance survey of the Clinch River was conducted at the CRSRP site.(2-22) The purpose of this survey was to investigate whether any substantive changes had occurred since the FES was issued. As a result of this survey It was concluded, as indicated below, that only mincr changes had occurred.

Attention was directed to sampling stations used in the 1974-75 baseline ,

survey, and to the relecated proposed barge unicading area. Sathymetry and bottem substrate type were sampled as the baseline survey, and aquatic crganisms incidentally encountered were noted. In addition to the field reconnaissance, da'ta collected near the Site and literature prepared since 1975 were sought for examination, and telephone contact was made with local scientific authcrities. Results of this effort are detailed

' elsewhere,(2-22) and are summarized below.

Field observations made during the reconnaissance survey and other available infcrmation Indicated the following aquatic corditions relative to the baseline description. Bathymetry and bottem type observations were consistent with baseline observations, with only miner variations. The bottem drops of f rapidly from the eastern (barge unloading area) side of the river to a maximum depth of approximately 23 feet relative to the pcol elevation of approximately 741 f t. MSL; a rise (10 feet maximum height above the river bottom) cccurs en the western side of the river. The substrate near the eastern shoreline is rocky.

2-31

There was little evidence to suggest chcnges in most grcups of aquatic crganisms. Scme dif f erences fece baseline survey results were noted f er aquatic macrcphytes and in the fish assemblage and use of the river. In Augus- 1980, macrcphyte growth was cbserved to be mere extensive than during the baseline perled; hcwever, growth was not of nuisance magnitude, and may have increased due to unusually faverable summer weather.(2~#7)

Yellow bass and striped bass appear to have increased in abundance in Watts Bar 1.ake. ( 2-48,2-49) The latter have been stecked since 1971, with increased stecking rates since 1975.(2-50) Very recent Information shows that larger (4 years + ) striped bass use the Clinch River in general as a coolwater ref uge during the warmer months (mid-July thrcugh CctcbeM.M thru 53) The cutsice of the river bend fecm approximately CRM 15 to 741 17 appears to be a f avcred Iccation; another is the western side of the river near the Grubb Island, frcm approximately CRM 18 to CRM 18.5 (see Figure 2-4) . (2-50 thru 53) A question was raised by the NRC staf f as to whether the striped bass may be adversely af fected by the CFSPP thermal plume in extended icw cr no-ficw conditions in the late summer ' months. Under typical summer conditions the thermal plume is so smalI that adverse ef f ects on striped bass wculd not be expected. Under hypothetical wcrst case conditions the avoidance of surf ace waters in the immediate area of the discharge wculd not result in any signifIcant adverse impacts.

The Project has initiated additional studies to address the NRC staf f questien and has ccmmitted to such renedial measures as may be appropriate. (2-57) ,

in response to a cencern that the Clinch River near the CRERP site may be used by sauger, an impcrtant game fish, fer spawning, the Project underteck a survey of the spawning h,3 bits of the sauger frcm March to May 1982, covering the Clinch River reach frem Melten Hili Dam to Gallaher Bridge.(2-54,2-55) It was observed that habitat suitable for spewning occurred throughout the area surveyed. Preliminary results Indicate that sauger spawn througneut this reach of the river. A final repcrt will be issued in December 1982.

2-32

I 2.7 SITE INVESTIGATIONS .

Site investiga+1on wcrk wcs conducted during the pericd frcm February 1972 thrcugh March 1978 and January 1982 through April 1982. Thi s w er < w as conducted in a manner to minimize the disturbance to the natural environment. Clearing of trees was kept to a minimum. Much of the impact of site investigation has already cccurred. Fcr example, trees and overstory have been removed, heavy equipment.has been used in the area, rock drilling has been perfccmed and explosive charges have been used for seismic evaluations.

2.7.1 SITE BCRINGS As alicwed by 10 CFR 5010(c)(1), site-explcration borings were conducted as necessary to substantiate the suitability of the site geology and to establish design requirements fer the CRSRP fcundation. The bcrings involved ground clearing and, when necessary, timber removal. Clearing and ,

timber removal were minimized during this required operation.

Initial soll and rock Investigations at the Site were conducted during the pericd frcm February 25 through March 17, 1972 by TVA in which four pilot berings were drilled. Twenty additional geologic borings were drilled by TVA between October 25 and December 29, 1972, and revealed general l

Infcrmation on the principal rock strata occurring at the Site.

Law Engineering Testing Ccmpany, Inc. (LETCO) of Atlanta, Georgia, was selected as the Geotechnical consultant en the project and ccmmenced Phase I of the site investigation on May 15, 1973. Three bcrings were completed during the period between June 14 and, June 21, 1973. Phase !! of the Investigation was conducted between September 4 and December 1,1973, and included 40 additional borings. Phase I and Phase il programs were i

l directed primarily at selecting the optimum Iccation for the Nuclear Island and obtaining additional Information on site-related geologic ancmalies,

e.g., sinkhole, and solution activity. Fieldwerk fcr Phase lit, which i

i 2-33

Includod 39 bcrings, was initiated on December 12, 1973 and ccmpleted on April 25,1974. This phsse permitted the determination of subsurf ace conditions at the location of specific Categcry I structures and adjacent areas. Between November 1974 and January 1975, LETCO conducted a test grouting program en the west side of the Nuclear Island, which verified the integrity of the Unit A limestene within the bearing influence of the Nuclear Isl and f oundation mat. An additional 23 borings were ccmpleted by LETCO between September 1976 and June 1977 en the east side of the Nuclear Island, 16 of which were fcundation borings for the Steam Generater Maintenance Bay, a Category I structure.

Fcr mere detailed infermation ref er to Section 2-5 of the PSAR.

f in addition, the folicwing programs were completed:

A. A program consisting of 94 bcrings was conducted between November 1974 and February 1975 to investigate fcundation conditions at the location of non-Categcry I structures, includ'Ing the Turbine-Generater Building, the Nermal Cooling Tower, service water intake and discharge pipe!!nes, and the site access road and railroad.

B. The construction contracter perfcrmed limited excavation and bcrings at the proposed quarry site and obtained confirmation that aggregate was suitable for both concrete and structural backfill.

The folicwing additional boring programs were completed and engineering reports (A & B) are scheduled f or completion in August 1982. Engineering report (C) has already been ecmpleted.

A. Soll and rock bcrings fer designated non-Categcry I structures and associated f acilities included in the Balance-of-Plant, to confirm subsurf ace conditions in foundation design; B. Verification bcrings in the rock in the west area of the Nuclear Island to confirm the integrity of the Unit A limestone within the bearing influence of the Nuclear Island mat; and 2-34

C. Continuous flight auger berings in the planned cut areas to determine the moisture content and the engineering properties of the soll proposed f er use es compacted fill. (Repcrt ccepleted and f urnished lha constructcr fer planning excavation sub-contract. No safety related considerations are involved).

2.7.2 SEISMIC SURVEYS Weston Geophysical Engineers, Inc conducted a seismic ref raction survey at the Site in June, 1973. Results of this survey permitted an evaluation of the sub-surf ace conditions based on measurements of ccmpressional wave velocities of the in-situ material . Westen also conducted a cross-hole and up-hole seismic survey at the Site between January 26 and March 22, 1974.

These surveys yielded Infcrmation concerning in-situ dynamic rock properties.

Birdwell, a subsidiary of Seismograph Services Corpcration, conducted a survey in selected boreholes in February 1974, utilizing a sonic logging device for determining in-situ dynamic properties of the rock.

2.7.3 NETEORCLOGICAL DATA CCLLECTION Collection of on-site metecrological data at a temperary meteorological f acil ity (Figure 2-9) located about one quarter mile west-southwest of the plant reacter site began on April 11, 1973 and ended March 2,1978. Data were collected' by the TVA " Pulse-0-Matic" system during the period April 11, 1973 to June 21, 1977. Data were collected by the TVA " NOVA" System during the period February 11, 1976 to March 2, 1978.

Because of the terrain around the CRBkP site, no single location for a meterological tower was fcund that satisfied all requirements for acceptable exposure under all metecrological conditions. Theref ere, two permanent metecrological sites were selected: a 110-meter tcwer at site B and a 10-meter tower at site A (Figure 2-9). Collection of on-site metecrological data by the NOVA System (site B) began on February 16, 1977, and ended March 2,1978. Measurements obtained at site B were those 2-35

)N

, /. ~

7fa U ~#

~ ~ ' 9') %~

p -

%, y

%}',1 gy"- %q <;

.o

_. ; : 0 .

- N,. hW." ~

X- ' f' p} /- d

) f.'2x.....T). ,,':-: h.. - ).jj ),{t [.h('f('a - G k, ./,. A, oe

.i,'~-g &

".h

!,, /'- . Q p,

.  ; n. .

) .

Cs

(

,, bb" f

b. d W ,< ~

s.

n S r,ex 9

n , s T.

j Y d;( ,,.[ fO $. k"=

x ',' s

- 4 W

A4 3 >

, , msh..

a . c. .

(l

/ j]

4 g,%

m .

,- ~

3 -

',=v U .,r, \n

. . =:- )'~ ,rd

(%.5 ta - i 2 ,ky. =i Mj

,') * $ h ft d

• 17 '

n'DA =

l

\

~

h h' ' .

Y

l. Q'  ;,Y '

% 5,

'of(.,,; l' ggg 1;97 - '

?. o reco 2ccel

~

> r

^

m $$ i,I,I,1I ..

Figure 2-9. Meteorological Facility Locator Chart 2-36

normally carried cut at the permanent metecrological f acility supporting the operation of TVA nucl ear pl ants. Monsurements at site A began on May 5,1977 and enced Mcrch 6,1978. Measurements at site A were wind directicn and wind speed only. Simultanecus measurements at the tanperary and permenent f acilities were mace during an overlepping period from -

February 16, 1977 to March 2,1978. Planned construction activities are not expected to conflict with metecrological measurements at the permanent locations. Approximately 10 acres have been, cleared f cr instal lation, access and to assure unobstructed air ficw monitcring for the permanent on-site meteorological facilities.

I I

i,

~

)

i i

l i

1 2-37

3.0 DESCRIPTION

OF ACTIVITIES The site preparaticn activities discussed belcw are essentially the scme as these included in the construction activities considered by the NRC in preparing FES Chapter 4, " Environmental impacts due to Construction." Of course, the post site preparation construction activities considered therein are excluded frcm the following discussion.

In the November 1981 Site Preparation Activities Report (SPAR) the land area to be cleared was 260 acres. The current estimate is 292 acres. This 32 acre Increase is attributable to increases in the quarry area, access road acreage, and other miner changes resulting from the issuance of construction grade drawings. (Construction grado drawings are final design drawings which are ready fcr construction. They have been ccmpletely reviewed and checked by professional engineers, checked against actual field topographics data, and Interf aces with other drawings have been j established. They represent the basis on which ccmpetitive bidding on a firm, fixed price is based).

In the November 1981 SPAR, the excavation quantity was approximately 2.8 million cubic yards. The current estimate is approximately 2.5 million cubic yards. e. T his 300,000 cubic yard decrease is attributable to more precise fiel d' tepography now available f rom detaile'd f iel d surveys (rather l

than frem aerial photography with only limited ground control), actual take-of f s frem construction grade drawings, and a ref lecilon of only the werk to be acccmplished by the site preparation sub-contracter and not necessarily the final grades to which the plant will be brought nearing the

! end of the construction period.

As demonstrated in Section 4 of this repert, the previous NRC determination that site preparation activities wculd not involve significant environ-mental Impact is expected to be unaf fected by these changes.

1 i

3-1

3.1 GENERAL SITE CLEARING AND GPADING Pricr to the start cf excavatten at the plant site anc other associated f acilities, the general area required fcr the Iccation of tempcrary and permanent f acilities will be cleared, grubbed and stripped.

Clearing of the area, as shown in Figure 3-1, will consist of removing trees, brush, shrubs, down timber, rotten weed, rubbish, other vegetation and objectionable material .

Grubbing will include removing stumps, roots, matted roots, stubs, crganic materials and debris.

Cembustible material frcm the clearing and grubbing operations will be burned in compilance with applicable Federal and State standards. Figure 3-1 shows the limits f or repetitive burning.

The stripping operation consists of removing the topso'll prior to the start of regular excavation or anbankment werk at the Site. Salvaged topsoil will be deposited in stcrage piles to be used for landscaping at a later date. (See Section 3.7)

The protected area enclosed by the security barrier, but not ut!!! zed for any structure, will be graded to an elevation of nominally 815 feet above mean sea level (MSL). Other areas required fer construction laydown space, the construction parking area, and tenperary road areas will be graded price to commencement of construction activities.

The total area to be cleared and graded consists of 292 acres, er 21 percent of the' 1364 land acres of the"CRBRP site. As indicated in Table 3-1, most of the disturbed area will be associated with temporary construction activities and f acil ities. The extent of site clearing and the location of temporary construction f ac!!! ties are shown in Figures 3-1 and 3-2, respectively.

3-2

LEGEND .

REPETITIVE CUHNING LIMIT

---

CLEARING fr GHUOCING LIMIT h I

---

ADDITIONAL CLEAHING LIMIT QUAHHY SETTLING DSN = DISCilAHGE SEHIAL NUMBER BASIN DSN 008 AS FOUND ON NPDES PEHMIT AGGHEGATE ,

' APPLICATION STOCKPILE AND .

CfluSilER AREA ___ ONE TIME BullNING

] ,

l UTILITIES QU AHI,1Y l CORHIDOR

] ,*

8 j /

HEPETITIVE I

THEATMENT POND **D" DSN 006

~ , AHEA 5 O 400 1200 I

s%- BURNING l !'~~ W L LIMIT g ..

.\ 200 800

%- s *

\

_ ~. . .a N s , ,

 % MET k[ SPOIL s

' OWR g, ' ) AREA 6 1

BAME UNLOADING

- FACILITY 's '

N (g-f j N,,

' ' ' ~~

w, THEATMENT POND * --

7 '

4j DSN 007 ,

y i C .

)

l CONCHETE

~

• l i

' - MET g s BATCH s TOWER '

' " j P l

'g PLANT AREA l ,

I 4 E '4 INDIAN i ) 73 i / \ ** BUHIAL

+

TitEATMENT POND **C" ,

o MOUND, /(

SPOIL /.

'f ' \

DSN 005 \_ H

%W*U SPOIL \ g AREA 31 i /

SPOIL 's AHEA 2 '~~

" 8 Y AHE A,1 V

% . . .]

--} r I .. #

.[' CEME ERy tj - '/

THEATMENT POND **A**

\

DSN 003

~

SEWAGE THEATMENT CLINCH HIVER PLANT DSN 002 COMMON PLANT '

DISCilAHGE DSN 001 ..

THEATMENT POND "B**

I,1 DSN 004 FIGURE 3-1. PRELIMINARY SITE CONSTRUCTION LAYOUT 4 42 2 met J 5

I TABLE 3-1 APPROXIMATE LAND AREAS AFFECTED BY CRBRP CCNSTRUCTICN ACTIVITIES Acres Disturbed t Catecery Temocrary Permanent Access Roads and Railroads (on-site) 30 30 Access Railroad (off-site) 4 4 Parking Area 19 2 Barge Unloading Area 4 4 Runoff Treatment Ponds 7 7 '

Quarry including Stock Pile Area and Crusher Facility 60* -

Concrete Batch Plant 5 -

Riverwater Intako, Pumphouse, Discharge Line 6 . .5 Spoll Areas and Sanitary Land Fill Area 43* -

Stcrage and Other Werk Areas 67 -

Permanent Plant Buildings and All Land within Security Barrier 37 37 Metecrological Tcwer Areas 10 -10 Additional Security Areas Required Fcr 150 foot line of sight beyond security barrier - to be grassed, mcwed - not restored to original conditions .- jl TOTAL 292 113.5

• All May Not Be Required 3-4

I

~

O MET. TOWE2 ,

r 1 THEATMENT POND **C" = 'A LAYDOWN AHEA i CONCHETE BATCH

[ j-rj j j 3' ,

PL ANT AREA CELL LINEH SilOP - llllll

,;;: ~ ~-

v . :I'"

\

CONT HOL & ED STOHAGE - e 'r  ;

flOU CONSTHUCllON AHEA -

II E j SUBSTAllON CHAFT

/ 'OH4CE I .$ PAHNING

/ f NON- - _ .

61 KV 1HANSMISSION LINE PA KN -

1 g TOlt ET k.k g s , f[ M"#*h AttEYS a.

q 2

] """ c" cc h) WAHEllOUSE f 3 h-

'Jff /

t Wl*2

^

C lAN t EXCLUSION ZONE tlHE BLOG. IIOUSE u

I o'

g[ PHO1ECTION TANK

~

-i 3

t ll M P. (t $

/ m - ,, f . . . ,

a LOCATE ON 5 s. 7 I PUMP ilOUSE*

4-WP4 ^ - -6 -

-- ] J-WP5 l

• THANSMISSION HIGitT OF WAY j

1HEAIMENT / 7ii - -

- --

• l '

POND *'B**

g ,

1. l

( '.  ! ....

TOtt ET 2

1H All L H -

,,,,,3 d~ It MP. N l ,_. 3 l SUS ASSEMBLY PAINT /' COMP. IIN LAYDOWN Snoe -

IlOuSE -f f 10P OF 4SLOPE . .

^ WP8 49 /' AREA (g MON 6 MON 7c--

THANSI LIFT CA PLYT SHOP- '~SIl P ' ""'

IN i

IHONWOHKEH h IEST t Agg {' !{,.....k r.-

'k "") I COOLING TOWEH g

{ SHOP 46*

HIGGING t OFT is ~, 7 g g EtECT. MdN9~ __j-.

IOOL SIOllAGE g ,.

t SilOP 5

. g .............. . t L ANI GHID SIOllAGE AllEA l lllllllll{J lllllllllllll CONSTHUC180N FENCE k _.__-,/ -

EOulP.SilOPis

& OPtHAllNG ENGHS.

