ML22266A272

Enclosure 2: TRISO-X Environmental Report Chapter 3 - Part 2 of 3

ML22266A272
Person / Time
Site:	Triso-X
Issue date:	09/23/2022
From:	TRISO-X
To:	Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Shared Package
ML22266A269	List: ML22266A270 ML22266A271 ML22266A272 ML22266A273
References
TX0-LTR-0004_0
Download: ML22266A272 (349)

Text

TX0-LTR-0004_0 ENCLOSURE 2 TRISO-X ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CHAPTER 3 PART 2 OF 3 (363 MB)

NON-PROPRIETARY

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Table of Contents CHAPTER 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 3.1 LAND USE ................................................................................................................3-17 3.1.1 SITE ......................................................................................................................... 3-17 3.1.2 REGION ................................................................................................................... 3-17 3.1.3 MAJOR POPULATION CENTERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE ................................ 3-17 3.1.4 SPECIAL LAND USES ............................................................................................ 3-18 3.1.5 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FACILITIES ................................................. 3-19 3.1.6 MINERAL RESOURCES ......................................................................................... 3-19 3.1.7 LAND USE PLANS .................................................................................................. 3-20 3.1.8 ZONING ................................................................................................................... 3-20 3.2 TRANSPORTATION ................................................................................................. 3-24 3.2.1 ACCESS TRANSPORTATION................................................................................. 3-24 3.2.2 TRANSPORTATION ROUTES ................................................................................ 3-24 3.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ............................................................................................ 3-26 3.3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND PHYSIOGRAPHY ..................................................... 3-26 3.3.2 KARST FEATURES ................................................................................................. 3-31 3.3.3 PHYSIOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY IN THE VICINITY OF THE HORIZON CENTER SITE ......................................................................................................................... 3-32 3.3.4 SOILS ...................................................................................................................... 3-35 3.3.5 SEISMICITY ............................................................................................................ 3-37 3.4 WATER RESOURCES.............................................................................................. 3-39 3.4.1 GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................... 3-39 3.4.2 SURFACE WATER .................................................................................................. 3-46 3.4.3 FLOODPLAINS ........................................................................................................ 3-51 3.4.4 WETLANDS ............................................................................................................. 3-52 3.5 ECOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 3-101 3.5.1 BIOTIC COMMUNITIES ........................................................................................ 3-101 3.5.2 TERRESTRIAL RESOURCES .............................................................................. 3-102 3.5.3 AQUATIC RESOURCES ....................................................................................... 3-107 3.5.4 IMPORTANT ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS................................................................ 3-109 3.5.5 RARE, THREATENED, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES ...................................... 3-113 3.6 METEOROLOGY, CLIMATOLOGY, AND AIR QUALITY ....................................... 3-147 September 2022 3-1 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Table of Contents 3.6.1 CLIMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGY ................................................................ 3-147 3.6.2 AIR QUALITY ........................................................................................................ 3-162 3.7 NOISE ..................................................................................................................... 3-223 3.7.1 BASELINE NOISE CONDITIONS ......................................................................... 3-223 3.7.2 APPLICABLE SOUND LEVEL STANDARDS ........................................................ 3-225 3.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ........................................................... 3-228 3.8.1 DEFINING THE AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS ............................................... 3-228 3.8.2 CULTURAL BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED CULTURAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................................ 3-228 3.8.3 SURVEY METHODS ............................................................................................. 3-230 3.8.4 SURVEY FINDINGS .............................................................................................. 3-231 3.8.5 REGULATORY COORDINATION .......................................................................... 3-232 3.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES ............................................................................. 3-233 3.9.1 VIEWSHED BOUNDARIES ................................................................................... 3-233 3.9.2 LANDSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................... 3-233 3.9.3 LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTED FEATURES ...................................................... 3-233 3.9.4 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS .......................................................................................... 3-234 3.9.5 RESIDENTS AND VISITORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY VISUAL IMPACTS ........

............................................................................................................. 3-234 3.9.6 VISIBILITY FROM ACCESS ROADS .................................................................... 3-235 3.9.7 HIGH-QUALITY VIEW AREAS .............................................................................. 3-235 3.9.8 APPLICABLE REGULATORY INFORMATION ...................................................... 3-235 3.9.9 COORDINATION WITH LOCAL PLANNERS ........................................................ 3-236 3.9.10 AESTHETIC AND SCENIC QUALITY RATING ..................................................... 3-236 3.10 SOCIOECONOMICS............................................................................................... 3-240 3.10.1 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS ..................................................................... 3-240 3.10.2 ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS ........................................................................ 3-243 3.10.3 COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS ...................................................................... 3-244 3.11 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH .............................................................. 3-267 3.