STOHAGE AREA 100 100 300

=

~

mrmenL7 "111 ~l ~l E_f_j 0 200 400 Figure 3-2. Temporary Construction Facility Layout 4 EJ 2su) 3 3

3.2 EXCAVATICN FOR FCUNDATIONS Grade elevation has been established at ncminally 815 feet MSL and suf ficient excavation will be perf ormed in the immediate vicinity of the main plant buildings to establish the design grade, permit the construction of access and temporary roads and prepare for the construction of the Category I structures. These Categcry I structures fer which excavation will be undertaken include the Centainment'j[ Reactor Service, Steam Generater, Centrol, Electrical Equipment and the Diesel Generater Buildings and the Emergency Ccoling Tower (including its Water Sterage Basin and related pipelines). Results of the detailed Investigation for the foundations of the Category I structures, which included observation of the rock core, water pressure testing, resistivity and sonic logging, ref raction, cross-hole and uphole studies, can be found in Section 2.5 of the PSAR. It is planned to excavate to approximately 713 feet MSL for the mat for the main plant structures. Excavation for the Categcry i Emergency Ccoling Tower, Diesel-Generater Buil ding and Diese'l Fuel Stcrage Tanks will be within sound siltstone and to an elevation of 766 feet MSL. Trenches extending to sound slitstone will be excavated for associated emergency plant service water piping per paragraph 3.4.6.

Excavation fer the balance of plant f acilities consisting of the Turbine Generater Building, Circulating Water Lines, and Nermal Cooling Tower will also be compl eted. The Circulating Water Lines will be placed and backfilled per Paragraph 3.4.6.

Estimated quantitles of material to be excavated for the plant structures are shcwn in Table 3-2. A small bcrrow area may be developed within the cleared and grubbed area to make up the short fall, (approximately 88,000 cubic yards) as noted in Table 3-2., Excavated material, except topsoll, will be utilized to establish the requ' ired grade elevation of 815 feet MSL.

Excavated material will also be used to construct the main access roads and railroad to grade. Additional excavated material will be deposited in stockpile er spoil areas adjacent to the main plant area and within the cleareg area. This additional material will be graded to drain and will be available to be utilized fer temporary construction f acilities and laydown areas.

3-6

e l

t i

A

- e, 5

e & $ -

3 3 e 8

==

3 1 .h s= C a a a a C 3 a

Q M

8 8 Q

8 g g *o A hm T m 3

um 9 C. . C. . . g aw M N ** O A e > CA J w Q e 4 g 3 == 3

@ w @ w u 3 >

4 w A na A Q 3 A

• 33 3 a *= 3 hm

• fa C 4 $ w

== 4 4 6 -W O O ha 3

= w T C Q Q == 13" 3 3a O C ==*

7 m,

==m

o. . . . == == C e.

e 9 3 == T P O 6 3 3 b 3 M @ o N == = 3 > S e Q. 4 3 3 >

3l

==

A 5 m. =

= N N 3 9 3 O

• Q

== == 3 d.= Q e

3 kC 6- ~ N' c

== 3 C he e g

==

- == a C w w m Q 4 2 3 .

49 . . . . . 3 3A -

N O - Di a O T N N 7 4 3 .-

@ Q == mm O A == c N A O e N O == @ 3 3 > Am e O. > ==. N. ,A w == Q. 5 e N 4 == N Q Q 3 e a

g e

3 ,=

4 e w *

• G G* 4 e a w & C s- e e = m 4 4 ==.

== *

• A 4 3=

• e *3 7 Ot @

N ==

• e s >= 3 C T.

e >= . e 4. J =

m Q

• e O g e o ==G. QQ E.N Q

==e.

o e == 6 e Q

m. e e == =g . 6 3 e e e w A -Q Ca =

2 e e C O O 4 3 @=

- 3 e e O C Q 3w N >

0

== *

• Q Q Q 4 3 3

e. O e . . . . . .

- 4, >J Z e e se - T @ @ C == =e g e ==

< e e A P. == Q o == c Q e 7O e e e = = @==- == c ==. ==3 Q

*3 "3 :n e e 5 QM =

. .= 9 3-G=Q Cu e e - >= =9 . t. ,N- .

O 3 e e - o -Qd e e Q 3

• C Q *=

e e . r** * , - w ,% o a e

e e

e a A s A

- 3AJ M e e < JG 4 == 7 == V

=>

e e n w a @ ee N

e e i g . . . 3Q = -e e e 3 y a e e > .=*=5

.C e e ed Q g 39 e @ e Q t/s *3 C 3 Q e e J M E =9 m 9 C QO CQ

=- 3 A Q .

o e

e e

e g

Q Q6 3

-w7A g 3

== C

• = @

e. e 7 e *3 *3 D e e C 13 5 4 > .

=*

• 3 3 3= "3 C* 3 9a A e a u a 3 3 h= tJ 3=

3

• 4 3# C hm -==g= 0 '

A w

== 2 mu9 C -- 6s 1 D C 5m 1 A

> C3=

e *3 = . . 3

< *3 C == eg C P= P C. & A w 3 4 and 3 e= m 9 C 3 eQ

• 3 ar Cv 3

=

o 3 N =

-w Q u A*

• 3 3 a}

C == 3 aC . 2 3- == == i=

7 == =

== y

-34 3- )

A 3 0 ==

.3

=3 a w

• 3-

• = =

4C "o 33r 3w 3 .1 .=

w 7 g == g == QC hm =

t,3 - D # a a- 3 2 5 9 * - 3 ** -aO g .= 3m . . . . 4 x 03 9 9 4 =

V C Q = u= @ @ O A A OC

• 94 O 3 e m == N w==== 3= 3 3 > a = N N. O g h C C - &.

Q G.2 aw 9 m ==

C w 4-w

• =

6 3 C ~

33

- c. 3 .= = 3 ). -=

3

] -3.

=3

A Q43 ** A 9 C e w I A 3

- .= > , -- , 3 >o 9

Q d Q w -S S In Oc -

"3 w. 3- s *3 25x

=

ac 33 D ai ' = -

wa

< m Q - w w- , . . a2-

2 S-8- 2 0e o -

N m=

== d'3

.*O ==

o -

mtel o ~ ~ > -

< .c , -33

- << < au 22 s- 2- -

3-7

At the time of the FES, excavation quantitles were estimated to be 1.44 million cubic yards. Hewever this estimate assumed that an additional 0.57 million cubic yards of berrcw material would be obtained from an of f-site location. Thus, the total estimated excavation in the 1977 FES was 2.01 million cubic yards. Principle dif ferences between the 1977 estimate and the current estimate of 2.5 million cubic yards are due to increased excavation fer security requirenents, larger craf t parking lot, addition of an emergency ccoling tcwer, excavation fer the concrete batch plant and refinement of the plan for balanced cut and fill.

Limestone and slitstone removed from the excavation area will be processed through a crushing and screening plant and utilized as surfacing for parking and laydown areas er as backfill.

Topsoll will be steckpiled and protected fer restcration, erosion control, and site landscaping both during and at the completion of the Project construction.

Six runof f treatment ponds, including a quarry pond, will serve to control siltation f rom stcrm water runof f. The ponds have been designed to handle a 5-inch rainf all frem a 24-hour stcrm having a recurrence interval of 10 years. This criterion conferms to EPA requirements specified in 40 CFR 423.45 and in the EPA document dated August 1974 " Effluent Limitations, Guidelines and Standards for a Steam Electric Point Scurce Category." The 100-year flood consideration is not applicable here.

The stcrage capacity of the runof f treatment ponds are given in Table 3-3 belcw and the locations of discharge points during construction period are shown on Figure 2-3.

3-8

Tabl e 3-3 Caoacity (Cubic Feet X 103 1 Runoff Treatment Pond A 450 B 335 C 280 D 120 E 205 Quarry , 200 Ground water levels vary across the Site due to differences in topography and weathered rock elevations. The levels were also found to vary on an annual cycle as influenced by precipitation. The normal ground water elevation in the main plant area is approximately 770 feet MSL. Dewatering

~

in the Nuclear Island excavation will be required below this elevation to permit construction to proceed in the dry ,and to control hydrostatic uplift pressure. The source of primary inflows is expected to be the previous weathered limestones which become exposed during excavation. During excavation, water encountered will be controlled by Installing drainage ditches at the tce of the slopes. Water will be collected in sump pits located around the periphery of the excavated slopes, to permit pumping to the runoff treatment ponds for filtration of suspended solids prior to discharge to the river in accordance with applicable Federal and State standards. Pumping capability will be provided to handle the anticipated seepage. Slotted drainage pipe will be installed in the Nuclear Island rock f aces to control ground water during construction.

Af ter excavation has been ocmpleted to the base level, the base area will be covered with a coating of gunite or fill concrete or gravel, as necessary, to prevent breakdown of the siltstone due to exposure, to level the base area, and to provide drainage. A mud mat with a waterproof membrane will also be placed to provide additional protection. The base area covering and mud mat wi!! becene an integral part of the Nuclear 3-9

Island fcundation. Lean concrete backfill will be placed to an elevation ,

of approximately 734 feet MSL against the cut walls. A waterprcof membrane will also be attached to the lean concrete backfill.

All bolted rock slepes will be covered with chain link or welded wire fencing f abric to retain loose rock fragments. Gunite will be applied to excavated siltstone f aces having no rock bolts, to prevent breakdown due to exposure.

Excavation in the. turbine building and ncrmal cooling tower areas will be concurrent with that in the area designated for Nuclear Island structures.

A detailed foundation Investigation has been completed fer these areas.

Based on the results of this Investigation, it is planned to excavate the residual overburden soils and weathered rock to an elevation of 790 feet MSL for the turbine building, and to an elevation of 763 feet MSL for the normal cooling tower, and to backfill to the required bearing elevation for the foundation mat with compacted structural fill, consistent with the construction schedule for the adjacent buildings. -

3.3 TEMPORARY PLANT FACILITIES Temporary construction f acilities consist of access f acilities, buildings and services required to execute a successful construction project.

Facilities to be developed are shown in Figures 3-1 and 3-2 and include the i

folicwing:

A. Temporary en site roads.

B. Ccnstruction parking areas.

C. Railroads and railroad spurs. ,

D. Centractor werk and stcrage areas.

. E. Ccnstruction utilities (power, water, compressed air, etc.). ,

F. Concrete batching and mixing plant. f G. On-site quarry and crushing facility.

H. Sewage treatment plant and craf t toilet f acility.

1. Fire protecticn system. f J. Run-of f treatment ponds.

3-10

K. Storm drainage system.

L. Berge unloading f acility.

M. Construction buil dings.

Construction of temporary on-site roads and parking areas must begin early in the site preparation activities to be available for use during the buildup of construction forces. Mobilization of major earthmoving equip-ment and material deliveries will also require early ccmpletion of all-weather access to the Site.

Completion of the railroad at an early date will provide an alternate method for volume deliveries. Railroad spurs will be constructed on-site for the ef ficient handling of material .

The construction contracters require work and stcrage areas large enough to acccmplish subassemblies, to construct scaf folding and to allow short-term stcrage of equipment and material s. Every ef fort has -been made to reduce - t the size of said areas required by scheduling their sequential use.

Construction power will be provided initially by portable electric gener-atcrs. A construction power substation will be constructed on-site to provide for the anticipated buildup of power requirements. Distribution transfermers, located on the Site, will supply 480 volt, 3-phase and l 110/220 volt single phase power for tempcrary power during construction.

A concrete batching and mixing plant, large enough to meet the requirements of the construction program, will be constructed on-site. Establ ishment and operation of a concrete batching and mixing plant also requires the purchase and on-site stcrage of cement. Fine and coarse aggregates will be .

processed and tested on-site. A supply, built up over a period of three l months er mcre, will be required to meet the early mass-pour schedule. The concrete batch pl ant will consist of two identical central mix concrete l plants, each rated at 100 cubic yards per hcur, each with cement, flyash and aggregate stcrage and handling f acilities with a ccmmon ice plant and boiler plant, all ccmplete with parts and equipment for autcmatic oper-l 3-11 l

1

ation. The cement and flyash handling f acilities will be equipped with a reverse-air-flow pollution control system. All canent and aggregate frem the wush out of transit-mix trucks will be processed through a waste water concrete separater to rectalm waste cement and aggregate. Wash water will be recirculated, eliminating the need f cr a run-of f treatment pond. Dust control will be maintained fer truck traf fic by sprinkling with water.

An on-site quarry, stockplie, and crushing f acility will provide concrete aggregate and granul ar structural fill. Crushing, screening, and stock-piling equipment will be procured, instal led and operated. Raw water for washing aggregate and dust control will be obtained from the river.

Drainage will be provided to runcf f treatment ponds to prevent si tt and suspended solids frem entering the river.

Early erecticn of the sewage treatment plant and craf t toilet f acilities is required to assure their completion and availability during craf t butidup as constructicn manpcwer requirements increase. Long delivery times have been experienced fer sewage treatment equipment. To assure availabillity when required and maximum protection of the environment, this equipment will be crdered and placed into operation as early as possible.

Apprcximately four to six months will be required to construct and to test the sanitary system. Sanitary f acilities are discussed further in Section 3.5.6 of this report.

During the early phase of construction, the fire protection system will consist of pertable dry chemical f ire extinguishers, located appropriatel y, to protect all temporary construction f acilities as they are set up. An existing DOE /Centrc:ter-cperated f ire station, located less than 4 miles aw ay , w i l l prov i de f i r st- l i ne protect !,o n. Installation of the construction fire protection system will begin as scon as site grading reaches the required elevations. It is intended to use as much of the permanent plant i

fire protection system as practical during site preparation to reduce costs. The fire protection system will consist of one permanent plant 3-12 I

water stcrage tank, with makeup water supplied by the Bear Creek waterline.

Fire pumps will take suction from the storage tand and discharge to a fire protection header to assure adequate flow and pressure at all hose and sprinkler locations.

The site storm drainage system will be developed, along with permanent site access roads, temporary construction roads, and spo11 and laydown areas, to assure that construction activities will nct, Interfere with natural watercourse runoff. Runof f treatment ponds will be constructed to protect the river frcm suspended solids and includes sand filters. Thus, these ponds will contcIn all or nearly all of the suspended solids and ensure that discharges into the river will be in accordance with applicable Federal and State standards.

The barge-unloading f acility will be constructed for the purpose of unloading large plant comporents, construction equipment, and bulk materials. it will be a concrete-slab-on-piling type of facility recessed

~ '

into the river bank. On one side and one end of the area, steel cheet piling will be driven to form two sides of the area to be excavated. Sandy slit material will be renoved from the bank using clam shell and/or dragline. This dredging will be carried out during the August to Merch period, if necessary, so as to not interfere w!th fish spawning. The material will be deposited and spread at the adjacent disposal location. A dike will be constructed around the disposal area. Sand will be placed on the bottom of the slip to cushion grounded barges during unloading. A stabillized parking / holding area will also be provided, as well as an access FCad.

1 Construction of fices on-site will consist initially of pertable trailers.

As the project progresses, these trailers will beccme inadequate, and a l full-size of fice will be established to handle the volume of werk I anticipated. Therefcre, an of fice building and a warehouse building will be constructed of a pre . engineered, metal type that can be set up and dismantled quickly, and yet have a lenger usef ul life than a wccden 1

3 - 13

structure. Other temporary buildings that will be installed during this period are the tire of fice and guard house, tool storage and rigging lef t, air compresscr building, first aid and ambulance building, and the test laboratory buil ding.

An of f-site of fice to accommodate parti ally the buildup of the contractor',s work force will be erected as early as possible prior to or during the site preparation period. The area to be develope,d f or this building is approximately 2.5 miles north of the Site on the Oak Ridge Reservation near the intersection of Hwy 58 and Blair Road (see Figure 3-3). It consists of 17 acros developed during Worl d War !!, with crushed rock surf acing, access roads, and utility systems (since deteriorated). Only scrub vegetation has established itself in the intervening years.

3.4 OTHER ACTIVITIES 3.4.1 PERMANENT ACCESS ROAD Site access for preliminary verk will be by existing local roads. Before site preparation activities can begin, the permanent access road will be constructed to handle the expected traf fic volume. Construction of the access road will begin af ter survey work, clearing, grubbing, and stripping. The permanent access road will consist of a ccmpacted subgrade, a crushed stone base and an asphaltic concrete surf ace. Total length of this access road is approximately 7,000 feet.

3.4.2 RAILROAD SPUR An access spur frcm the existing railrcad at COE's Oak Ridge Gaseous, Dif f usion Pl ant wil l be extended to the plant site. The right-of-way will be cleared and grubbed, and earthwcrk will be done at the same time as the construction of the site access road. Ccnstruction of the railroad spur is e

3-14

t.

N d Site liighway 58 Oak Ridge  %

( }

i r

f

(

Tree Line (Not Disturbed) d 2

Tree Line (Not Disturbed) h g%%w jI -

Y -

m G Proposed Laydown Area =12A  ; Proposed Office Approx. E Building Site = SA 350' = f 2 Approx. .

~

2 '

- Approx. _c 1500'

} 600' o

8 T

2 V

Figure 3-3. propo,ed Location of Off-Site Office

scheduled to be completed at the earliest time possible, to af icw maximum transport of heavy material and equipment ento the Site. Total length of the railrcad is approximately 15,000 feet, including service to the reacter service and maintenance buildings.

3.4.3 CCNSTRUCTION PARKING APEA The construction parking area will be prepar,ed to accommodate 1900 cars.

It is scheduled to be constructed during plant site excavation and will utilize the e.xcavated material to avoid the extra time and cost of double handling that material. Clearing and grubbing of the area will commence at the same time as that of the access read to gain economics of scale. The surf ace of the parking area will be crushed stone, sieped to be sel f-draining, with runof f conveyed to nearby runof f treatnent ponds by the stcrm drainage system. The construction parking area is to be ecmpleted in time to acccmmodate the increases in construction manpower expected near the end of the excavation werk. .

3.4.4 TEMPORARY ROADS Temporary reads will be deveicped during clearing, grubbing and excavation of the CRBRP areas. These roads will be used fer access to construction areas from the permanent access road and from the barge unicading facility, and for hauling excavation and quarry material . The main netwcrk of temporary reads will be placed at the location intended f or the permanent site roads to obtain ecmpaction f rom use, and to eliminate the cost of having to construct another read base in a dif ferent location.

To avoid damage by heavy equipment, th.ese temperary roads will not be paved.

3.4.5 CONTRACTCRS WORK AND STCRAGE AREAS Areas large encugh for stcrage of the excavated material will be cleared and grubbed before the start of excavation. Excavated material stcrage areas will be relatively flat, sicped to be self-draining, and will drain l

3-16 l l

to runoff treatment ponds. Ccnstructed in this manner, they can then serve as werk and storage areas fer the contracters. The sequence cf construc-tion events and their timing have been scheduled to reduce the amount of land required during construction by the successive use of designated areas.

3.4.6 BURIED WATER PIPES in order to maximize werking surf aces around the main plant area, the emergency plant service water piping between the Electrical Equipment Building and the Emergency Cooling Tower; and the circulating water piping between the Cooling Tower and the Turbine Generater Building; will be installed and backfilled with Class A Fill. This will permit easier crane access and mere appropriate areas for pre-f abrication of cell-liner and rebar modules.

3.5 CCNSTRUCTICN UTILITIES .

3.5.1 ELECTRIC PCWER Ccnstruction electric power will be provided from a tap on the 161 KV transmission line which traverses the Site. A temporary substation wil l

( transform the 161 kV to 13.2 kV which will be reduced to 480 V and distributed throughout the Site as the scurce of temperary power during construction.

3.5.2 CCMPRESSED AIR Due to the large requirements for ccmpressed air during construction, it is l

econcmically advantageous to install a central ccmnon ccmpressed air supply

(

l system. This system will include air ccmpressers and an underground distributien system.

3 -17 l

3.5.3 WATER SYSTEM Initially, drinking water will be trucked onto the site. Later the permanent water main will be constructed from the Bear Creek Road Fil tration Pl ant to the Site. A temperary distribution system will be installed to serve the construction of fice, sanitary facilities, and construction buildings to provide for the craf t manpower buildup.

The route of the water line from the Bear Creek Water treatment plant to the CRBRP plant s'Ite will be located alongside the existing Bear Creek Road and within the shculders of the new plant-access road which essentially will be a reconstruction of the existing River road (originally named Grubb island Patrol Road), as shown in Figure 2-3. Theref ore, the instal lation of the water main does not entall any additional disturbance other than that required f or construction of the access road and, in particular, avoids the natural area shown in Figure 2-8.

3.5.4 RAW WATER USE Raw water will be required for soll compaction, dust control and quarry operations. Water for soll compaction will be pumped from the Clinch River into a tank truck for spraying onto fill areas. Water for the quarry will be pumped frem the river and will be recycled from settling basins. Water fcr the concrete batching and mixing plant will be taken from the Bear Creek Road Filtration Plant via a permanent water main.

3.5.5 FIRE FROTECTICN Fire protection during site preparation activities will consist of portable dry chemical fire extinguishers located to protect temporary construction f acilities and the various areas under construction. Installation of the construction fire protection system will begin as early as practical . The system will consist of a grade-level fire protection stcrage tank, and the Bear Creek water line to supply makeup water. Fire pumps will take suction 3-18

frem the tank and discharge to a fire protection header. It is Intended to Install and use as much of the permanent fire protection system as practicable.

3.5.6 SANITARY FACILITIES Initially, sanitary f act!Itles will be provided by portable toilets.

Resulting waste will be collected and dispos 3d of by a local service ccmpany. The servicing contracter will dispose of this waste of f-site in a manner acceptable to all local health and environmental authorities.

Pertable toilets wculd continue to be used in renote areas.

When the construction of fice and craf t toilet f acilities are completed, they will provide sanitary fac!!Itles for the werk fcree. These f acilities will be serviced by the on-site sanitary waste treatnent plant. A permanent sewage treatment f acility will be erected during the site preparation period, it will be ccmplemented by a much larger (52,000 gpd) temporary f acility to service the peak construction force. The temperary f acility will be dismantled and salvaged f ollowing plant construction, leaving the permanent f acility to service the plant over its operating life. Discharges from both facilities will be in accordance with applicable Federal and State standards.

The location of the sewage treatment plant and the approximate location of I the discharge outfall are shown in Figure 2-3.

Effluent f rcm the sewage treatment plant which will become operational near l the end of site preparation activities, will be pumped into a pipe-line that will also be used to discharge the cooling tower blowdewn during CR8RP operation. The location of the sewage treatment plant and approximate location,of the discharge cutfall are shown in Figure 2-3. The 20 inch discharge pipe extends into the river about 25 ft. frem the shcret ine at

approximately Clinch River Mile 16 and has a minimum depth below low water to pipe-centerline of 4 feet with a single-port dif fuser to ensure thorough dispersien.

3-19

3.6 PERMANENT MAIN SURVEY CCNTRCL LINES AND BENCH MARKS Base-line survey monuments and project control lines have been established as incicated in Figure 3-2 fer the proper hcrizontal and vertical control of the entire project. The monuments to be installed will be tied to the existing bench marks previously established by TVA and will be engraved with cross marks f or exact location. Elevation above mean sea level and the coordinates of the grid system used will be indicated. Each monument will be set into a poured concrete base which extends at least four feet below grade. With established base-!!ne survey monuments as guides, a series of project control lines will be established in the werk area proper for reference during construction.

3.7 QUARRY AND STOCXPILE AREAS Clearing, grubbing, stripping and grading will be performed to permit excavation to ccmmence fer the quarry, to deveicp stockp!!e areas for topsoll, slitstone, timestene and crushed rock, and ev'entuall'y to establish final plant grade. Required fill material for establishing grade will be obtained frem selective excavation of residual soil and excavated rock.

Direct placement of soll will be performed where possible. During the site preparation period the onsite quarry and crushing plant will start to produce cencrete aggregate as well as well-graded granular material for the required structural fill. A designated area will be prepared to permit stockpiling of this material near the concrete batching and mixing plant.

(Reference Secticn 4.1.1.1 of the Project's Environmental Repert)

Stockpiles will be shaped and dressed to drain. Potential erosion due to rain, run-of f er seepage during excavation will be controlled by constructing drainage ditches around the periphery of all designated stockpile areas and at the base of all excavation slopes. Crainage water l can then be collected in sumps and either pumped or permitted to ficw under gravity to runof f treatment ponds prior to discharge into the river.

Discharging the ef fluent to the river will be in accorcance with applicable l

Federal and State substantive standards. l l

l 3-20

The quarry will be. excavated frcm the side of an existing hill, with average excavation deptns expected to range f rca 40 to 100 feet below the existing grade. Multiple small blasts of dynamite will be used to f acil itate removal of the material . Explosives will be used intermittently starting shcrtly af ter initial clearing and grubbing and extending through the excavation period. Olsturbance from explosives will be limited by use of small multiple charges to minimize noise, dust and vibration ef fects in the vicinity of the plant and quarry sites. Topsoll and overburden in the quarry will be scraped of f, separately stockpiled and replaced over the quarry when excavating activities have ceased.

In crder to a!!eviate the problem of erosion and siltation that will cccur during development of quarry as during as any operations, the quarry runof f treatment pond will be constructed during the initi al phase of quarry develcpment and will be located at Plant cocedinates N90+00, E192+25.

Af ter quarrying operatiens have been completed, all temporary facilities will be dismantled, excess building materials will be hauled of f-site for disposal and disturbed areas will be reshaped and replanted to conferm with adjacent contours. The quarry flocr will be covered in sequence with waste rock first, subsoll second and topsoil en top such that each layer is shaped fcr drainage befcre the next is evenly spread. Reclamation of the quarry will consist of loosening the topsoll and then planting a mixture of native grasses and other appropriate cover.

l The Project has filed an application with the EPA for an NPCES permit to l

discharge ef fluent frem the quarry runof f treatment pond :nto the Clinch River at the location 35 deg. 53 min. 57 sec. Ncrth Latitude and 84 deg. 22 min. 27 sec. West Longitude. The qua'rry runof f treatment pend has been designed to acccmmedate the runof f resulting frem 5 inches of rainf all per 24 hcur period which is consistent with design practice and EPA requirements fer run-of f treatment ponds. A sand f ilter will al so be provided.

3-21

Precedural controls on the quarry runof f treatment pond discharge to ensure ccmpliance with regulations have been incorpcrated into the Constructer's

" Construction Environmental Mcnitoring Program,"(3-I) and " Erosion and Sediment Centrol Plan n (3-2) which also provide fcr such controls en the other runof f treatment ponds.

3,. 8 COST OF SITE FREPARATION AND EXCAVATION The cost of labcr and materials to conduct the various proposed activities is summarized in Table 3-4. The total cost is estimated to be $81.5 million. If this ef fert were not followed by plant construction, it is estimated that the salvage value of facilities and equipment would be $14.0 million. Cost of total redress including restoration of original conteurs would be 59.6 million as presented in Section 5.8 of this report. If certain f acilities are left intact fer future industrial use, the cost of redress would be approximately $7 million.

9

/

/

e

-m

• J' b

v' 3-22 l

TABLE 3-4 COST CF SITE PREPARATION AND EXCAVATION ACTIVITIES Cost Activity (1 million)

Site clearing, grading and excavation 37.5 Permanent factIitles 5.5 Temporary factiIties, construction equipment and tools 30.1 Construction engineering and management _L.i TOTAL 81.5 y .

."a i 4 w#

J f

/

+

0 t

l .

~

i

[

3-23

4.0 ENVIRCNMENTAL EFFECTS OF SITE PREPARATICN Site preparation will consist of clearing and grubbing, excavaticn and backfilling, and construction of temporary and permanent f acilities such as access roads, rail lines, laydown and stcrage f acilities, en-site quarry and crusher facilities, runoff treatment ponds, a concrete batching and mixing plant, a sewage treatment plant, water lines, and barge unloading f acilities as described in Section 3.0. Site preparation activities for the plant will cover a pericd of approximately 14 months. The construction monitoring program described in Section 4.8 will be anployed to moniter the impact of site preparation and will ensure that methods being employed to mitigate impact are effective. The environmental analysis and conclusions provided below reflect an update from the site characteristics and proposed construction activities that formed the basis of the earlier NRC impact assessment. This updated information, described in previous sections of this report and summarized in appropr' late locations below, shows that thare are no significant changes to the site conditions or to the proposed site preparation activities pr'eviously assessed by the NRC 'during the preparation of the FES and, in f act, serves to confirm the conclusion contained in the FES that, "It is the staf f's opinion that the environmental impact of such werk (site preparation) would not be significant." (FES, pg. 9-23 ) .

i 4.1 IMPACTS OF ECCLCGY, LAND USE, S0ll AND WATER RESCURCES 4.1.1 IMPACT CN TERRESTRIAL ECCLCGY The ecological impact of CRBRP construction on the terrestrial ecology was l assessed by the NRC staf f in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.4.1 of the FES and was premised on temporary disturbance of a' bout 195 acres of primarily forested land. The environmental assessment provided herein is based on er updated value of approximately 292 acres, but does not alter the conclusion that en balance the environmental impact on the terrestrial ecology wculd be

" minimal in view of the f act that the amount of land af fected wculd be less than 1% of similar available land on site and the Oak Ridge Reservation."

(FES, pp. 4-5).

4-1

The principal effects of the CRBRP cn the terrestrial ecology of the area will occur in connection with site-preparation activities. A smaller impact will result from construction of the railroad and access road. Site biota will be af f ected by site preparation activities, but the ef fects are expected to be mincr.

As mentioned, approximately 292 acres of land surf ace will be disturbed during the site preparation activities for the' CRBRP. Plant community types, acreages and percentages of af fected areas are listed in Table 4-1 based on disturbance locations shown in Figure 3-1 and vegetation types shown in Figure 2-8. Approximately 203 acres (70 percent) of disturbed land is covered with four plant communities, including hardwood, pine plantation, cedar-pine and hardwood-cedar. Three community types wil l have mcre than 20 acres disturbed, representing approximately 171 acres (59 percent of disturbed land). The only significant difference from the earlier NRC assessment is that 23% of the disturbed land (67. acres) will involve the hardwcod ccmmunity ccmparea to 5% in the FES; disturbance of the cedar-pine community will decrease from 25% to 20% (59 acres). Only 89 acres of non-ferested land will be disturbed by site-preparation activities. The 292 acres of disturbed land consitutes only 0.7 percent of all land on the Oak Ridge Reservation (CRR). However, cedar-pine, hardwood-cedar, hardwced-cedar-pine and pine plantation are more ccmacn on the land that will be disturbed by CRBRP site preparation activities than on CRR, representing 20, 6, <1, and 15 percent of the respective ccmmunity types, as shewn in Tabl e '4-1. Timber on disturbed land will be harvested prior to site-clearing activities.

As discussed in Section 2.6.1.1, ths site contains some rare community types and rare plant species but no threatened varieties. These rare species exist elsewhere in Tennessee and are widespread in the Appalachian region. Even so, site-preparation activities have been planned such that intrusion on these rare species is avoi ded.

4-2

TABLE 4-1 PLANT COMMUNITY TYPFS AFFECTED BY CP2PP CONSTRUCTION

• Percent Of Olsturbed Stratum # Ccmmunftv Tvoe Acreace Land Hardwcod 23 Red Oak-White Oak- 29 Yel low Popl ar 24 Red Oak-Hickory- 11 Yel l ow Popl ar 26 Red Oak-Yellow Popl ar 3 28 White Oak-Red Oak-Yellow Popl ar 17 31 Yellow Poplar-Red Oak 2 33 Sweetgum-Virginia 1 .

Pi ne-Sycamore 35 Elm Box Elder-Ash _;!

• Total Hardwoods 67 23%

Pine Plantation t 3 White Pine Plantation 15 l 5 Viginia Pine-Pl antation 3 l

7 Loblolly Plantation 1954 8 I 10 Loblolly Plantation 1979 16 13 Natural Pine _jl Total Pine Plantation 45 15%

l l

l 4-3

TABLE 4-1 (continued)

Percent Of Disturbed Stratum # Ccmmunity Tvoe Acreace Land Successional Pine 6 Shcrt Leaf Pine-Virginia Pine-Plantation 6 9 Virginia Pine-Shcrt Leaf Pine-Pl antation _jl Total Successional Pine 13 5%

Cedar-Pine 15 Cedar 49 16 Cedar-Natural Pine jBl Total Cedar-Pine 59 20%

Hardwood-Cedar

• 18 Cedar-White Oak-Red Oak 13 19 Cedar-Ash-Hackberry 2 21 Red Oak-Cedar-Yellcw Popl ar _jl Total Hardwood-Cedar 15 6%

Hardwood-Pine 20 Red Oak-Shcrt Leaf Pine _jl Total Hardwood-Pine 3 1%

l 4-4

TABLE 4-1 (continued)

Percent Of Di sturbed Stratum f Ccmmunity Tvoe Acreace Land Hardwcod-Cedar-Pine 27 Southern Red Oak-Popl ar-Shcrt Leaf Pine __L Total Hardwood-Cedar-Pine 1 <1%

Non-Forested 39 Ncn-Forested 5 40 Clearcut 54 42 Pcwerl ines 11 43 Roads 16 44 Quarry 1 ,

45 inundated Land _jl Total Non-Forested 89 30%

TOTAL 2 92

• On-site plus of f-site excluding transmission l ine.

4-5

4 Wildlif e will be af f ected in proportion to ef fective habitat loss.

White-tailed deer (Odecot teus vircinianus) utilize the relatively open cedar-pine and mixed hardwcod ccmmunities where browse and cover are available. Fcrest thinning as part of the COE ferest management program provided additional relatively open habitat and additional browse and Cover.

Site-preparation activities are expected to decrease deer habitat and populations on the Site by approximately 20 pe'rcent. Pcpulation reductions of gray squirrel, raccoon, gray fox, cpossum and bobcat al so are expected to decrease approximately 20 percent, since they occupy forestland.

Wildlife residing in open habitat, such as cottentail, weedchuck and striped skunk will Initially experience population reductions of approximately 20 percent during site clearing followed by population increases to levels approximately equal to those pricr to these activities as cleared habitat peripheral to most site activities beccces available for their habitation. Populations of white-footed mice, cotten rats, house mice, golden mice and short-tall shrews will Initial ly decrease by approximately 15 percent during site clearing, followed by a population

~

increase of approximately 20 percent above pre-disturbance levels as open, cleared habitat becomes available for habitation.

Populations of fcrest dwelling birds, such as ruf fed grouse, American woodcock, woodpeckers, blue Jay, flycatchers, vireos and warblers, will decrease by approximately 20 percent due to habitat loss during construction. Folicwing plant construction, populations of these birds will increase slightly to approximately 85 percent of the levels prior to site preparation. Species typical of open habitat such as mockingbird, grackle, cowbird, cardinal, Indigo bunting, American goldfinch and most sparrews, will Initially decrease by approximately 15 percent of their initial level during site preparation activities. These populations are expected to return to their normal level as construction is ccmpleted and abundant cpen habitat beccmes available. Pest birds such as crews, starlings and house sparrows will increase by approximately 20 percent during site preparation.

4-6

Reptile populations are expected to decrease by approximately 50 percent during site clearing because of habitat loss and road kills. Amphibian populations are expected to decrease Initially by approximately 20 percent, followed by a 100 percent increase during site preparation as they colonize ponds and as insect pests become abundant near site preparation activities.

Threatened and endangered wildlife will be af fected the same as other wildlif e in proportion to ef fective habitat loss. The bal d eagle and i osprey species have active nests along Watts Bar Lake and occasionally may visit the Clinch River to feed. The bald eagle is listed as endangered in the U.S. and Tennessee, while the osprey is listed as endangered in Tennessee. Neither species is expected to be af fected by CRBRP site preparation. The eastern cougar, if present on CRR, ranges widely and I's not expected to be af fected by site preparation. The cougar is listed as endangered in the U.S. and in Tennessee. Cooper's hawk, listed as threatened in Tennessee, resides in mature handwood fcrests of CRR where it feeds on songbirds. The sharp-shinned hawk, also listed as threatened in Tennessee, resides in open forest where it feeds on bfrds as large as pigeons. Both species have ample feeding habitat and range widely in search of food. They are not expected to be af fected by site preparation.

The marsh hawk is a winter resident of CRR, is listed as threatened in Tennessee. It f eeds on smal i mammal s and an occasional reptile in open habitat and may benefit from increased small mammal populations on disturbed l and. Other threatened and endangered species discussed in Section 2.6 are only possible residents of ORR and are not expected to be af fected by site preparation activites.