11.1 BACKGROUND

RADIATION EXPOSURE ............................................................ 3-267 3.11.2 MAJOR SOURCES AND LEVELS OF CHEMICAL EXPOSURE .......................... 3-269 3.11.3 OCCUPATIONAL INJURY RATES AND OCCUPATIONAL FATALITY RATES ...... 3-270 3.11.4

SUMMARY

OF HEALTH EFFECTS STUDIES RELATED TO CHEMICAL SOURCE EXPOSURES ........................................................................................................ 3-271 3.12 WASTE MANAGEMENT ......................................................................................... 3-275 3.12.1 NONRADIOACTIVE WASTE ................................................................................. 3-275 3.12.2 RADIOACTIVE AND MIXED WASTES .................................................................. 3-275 September 2022 3-2 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Number Title 3.1-1 Regional Land Use 3.1-2 Prime Farmland in the Region 3.2-1 Average Annual Daily Traffic Counts (2016-2020) 3.4.1-1 Summary of Observation Well Installation Details and Monitoring Program 3.4.1-2 Summary of Observation Well Groundwater Levels 3.4.1-3 Groundwater Parameters Associated with the Horizon Center Site 3.4.1-4 Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Summer 2021 3.4.1-5 Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Winter 2022 3.4.1-6 Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Winter 2021/2022 3.4.1-7 Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Spring 2022 3.4.2-1 Precipitation Depth - Duration - Frequency Data for Oak Ridge, Tennessee 3.4.2-2 USGS Streamflow Stations within 3.0 Miles of Horizon Center Site 3.4.2-3 Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Summer 2021 3.4.2-4 Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Fall 2021 3.4.2-5 Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Winter 2021/2022 3.4.2-6 Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Spring 2022 3.4.2-7 Mean Concentrations of Metals and Inorganics in East Fork Poplar Creek from Annual Ambient Surface Water Monitoring: July 2018-June 2019 3.4.4-1 NWI-Mapped Wetland Habitats within the Horizon Center Site and Vicinity 3.5.2-1 Land Cover within HCS and Vicinity 3.5.2-2 Vascular Plant Species Observed on the HCS Study Area, Summer and Fall 2021 3.5.2-3 Mammal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS 3.5.2-4 Herpetofauna Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS 3.5.2-5 Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS 3.5.3-1 Fish and Crustacean Species from 2021 Aquatic Surveys of Streams in Proximity to the Horizon Center Site September 2022 3-3 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - List of Tables Number Title 3.5.3-2 Fish Species Present in East Fork Poplar Creek, March-May 1997 3.5.5-1 Protected Species Potentially Occurring within or in Proximity to the HCS 3.5.5-2 Potentially Suitable Bat Roost Trees Identified within the Study Area 3.5.5-3 Habitat Requirements for Plant Species of Conservation Concern Listed within the Area Encompassed by the Bethel-Valley, Tennessee, and Elverton, Tennessee, Topographic Map Quadrangles 3.6-1 Climatological Normals (1981 - 2010) and Means Oak Ridge, TN (KOQT) 3.6-2 Climatological Normals (1981 - 2010) and Means Knoxville, TN (KTYS) 3.6-3 Locations of ASOS and COOP Weather Observing Stations and Supplemental Data Sources from ORR 3.6-4 Fujita Scale and Enhanced Fujita Scales to Determine Tornado Intensity 3.6-5 Documented Tornadoes in Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane Counties, TN (1950 - 2020) 3.6-6 Not Used 3.6-7 Monthly and Annual Thunderstorm Days Oak Ridge National Laboratory (2001 -

2019) 3.6-8 Monthly and Annual Thunderstorm Days Knoxville Airport (1948 - 2019) 3.6-9 Computed Lightning Strike Density at Oak Ridge and Knoxville, Tennessee 3.6-10 Summary of Observed Hail in Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane Counties, Tennessee (1950 - 2020) 3.6-11 Average and Monthly Maximum Snowfall Oak Ridge, TN (1947 - 2019) 3.6-12 Normal and Monthly Snowfall Knoxville Airport (1944 - 2019) 3.6-13 Freezing Rain Days at Oak Ridge (1999 - 2019) 3.6-14 Number of Days with Heavy Fog at Oak Ridge (KOQT), Tennessee (2000 -

2019) 3.6-15 Number of Days with Heavy Fog at Knoxville Airport (1964 - 2019) 3.6-16 Maximum Daily Liquid Equivalent Precipitation and Snowfall from ASOS and COOP Stations 3.6-17 Design Dry- and Wet- Bulb Temperatures and Bounding Values 3.6-18 Computed 100-Year Return Interval Extreme Temperatures at Knoxville, Tennessee 3.6-19 Computed 100-Year Return Interval Extreme Temperatures at Oak Ridge, Tennessee September 2022 3-4 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - List of Tables Number Title 3.6-20 Bounding Values for the Computed 100-Year Return Interval Extreme Temperatures 3.6-21 Daily Maximum and Minimum Dry Bulb Temperatures from Local ASOS and COOP Stations 3.6-22 Annual Joint Data Recovery of 15-m Wind Speed, Wind Direction and Pasquill Stability Class from Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-23 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2016 3.6-24 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2017 3.6-25 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2018 3.6-26 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2019 3.6-27 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2020 3.6-28 Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2016 - 2020 3.6-29 Frequency of 15-m Wind Direction Persistence at Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-30 Longest Wind Direction Persistence at Tower D (15 m) (2016 - 2020) 3.6-31 Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-32 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class A) 3.6-33 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class B) 3.6-34 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class C) 3.6-35 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class D) 3.6-36 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class E) 3.6-37 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class F) 3.6-38 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class G)