The dif f erences between the impacts resulting from the activities described herein and those described in the FES are not significant. This impact assessment of the proposed site preparation activities re+Iects; (1) the increase in land area to be disturbed (292 acres compared to the 195 acres planned at the time of the NRC staf f review); and (2) updated ecological data from an August 1980 reconnaissance survey which confirmed that no significant changes to the ecology of the site had occurred since the FES was issued. On the basis that no threatened cr endangered fauna is

, expected to be af fected by CRBRP site preparation activities, that the 4-7

3 e

varicus site flera also exist en the Oak Ridge Reservation, Tennessee and the Appalachlan reglen, that site preparation activities have been planned to avoid scme rare plant species that occur on the site, and that control measures endorsed or recommended by the NRC staf f to limit construction impacts will be implemented, the conclusion in the FES that "the impact on terrestrial biota wculd be minimal" renains valid, in addition, en February 8,1982, the NRC staf f evaluated the environmental impacts on terrestriai blota associated with the proposed site preparation activities and reaf firmed its previous FES conclusion.(4-4)(4~I) 4.1.2 WPACT ON AQUATIC ECCLOGY The ecological impact of CRBRP construction on the aquatic ecology was assessed by the NRC staf f in Section 4.4.2 of the FES. It was based on the construction of a river pump house, intake / discharge pipes and a barge unicading facility. Only the barge unicading f acility,Is included in the site preparation activities proposed herein and that will involve substantially less dredging (11,000 yd )3 than assumed in the FES (19,000 yd3 ) . This reduction resulted from revisions in the original preliminary design (which had required coffer dams) to the current simpler design with less insult to the river.

l l Some disturbance of the aquatic environment will result fran operations involving construction activities at the barge unloading area. On one side of the area, steel-sheet piling will be driven to form two sides of the area to be excavated. Approximately 11,000 cubic yards (5,000 cubic yards, to be taken frem below minimum water level, elevation 735. feet) of sandy slit material will be removed from the river bank using clamshell and/cr dragline, it will then be deposited and spread at the adjacent disposal location. Except fer the final dredging, all werk will be accomplished without disturbing the river. To control turbidity and preclude excavated material frem returning to the river, a dike will be constructed around the disposal area. Approximately 700 cubic yards of sand will be placed on the bottom of the slip to cushion grounded barges.

4-8

Benthic communities in the dredged area of the barge unloading facility will be eliminated and those in other nearby portions of the river bottom A beseline aquatic survey, conducted on the Clinch will be disturbed.

River at the Site to identi fy and characterize the existing biological communities, Indicates that communities in areas where sita preparation

• Impact may occur are dcminated by common chironomold and oligocheete Fish species. These species will recover rapidly in the af fected area.

species are expected to avoid areas of high turbidity and will not be impacted by construction acitivites.

On the basis of the CRBRP construction plan and the site characteristics defined at the time of the FES ef fort, the NRC staf f concluded that "the aquatic ecosystem is expected to sustain no significant Impact from To measure impacts, the constructing the plant and transmission lines.

staf f would require monitoring during construction, as specified in Section 6.1.4." FES Section 4.4.2, page 4-6.

The updated impact assessment of the proposed site preparation activities reflects the f act that construction of a river pump house and intake / discharge pipes included by the NRC in its FES asssessment would not be involved in the proposed site preparation ef fort. Only the construction of a barge unicading f acility wculd remain as a river-front construction ef fort, thereby reducing the river dredging volume to 11,000 cubic yarde, which is substantially smaller th.an the 19,000 cubic yards assumed in the l

l FES.

Since the dredging volume is smaller than that used in the NRC assessment, the benthic species disturbed by dredging activities are expected to recover rapidly, fish species will be able to avoid areas of high turbidity, and control measures and a monitcring program recemrended by the NRC staf f will be implemented, the previous NRC conclusion that "the aquatic ecosystem is expected to sustain no significant impacts" remains valid.

In its most recent evaluation of the impacts of site preparation activities on the aquatic biology, the Staf f again concludeo that " based on the area to be af fected and the f act that a significant pcrtion of this area is dry during parts of the year, no significant long-term impact on blota is 4-9 i

expected." In making this finding the Staf f reccmmended that Applicants conduct "a mussel survey in the vicinity of the Site, report the results to the NRC, and revise ,the water runof f control measures as necessary to protect the mussels."(4-2) Applicants did conduct such a survey in May 1982 (see paragraph 2.6.2.1).

4.1.3 IMPACT CN LAND USE The impact of CRBRP construction on Site land 'use was assessed by the NRC staf f in Section 4.2.1 of the FES, and was based on temporary disturbance of 195 acres, which included a 32-acre borrow pit for structural fill. As described in Section 3.1, current plans provide for approximately 292 acres of temporarily disturbed land, including up to 60 acres for an on-site quarry and stockpile areas which eliminates the need f or the of f-site borrow pit, and substantially reduce of f-site trucking for construction materials. The total area of permanently disturbed land and the allocation of this land fer specific purposes is comparable to thgse values used in the FES. The CRBRP site consists of approximately 1,364 acres, nearly all in woodl and. Of this total acreage, approximately 292 acres will be disturbed by construction of CRBRP, as shown in Figure 3-1. Tabl e 3-1 reveals that most of this disturbance will be associated with tenporary construction-related activities. Approximately 113 acres will be permanently required for permanent plant structures and surrounding land within an area to be eventually enclosed by' a security barrier as well as additional grassed and mowed areas for line of sight viewing beyond the security barrier, access roads, railroads, runof f treatment ponds, and barge facilities. The increase from 73 acres estimated in the 1977 FES to the 113 acres now estimated is the result of a requirement for increased area for security ccmbined with an Inc.reased requirement for access road right-of-way.

Areas of the Site first will be cleared, grubbed and stripped during the site preparation phase. The plant area will undergo a majcr land use change frem woodl and to industrial use. Trees of ccmaercial value will be 4-10

harvested and removed frcm the Site in accordance with the DOE Fcrest Management Program. As indicated in Figure 3-1, clearing will be limited to these areas required for site preparation activities and permanent plant buildings.

Because the CRBRP will be located in an undeveloped area, temporary constr-uction f acilities will be essenti al . Tenporary construction buildings and f acilities will be arranged in an orderly manner to minimize the impact on terrestrial ecology, reduce land-use requireme'nts, expedite construction operations and f acilitate routine groundskeeping, as shown in Figure 3-1 and Figure 3-2. Acreage required fer the temporary f acilities is listed in Tabl e 3-1. Folicwing 'ccmpletion of the plant and termination of quarry operations, temporary facilities will be dismantled, excess materials will be hauled of f-site for disposal and all disturbed areas will be reshaped and replanted. Construction of f acilities such as laydown areas, parking areas, plant site railroad spurs, concrete batch plant areas and areas assigned to varicus contracters will be time-sequenced to minimize the size of disturbod areas.

Quarry site preparation will consist of clearing, excavation, and construction of access roads, stockpile areas, and the quarry and crusher l

facilities. Timber of ccmmercial value will be harvested and removed in accordance with the DOE Fcrest Management Program. The quarry will be excavated frem the side of an existing hill, with average excavation depths expected to range from 40 to 100 feet below the existing grade. During the site preparation activities, quarry cperation will involve removal of approximately 300,000 cubic yards of crushed aggregate. Disturbance from explosives will be ilmited by use of small multiple charges to minimize l noise, dust and vibration ef fects in the vicinity of the plant and quarry sites. Topsoll in the quarry will be screped of f, separately stockpiled and replaced over the quarry when excavating activities have ceased. After quarrying operations have been ecmpleted, all temporary f acilities will be dismantled, excess building materials will be hauled of f-site fer disposal and disturbed areas will be reshaped and replanted. The quarry ficer will l

4-11

be covered in sequence with waste rock, subsoll, and tcpsoII, such that each layer is shaped for drainage befcre the next is spread evenly.

Reclamation of the quarry will consist of loosening the tcpsoil and then planting a mixture of native grasses and other appropriate cover.

On the basis of the CRBRP construction plan and the site characteristics defined at the time of the FES ef fort, the NRC staf f concluded that "the loss, fer the life of the plant, of 73 acres for production of blota would

~

not consitute a significant impact since there are thousands of similarly forested areas in the vicinity" (FES, Section 4.2.1, page 4-3) and also .

that "the extent of such ef fects (resulting from moving construction equipment and disturbing land) would be at a practicable minimum during the brief perleds of their occurrences. The long-term ef fects would not be significant" (FES, Section 4.2.1, page 4-4).

The present impact assessment of proposed site preparation activities is based on current plans for a 60-acre on-site quarry and stockpile area, whereas the NRC staf f analysis in the FES assumed a 32-acre bcrrow pit for structural fill and did not include consideration of quarry (since its use was speculative at that time). The use of an on-site quarry and stockpile area would eliminate the need for a borrew pit and substantially

~

reduce of f-site trucking for construction material s. Further, the total area of permanently disturbed land is essentially similar to that used in the FES; 73 acres in the FES versus 113 acres based on current estimates.

The 113 acres is 8% of the total CRBRP site and .3% of the Oak Ridge Reservation. The previous NRC conclusions regarding land-use impact remain valid.

4.1.4 IMPACT ON SOILS The effect of erosion associated with construction of the CRERP was assessed by the NRC staf f in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.3 of the FES, and the NRC analysis was based on the same basic erosion-control measures to be used in the preposed construction activities described in Section 3 of this repcrt.

4-12

Excavating and grading activities wilI cause disturbance of soils in the plant site area and seme resultant short-term erosion. Examination of the soil of the Site indicates that it is not valuable for agriculture and is much more adaptable to currently employed fcrestry practices. The CRBRP site topography is predcminately rolling (8% to 15% slope) to hilly (15% to 30% sicpe) and is not classed as prime or unique f arm land. The Roane County soll survey issued May,1942 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in cocperation with the Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station and TVA shows two main soll types. One type is the CI'arksville Cherty Sitt Loam Hilly Phase. it is derived from the Cherty Limestone and wculd be classed as pocrly suited fcr agricultural crops. The second type, the Upshur Silty Clay Loam Valley Phase soil type is a very shallow soli that is derived frcm shaley limestone, it contains outcrops of limestone, and is considered peer for cultivated crops. Although the site soll is unsuitable for agriculture, it is adaptable to currently empicyed forestry practices.

Judicious use cf ditches and the impoundment of alI stcrm runoff streams will control erosien and prevent siltation of the Clinch River. Any discharges frcm erosion control devices will be leptem'ented in accordance wIth applicable Federal and State standards.

Within the prcposed areas of site preparation activities, soil-erosion and revegetation potential have been Identi fied. Only approximately 10 acres of soll that will be disturbed by site preparation activities have a moderate to severe erosion potential due to steep, erodible sicpes, as shcwn in Figure 4-1. Figure 4-2 reveals that only 40 acres of disturbed land have a severe cr mcderate-to-severe seedling mcrtality rating.

Replanting of temporarily disturbed areas of the construc*lon site described in Section 4.1.1 therefore can be anticipated to be successful .

~

Access roads and steckpiled soils are majcr contributcrs to erosion. The l

existing access road is an unditched dirt road, improvements to this road will consist of regrading, widening, straightening, ccmpacting, graveling, placing an asphaltic surface and ditching. These improvements wil l provide l greater control of erosion runcf f. Steckpiled soils will be contcured and ditched to minimize runoff. Tcpsoll, which will not be used f er several years, will be contcured, seeded and mulched in addition to f

l 4-13 l -

P i

i

"- ~~~ 5 N '

i I I '

s'I I l l

V* 9

/,;'A f

/. '

r f' l e

l?l

[i

' , ,, fj:[

.: / <

s .., ,p8

'** /*f l '*

p Q l s .

.o** -

1 w n _ _-

! . p? --

~

M T l

~

ms ,3Lj,3g j

,,,,a n .

[f

_ g4 . = . . . . . .

( LEGEND i , J

! V

) SLIGHT s* ,

d' SUGMT TO MCOERATE e 968 l  !

SCALE lN FEET h 'ff. MODERATE MOCERATE TO SEVERE SEVERE

=.--a l i

m **CACSED TRANSMIS$1CN UNE ,

I eseess' ALTEPNATE TRANSMISS;CN LINE e a e SITE SOUNCARY l

l l

Figure 4-1. Soil Erodibility of tne CRSRP Area l

1-14

n w a' ,t b y e s*/ ' '

$ # , fJAy'

,i,,,

s n Q,f '.

s',' ,

K f,';'?pgI gg F'

$~ .

p i.,., y l4f&li..[

• "//

,. 2 - '*

?J si'\ si'-

,1 ,l 'c si s; - ,

' f$

y " " ' != 'I's' N

1. 'd "' ;jD h' ,, ' f / .',,f,7I

t. *f,,, / ' %'4 ,

y '

4CPES SLANO

- 'of' ' ,

"Q

_%,$,p-,7?fl's,,q'. s

., f,,Gev - F. ,. ?UeRN9sWj

)y f ,

e -

,,,r e// - s ,4 ',, ..

D:::::

ff

%  ?

% /@$!!,'i I,

s!

r dow f YI, l1,%'

b I

t.EGENo (

':ffI k,^_.

4df

• 4,

' i n, SUGHT

- d&j,, ;ft,,4rmAO N N

' f,,'#h,f* ,I' f SUGHT 7 VCCE9 ATE C 988 sc ''f't/SE'/ ~, . , , '~ - '

m i

scAtg 3 rgg7 1

=NN ' v,4fff: s

' g

1. • • YCCERATE

' 7',7

S '[f"&g m;

s

,1

' VCCEDATE O SCd8E

~

d g p'e p ,. 3 SEvE9E

%,*4=

mumumu F#CPCSEC MANSMISSICN UNE seasse ALTE?*iATE MANSMISSICN UNE

. . .m site sCuNCAny l

I 1

Figure 1-2. Revegetation Potential of the CRBRP Area in Tems of Seedling Mortality Rating l a-LS

b being ditched to control runoff. Most excavated soil which is subject to erosion will be deposited near the construction site and little is expected to reach the Clinch River because of the use of the run-of f treattent ponds with sand filters and other amelicrative measures taken.

On the basis of the CRBRP construction plant and the site characteristics defined at the time of the FES ef fort, the NRC staf f concluded in FES Section 4.2.1 (page 4-4) that " ... temperary adverse of fects such as erosion, siltation ... wculd be at practicable minimum during the brief periods of their cccurrences. The long-term ef fects would not be significant".

The impact assessment of the planned site preparation activities ref lects the proposed method of quarry operation and reclamation. The proposed site preparation activities have erosion potential comparable to the construction plans evaluated in the FES. Further, the same extensive erosion control measures required as conditions by the. NRC staf f in the FES will be used in connection with the proposed site preparation activities.

On these bases, the previous NRC conclusion in the FES regarding soll erosion and siltation impacts remains valid.

4.1.5 IMPACT CN WATER RESCURCES The Impact of CRBRP construction on water use was assessed by the NRC in Section 4.3 of the FES. It assumed that maximum use of river water during the peak crushing period wculd be 40,000 gallons per day (gpd); the maximum requirement during plant construction was expected to be 190,000 gpd. The NRC staf f judged that this withdrawal was small relative to the river's annual average ficw and concluded that proposed use of river water during plant construction was not expected to have a significant ef fect on navigational and recreationa.1 uses of the river er on any downstream uses.

Use of Clinch River water for proposed site preparation activities will be required fer ccmpaction'of fill, quarry and crushing operations, and dust control and is currently estimated to consume less than 60,000 spd. This 4-16

Is based on an estimated usage of 24,000 gpd f er earth ccmpaction, 20,000 gpd for dust control and 16,000 gpd f cr quarry and crushing operations.

This consumption level will clearly have no ef fect on river water uses.

Construction practices in the vicinity of intermittent ficwing streams will be controlled carefully. Crainage ditches and runof f treatment ponds at the Site, as discussed in Section 3.0, wilI control runoff so that no materials capable of siltation reach the Clinch River. Any discharges frcm runof f treatment ponds will be in accordance with applicable Federal and State substantive standards.

Construction of the barge unloading area will involve only a small area at the river bank and will pose no obstruction to barge or pleasure-craf t traffic. The f acii Ity (sheet-pli Ing and concrete siab-on-pil ing) wIl I be constructed on dry ground. Final dredging and excavation to open access to the river will be conducted during the August to March period if necessary to preclude interf erence with the f Ish-spawning season.

The groundwater environment at the Site will be changed substantially by the construction of the Nuclear Island. Presently, plans cal l for the base of the foundation of the structures to be placed at elevation 713 feet MSL.

Excavation for the Nuclear Island foundation will be perfccmed simul-l taneously with pumping and dewatering. Due to the proximity of the Clinch River and the contigucus area of deeply weathered, more permeable rock between the Nuclear Island and the river and since the excavation will extend to a depth of at least 20 feet below the ncrmal icw stage of the river, considerable dewatering of the plant site will be required to acccmmodate the proposed construction. The water table probably will be f

l Icwered arcund the Nuclear Island to an elevation below the normal water surface elevation in the Clinch River,' and thus groundwater ficw frcm the river toward the plant site .may be Induced.

l l On the basis of a maximum river water consumption requirer. ant of 190,000 gpd, the NRC staf f concluded (FES Section 4.3, page 4-4) that "this smalI withdrawal [of river water] is expected to have no significant ef fect on navigational and recreational uses of the river er on any downstream uses."

4-17

With regard to construction of a river pump house, intake / discharge pipes and a barge unicading f acility that was evaluated in the FES, the NRC staf f l Judged (FES Section 4.3, page 4-5) that " protective measures and the plans to do majcr construction elements in sequence wculd give protection sufficient to insure only temporary, mince adverse impacts upon the aesthetic quality and navigational and recreational uses of the' river".

The NRC staff considered the use of the barge unloading facility for the delivery of construction materials and plant components and concluded (FES Section 4.3, page 4-4) that "the overal l ' impact [on other river shipping]

would be very small because of the limited number of shipments over the several year construction period".

The impact assessment of water resources during proposed site preparation activities considers the f acts that river withdrawal requirements of these limited activities will be much smaller (60,000 gallons per day) than the value used by the NRC for the FES (190,000 gallons per day), that the site preparation activities do not include construction of the river pump house and intake / discharge pipes, and that use (if any) of the barge unloading f acIIIties would involve only construction equipment and materials, and not plant components. On these bases the NRC staf f conclusions on the impact of site preparation activities on water rescurces remain valid.

In its recent evaluation of site preparation activities, the NRC staf f concluded that the use of 60,000 gallons of Clinch River water per day, amounting to only 0.002% of the river's average daily ficw, "should have no ef fect on navigational and recreational uses of the river or on any downstream water uses". In addition, the staf f found the construction of the barge unicading f acility and placement of fill at the river bank for the access wall would not cbstruct barge traf fic or pleasure-craf t although it would result in a temporary increase of siltation in the immediate stretch of the river. The staf f concluded moreover, that siltation from site preparation activities in other areas of the site would be negligible since the runoff water wculd be treated before discharge in accordance with Federal and State standards."(4-3) 4-18

4.2 SOLID AND LIQUID WASTE DISPOSAL The ef f ects of solid and liquid waste disposal associated with CRBRP construction were assessed by the NRC staf f in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.4 of the FES and were based on the same basic disposal practices described in Section 3 of this report.

Open burning will be employed for disposal of forest slash cleared from the Site in accordance with applicable State and Federal substantive standards.

Burning will result in some releases of particulates and gases into the atmosphere; however, these releases will be local and generally shcrt-lived. Non-ccmbustible waste and residue f rom burning wil l be buried on-site, and the disturbed area will be graded and seeded with appropriate ground cover species to minimize soll erosion.

Scrap ccmbustible materials are planned to be removed from the Site by contracters and disposed of of f-site in accordance with applicable

~

regulations. A demolition fill area for scrap, non-ccmbustible materials such as broken concrete, miscellaneous metal, boulders, cr concrete biccks wil l be establ ished on-site.

Major chemicals used on-site during the construction period include scaps, detergents, paints, cleaning fluids, chemical fire extinguishers, oils and fuels such as propane, gasolines and diesel oil. The dissemination,,

release, or spillage of such materials on the Site will be controlled in acccrdance with applicable Federal and State substantive standards. Spill prevention control plans will be developed and submitted in accordance with EPA requirements. .

Used oil will be hauled off-site for disposal. The use of fire extinguishers is expected to be minimal, but, if they are used, the waste will be disposed of by an outside contracter. After use, soaps and detergents will be directed to the construction sanitary system er processed through a waste disposal system. Sweeping ccmpcunds will be 4-19

b disposed of of f-site or buried on-site. All potentially hazardous materials will be transported and/or disposed of in accordance with the Resource Ccnservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and applicable State of Tennessee requirements.

Based on the nature of plant construction activities and proposed practices .

for the disposal of solid and chmical wastes, the NRC staf f concluded in the FES (FES Section 4.2.1, page 4-4) that " surrounding forested areas would sustain no significantly adverse ef fects in view of the appIIcant's plans for ... limited on-site burning in conformance with State and Federal air poilution requirements". The NRC staf f al so judged (FES Section 4.4.1, page 4-5) that "the applicant's commitments to restrict ... chemical releases would be adequate to protect the terrestrial ecosystem from significantly adverse effects frcm those sources". On the basis of its evaluation of the applicant's plans for mitigating the ef fects of disposing of chemicals and solid waste, the NRC staf f concluded (FES Section 4.4.2, page 4-6) that " disposal of those material s would have. Insigni ficant effects upon the aquatic ecosystem".

The impact assessment of solid and liquid waste disposal on the environment during site preparation activities is based on the AppIIcant's ccmmitment to the same waste disposal practices judged to be adequate by the NRC in its FES. In its recent review of these practices, the NRC Staf f reaf firmed the conclusion in the FES.f4-43 Acccrdingly, the NRC conclusions on the disposal of solid and liquid wastes remain valid.

4.3 SANITARY AND OTHER WASTE TREATFENT AND PROCESSING The impact of disposal of conventional garbage and sanitary waste was ,

addressed by the NRC staf f in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.4.2 of the FES, respectively, and was based on the same basic disposal practices described in Section 3 of this repert. The NRC staf' concluded that these practices would comply with applicable requirements and that disposal of sanitary wastewater wculd have an insignificant ef fect upon the aquatic ecosystem.

4-20

4 Chemical toilets will be used during the Initial site preparation activities. Sewage will be collected in contracter-owned tank trucks and hauled to a local community sewage treatment plant for disposal . Sanitary wastes will not be discharged directly into streems or streem beds.

During the latter phase of site preparation a 52,000 gpd sewage treatment facility will become cperational. The discharge to the Clinch River will be in accordance with appIIcable Federal and State substantive standards.

Waste water frem dewatering operations, water spills from curing operations and site storm drains will be routed through ditches to silt-retention trenches and runof f treatment ponds prior to return of the water to the river. All waste water discharged into the Clinch River will comply with applicable Federal and State substantive standards.

Conventional garbage will be generated during con'struction. This waste will be collected by an outside contracter and disposed of of f-site in a local disposal f acility. No incineration of garbage will be allowed on the Site.

Based on the nature of plant construction activities and proposed practices for the disposal of conventional garbage and sanitary wastes, the NRC in l

the FES (Section 4.2.1, pages 4-3 and 4-4) endorsed the Applicant's proposed practice that " conventional garbage wculd not be incinerated on the site but collected and disposed of of f-site by a licensed contracter, or on-site near the borrow pit in compliance with applicable requirements".

The NRC staf f also evaluated the Applicant's plans for mitigating the ef fects of disposing of sanitary wastewater and concluded (Section 4.4.2, page 4-6) that " disposal of those mateclat s wculd have insignificant ef f ects upon the aquati c ecosystem".

The Applicants remain ecmmitted to prccess and dispose of conventional garbage and sanitary wastes during site preparation activities using the same practices that were judged acceptable by the NRC staf f in their FES assessment as well as the more recent staf f assessment of applicant's site 4-21

preparation activities.(4-5) Therefcre, the NRC conclusion on the environmental impact from disposal of garbage and sanitary wastes remains valid.

4.4 IMPACT CN HISTCRICAL AND ARCHAECLCGICAL FEA'RJRES The impact of construction activities on historical and archaeological features of the Site was addressed by the NRC staf f in Section 4.2.1 of the FES and was based on the operation of a borrow pit that was planned near the Hensley cemetery and the Indian mound. The NRC staf f concluded that restrictions on the borrow pit activity wculd avoid interference with these two sites. The construction activities proposed herein no longer include j the use of a borrow pit and thereby avoid the only significant activity that was in close proximity to these sites.

Several archaeological sites were found in the area of the Site and excavated by the University of Tennessee, as described, in Secflon 2.4 All field work at these sites was completed by April 30, 1975. Recovered artif acts have been removed to the University for further study and analyses.

The Hensley f amily cemetery, the only site of local histcrical Interest. Is located on the tip of the peninsula and is to be preserved, with the f amily retaining the right of access. The cemetery is not in the immediate area affected by site preparation activities. Extreme care will be exercised to ensure that the cemetery renains intact. No sites or structures within the boundaries of the Site have histcrical significance that would qualify for inclusion in the National Register.

On the basis that proposed construction activities no longer include the use of a borrow pit, that all archaeological field werk was completed in 1975 and that the Hensley cemetery will be preserved, the staf f recently reaf firmed that the conclusions of the FES regarding protection of .

historical and archaeolcgical val ues remain val id.(4-6) 4-22

4.5 IMPACT CN AESTHETIC VALUES The impact en aesthetic values due to CRSRP construction activities including noise, was addressed by the NRC staf f in Sections 4.5.5 and 4.5.6 of the FES and assumed that plant construction wculd proceed to ecmpletion, whereas the activities proposed herein only include site preparation and excavation.

Construction of plant f acilities will cause negligible aesthetic disturbance to resident and transient populations because of the limited constructicn duration, the limited number of viewing locations, and the distance frem the site of resident and transient populations.

Members of the public using the Clinch River in the vicinity of the Site will be exposed to construction of the barge unloading f acility at Clinch River Mile (CRM) 14.5. Excavating and grading activities at the plant site itself will be shielded for the most part by the dense veget'ation at the river edge, even though noise will be heard from the heavy construction equipment and activities.

A small Industrial park is located 1.5 miles to the ncrth, a ecmmercial camping area is located about 1.5 miles southeast and several houses are scattered throughout the area east and south of the Clinch River, the l closest of which is located over 0.3 miles f rom the river-water pumphouse.

Construction noise at these locations will vary with the particular phase of construction, the mix of equipment used f er each phase and the cycle of the equipment. The noisiest equipment types to be operated during the proposed site preparation and excavation activities are listed in Table

~

4-2, which Indicates that this equipment will produce maximum noise levels of approximately 58 cBA at one mile. This noise level falls in the l categcry of " Clearly Acceptable" noise (less than 62 cSA) defined by the l

Noise Pollution Level (NFL) criteria generally used as an aid in determining acceptabl e noi se level s. ( 4-7) The ccmbined noise level of trucks and scrapers at a distance of one mile is ccmparable to the noise snitted by a household dishwasher.I4-0) Explosien noise fran blasting will 4-23

_ ~ _

^

TABLE 4-2 NOISIEST EQUIPMENT TYPES OPERATING AT INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION SITES 50 Feet 0.5 Mile 1.0 Mile -

Construction dBA NPL dBA NPL dBA NPL Phase Eauipment Level (dB) Level (dB) Level (dB)

Site Truck 91 57 51 Preparation 102 68 62 Scraper 88 54 . 48 Excavation Rock Orill 98 64 58 105 71 65 Truck 91 57 51 Note:

dBA Level is the actual decibel level for the activity indicated.

NPL is the Noise Pollution Level generally considered acceptable.

4-24 1

I 4

I be minimized by the use of small multiple charges. Noise levels resulting f rom cperation of the rock crushing f acility wil l typical ly range frem )

80 dBA at 100 feet to 70- c8A at 300 feet and will fall within limiting noise level regulations at the site boundary. It is concluded that noise j generated frem site preparation activities will be within acceptable limits at nearby inhabited areas.

Natural features of the terrain will be preserved as much as possible.

Clearing plans will be coordinated with architectural personnel to avoid Indiscriminate clearing and to provide screening of the construction area.

On the basis of the physical location of proposed construction activities relative to varicus natural and demographic f eatures, the NRC staf f concluded (FES Section 4.5.5, page 4-16) that "the CRSRP would not form an objectionable visual intrusion on the landscape". The staf f al so reviewed the Applicants' plans f or dust and noise control, concluding that " dust and noise and other potentially adverse ef fects from blasting and heavy

~

equipment would have miner adverse ef fects and they wculd be experienced only by the few residents immediately scuth of the river n. (FES Section 4.5.6, page 4-17 ) .

On the basis that construction activities wculd be limited to site clearing and excavation rather than the total plant construction ef fort, that the construction noise levels would have the same maximum values judged acceptable by the NRC staf f, and that dust would be controlled by the same mitigating measures evaluated in the FES, the conclusion of the FES regarding constructicn impact on aesthetic val ues renains val id.

4.6 IDENTIFICATION OF UNIQUE CR SPECIAL HAZARDS' The preposed activities involve only conventional excavation and grading techniques. Thus, no unique hazards are expected to exist.

Construction of the barge unicading facility will involve only a smal l area at the river bank and will pose no obstruction to barge er pleasure-craf t traf f i c.

4-25

Two other areas in which potential hazards might exist are the use of tank trucks fer refueling construciton vehicles and the use of explosives for blasting. Fuel will be handled and dispensed by ccmpetent, experienced personnel, and the explosives will be handled by certified blasters, in accordance with standard construction saf ety practices, so as to min!mize potential hazards from these sources. Neither would present hazards dif f erent from typical construction activities.

4.7 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS OF PROPOSED ACTIVITIES The economic and social ef fects of CRBRP construction in the region of the CRBRP site were evaluated by the NRC staf f in Section 4.5 of the FES. This impact assessment was based on a peak of 2800 werkers on the project with approximately 600 werkers in place for the Site preparation phase. Two large projects being considered f or the region at that time, CENTAR (a proposed centrifuge enrichment plant) and Exxon's proposed fuel reprocessing plant, were assumed to be ecmpeting f or construction labor and local ccmmunity services; these two projects have since been cancelled.

Two other construction projects in progress at the time of the NRC assessment (modification to the Kingston Steam Plant and construction of the Watts Bar Nuclear Plant) are new virtually ccmpleted.

This section contains a summary of qualitative and quantitative assessments of demographic and sociceconanic ef fects of the proposed site preparation l activities on a study area comprised of pertions of Andersen,' Knox, Loudon, and Roane Ccunties, the West Knox Ccunty area (including the newly incorporated city of Farragut), and seven municipalities'within the four 1

counties (Figure 2-2). The city of Farragut is not assessed separately like the other seven municipailtles in the study area because it does not provide public services for its residents except for road maintenance. A 1980 data base was used during the analysis, including the 1980 preliminary reports of popul ation and housing of the U.S. Bureau of Census. The peak i

l 4-26

I . i werkferce size during the site preparation period is now estimated to be 1100 new employees over the number of project-related enployees currently working in the study area (460). Results repceted here follow from an assumption of normal levels of competition for area labor '(27 percent inmover rate).

The urban centers expected to receive Inmo/ers are Oak Ridge (9.5 miles),

highway miles from the CRBRP site, Kingsten (11 miles), Lenoir City (17 miles), Herriman (18 miles), Rockwood (23 miles), Ci f rton (24 miles), and the ncrth, ncrthwest, and western sections of the c!'y of Knoxville (approximately 25 miles). The 1980 population for "hese cities, based on the 1980 Census of Popuistion and Heusing, is Oak Ridge, 27,552; Kingston, 4,367; Lenoir City, 5,414; Harriman, 8,257; Rockwced, 5,744; end Clinton, 5,23 9. The Knoxville / Knox Ccunty Metropolitan Planning Commission estimates that approximately 70,000 persens live in the nortn, northwest and west sectors of Knoxville closest to the CRERP.

Not all new employees associated with site preparation will relocate to a new residence within the area. Instead, it is new estimated that approximately 300 CRSRP anployees will relocate to new residences inside the study area and be distributed as shown in Table 4-3. To estimate the size of the population influx resulting from site preparation, it was assumed that 70 percent of the anployees moving into the area wcul.d have f amilies and that, en average, there wculd be about 3.2 people per family (and about .7 school age children per family). Thus, an estimated total of 770 men, wcmen, and children will relocate to new residences within the area by the end of site preparation. Knox County is expected to receive the largest number of new pecple (350), folicwed by Roane Ccunty (190),

Anderson County (150), and Leuden County (80). No municipality is expected to receive a population influx greater than 1 percent of the 1980 total municipal population except for Kingsten where the new population could be approximately 3 percent of the total municipal population.

The socio-ecenemic conditions eval uated include: availabil ity and cost of housing; current enrollments and capacities of school systems; availability of recreation f acilities and programs; health care f acilities and services; 4-27

l TABLE 4-3 CLINCH RIVER BREECER REACTOR PROJECT DISTRIBUTION OF MOVERS AT PEAK CURING SITE PRE?ARATION ACTIVITIES Number of People Moving Percent into Each Area Moving into -

Each Area Jgt!ltl Schcol Ace Anderson County Oak Ridge 15 110 20 Clinton Area 5 40 10 Knox County Knoxv ii I e 5 40 10 West Knox County Area 40 310 60 Loudon County

~

Lenice City Area 10 80 10 Eqnp_e County Kingston Area 15 110 20 Rockwood Area 5 40 10 l

Harriman Area _1 40 1Q 100 770 150 l

l l .

l l

4-23

capacities and usage of water and wastewater nystems; and aspects of public safety. No significant acverse impacts are expected to occur in any municipality er portion of the study area fcr any of the elements listed above. This is a result of the small population influx (770 people) distributed throughcut the study area, where the ecmbined population is estimated to be over 200,000 people.

The project-related demand fcc housing at the municipal and county level is considerably less than the available housing supply, it is estimated that Oak Ridge and Kingston both will require 45 hcusing units to acccmmodate inmovers associated with site preparation, while all other communities will need no mere than 30 units to acccmmedate the project-related housing demand. The number of new housing units added to the existing housing stock within all municipalities en a yearly basis for the past several years is higher than the number of units needed to acccmmodate inmoving werkers during the site preparation period. It is estimated that, of the 300 housing units needed to house inmoving werkers during site preparation, about 50 percent wil l choose single-f amily hcmes, 30 p'ercent mobile hcmes, and 20 percent apartments er sleeping rocms.

! All of the school systems within the study area have excess capacity to accommodate additional students except the ncrth, northwest, and southwest secters of the Knox County School Syste, where the ecmbined enrolIment exceeds capacity by 90 students. The Harriman, Roane, and Oak Ricge systems have the Iargest dif ferential between capacity and enrolIments, excess capacity ranging frem 450 to 1,000 students, with the Lenoir City School System having the icwest level of excess capacity with available capacity fer abcut 75 students. All schcol systes in the study area will receive only about 10 to 20 students except the Knox Ccunty School Syst m

( which could receive up to 60 students. Therefcre, none of the school systems with existing excess capacity wculd be f aced with any noticeable l adverse ef f ect frem the minimal increases in syste enrollment resulting frem students of CRSRP employees. Even the increase in the Knox Ccunty School System enrollment as a result of the proposed project is insignificant because it represents less than 1 percent of the systm capacity fcr the three sectcrs expected to receive students.

l 4-29

O Most of the water and wastewater systems within the study area are '

cperating at levels consicerably belcw treatment capacity. Of the 16 water systems, 11 are cperating at 60 percent er less of system treatment capacity and 3 at 75 percent er less of capacity. The First Utility District in Anderson County is operating at the maximum level of treat:ent capacity which is of fset by agreements to purchase additional water on a regular basis frcm adjacent districts while existing plant capacities are being increased. The Piney Utility District in Lcudon Ccunty is also operating at the maximum level of treatment capacity. This district plans to add another spring to its overall system to provide the capacity to accommodate additional demands. Fcr wastewater systems, al l util ity districts in the study area are operating well belcw treatment capacity (80 percent er less of capacity) except for the Harriman district, which is operating at maximum capacity. Seven of the 11 districts in the study area, including Harriman, plan to increase existing plant capacity by 1984 No significant adverse effects to water and wastewater service are expected during the proposed site preparaticn activities because of the planned increased treatment capacities by districts currently with6ut excess capacity and because the project-related population increase represents less than 1 percent of.the combined population served by utility districts within the study area.

In the area of' health care, the average occupancy rates for hospitals in the four counties expected to receive inmovers include: Anderson (765),

Knox (77%), Loudon (64%), and Reane (64%). The ratios of physicians and dentists per 1,000 population are considerably higher than are considered necessary by the U.S. Cepartment of Health and Human Services. The minimal increase in patient load because of the project-related population increase will not have any noticeable adverse ef fect en the quality of health care provided to residents of the four-county area.