September 2022 3-5 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - List of Tables Number Title 3.6-39 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Stability Classes A - G) 3.6-40 Average Monthly and Annual Mixing Heights (m) from SODAR at ORNL / Tower D (2014 - 2019) 3.6-41 Average Monthly and Annual Mixing Heights (m) from SODAR at Y-12 (2019) 3.6-42 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) 3.6-43 Current NAAQS Attainment Status of Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane Counties, Tennessee 3.6-44 Measured Carbon Monoxide Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS 3.6-45 Measured Lead Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS 3.6-46 Measured Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS 3.6-47 Measured Ozone Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS 3.6-48 Measured Concentrations of Particulate Matter with an Aerodynamic Diameter less than 10 Microns and Comparison with NAAQS 3.6-49 Measured Concentrations of Particulate Matter with an Aerodynamic Diameter less than 2.5 Microns and Comparison with NAAQS 3.6-50 Measured Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS 3.6-51 Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions by County (2017) 3.6-52 Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the Horizon Center Site 3.7.1-1 Ambient Noise Monitoring Results 3.9.10-1 Scenic Quality Inventory Evaluation and Scoring for the Horizon Center Site 3.10.1-1 Population in the Region of Influence (2000-2020) 3.10.1-2 Population Projections for Region of Influence through 2065 3.10.1-3 Minority Populations in Region of Influence (2020) 3.10.1-4 Populations below Poverty Level in Region of Influence (2019) 3.10.1-5 Population Density in Region of Influence 3.10.2-1 Labor Force and Employment Characteristics of the Region of Influence 3.10.2-2 Employment by Industry in Region of Influence (2019) 3.10.2-3 Largest Employers in the Region of Influence (2021) 3.10.2-4 Income Data for Counties within Region of Influence (2019) 3.10.2-5 County Tax Revenue by Category for Fiscal Year 2021 3.10.2-6 Tennessee Property Tax Classes September 2022 3-6 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - List of Tables Number Title 3.10.2-7 City of Oak Ridge and Anderson County Property Tax Rates over the Last Ten Tax Years (in $ per $100 assessed value) 3.10.3-1 Housing Characteristics in Region of Influence (2019) 3.10.3-2 Value of All Owner-Occupied Housing Units in Region of Influence (2019) 3.10.3-3 Educational Facilities in the Region of Influence (2017-2018 and 2020-2021 School Years) 3.10.3-4 Enrollment by Level of School in Region of Influence (2019) 3.10.3-5 Level of Educational Attainment in Region of Influence for Persons 25 and Older (2019) 3.10.3-6 Licensed Health Care Facilities in Region of Influence 3.10.3-7 Number of Residents per Type of Licensed Health Care Professional in the Region of Influence 3.11-1 Summary of Background Radiation Exposure in Vicinity of TRISO-X Facility 3.11-2 Summary of Facilities within a 10-mi Radius of the Planned TRISO-X Facility and Reported Toxics Release Inventory Emissions to Air in 2020 3.11-3 Summary of 2020 Occupational Incidence Rates for Selected Industries September 2022 3-7 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Number Title 3.1-1 Aerial View of the HCS Vicinity 3.1-2 Aerial View of the HCS Region 3.1-3 Regional Land Uses 3.1-4 Major Population Centers near the HCS 3.1-5 Major Special Land Uses in the HCS Region 3.1-6 Other Land Use Features near the HCS 3.1-7 Prime Farmland in the Region 3.1-8 Map of HCS Vicinity Zoning 3.2-1 Regional Highways and Interstates near the HCS 3.2-2 Roads in the Vicinity of the HCS 3.2-3 Average Annual Daily Traffic Count Locations Along Routes to the HCS 3.3.1-1 Physiographic Provinces within the Horizon Center Site Region 3.3.1-2 Valley and Ridge Province 3.3.1-3 Typical Stratigraphy within the Valley and Ridge Province Near Oak Ridge Reservation and the Horizon Center Site 3.3.3-1 Geologic Map in the Vicinity of the Horizon Center Site 3.3.3-2 Physiography in the Vicinity of the Horizon Center Site 3.3.3-3 Locations of Geotechnical Borings and Groundwater Wells Used to Characterize Subsurface Conditions at the Horizon Center Site 3.3.3-4 Representative Fence Diagram Illustrating Geologic Cross Section of Horizon Center Site at A-A 3.3.3-5 Geologic Cross Section in the Vicinity of the Horizon Center Site 3.3.5-1 Seismic Events Recorded by USGS from 2000 to 2021 3.4.1-1 Typical Groundwater Flow Patterns within the Aquifers and Aquitards of the Valley and Ridge Province and at the Horizon Center Site 3.4.1-2 Groundwater Wells Within a 3-mile Radius of the Horizon Center Site 3.4.1-3 Groundwater Monitoring Wells Within and Adjacent to the Horizon Center Site 3.4.1-4 Hydrograph of Groundwater Potentiometric Elevations: September 2021-August 2022 3.4.1-5 Potentiometric level Contours of Water Levels Collected on September 16, 2021 September 2022 3-8 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - List of Figures Number Title 3.4.1-6 Potentiometric level Contours of Water Levels Collected on January 12, 2022 3.4.2-1 Streams and Topography Within 3-Mile Radius of Horizon Center Stie 3.4.2-2 Surface Drainage near the Horizon Center Site 3.4.2-3 Surface Water Quality Sampling Locations for the Horizon Center Site 3.4.3-1 NFIP Flood Insurance Rate Map for Horizon Center Site 3.4.3-2 East Fork Poplar Creek Flood Elevations 3.4.3-3 East Fork Poplar Creek Floodplain Map 3.4.4-1 NWI-Mapped Wetland Habitats within the Horizon Center Site 3.4.4-2 Wetland and Stream Delineation of the Horizon Center Site 3.5-1 Land Cover, Vegetation Types, and Bat Habitat in the Study Area 3.5.2-1 Land Use/Land Cover within 5 Miles of the Horizon Center Site 3.5.4-1 Important Ecological Areas within 5 Miles of the Horizon Center Site 3.6-1 Annual Wind Rose Oak Ridge, Tennessee (2005 - 2020) 3.6-2 Seasonal Wind Roses Oak Ridge, Tennessee (2005 - 2020) 3.6-3 Annual Wind Rose Knoxville, Tennessee (1990 - 2020) 3.6-4 Seasonal Wind Roses Knoxville, Tennessee (1990 - 2020) 3.6-5 Locations of ASOS and COOP Meteorological Stations and Supplemental Data Sources 3.6-6 Annual Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-7 January Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-8 February Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-9 March Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-10 April Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-11 May Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-12 June Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-13 July Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-14 August Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-15 September Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-16 October Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-17 November Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020)