In terms of public safety, it appears that additions to the current law enf orcement and fire protection staf fs should not be necessary to accommodate the population influx in the counties and municipalities receiving Inmovers. ' Currently, the number of police per 1,000 population 4-30

In the varicus municipalities ranges frcm over 2.0 in Clinton and Rockwcod to 1.5 in Oak Ridge. Harriman, Kingston, and Lenoir City have rates of approximately 1.6 per 1,000. In the unincorporated parts of the counties, the rates of law enforcement of ficers per 1,000 are icwer than in the cities, ranging frem .50 in Rcane Ccunty to .60 in Anderson Ccunty. Fcr fire protection, only Lenoir City dces not have any full-tine firenen. In mos5 of the ccmmunities, the staf f of full-time paid firemen is suppcrted by a considerably greater number of volunteer and paid-on-call firenen, except for Oak Ridge, which has only full-time paid firemen. For both law enforcement and fire protection services, no noticeable change in the quality of service or in operating expenditures would occur because of the project-related demand f or public safety services.

There are five full-time recreation and park agencies that provide year-rcund comprehensive programming and employ professional staf f within the study area. Of the four counties only Loudon County currently does not have a full-time recreation and parks department. The project-related population influx is so small compared to the existing' study area baseline pcpulation that no ecmmunity or county recreation program will be noticeably affected.

The transportation effects resulting from the level of enployment required to support site preparation activities will not induce significant adverse ef fects to ecmmuters on highway links in the project area. Of the highway links in the project area, only State Reute 95 (SR 95) between 1-40 and Bear Creek Road (CRBRP access road) currently has an existing level of service icwer than level of service C curing the hcurs l'n which CRBRP commuter traf fic will contribute to the traf fic load. (Refer to the Highway Capacity Manual, Highway Research Scard Special Repcrt 87, pages 80-81 published in 1965 fer ccmplete definition of the different traf fic levels of service.) It is estimated that the highest increase in ecmmuter traffic will be along Bear Creek Road heading east tcward SR 95, where as many as 300 total vehicles could be added to the existing ficw, and along SR 95 heading south, where about 275 vehicles could be added. The increase in traf fic volume on all other read links within the project area will te less than 200 vehicles per hcur during peak ccmmunity hours for CRERP site

~

4-31

a preparation. It is estimated that none of the projected traf fic volumes 1 will exceed the calculated capacities (level D) during the hours when the CRBRP traf fic contributes to the existing traf fic volumes for any of the I highway links in the project area.

In contrast to the broader CRSRP construction program and greater construction activity in the regicn assumed in the FES, the proposed CRBRP site preparation activities will enploy a smaller number of workers and will have no significant economic and social impact on the surrounding communities including the city of Oak Ridge in which the CRERP site is located. The population influx of about 770 people will be distributed throughout an area having a population of over 200,000 people and will not place a significant burden on any of the community services. In view of local conditions and the fact that there are no other large construction projects currently underway in the area, the economic Impacts may be considered f averable. Ccnsistantly, the NRC staf f repcrt of February 8, 1982, stated that, "This is a small population influx compared to the total population in the four counties of mere than 200,000. The communities in which the werkers are located can expect to benefit from payroll expenditures. In general, the staf f believes the revenue generated by the in-moving population through sales tax, taxes on property and beverages, etc., would be sufficient to cover the local costs of increased services to accommodate these werkers and their f amil ies (FES, PP.5-14, 15)."(4-9)

This was confirmed during oral presentation of A. K. Bissell on February 16, 1982 before the ccmmission, the city of Oak Ridge is suppcrtive of the requested exemptions and remains confident that socio-econonic issues of concern "can be very adequately addressed dur.ing the hearings and deliberations which will occur prior to issuance of construction and operation permits".(4-10) _

4-32

4.8 SITE PREPARATION ACTIVITIES IPPACT CCNTROL PEASURES The proposed site preparation activities described in Section 3 and the environmental assessment of these activities provided in Section 4 are based on mitigating actions to avoid unnecessary adverse environmental impacts. A summary of these mitigating actions, which represent commitments by the Project is provided in Tabl e 4-4, including specific recommendations made by the NRC staf f in Section 4.6 of the FES.

A pre-construction monitoring program was conducted by TVA during 1975-1978. Information from the monitoring program will be used to provide background information f er impact assessment during plant construction.

Once site preparation begins, the TVA program and one to be Instituted by the construction contracter will monitor those areas which may be af fected by site preparation activities.

Monitoring fer primary site preparation impacts on the Site will concentrate on both vegetation and erosion sediment co'ntrol . A program for construction environmental monitcring during construction has been prepared by the construction contracter.I4-III Critical ecological elements have been identified frem baseline survey data, and the plant construction manager has been provided with maps and photcgraphs of the locations of these critical elements so that they may be avoided during site preparation. Semi-annual inspections of species and community locations will be perfcrmed to moniter the status of the critical elements and, if required, to modify site preparation activities.

l i

l 1

1 4-33

l i

TABLE 4-4 l CRBRP SITE PREPARATICN ACTIVITIES IMPACT CONTRCL MEAStJRES

1. Cpen burning will conform to State and Federal air pollution

! requirements.

2. Disposal of wastes will conform to Tennessee Solid Waste Management Regul ations.

3. Blasting will be restricted to small multiple charges.

4 Encroachment upon the Hensley Cemetery and the Indian Mound will be avoided.

5. Reclamation will consist of grading, returning topsoll and seeding native grasses and other appropriate cover.

6. In constructing the berge-unicading f acility, river siltation will be controlled by building the factilty on dry ground. Some temporary turbidity increase and miner siltation will occur during final dredging.

7. Disposal of hazardous wastes and pollutants will conform to Federal and State Regulations.

8. Garbage generated during construction activities will not be burned. It will be discarded by a licensed contractor in regulated disposal f aci l iti es.

9. Treated sanitary wastewater discharged to the river will, I meet standards of the Tennessee Department of Public Health.

Chemical toilets will be used primarily during site preparation and resultant waste disposal will ccmply with approved practices.

I 10. General erosion control will consist of leveling rutted l

areas, maintaining conteurs where possible, leav ing tree stands where possible in the plant construction area, constructing drainage ditches at the base of stockpiles and excavation slopes, rip-rapping major diversion channel s where erosive velocities are indicated, retaining drainage water in run-off treatment ponds before discharge to the river, develeping a stcrm drainage system fer Site access roads and spoil laycown areas, landscaping as scen as construction schedules permit, providing burlap protection to seeding on slopes, and planting trees er other appropriate vegetation.

4-34

TABLE 4-4 (Centinued)

CRBRP SITE PREPARATION ACTIVITIES IMPACT CONTRCL MEASURES

11. The Site access road will be paved; on-Site traf fic will be controlled by the Constructer.

12. Dust will be controlled by sprinkling roads and construction areas.

13. Construction access roads will be restored to equal or better than original condition.

14. Chemicals will not be used in clearing land although maintenance of right-of-way may involve localized applications of authorized herbicides. If herbicides are used, they will be applied only under certified supervision.

15. Activities will be limited to those described in Section 3.

16. A fire prevention and control plan will be developed and applied.

17. The plant construction manager has been provided with locations of critical ecological elements. On-the-ground Inspections of species and community locations will be made semi-annually.

18. Water discharged from runof f treatment ponds will meet the effluent limitations which are promulgated by E?A in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit. All runof f treatment ponds will be constructed early in the site preparation activities.

l 19. Work schedules staggered with those of other plants will be l established, if needed, to avoid unreasonable congestion on State Road 58 in Roane Ccunty.

20. Dredging fer the barge unloading f acility will be conducted during the August to March period unless there is evidence showing that those activities at other times wculd not adversely af f ect f ish spawning.

4-35

Y 5.0 RECRESS/BILITY OF IMPACTS Conduct of the site preparation activities is described in Section 3.0 of this report. This section describes hcw the ef fects of these activities would be redressed to restere the Site to an acceptable environmental condition and/cr make it suitable for future alternate uses, should subsequent construction not be authorized.

• An acceptable environmental redress can be ef fected f or al l of the activities associated with the site preparation discussed in Section 3.0 of this report. Areas of work subject to redress are as folicws:

A. General site clearing, grubbing and grading B. Excavation fer main plant areas buildings C. Temporary pl ant f acil iti es D. Access roads and railroad spur lines, etc.

E. Construction utilities F. Main control lines and benchmarks .

G. On-site quarry and crushing f acility The temporary buildings, construction utilities and other construction f acilities easily can be removed frem the Site. Excavated areas wculd be backfilled and restered to a condition ccmpatible with their intended future use by gracing, planting and seeding.

The CRBRP site is cwned by the U.S. Government under the management and l custody of TVA. The Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge Operations Office (CRO) acts fer TVA fcr fcrest management en the site. The 1364 acre peninsula, including the 292 acres involved in site preparation, is

[

l presently dedicated to industrial purposes. The COE forest management activities have already resulted in removal of the majcrity of harvestable trees, due to considerations not assoc, lated with the Project activities.

Therefore, the intended Industrial development of the Site should not require restering it to its criginal natural condition. Neverthel ess, it could easily be returned to conditions consistent with the DOE Fcrest Management Program and in harmony with adjacent environs.

5-1

The proposed alternate use fer industrial develcpment, as prescribed in a land use plan develcped by the Oak Ridge City Planning Deparment, also involves clearing of trees, shrubs, and undergrowth and installation of access roads, rail road serv ice and water and sewer l ines. I Eullding of reads, railroad and Infrastructure associated with site preparation activities cculd be utIIIzed effectively in such a development with substantial savings to the developers. Additionally, the barge unloading f acility and railroad access would be benef icial in attracting majer Industrial concerns to the Site. The site preparation activities shculd therefore improve the area fcr the proposed alternate Industrial utilization and for attracting majcr Industries, in view of these benefits, the permanent road, the railroad access, the utility services and the barge f acilitles probably wculd not need to be removed. However, if it becomes necessary to dismantle and to re-landscape the area af fected by such roads and f acilities, this can be accomplished at a smal l cost.

Information supporting the redress cost estimates can be found in Ref. 5-1.

~

5.1 GENERAL SITE CLEARING, GRADING AND EXCAVATION The redress plen contempiates backfIIIing the excavations made fer the foundations of the permanent plant facilities and backfilling other depressions within the construction area.2 Subsequently, the area would be graded to f acilitate drainage, topsoil stockpiled during site clearing would be replaced, and the redressed construction area wculd be reseeded and Iandscaped. )

i The costs associated with these activities are estimated at approximately

$5.47 millicn. j i

I AppiIcants response to NRCC and Tennessee Atterney General Ccements, January 28, 1982.

2 The runof f treatment pends wculd renain in place. I 5-2 l

t Grading to f acilitate drainage wculd leave the site in a condition most compatible with its intended future use for Industrial purposes. Restcr a-tion of the site to its criginal conteurs (with two ridges straddling the area where the main excavation will be located) would be entirely incon-sistent with future Industrial use, if recentcuring were required, however, total restcration costs (in millions of dollars) are estimated at approximately $7.85 million. -

In order to carry cut redress to original conteurs, a two-step process could be contemplated. First, the facility excavations would have to be backfilled and brought to the criginal elevation without regard for the ridges now located on either side of the excavation area. Second, grading would be undertaken to restere the ridges to their original conteurs.

Redressing to criginal contcurs increases general site redress and backfill costs by approximately $2.4 million.

On the basis of the foregoing, the costs of redress fo'r the general site and excavation are estimated to range between $5.47 million (redress for industrial purposes) and $7.85 million (redress to original conteurs).

5.2 TEMPCRARY PLANT FACILITIES The redress of temporary plant f acilities is discussed in Section 5.3 of the SPAR. Facilities such as the concrete batch plant, administration buil ding, on-site warehcuse, TVA substation, and other miscel lanecus buldings, can be dismantled and removed, if required, er can remain in place to support other werk at the Clinch River site.3The costs to dismantle and remove all temporary pl ant f acilities total approximately

$490,000.

3 Current plans call for the rxministration building and warehouse to be part of the permanent 'ec i l ity. The other structures wcula be remcved at the completron or the construction phase of the project.

5-3

l This includes removal of non-salvageable building superstructures and foundations to belcw grade. Concrete pads wculd be removed, as wculd any pipes er other protrusions from the ground. The oost estimate as'sumes' that all salvageable material would be removed beforehand.

5.3 ACCESS ROAD, RAILRCAD SPUR LINE, AND BARGE UNLOADING FACILITY In the event of project termination it is likely that the railroad spur would remain intact since it enhances the value of the site for alternative industrial uses, if required, however, the railroad ties, rails and accessories could be disassembled and renoved, fill material and topsoil replaced and the area of the spur line reseeded. It is estimated that the Applicants could recover approximately $439,000 in salvage value from a contractor for allcwing the removal of the ties, rails and accesscries.

The cost to the Applicants for other redress work, including spreading two feet of backfill and landscaping and seeding, would be approximately

$74,000. .

The permanent paved access road will be constructed fer the most part on an existing dirt and gravel access road. Since no purpose would be served by degrading a paved read to a gravel road, no redress of the access road is contemplated by the Applicants. If such werk were required, however, the estimated cost of such werk would be approximately $94,000.

Redress of the barge unloading f acility would require spreading and com-pacting backfill and topsoll over the facility and reseeding. Estimated cost of such redress work is $88,000.

5.4 CONSTRUCTICN UTILITIES ,

in all likelihood, the construction utilities wculd remain intact in the event of project cancellation, since they would be required for any subsequent develcpment of the site as an Industrial park. If directed to 5-4

do so, however, the Applicants wil l remove al l above-ground appurtenances associated with the utilities, such as cables, hydrants, pumps and tanks, including dismantling and removing the sewage treatment plants, and removal and salvage of the construction fencing.

The cost associated with such redress is estimated at $25,000 and the salvage value is estimated at $215,000, for a not return of $190,000.

5.5 MAIN CONTROL DEVICES AND BENCHMARKS The horizontal control devices such as targets, concrete monuments, markers and similar devices wculd be removed. Benchmarks and vertical control devices wculd probably be left in place for future survey reference but could be removed, if required. The cost of this activity is relatively insignificant and is included in the overall scope of work and cost for general site redress.

~

5.6 QUARRY AND CRUSHING FACllLTY

( The redress plan calls for removal of the crushers and backfill of the l quarry area with aggregate and spoil material stockpiled onsite during the quarry cperation. The Applicants wculd then ecmplete redress by returning the topsoil removed during the initial site work at the quarry, by grading to restore to criginal drainage lines, and by reseeding the area.

l The cost of redressing the quarry area at the end of site preparation is estimated at $1,057,000.

5.7 SALVAGE VALUE The salvage values caiculated at the end of site preparation for construc-tion Infrastructure, equipment, tools and materials delivered but not in place are estimated at $13.43 mil lion.

5-5

5.8 SUWARY The estimated costs of redress are summarized on Table 5-1. The cost of redress ranges from $7 million to $9.6 mil lion. In the base case presented in the SPAR, the site will be redressed to a state which is most compatible with future Industrial use at a cost of $7 million. Additional redress can be ef fected to a state which renoves all improvements at an additional cost of less than 5.3 million, including redress of the acce.ss road.

Restoration of the general site area to original contours can be ef fected for some $2.4 million of additional cost, but as with the renoval of improvements, the site would be less suitable for Industrial use. Revenues from salvage of construction equipment, materials, and f acilities would range between $13 and $14 million.

The NRC Staf f has reviewed Applicants redress plans and concluded that (1) the "affected areas of the site could be restored essentially to their present conditions of vegetation and animal life" although " perfect restoration of the topography could not be achieved" and (2) Applicants redress cost estimates were reasonable although conservatively high.(5-2) e 5-6

TNILE 5-1 -

StM4ARY OF REDRESS ACTIVITIES MD COSTS (Cost in 1 Million)

Industrial use improvanents Removed, to original contours Redress Salvage Rodres> Sulvago Cost Value Cost Valuo General Site Rodross and Backf ill 5.470 7.851 Quarry and Crusliing FacliIty 1.057 1.057 Temporary P1 ant Facil I tles .490 3.558 .490 3.558 Construction Equipment (incl . Gatcli 9.418 9.418 Pl ant )

Construction utilItles (Inci. Fencing .450 .025 .665 and TVA Substallon)

Itallroad and Bargo facillites .162 .439 Access fload .094 101AL 7 .0 17 13.426 9.679 14.08 Not Cost (Revenuu) (6.40 9) (4.40 1)

6.0 FORECLOSURE OF ALTERNATIVES Although the prcposed site preparation activities at the CRBRP site will modify semewhat the physical and ecological features of the immediate plant locale, such activities will not f oreclose any alternatives with regard to the CRBRP Project er to land use of the CRBRP site.

6.1 CRBRP DESIGN l

The scope of proposed site preparation activities has been limited to those tasks which will have no impact on the construction of safety-related structures. Therefore, the proposed activities will preserve the ability of the Project to make plant design changes, if any, that might be required in the course of the NRC staf f review.

6.2 SITE UTILIZATION The approximate 292 acres impacted by the proposed activities are part of the 1364 acres of undeveloped property owned by the U.S. government and in the custody of the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA). Part of this land (112 acres) has already been set aside for Industrial development, as described in Section 2.3 while the renalnder is being reserved fer TVA use.

As a f acility designed to provide construction and operating experience for the advancement of LMFBR technology, the CRSRP has a mission consistent with the general uses planned by the government for this property. In the event that a decision is made not to proceed with construction of CRERP plant structures af ter site preparation activities are completed, the Site could be restored fer a variety of land uses consistent with existing government plans fer this property, as' described in Section 5.0 of this report. As indicated in Section 5.8, the restcration cost involves a modest financial ccmmitment.

The alternative of abandonment of the project would not be af fected by the proposed activities. The expenditures for the proposed site preparation activities are approximately 6% of the project cost accrued to dare, and 6-1

less than 3% of the estimated total project cost. The relatively smal I investment for site preparation activities will not cause an irretrievable tilt of the cost-benefit balance toward project completion, and thereby has no ef fect on the evaluation of alternatives.

As the NRC Staf f found in its recent eval uation, conduct of the proposed activities wculd not creata "an irretrievable tilt of the cost-benefit balance away from the alternative of complete abandonment of the project or l the alternative of utilizing another site." Nor wculd the activities

" foreclose any design alternatives."(6-1) 4 9

e e

6-2

7.0 EFFECT OF CELAY CN PUBLIC INTEREST in August 1981, the Ceputy Secretary of DCE stated, "The Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant (CRBRP) Project is a key step in the development of the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reacter (LMFBR) and is a vital element in f ul filling the Department of Energy's nuclear mission... Congress has stated its intent that the CRBRP should be constructed in a timely and expeditious manner as set forth in the existing Project arrangements."(7~l)

The Omnibus' Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981(7-23 provided full funding for the Project and also established a clear mandate for expeditious i Project ccmpl etion. The Conference Report acccmpanying this legislat-Ion (7-3) expressly provides as folicws: .