September 2022 3-9 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - List of Figures Number Title 3.6-18 December Wind Rose Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-19 Seasonal Wind Roses Tower D (2016 - 2020) 3.6-20 Terrain Near the Horizon Center Site 3.7.1-1 Ambient Noise Survey Monitoring Locations 3.8.1-1 Survey Area for Cultural Resources and Area of Potential Effect 3.9.1-1 Horizon Center Site Vicinity Map 3.9.3-1 Aerial View of the Horizon Center Site with Photograph Locations 3.9.3-2 Horizon Center Site Photographs (Sheets 1 - 6) 3.10.1-1 Population Centers within the Region of Influence 3.10.1-2 Minority Percentage by Census Block Group within 4.0 Mi. (6.4 Km) of the Horizon Center Site 3.10.1-3 Percentage of Population below Poverty Level by Census Block Group within 4.0 Mi. (6.4 Km) of the Horizon Center Site 3.10.1-4 Population Density by Census Block Group within the Region of Influence 3.10.3-1 Community Facilities September 2022 3-10 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ac. acre ACS American Community Survey AGL above ground level AMO Atlantic multi-decadal oscillation ASCE/SEI American Society of Civil Engineers/Structural Engineering Institute ASHRAE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.

ARAP Aquatic Resource Alteration Permit APE Area of Potential Effects ASOS Automated surface (weather) observing station ATTD Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Division (managed by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA])

bgs below ground surface BLM Bureau of Land Management BLS Bureau of Labor Statistics C degrees Celsius CalEPA California Environmental Protection Agency CBG census block groups CEUS SSC Central and Eastern U.S. Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities CFR Code of Federal Regulations Chi/Q (/Q) Relative atmospheric concentration cm centimeter CMA Cooperative Management Area cm/sec centimeters per second CNS Consolidated Nuclear Security, LLC COOP Cooperative weather observing station September 2022 3-11 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition CROET Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee Cs Colbert silty clay loam CSXT CSX Transportation CWA Clean Water Act dBA A-weighted decibel DBT Dry bulb temperature Delta-T Vertical temperature difference DOE U.S. Department of Energy DOI U.S. Department of the Interior DVFC Dandridge-Vonore Fault Corridor EA Environmental Assessment ECHO Enforcement and Compliance History Online EF-scale Enhanced Fujita tornado intensity scale EFPC East Fork Poplar Creek ENSO El Nino - Southern Oscillation EPRI Electric Power Research Institute ESA Endangered Species Act ETTP East Tennessee Technology Park ETSZ East Tennessee Seismic Zone FAA Federal Aviation Administration

°F degrees Fahrenheit Fc Fullerton cherty silt loam Fcl Fullerton cherty silt loam, hilly phase FIRM Flood Insurance Rate Map F-scale Fujita tornado intensity scale FR Federal Register ft. feet ft/d feet per day gpm Gallons per minute Gs Greendale silt loam September 2022 3-12 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition HA Habitat Area ha hectare HCS Horizon Center site HFIR High Flux Isotope Reactor HHE Health Hazard Evaluation IAEA International Atomic Energy Agency IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation website (USFWS)

HCS Horizon Center site in. inch IND-2 general industrial district IND-3 heavy industrial district I-40 Interstate 40 I-75 Interstate 75 JFD Joint frequency distribution kg kilograms km kilometer KOQT Station identifier for the ASOS in Oak Ridge, Tennessee KTYS Station identifier for the ASOS at the McGhee Tyson airport in Knoxville, Tennessee Ldn day-night average community noise level Leq equivalent noise level LCD Local climatological data lpm liters per minute M Magnitude m meter Mmax Magnitude of the largest possible earthquake Mw Moment magnitude MCL Maximum contaminant level MCWB mean coincident wet bulb temperature September 2022 3-13 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition m/d meters per day MGD million gallons per day mg/L milligrams per liter

µg/L micrograms per liter MHP Master of Historic Preservation Mi Melvin silt loam mi. miles MMI Modified Mercalli Intensity mph miles per hour mpn/mL most probable number per milliliter mrem/yr millirem per year m/s meters per second m3/s cubic meters per second MSL Mean sea level mSv/yr millisievert per year MWt Megawatts thermal NA Natural Area NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard NAVD88 North American vertical datum of 1988 NCEI National Centers for Environmental Information (formerly known as the National Climatic Data Center [NCDC])

NFIP National Flood Insurance Program NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health NLCD National Landcover Database NNSA National Nuclear Security Administration NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NPDWR National Primary Drinking Water Regulations NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places NM noise monitoring location September 2022 3-14 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition NMSS Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards NWI National Wetland Inventory NWS National Weather Service ORED Oak Ridge Electric Department OREIS Oak Ridge Environmental Information System ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory ORR Oak Ridge Reservation OSMRE Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement, U.S. Department of the Interior PCBs polychlorinated biphenyls PDO Pacific decadal oscillation PH Potential Habitat RA Reference Area RCP Reinforced concrete pipes RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act RLME repeated large magnitude earthquake RsC Rolling Stony Land (Colbert and Talbott soil materials)

ROI region of influence SODAR Sound detection and ranging STP soil test pit sq. mi. Square miles TCA Tennessee Code Annotated TD-3505 A meteorological data archiving format TDA Tennessee Department of Agriculture TDEC Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation TDF Tennessee Division of Forestry, Tennessee Department of Agriculture TDOA Tennessee Division of Archaeology TDOT Tennessee Department of Transportation September 2022 3-15 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition THC Tennessee Historical Commission THC GIS Tennessee Historical Commission Geographic Information System TMDL Total Maximum Daily Load TN SHPO Tennessee State Historic Preservation Office TOC Top of casing TGS Tennessee Geological Survey TRISO-X FFF TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Ts Talbott silty clay loam TVA Tennessee Valley Authority TWRA Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency UF6 Uranium hexafluoride USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USC United States Code USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USGS U.S. Geological Survey USFS U.S. Forest Service USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USNRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission VRM Visual Resource Management WBNP Watts Bar Nuclear Plant WBT wet bulb temperature WOTUS Waters of the United States Y-12 Y-12 National Security Complex September 2022 3-16 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment CHAPTER 3 Description of the Affected Environment 3.1 LAND USE This section describes the characteristics of the land use of the Horizon Center site (HCS) vicinity and region. This section provides input to various other sections including, but not limited to, Sections 4.1, Land Use Impacts; 4.4, Water Resources Impacts; 4.12, Public and Occupational Health Impacts; and 6, Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Program.

3.1.1 SITE The HCS (Figure 3.1-1) is located on undeveloped land currently owned TRISO-X, LLC west of Oak Ridge, Tennessee in Roane County. The HCS is an existing City of Oak Ridge industrial park that was formerly part of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) reservation but was never developed. DOE transferred the ownership of this site to Horizon Center in 2003 and subsequently Horizon Center transferred it to the Oak Ridge Industrial Board in 2005.

The previously disturbed greenfield site is dedicated for industrial development and consists of four separate development areas. Development Area 6a, has been identified as the preferred site for the proposed TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF). Figure 3.1-8 shows the current zoning categories for the development areas.

3.1.2 REGION The region in which the TRISO-X FFF is located is defined as the area within a 5.38-mi. (8.66-km) radius of the center point of the HCS (Figure 3.1-2). Most of the region is located in Roane County, Tennessee. Smaller parts of the region also touch Loudon, Anderson, and Morgan Counties.

Major land uses within the region are depicted in Figure 3.1-3 and are listed in Table 3.1-1. The dominant land uses in the region are forestlands (37,242 ac. [15,071 ha], 64 percent),

developed lands (9767 ac. [3953 ha], 17 percent), agriculture (7347 ac. [2973 ha], 13 percent),

and waters or wetlands (2674 ac. [1082 ha], 5 percent).

3.1.3 MAJOR POPULATION CENTERS AND INFRASTRUCTURE The population centers located in and near the HCS region are shown on Figure 3.1-4. The major population center in the region, is the City of Oak Ridge with a population greater than 25,000. Smaller population centers in the region are shown on Figure 3.1-2 and include the town of Oliver Springs and populated places of Union, Clacks Gap, Oak Hill Estates, Scandlyn, and Allingham. Section 3.10 provides a description of the demographic, economic and community characteristics of population centers within the socioeconomic Region of Influence (ROI).

Existing infrastructure located in and near the HCS region are also shown on Figure 3.1-4.

Available utilities in City of Oak Ridge and at the HCS include electric service, potable water, gas, sewer, garbage collection, telephone, cable, and internet service (Oak Ridge, 2021).

September 2022 3-17 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment The major transportation corridors within the region are described in detail in Section 3.2, Transportation. Transportation infrastructure near the site includes the TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike, two interstate highways Interstate 75 and Interstate 40 and several Tennessee State highways, and local roads.

CSX Transportation (CSXT) Class I Railroad provides freight rail service in Anderson County. A CSX Operating Agreement extends service into Roane County, along State Route 61, with a mainline extension to the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP), adjacent to State Route 327.

The McGhee Tyson Airport is a public/military airport located south of Knoxville. The nearest private airport is the Oliver Springs Airport (Figure 3.1-4).

The Clinch River flows through the HCS Region, downstream of the Melton Hill Dam. The Clinch River is a component of the navigable river channels on the Cumberland and Tennessee Rivers, and is part of the U.S. Inland Waterway System (USACE, 2021).