" Breeder reactor systems.--This technology demonstration plant, as set f orth in the existing project arrangements, is a key step in the development of the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reacter. The conferees intend that the plant should be constructed in a tJmely and expeditious manner, so that a decision on the commercialization and deployment of breeder reacters can be made en the basis of information obtained in the operation of the plant. The plant should therefere be constructed en the basis of that objective, and not on the basis of prov'iding neeced power in the specific region of the Clinch River site."

In October 1981, the President stated, "I am directing that government agencies proceed with the demonstration of breeder reactor technology including templetion of the Clinch River Breeder Reacter. This is essential to ensure cur preparedness for icnger-term nuclear pcwer needs."II~4I In May 1982, DOE issued its supplement to the LMFBR Program Environmental Impact Statement. The CCE program cal led f or in that supplement is construction of CRBRP as soon as possible, in February 1977, the NRC issued its Fir.at Environmental Statement and concluded that the action 7-1

called for Is construction of CRERP. As discussed more f ully below, continued del ay of the CRBRP Project would have significant adverse impacts on the public Interest for the folicwing reasons:

1. The LMFBR Program would lose significant Informational and programmatic benefits. The LMFBR concept can be confirmed as viable only through the accumulation of LMFBR plant construction and operating experience. At the present time the CR8RP is the focal point for the entire LMFBR program. As such, any further delay would directly impact on the momentum of the LMFBR program.

Grant of this request will provide substantial informational and other benefits as well as advance important national policies.

2. The United States leadership role in nuclear issues of Intern-ational importance would be substanti al ly Impeded. Grant of this request will promote the revitalization of the U.S. leadership role.

3. The program would lose cost savings. If approval to initiate site preparation activities identi fied herein is granted it is estimated that the current Project schedule can be shcrtened by 6-12 months.

The estimated 6-12 months reduction in schedule will result in substantial cost savings. ,

7.1 OVERALL LMFBR PROGRAM BENEFITS The Department of Energy's LMFBR Program consists of three basic elements:

1) a base Research and Development Program, 2) developmental pl ants, and

3) support'ing fuel cycle programs.

The base Research and Development (R&D) Program is designed to advance breeder technology, and support the design, construction, and operation of the LMFBR developmental pl ants. The R&D Program includes work in engineered systems and ccmponents, fuel s, material s, saf ety, physics, and test f acil Ity operation.

The developmental plants include operational reactors such as the Experimental 3reeder Reacter-Il and the Fast Flux Test Facil Ity. The other developmental plants are the CRBRP and the Large Developmental Plant (LCP).

The LMFBR Fuel Cycle Program suppcrts the demonstration plants and the R&D program. This includes fuel f abrication, transpcrtation, reprocessing, and waste management and disposal.

7-2 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

These three majcr program elements have been integrated and together form the overall U.S. LMFBR Program. Information on the LMFBR Program can be found in the "LMFBR Program Environmental Statement" (ERDA-1535) and its supplement, " Environmental Impact Statement for the Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Reacter Program" (Supplement to ERDA-1535, COE/EIS-0085-FS, May 1982).

LMFBR develcpment includes the design, construction, and operation of developmental plants in increasingly larger sizes demonstrating LMFBR technology as needed to support the progression of key technical decisions.

• The CRBRP design, construction, and operating Information is vital since it forms the basis for the key technical decisions at the appropriate extrapolation scale, guides the R&D Program, and of fers potential LMFBR Program cost reductions. At the present time CRBRP serves as tha major focal point for the overall program.

As the focal point of the LMFBR Program, demonstrable ' progress In the CRBRP project is essential to the vitality of the averall program. The granting of this request will result in substantial benef its to the everall LMFBR Program. The pace of CRBRP has a marked ef fect on the overal l program momentum. Approval of this request and the subsequent prompt start of CRBRP site preparation would boost the momentum of the overall program, and enhance the probability of successful LMFBR development.

The CRBRP has a unique impcrtance to the LMFBR Program. The CRBRP will demonstrate reliable working relationships among diverse pcwer generation l systems and ccmponents fer the first time in an intermediate-scale U.S.

LMFBR powerplant. As such, it will be the first full-scale, integrated test of many of the Individual elements of the LMFBR program which have been develcped over the past 30 years. CRERP cperation will provide unique experience to further guide Individual LMFBR program elements.

Although cperation of the Fast Flux Test Facil Ity (FFTF) is currently providing important LMFBR informational benef its, only the CRBRP will i provide a full-scale Integrated test of LMFBR powerplant ecmponents and 7-3

systems. The FFTF is a test reactor and has no fuel blanket to demonstrate breeding, has no steam generaters and turbine-generater, and is not hooked to a utility grid since It does not produce electricity.

Conversely, and perhaps mere importantly, should the focus of the LMFBR I Program be blurred as a result of further delays in the CRBRP, both the project and the overall program would be burdened with additional delays and costs beyond those already suf fered. The threats would be mani fest in several forms. One serious concern is the negative impact on the project and program appropriations resulting from continued frustration over the progress of CRBRP. Another serious concern would be the continued loss of the cadre of technical experts as they transfer to other areas in which they could hope to see more tangible progress during their professional careers. In f act, over the last five years, a substantial number of quallfled personnel have lef t the CRERP Project. Extensive ef forts were undertaken during the last year to restore the necessary talent for effective project completion. However, retaining this, nucleus of quallfled personnel will be difficult without tangible progress on the Project.

Also, any further delay of the CRBRP would adversely af fect the ef forts to obtain International participation in the LMFBR Program. Negotiations are currently underway with both the British and the Jaoanese in an attempt to minimize the costs and technical risks associated with the design, R&D, construction, and operation of large LMFBRs. Data from the construction and operation of CRBRP is crucial to executing such international agreements.

And, lastly, termination of the overal l LMFBR. Program could foreclose the opportunity to exploit the vast scurce of energy available within the United States in the form of the deplated uranium tallings - a potential energy source that is already mined, processed, above ground and readily available fer use when breeder reacters are depicyed. Proceeding expeditiously with the CRBRP wculd greatly reduce the risk that negative events as described above would occur.

l 7-4

7.1.1 BASE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM BENEFITS The R&D Progran is responsible for performing the tasks that are necessary to develcp the CRERP components and systems, extrapolate components and systems from the CRBRP to the Large Developmental Plant project and f uture LMFBR plants, and to resolve problems that may be encountered during CRBRP and LDP construction and operation. Approval of this request will primarily benefit the R&D program by enabling earlier identification of plant system and ccmponent problems that need resolution.

The particular areas of plant &nd component development which will benef it from prompt design, construction, and operation of CRBRP are illustrated in Tabl e 7-1.

S O

7-5 l

Table 7-1 Plant and Cemeenent Areas Examoles of Benefit Plant Level Analyses and Codes Validation of plant level analyses including thermal / hydraulic analysis, transient analysis, and others.

Reactor Core Physics Verification of abscrber worth calculations; confirmation of critical core predictions and measurements; verification of analytical techniques; fuel management experience and confirmation.

Fuel and Cladding Full scale, full power validation of .

fuel component and system design; confirmation of fuel costs and design margins.

Reactor Internal Structures Confirmation of constructabil ity of upper internal structure (UIS); ,

verification of design margins to '

accommodate thermal striping; verification of UlS operating features; verification of UlS Instrumentation.

Plant Component Performance Confirmation of tube integrity /and Steam Generaters reliability; confirmation of acceptability of Departure from Nucleate Boiling and water chemistry experience In plant operational environment; provision of key information on steam generater tube fouling and corrosion; verification of design margins in plant operational environment.

Pumps Confirmation of constructabil ity and long term reliability and operation; verification of design margins in plant operational environment.

Valves, Piping and other Confirmation of constructabil ity and Components long term reliability and operation; verification of design margins.

7-6

I O

Plant Safety Systems Establishment of licensing criteria that can be utIIIzed for future plants; confirmation of performance and reliability of redundant and diverse shutdown systems; further confirmation of natural circulation; verification of design margins; plant operater trai ni ng.

Constructability/Fabricability Confirmation of constructabil ity of LMFBR plants; confirmation of cell liner and catch pan construction techniques ano large liquid metal piping installation; validation of modularization techniques; confirmation of LMFBR plant construction costs; verify there are no construction related problems unique to a LMFBR plant; identification of design improvements for LCP and subsequent plants.

Pl ant Operation Verification of startup test and operating procedures; LMFER cperation experience; verification of design adequacy, design margins, and unique operational characteristics of LMFBR plants.

1 Maintenance, in-Service Operation confirms LMFBR plant inspection, Reliability, maintenance in-service inspection, Availability reliability, availability and ALARA within a utility operations netwerk.

l l

S l 7-7

Earlier identification of any problems that require R&D solutions will have additional Indirect benefits. First, it will allow the total retention time required for the R&D staf f to be reduced, thus helping reduce overall LMFBR Program development costs. Second, the ultimate LMFBR design acceptance will be determined by the operation of the CRBRP and each of the individual ccmponents and systems. Finally, it will lower the technical risk In conducting the R&D Program since R&D werk will be focused on specific areas for potential improvements that are directly identi fied from CRBRP construction and operation.

7.1.2 LARGE DEVELCPMENTAL PLANT BENEFITS The next majcr step beycnd the CRBRP in establishing the readiness of LMFBR technology in the U.S. Program is the development of a larce scale LMFBR plant, presently designated as the Large Developmental Plant (LDP).

Design, construction, and operation of the LDP will give Industry and

~

utilities the necessary technical information required for future private sector decisions on when to proceed with LMFBR commercial introduction.

Conceptual design of the LCP began in October 1978. Establishment of the basic plant parameters was completed in late 1979, and preliminary design of key plant systems has been proceeding since that time. Funding has been provided for LCP during the last four fiscal years at the rate of $15 million per year.

Because of the previous five years of delays of the CRBRP, data from construction, startup, and operation of the CRBRP is already signifi.cantly delayed and is required at the earliest opportunity for use in the LDP.

Approval of this request and the prompt start of CRBRP site preparation will maintain the essential utility, Industry, and Government expertise in breeder technology which is required fer successful completion of the LCP.

In addition, a gain of 6 to 12 months in the CRBRP schedule will directly translate into mere breeder experience available to the LDP at an eart ler i

i 7-8 I i

date. Fcr example, lessons learned frcm CRBRP construction and startup procedures will be mere readily factored into the LCP design, at a time when such input would be most benef icial and thus would reduce LDP costs and R&D requirements.

Another significant benefit to the LDP from prompt start of CRBRP site preparation is the positive ef fect that it wculd have on the potential private sector LCP sponscrs. It will demonstrate the Government's ccmmit-ment to the LMFBR program to industry, utilities, and potenti al foreign participants, and will encourage them to make a ocmmitment to the LDP and further the development of the LMFBR cption.

Negotiations already have begun to assemble the Government and utility experts into a team to advance LCP conceptual design and def ine during the next two years the basis on which the project may proceed. The anticipated agreements will form the basis for f uture cooperation among the Government,

,' industry, and utilities to design, construct, and operate the LCP. A draf t i

agreement has been developed by COE and the Electric Pcwer Research institute (EPRI) to f urther develop the LCP conceptual design. This l

agreement states that expeditious completion of CRBRP is impcrtant to thet

( ef fective conduct of the LCP cooperative ef fort. DOE and EPRI are expected to sign this agreement before the close of FY-1982. Sim il arl y, I negotiations have been initiated with the Japanese and British with the objective of obtaining foreign cooperation in suppcrt of the LCP and related LMFBR activities. Hcwever, failure to move agressively forward with CRBRP could be perceived by the private secter and foreign countries as a lack of Government ecmmitment to the LMFBR program which wculd thwart its further develcpment. This could Impede the prospect for cooperation with the domestic industry and f oreign participants:

7.1.3 FUEL CYCLE PROGRAM BENEFITS l Demonstration of the technoicgy fer reprocessing and recyc!!ng of LMFBR fuels will begin a few years af ter the initial criticality of CRBRP. An early demonstration of this technology is essential to ecmnerciall:ation of the LMFER.

7-9

The demonstration of LMFBR fuel cycle closure is an essential part of the overal l LMFBR program. LMFER fuel contains a high concentration of valuable fissile material which makes storage a more severe economic penal ty. Thus, the long range goal is to reduce to a minimum the time to complete the cycle of fuel removal frcm the reactor, fuel reprocessing, ref abrication and reinsertion back into the reactor.

Earlier conpletion of the CRBRP, followed by a reprocessing demonstration, would permit an earlier overall confirmation of cur abil l't y to close the LMFBR fuel cycle. This approach also provides, additional LMFBR fuel with which to conduct prototypic fuel cycle demonstrations that will optimize key performance f acters including fuel assembly design, reprocessing and ref abricat!cn and Irradiation of core and blanket fuel assemblies.

7.2 INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM CONSIDERATIONS The completion of CRBRP and continuation of the LMFBR Program are essential to the maintenance of active U.S. Influence and leadership in the Inter-national nuclear field, particularly in relation with other nuclear nations that also ascribe considerable Impcrtance to breeder development.

Nuclear power has obtained a central role in the energy programs of several nations, and in the next century the LMFBR will be a key element of several large electric pcwer programs in western Europe and Japan due to the secure fuel supply that the LMFBR offers. Although the U.S. previcusly held a positicn of leadership in LMFBR development, other nations including France, the United Kingdom, and the USSR have surpassed the U.S. In Intermediate-scals pl ant experience. Currently, the Japanese and Germans are both constructing CRBRP size developmental plants. The French plan to bring their first large-scale plant on line in 1983.

I I

For more than two decades, beginning in the early 1950's, the United States played the majcr leadership role in expanding the peacef ul use of nuclear energy throughcut the worl d. For example, much of the Light Water Reacter technology in use in the worl d today is the result of U.S. ef ferts and 7-10

4 technology. In the 1960's the United States assumed a new leadership role with the develcpment of the LMFBR. Majcr Industrial nations in western Europe and Japan folicwed our lead and began serious development of breeder technology to meet their mere immediate energy security needs.

In the late 1970's, however, the United States relinquished this leadership role. As previcusly noted, other nations with majcr breeder programs have surpassed us in terms of demonstrating the technology at Intermediate and near-commerical sizes. Since several other nations will have operating ,

commercial er near-ccmmerical size breeders by tne mid 1990's, each year of delay of CRBRP simply places the U.S. ccmmitment and technology further behind the rest of the world; and further diminishes the ability of the U.S. to influence global events as well as diminishing the ability of U.S.

Industry to ccmpete in weric nuclear markets ever the long term.

President Reagan has reiterated the crucial impcrtance of suppcrting ef fective international measures to reduce the threat of proliferation to help achieve a credible non-pro!!feration policy. He ~has al so made it clear that we must re-establish our credibility in developing International nuclear policy and safeguards, as well as our credibility as a supplier of nucl ear equipment, technology, and f uel s.

The Internaticnal Nuclear Fuel Cycle Evaluation (INFCE) reaf firmed the LMFSR as the preferred and acceptable acvanced nuclear fuel cycle.

Proceeding new with CRSRP is required to provide the U.S. with a needed technological basis to continue its influence over weridwide nonprolif eration aspects of LMFBR applications. A strong LMFBR program, including prompt undertaking of CRERP site preparation activities, is necessary to suppcrt this policy.

The successful concuct of the U.S. LMFBR Program is necessary for us to reestablish cur leadership role in wcrid nuclear energy matters; the early construction and cperation of CRBRP is an essential part of that program.

CRERP was deferred mere than five years ago. It has been more than hai f a year since the President ceclared his intention of expeditiously completing CRBRP. An additional one-hal f to one-year delay in initiating CRERP site 7-11

l e

preparation will be viewed overseas as further indecision and as a continuation of the deferral policy of 1977. As a result, our role in the formulation of international nuclear policy will be further diminished, as ,

will our acceptance as an active member in worl d nuclear ccmmerce.

In summary, aggressively completing CRSRP will reestablish our commitment to the breeder, advance technology closer to a ocmmercial status, and represent our stake and right to be an active participant in forming world r.cn-prol i f erat!,n pol icy and saf eguards. A; an additional benef it, it will anheace U.S. prestige overseas and re-establish our Interest in worl d nuclear markets.

7.3 MONETARY COST OF DELAY Although the mejor ef fects of delay are associated with the aforementioned

, Informational benef tts and international program considerations, there are significant monetary cost impacts. In a February 25, ,1982, letter to the NRC, DOE set forth an analysis of the monetary cost of delay to the CRSRP Project from three different perspectives, any of which demonstrate that further delay of CRBRP would result in substantial costs.(7-5) These perspectives were the appropriations (or fiscal) perspective, the economic perspective and the financial perspective.

7.3.1 THE AFFRCPRIATICNS PERSPECTIVE The appropriations perspective represents a view similar to that taken by Congress and the Administration in which annual funding and project costs are estimated in year of expenditure dollars. In this context, the appropriation perspective does account.for inflation. With regard to the circumstances surrounding the CRBRP, the past 5 years delay on the project has been recognized by the Congress and Administration as having increased the,overall project cost by approximately $800 million. Thus, from the appropriations perspective, an additional 1 year delay in the CRERP Project would cause project corts to increase due to inflation as well as the added costs for support of project management, quality assurance, procurement, licensing, and other staf f that must be retained during the delay for 7-12

project continuity. To provide a conservative estimate, the project estimate of increased manpower costs assumes no increase in the costs of engineering due to inefficient use of resources. This is most conservative, since the project's flexibility to ef fectively utilize engineering staff without loss of ef ficiency has largely been exhausted over the past 5 years.

The Increases in materials and labor and the additional management costs for the project are slightly of fset by inflation's ef fects on the plant's revenues. The net effect of an additional 1 year delay to the project from an appropriation perspect, is estimated at $129 million.

7.3.2 THE ECCNCMIC PERSPECTIVE Another way of assessing the cost of delay is the econanic perspective.

This is a perspective that views delay costs from the perspective of their total Impact on our society and econcmic system,' and igncres the actual additional financial cost which the project will exper'lence. This method is. In sharp contrast with the appropriation perspective taken by the Congress and the Administration which measures delay costs as to their relative burden upon Individual projects.

From the econcmic perspective, only future changes in the requirenents for l abor resources, material s, pl ant equipment, foregone revenues and R&D information are appropriate elements of the cost of delay. In this context a delay in the project will involve at least three elements of quantifiable economic cost. These elements expressed in precent wcrth terms include costs fer maintaining management personnel during the period of delay, the cost of deferring the revenue from the plant by 1 year and a projected savings by deferring the project 1 yee'r. The net of these costs is estimated at a minimum of $28 million fer a 1 year project delay.

7-13

7.3.3 THE FINANCI AL PERSPECTIVE The cost of delay from the financial perspective represents the impact on ,

the project itself. Frem this perspective, the ef fect of a one year delay in completion will result in the capitalization of an additional one year of Interest measured at the time of plant completion. In addition, the financial costs of delay include the additional management costs, the loss due to the deferral of revenue, and any savings due to delaying anticipated expenditures. From the financial perspective, the present worth of a one year delay in the CRBRP Project would result in a cost increase of $218 million.

In summary, the costs of a cne year delay to the CRBRP can be viewed from three separate, but independently valid perspectives. In each case, the <!

quantifiable costs of a one year delay are real, and substantial (7-5) ,

7.4 CONCLUSION

The CRBRP Project has clearly reached the stage where initiation of site preparation is appropriate. Project design werk is approaching 90 percent completten and engineering research and development is approximately 95 percent completien. As of the end of April 1982 mere than $600 million worth of hardware has 'been delivered or is on order with suppliers.

The Project has undergone an extensive licensing review by the NRC. In February 1977, the NRC issued the Final Environmental Statenent which recommended the grant of a Construction Permit. In March 1977, the NRC issued the Site Sultability Report whi.ch found the Site to be suitable from the standpoint of radiological health and safety. The SSR was updated in June 1982 and reaf firmed these conclusions, in the FES, the NRC staf f concluded that the environmental ef fects of site preparation activities would not be significant. These conclusions are unchanged with respect to the preposed activities. The measures and controls committed to by the 7-14

Project and the additional precautions recommended by the staf f would be adequate to ensure that adverse environmental ef fect, if any, from proposed site preparation activities wculd be at the minimum practicable level .

As Indicated in Section 4.0 of this Site Preparation Activities Report, the changes that have been made to proposed site preparation and excavation plans subsequent to the 1977 NRC staf f review are not expected to alter this conclusion. The NRC's June 1982 update of the Site Sultabil ity Report (SSR) also confirms the March 1977 SSR conclusions, that the characteristics of the CRERP site are suitable.

The impacts of site preparation activities are easily redressable at modest

($7 - 9 million) cost. The area of the site is presently dedicated to industrial use and completion of site preparation activities would actually enhance the value of the site for its intended purpose. Even so, the Applicants' are committed to redress if that should be necessary.

~

Conduct of the proposed site preparation activities would not foreclose alternatives. All site alternative uses would be preserved, and in view of the relatively small cost of site preparation, the alternative of abandonment would not be af fected. .

, Given that the impacts of site preparation are insignificant and easily redressable, and that no reasonable alternatives are foreclosed, the conduct of site preparation activities is in the public Interest. Grant of the request will accelerate and assure the ficw of informational benef its to the LMFBR program, and to related international programs. It wit!

l j advance important national policies. Congress and the Administration have stated that the CRBRP should be constrJcTed in a timely and expeditious matter. Grant of the request will place us one significant step closer to

! realizing the value of the energy represented by above ground stocks of depleted uranium tailings. Finally, but still significantly, it will provide substantial monetary cost savings to the project. On balance, the public interest weighs heavily in f avcr of this request.

9 7-15

8.0 REFERENCES

REFERENCES FOR

SUMMARY

AND CCNCLUSIONS 0-1 Letter frem W. Kenneth Davis, Deputy Secretary DOE, to Dr. J. N. Palladino, USNRC, dated August 13, 1981 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 1.0 1-1 Final Environmental Statement related to construction and operation of Clinch River Breeder Reacter Plant, U.S. Nuclear Regulatcry Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Occket No.

50-537, NUREG-0139, February 1977.

1-2 lbid, Chapter 9, Alternatives, pg. 9-23.

1-3 Site Sultability Report by the Office of Nuclear Reacter Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatcry Commission in the Matter of the Cl inch River Breeder Reacter Pl ent, Docket No. 50-537, March 4, 1977. Revision, June 11, 1982.

1-4 lbid, Section 1.8, Summary Conclusions, pg. 1-7.

1-5 Letter from W. Kenneth Davis, Deputy Secretary COE, to Dr.'J. N. Palladino, USNRC, dated August 13, 1981.

1-6 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Pub. L. No. 97-35).

1-7 House Ccnference Report No.97-208, 97th Cong., 1st Sess. , 2 at 827 (1981).

REFERENCES FCR,SECTICN 2.0 2-1 Telecon, Mrs. Louise Dunlap, Oak Ridge Chamber of Ccmmerce, to Scharre, P., TVA, July 1981.

2-2 Thornbury, W. O., Princioles of Geere'rcholcev, John Wylie and Scns, New Ycrk, 1960.

2-3 Letter, Harper, H.L., Director of Fiel d Serv ices, Tennessee Histcrical Commissicn to Rcark, R., Division of Reservoir Properties, TVA, 5 June 1973.

2-4 University of Tennessee, site survev cecerds fer Acene coun+v.

Tennessee. en file, McClung Museum, Univerity of Tennessee, Knoxville, no date.

2-5 Schroedl, G. F., salvece Archaeolcev in the clinch River Licuid  ;

yetal Fest Areeder :eecter Plent Area. Repcrt submittea to TVA and PMC.

8-1

2-6 Rodgers, J., The Tecten tes of the Ancal echians. Wiley-interscience, New York, 1970.

2-7 McMaster, W. M., Geolecte veo of the Oak 4?gge Reservatten.

Tennessee. CRNL-TM-713, Oak Ridge National Labcratcry, Heal th Physics Division, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1963.

2-8 Tennessee Y' alley Authority, Watts 9ar PSAR. 1970, NRC Docket No.

50-390/391.

2-9 Tennessee Valley Authority, Foundation Investications. Clinch River

.SJ1L.1973.

2-10 Milici, R. C., The Straticrachv of Knex County. Tennessee. G.S.A.

Southeastern Section Meeting at Knoxville, Tennessee Division of Geology, Bulletin 70, April 11-14, 1974, pp 9-24.

2-11 Clark, G. M., Scme Gecmcrohic Aseects and Problems Related to the Area. Tennessee. G.S.A. Scutheastern Section Meeting at Knoxvil le, Tennessee Division of Geology, Bulletin 70, April 11-14, 1973, pp 1-8.

2-12 Kellberg, J. J., Encineerine Geoleev of Knox County. Tennessee.

G.S.A., Tennessee Division of Geology, Bul laton 70, 1973.

2-13 Rodgers, J., Geolecie Mao of East Tennessee with Exclanatory Text.

Tennessee Department of Conservation, Division of Geole , Bulletin 58, Part 11, Nashvil le, Tennessee,1953, pp 11-148.

2-14 Rodgers, J., Chrenolcev of Tectenic vevements in the Accelechian Recion of Eastern North America. American Jcurnal of Science, Vol 265, No. 5, 1967, pp 408-427.

2-15 Personal communication on Valley and Ridge Geology, Moneymaker, R. H., Chief Geologist (retired), Tennessee Val ley Authority, to Carter, R., Law Engineering Testing Company,1973.

2-16 Tennessee Valley Autority, Division of Water Centrol Planning, Hydraulic Data Branch, Crainace Areas for Streams in Tennessee River Basin. Repcrt No. 0-5829-R-2, Knoxvi l le, Tennessee, March 1970.

2-17 DeBuchannanne, G. D. and Richa'rdson, R. M., Greundwater Pescurces of East Tennessee, Tennessee Department of Conservation, Division of Geology, Bulletin 58, Nashville, Tennessee, Part 1,1956.

2-18 Bradburn, D. M., Fcrest venecement Plan. E90A cak Ridee Reservatten lo76-1C80. Oak Ricge National Labcratcry, Environmental Sciences Division Publication no.1056 (CRNL/TM-5833), June 1977, 58 pp.

2-19 Type Map of TVA and LMFBR Site: Portions of Forest Management Compartment Nos. 13 and 14: 1,364 acres, April 1973.

8-2

2-20 Parr, P. D. and Taylce, F. G., Plant Soecies on the Decertment of Enerov - Oak Didee Deservation that are Rare. Threatened er of Soecial Concern, Jcurnal of the Tennessee Academy of Science, Vol.

54, No. 3, July 1979, pp.100-102.

2-21 Ayensu, E. S. and DeFilipps, R.A., Endeneered and Threatened Plants of the United States. Smithsonian Institution and Wort d Wil d!!fe Fund, 1978, pp. 180-182.

2-22 Energy impact Associates, Acuatic and Terrestrial Ecolocv Reconnaissance Survevs. Aucust Ic80. Clinch River Breecer Reactor h November 1980, 50 pp.

2-23 Radford, A. E., Ahles, H. L. and Bell, C. R., Manual of the Vascular Flora of the Carolinas. University of Ncrth Caro!!na Press, Chapel Hil l, North Carolina, 1968.

2-24 Fernald, M. L., ed., Grav's Manual ef 9etanv. 8th edition, D. Van Nostrand Co., New Ycrk, 1950, Ccrrected by Rollins, R.C., 1970, pp 483, 484, 486.

2-25 U. S. Department of Interior, Fish and Wil dl i fe Serv ice, Peoublication of List of Endancered and Threatened Soecies and Correction of Technical Errers in Final Oules. Feceral Register Vol. 45, No. 99, 10 May 1980, pp 33767-33781..

2-26 Tennessee Wil dli fe Rescurces Commission, Endancered or Threatened I

Soecies. Procl amation Number 75-15 (12 June 1975) as amended by l Procl amations 77-4 (13 May 1977), 78-14 (22 September 1978) and 78-20 (draft), Nashville.

I 2-27 Tuttle, M. D., Pecul ation Ecolcev of the Grev Bat (Myotiscrisescens) Obilcotrv. Timinc and Petterns of Vove-ent.

Weicht loss Durinc Micretien. end Seesenal Adeotive Stratecies.

Occasional Papers No. 54, Museum of Natural Histcry, University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, May 12, 1976, pp. 1-38.

l l 2-28 Tel econ, Beimbern, W. A., EI A, to Humphrey, S., Florida State Museum, 5 April 1979.

2-29 Barbour, R. W. and Davis, W. H., 9ats of America, University Press of Kentucky, Lexi ngten, Kentucky, 1969, pp. 63-66, 88-95.

2-30 Hcwel l, J.C. and Dunaway, P. 'E . , Lenc Term Ecolecical Studv of the Oak Ridce Aree: II. 05servattens en the u e -mels with Scecial Reference to Velmen Vallev. Oak Ricge National LabcraTery, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 26 Octccer 1959.

l 2-31 Stcry, J.D., Unpublished list of mammal s observed er trapped on the Oak Ridge Reservation, Environmental Sciences Division of the Oak Ridge Naticnal Laberatcry, Oak Ricge, Tennessee.

8-3

2-32 Letter, Story, J. D., Environmental Sciences Division, ORNL, Oak Ridge, Tennessee to Webb, J., Tennessee Wil dlife Rescurces Agency, Nashville, Tennessee, 19 December 1978.

2-33 U.S. Department of the latericr, Sureau of Sport Fisherles and Wil dl if e, Fish and Wil dl if e Serv ice, Threatened Wildl if e of the United States: 1973 Editten. Rescurce Publication 114, March 1973, 1 pp 124-125, 127-128, 162-163 and 203. i 2-34 Tennessee Valley Authority, Divislo'n of Fcrestry, Fisheries and Wildlife Development, A Checklist of Birds of the Tennessee Vallev.

January 1974. j 2-35 Johnson, R. M., The Hercetof auna of the Oak Ridce Area. ORNL-3653, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ricge, Tennessee, December 1964.

2-36 Woosley, L. H., Jr., Taylcr, M. P., Toole, T. W. and Wells, S. R.,

Status of the Ncnradiolecical Water Quality and Nonfisheries Biolocical Ocemunities in the Clinch River Arier to Ccnstruction of the Clinch River Breeder Reacter Plant. 1975-1978. Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattancoga, Tennessee and Muscle Shoal s, Alabama, February 1979, 143 pp. and appendices.

1-37 Letter, Linton, H. D., Cl arion State Col lege, Cl arion, Pennsyl vani a to Twee, S. M. WESD, 23 March, 1975. .

2-38 Harl an, J. R. and 3peaker, E. B. , Iowa Fish and Fishing, Iowa St.

Printing Bd., 1956.

2-39 Martin, R. E., Auerbach, S. l. and Nelson, D. J., Grewth and Movement of Smallmcuth Buffalo. ictiebus bubalus (Rafinescue). In Watts 9ar Reservoir. Tennessee. ORNL-3530, Oak Ridge National Laboratcry, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 1964 2- 40 Jaco, S. D., and Sheddan, T. L., TVA Fish Deculation Mcnitorinc -

LMF9R Demonstratien Protect. Unpublished Repcrt, 11 January, 1974.

2-41 Federal Register, Vol . 39, No. 3, 4 January 1974, pp 1171-1175.

2- 42 Tennessee Wil dl ife Rescurces Commission Procl amation, Endancered or Threatened Seecies. Prcc. No. 75-15 (June 12, 1955) as amended by Proc. 77-4 (May 13-1977), Proc. 78-14 (September 22, 1978) and Proc. 78-20 (draft). .

2- 43 Tennessee Valley Authority, unpublished gill net data, Kingsten Steam Plant, 1975.

2-44 Tel econs, Heitman, F., Lake Euf al la Fishery Management Unit, Lake Euf f alo, OK, with Wagner, D. J., Energy impact Associates, Octcber 15, 1980.

2-45 Smith, P. W., The Fishes of Illinois. University of Illinois Press, Urbana, 1975, 314 pp.

8-4 - - - . _ - - - - - . - - - - , . -

o 2- 46 Pflieger, W. I., The Fishes of utsseeri . Missouri Cepartment of ccnservation, 1975, 343 pp.

2- 47 Trip Report, Wagner, D. J., Energy impact Associates, 19-20 August.

2 - 48 Telecon, Lear, J., Dr. Oak Ridge Nationsi Laborateries, with Wagner, D. J., Energy impact Associates, 14 August, 1980.

2-49 Tennessee Valley Authority, unpublished rotenone survey data for Watts Bar Reservoir, 1949-1980.

2- 50 Tel econ, Myhr, A., Tennessee Wil dl ife Rescurces Agency, with Wagner, D. J., Energy impact Associates, 20 Octcber 1980.

2-51 Tel econ, Coutant, C.C., Dr., Oak Ridge National Labcrateries, with Wagner, D. J., Energy impact Associates, 23 October 1980.

2-52 Telecon, Cheek, T., Tennessee Technological University, with Wagner, D. J., Energy impact Associates, 21 Octcber 1980, 2- 53 Tel econ, Van Den Avy le, M., Dr., Tennessee Technological University, with Wagner, D. J., Energy impact Associates, 13 October, 1980.

2-54 Fletcher, J. W., Assessment of Adult Larvel Fish Peculations of the Lower Clinch River Aelew ve tten util Dem. M. S. Thesis, Tennessee Technological University, Cookevil le, December 1977, 90 pp.

Scott, E. M., "Cl inch River Sauger Study", unpubl ished manuscript, 2-55 Tennessee Valley Authcrity, 1980, 15 pp.

2-56 Letter, Harper, H.L., Tennessee Histcrical Commission to Ramsey, M.D. of TVA, May 17, 1982.

2-57 Letter, J. Lengenecker, COE to P. Check, NRC dated 5/28/82.

REFERENCES FCR SECTICN 3.0 3-1 Stone & Webster Engineering Ccep., CRBRP "Censtruction Environmental Program," March 8,1982.

l 3-2 Stone & Webster Engineering Cer)., CRBRP " Erosion and Sediment Control Pl an," May 21, 1982. -

REFERENCES FCR SECTICN 4.0 4-1 Clinch River Breeder Reacter Pl ant Repert, prepared by NRC staf f at 14-26 (February 8, 1982) (hereinaf ter sited as Staf f Repert) 4-2 Staff Repcrt at 20-21.

8-5

M e

4-3 Staf f Report at 16.

4-4 Staff Report at 18, 4-5 Staff Report at 25.

4-6 Staf f Report at 16. -

4-7 Noise from Construction Equipment in Operation Building Equipment and Home Activities, NTID 300.1, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, December 31, 1971.

4-8 Bradburn, D. M., Ferest Menacement Alan. EPDA Cak Ridce Reservatten: 1976-1C80. Oak Ridge National Laboratcry, Environmental Sciences Division Publication No.1056, June 1977 (ORNLTM-5833), 58 pp.

4-9 Staf f Report at 22-23.

4-10 Transcripts of February 16, 1982 meeting of U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, page 106.

4-11 Stone & Webster Engineering, Corp., CRBRP "Censtruction Environmental Program," March 8,1982.

REFERENCES FCR SECTION 5.0 5-1 Letter from G. L. Chipman, COE to Dr. J. M. Pal ladino, NRC and NRC Commission, January 18, 1982.

5-2 Staf f Repcrt at 28-29, 30-31.

a REFERENCES FCR SECTICN 6.0 6-1 Staff Report at 32-33.

1 REFERENCES FCR SECTION 7.0 1

7-1 Letter from W. Kenneth Davis, Deputy Secretary DOE, to Dr. J. N.

Palladino, USNRC, dated August 13, 1981.

7-2 Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 (Pub.1. No. 97-35) 7-3 House Conference Repcrt No.97-208, 97th Cong.1st Sess. 2 at 827 (1981).

l 8-6

I

,d v?

7-4 President Rcnald Reagan, "The President's Policy Statement on Nuclear Power," October 8, 1981.

7-5 The calculations supporting the cost of delay are contained in W. Kenneth Davis, Deputy Secretary DOE to NRC Commissioners, February 25, 1982, Applicants Response to NRDC, incorpcrated, and Tennessee Attorney General s Comments, January 28, 1982, and Applicants Answers to Questions Set fcrth in Attachment A to the Commissioners, December 24, 1981, Order (January 18, 1982).

I r

S 8-7

. - - _ - _ _ _ _ , - - - - . _ . . - . _ . _ _ . _- _ __.