3.1.4 SPECIAL LAND USES DOE Oak Ridge Reservation The Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) is situated in and near to the City of Oak Ridge. ORR covers 52 sq. mi. (134.7 km2) of land in Anderson and Roane counties. The DOE operates three sites on the reservation: the ETTP, formerly known as the K-25 Site, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and the Y-12 National Security Complex (DOE-ORR, 2021). The three sites are government-owned, contractor-operated facilities; under DOE guidance, private companies manage the day-to-day operations of the sites according to Federal laws, DOE orders, and State laws and regulations.

Government-sponsored activities in Oak Ridge date back to the Manhattan Project and continue to the current day. Both past and current activities involve hazardous chemicals and radioactive materials. The Manhattan Project National Historical Park protects many structures associated with the Manhattan Project including ones on the ORR as shown in Figure 3.1-5.

The Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) is located approximately 5 mi. (8 km) from the HCS.

Y-12 is operated by Consolidated Nuclear Security, LLC (CNS) for the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Primary activities at Y-12 include processing, retrieval, and storage of nuclear materials; dismantling nuclear weapons; providing fuels to the nations naval reactors; and performing complementary work for other government and private-sector entities.

Other Land Uses Other special land uses in the vicinity of the HCS include the following facilities:

• U.S. DOE natural areas (Figure 2.1-1)

• Campbell Bend Barrens and Crowder Cemetery State Natural Areas (Figure 3.1-5)

• North Boundary Greenway (Figure 3.1-6)

• McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery (Figure 3.1-6)

September 2022 3-18 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.1.5 AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES AND FACILITIES According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), there are approximately 69,500 farms in Tennessee, comprising approximately 10,800,000 ac. (4,411,100 ha), producing a variety of crops and livestock (USDA/NASS, 2020). Tennessee also produces a variety of forest products (USFS, 2009).

Farming A breakdown of prime farmland data for the HCS Region is provided in Table 3.1-2 and Figure 3.1-7. The USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey data are not available for Federal land, which comprises over one third of the HCS region. However, a previous DOE Environmental Assessment (EA) did identify soils indicative of prime farmland at the HCS, but did not specify the acreage (DOE, 1996). Based on the distribution of prime farmland in the region, the available soil survey data, and the analysis in the DOE EA, it is estimated that 13 percent of the soils in the HCS region are designated prime farmland.

In Roane County, there are 617 farms, comprising over 47,000 ac. (19,020 ha) with an average size of 77 ac. (31.2 ha). Land in farms consists of cropland (32 percent), pastureland (27 percent), woodland (35 percent), and other (5 percent) (USDA, 2017). Only 37 ac. (14.9 ha) of Roane County farmland is irrigated (USDA, 2017). The major crops include forage (hay/haylage), 10,493 ac. (4246 ha), corn for grain, 128 ac. (51.8 ha), vegetables harvested, 80 ac. (32.4 ha), sweet corn 31 ac. (12.5 ha), and berries, 20 ac. (8.1 ha). The majority of the livestock inventory consists of cattle and layers (i.e., egg-producing poultry). Other livestock includes broilers and other meat-type chickens, goats, hogs, pigs, horses, ponies, pullets, sheep, lambs, and turkeys (USDA, 2017).

Forestry According to the Directory of Tennessees Forest Industries, which is published by the Tennessee Division of Forestry (TDF) of the Department of Agriculture, in cooperation with the TVA and the USDA Forest Service, wood consuming industries in or near the Region include two secondary mills located in Roane County. The secondary mills process primary materials, such as hardwood lumber or paper, into other products, including furniture from hardwood lumber.

3.1.6 MINERAL RESOURCES According to the Tennessee Geological Survey (TGS), which is part of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC), the State has a history of mining more varieties of mineral resources than any other State east of the Mississippi River, except North Carolina, dating back to the late 18th century (TGS, 2020). Tennessees non-fuel mineral production includes Portland cement, sand and gravel, stone, zinc, and ball clay (TGS, 2020).

Non-fuel mineral products valued at more than $1.5 billion were produced in 2018, creating more than 48,600 jobs and direct and indirect economic impacts of $3.8 billion. (TGS, 2020).

Tennessee also has coal, oil, natural gas, oil shale, and radioactive minerals deposits. Only coal, oil, and natural gas are currently being recovered, with a total production value in 2018 of

$44.8 million (TGS, 2020).

September 2022 3-19 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Non-Fuel Mineral Production The HCS region is an area capable of producing crushed stone, however, there are no producers within the Region. (USGS, 2019).

Coal, Oil and Gas Current coal production includes bituminous coal from 22 counties in the Cumberland Plateau and Cumberland Mountains regions, which includes a slight portion of western Roane County (TGS, 2020; OSMRE, 2019). There is currently no coal, oil, or gas production in the HCS site Region (EIA, 2020).

3.1.7 LAND USE PLANS Current and future land use plans for the HCS are represented by the Horizon Center Development Plan (HDC, 2001). The Horizon Center is planned to accommodate the development of approximately four million square feet of manufacturing, research and development, distribution, office, and support facilities. Objectives of the Development Plan include the efficient allocation of useable land for buildings, parking, vehicular circulation (auto, truck, and rail), utilities, and employee amenities. Phase One of the plan included the development of on-site and off-site infrastructure for Development Areas 1, 2 and 3 which are designated to provide access to support development throughout the Horizon Center.

Development within the City of Oak Ridge is characterized in the City of Oak Ridge City Blueprint (COR, 2019). The Blueprint is a living plan to guide the Oak Ridge City Council and Planning Commission in their efforts to encourage and maintain quality community growth and development in Oak Ridge. The blueprint identifies various elements for meeting citywide objectives which include economic vitality and sustainable growth, housing and healthy neighborhoods, recreation and natural assets, land use and infrastructure, transportation and mobility and livability and community vibrancy. The Blueprint anticipates new development at the HCS, and projects increased worker and resident population and demand for public services and infrastructure. Additionally, the blueprint identifies the North Boundary Greenway, which borders the HCS to the northwest, with main public access from the west guard house on the TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike as a facility which supports the objective of maintaining recreation and natural assets.

3.1.8 ZONING As discussed in Chapter 1, the City of Oak Ridge has zoned the HCS (and all other development areas at the Horizon Center industrial park) as a general industrial district, IND-2 (Figure 3.1.8). As defined in the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 8.02, the IND-2, general industrial district is established to provide areas in which the principal use of land is for processing, manufacturing, assembling, fabrication, and warehousing. The IND-2 district provides for enterprises in which goods are generally mass-produced from raw materials on a large scale through use of an assembly line or similar process, usually for sale to wholesalers or other industrial or manufacturing uses (COR, 2010). However, the HCS requires rezoning as IND-3 (heavy industrial district). This classification covers manufacturing facilities that have a greater impact on the surrounding area than industries found in the IND-2 (general industrial district), including the involvement of radioactive materials.

September 2022 3-20 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Section 3.1.1 states that the development areas at the Horizon Center industrial park are separated by dedicated green belts. These areas are zoned as Greenbelt Districts by the City of Oak Ridge. The stated purpose of the Greenbelt District is to provide for certain publicly held property to be preserved in its natural state as much as possible.

In addition to zoning restrictions and regulations, the Oak Ridge Industrial Development Board executed a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions for the Horizon Center industrial park. This document expands the definition of natural area to include land within the 100-year flood plain of the East Fork Poplar Creek or a buffer area of 100 feet on either side of the centerline of the East Fork Poplar Creek and its tributaries. In addition, land lying between road rights-of-way or land areas designated for development and the boundary of the 100-year flood plain or the 100-foot buffer areas are also defined as Natural Area. Article V, 5.3.2 also includes protection of Indiana bat habitat through retaining live or dead trees with exfoliating bark whenever possible. Cutting of those trees is not permitted between April 15 and September 15 unless coordinated with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (ORIDB, 2013).

September 2022 3-21 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.1-1 Regional Land Use NLCD Land Cover Class Area (ac) Area (%)

Deciduous Forest 30,827 52.97 Hay/Pasture 7347 12.62 Mixed Forest 5041 8.66 Developed, Open Space 3899 6.70 Developed, Low Intensity 3187 5.48 Developed, Medium Intensity 1769 3.04 Woody Wetlands 1621 2.78 Evergreen Forest 1373 2.36 Open Water 1013 1.74 Developed, High Intensity 913 1.57 Shrub/Scrub 635 1.09 Herbaceous 465 0.80 Barren Land 66 0.11 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands 40 0.07 Total 58,196 100.00%

Source: Dewitz and USGS, 2019 September 2022 3-22 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.1-2 Prime Farmland in the Region Farm Class Acres Percent All areas are prime farmland 7225 12.4 Not prime farmland 50,803 87.3 Prime farmland if drained 21 0.035 Prime farmland if protected from flooding or not 147 0.25 frequently flooded during the growing season Total 58,196 100 Source: NRCS, 2021 September 2022 3-23 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.2 TRANSPORTATION 3.2.1 ACCESS TRANSPORTATION This section describes transportation facilities at or near the Horizon Center site (HCS). This section provides input into other sections such as 4.2, Transportation Impacts and 4.6, Air Quality Impacts and includes information on access to and from the HCS and proposed transportation routes.

3.2.2 TRANSPORTATION ROUTES The TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) is located at the HCS in Roane County in the City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Tennessee State Route 95 (TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike) is a multi-lane State highway connecting Oak Ridge to Interstates 40 at an interchange southeast of the HCS (Figure 3.2-1). Interstate 75 is a north-south oriented highway passing through eastern Tennessee. Interstate 40 (I-40) is an east-west oriented highway crossing Tennessee. Interstates 40 and 75 interchange in two locations: in Knoxville, Tennessee, for I-75 northbound into Kentucky, and north of Lenoir City for I-75 southbound toward Chattanooga, approximately 9 mi. (14.4 km) southeast of the HCS. State Route 58 is a north-south state highway that serves as a major route for many communities in Roane, Meigs, and Hamilton counties. SR 58 joins I-40 for part of its route in Roane County, from the Kingston exit (352) east to the Oak Ridge exit (356) west of Oak Ridge.

The closest public airport to Oak Ridge and the HCS is the McGhee Tyson airport located approximately 23.5 mi. (37.9 km) southeast of the HCS. The Oliver Springs Airport is a small private airport 6.2 mi. (10 km) to the northeast of the HCS.

CSX Transportation (CSXT) provides industrial rail services to Oak Ridge via a line from Cincinnati, Ohio to Atlanta, Georgia (CSXT, 2015).

The Clinch River borders the southern portion of the HCS Region, approximately 3 mi. (4.8 km) away at its closest point, on the other side of the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP).

Portions of the Clinch River are used for industry and recreation around Oak Ridge.

The primary access to the HCS is from the TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike to Novus Drive (Figure 3.2-2). The intersection is located approximately 0.4 mi. (0.6 km) southeast of the proposed entrance to the TRISO-X FFF. A secondary access route to the TRISO-X FFF is from the TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike to Imperium Drive intersection, 0.65 mi. (1 km) northeast of the Novus Drive intersection (Figure 3.2-2).

These access routes are available to move construction materials and workers to and from the HCS. The closest vertical height, width or weight restriction is an axle weight restriction for Interstate 40 in the vicinity of U.S. Route 27, approximately 12.7 mi. (20.4 km) to the west of the HCS. Traffic counts from the most recent available 5-year period along routes to and from the HCS are provided in Table 3.2-1. Annual Average Daily Traffic counts provide traffic volumes based on a 24-hour, two-directional count at a given location. Raw traffic data is mathematically adjusted for vehicle type, determined by an axle correction factor. The data is then statistically corrected by a seasonal variation factor that considers time of year and day of the week.

(TDOT, 2022). The locations of the traffic counts are shown in Figure 3.2-3. Additionally, a traffic study is being conducted, as required by the City of Oak Ridge. TRISO-X will abide by the results and any recommendations from the study.

September 2022 3-24 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.2-1 Average Annual Daily Traffic Counts (2016 - 2020)

Location TNDOT Identifier 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Oak Ridge Turnpike (SR 95) 73000059 10,890 10,428 11,486 11,593 13,635 WIPP Road (SR 95) 73000058 5043 5066 5830 6234 7453 Oak Ridge Turnpike (SR 95) 73000060 11,531 11,806 12,641 12,560 14,944 Gallagher Road East of Kingston 73000061 11,231 11,296 10,290 12,270 12,924 (SR 58)

Blair Road North of SR 95 73000174 2131 2152 2485 2985 3358 Source: TDOT, Transportation Data Management System, 2021 September 2022 3-25 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS 3.3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY AND PHYSIOGRAPHY The geologic region for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) is defined as the area within a 100-mi. (161-km) radius of the Horizon Center site (HCS) (Figure 3.3.1-1). The geologic region of the HCS includes the following five physiographic provinces, listed from west to east:

• Interior Low Plateaus Province.

• Appalachian Plateaus Province.

• Valley and Ridge Province, which contains the HCS.

• Blue Ridge Province.

• Piedmont Province.

Each of these physiographic provinces is described below in terms of its physiography and geomorphology. A more detailed discussion is provided for the Valley and Ridge Province, in which the HCS is located.

Interior Low Plateaus Province An eastern part of the Interior Low Plateaus Province is situated within the western portion of the HCS region radius. The Interior Low Plateaus exist at the southeastern extent of the Central Lowlands, the boundary between the Interior Low Plateaus and Central Lowlands provinces occurs where the maximum extent of Pleistocene glaciers reached. The Interior Low Plateaus consist almost completely of horizontal beds of Paleozoic sandstone, shale, and limestone. The entire province is divided northeast-southwest by a fold axis known as the Cincinnati Arch. The area is also home to two structural domes that have been eroded to form basins lined with inward-facing cuestas (NPS, 2021a).

The limestone of the province is marked by well-developed karst topography, including Mammoth Cave National Park. Mapping of Mammoth Cave is ongoing, but currently 480 km (300 mi.) of caverns are mapped, making it the longest cave system on earth. The caves are well decorated, with formations that include remarkable gypsum crystals and travertines and include great rooms and a large underground river (NPS, 2021a).

The Interior Low Plateaus are characterized by widespread but small-scale coal, petroleum, and natural gas mineral resources. In addition, fluorite (used in steel production) and phosphate are mined extensively in the region (NPS, 2021a).

Appalachian Plateaus Province The Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province is bounded on the west by the Interior Low Plateaus and on the east by the Valley and Ridge Province. The Appalachian Plateaus form the northwestern-most province of the Appalachian Mountains, stretching from New York southwest to Alabama. The Appalachian Plateaus are composed of sedimentary rocks deposited during the late Paleozoic, including sandstones, conglomerates, and shales. These rocks exist largely September 2022 3-26 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment as horizontal beds that have been cut by streams to form the mountainous terrain that is distinctive today. Mountain ranges in the Appalachian Plateaus include the Catskill, Pocono, Allegheny, and Cumberland Mountains. In addition to these sedimentary rocks, beds of coal are locally significant throughout the Appalachian Plateaus, making this area the heart of the American coal industry. Much of this mining has been done underground in the past, but new technology allows entire areas of surface to be removed, exposing the coal beneath (NPS, 2021b).

The Appalachian Mountains as a whole have a long geologic history. In the early Paleozoic, the North American craton (what would eventually become North America) was located near the equator, and the eastern margin was often submerged beneath a shallow sea depositing carbonate and other sedimentary rocks. In the mid-Paleozoic, the supercontinent Pangea began to assemble as the oceanic plate slid underneath the eastern edge of the thick North American craton pulling with its islands, and eventually the continent Gondwana (Africa), to collide with North America. This collision folded and lifted the sedimentary rocks, creating the beginning of the Appalachian Mountains. As the mountains rose, streams cut through them, eroding and carrying sediments to be deposited in the neighboring lowlands. These sediments became the rocks that make up the Appalachian Plateaus. Throughout the Mesozoic, as the supercontinent Pangea broke up and drifted apart, the Appalachian Mountains (then at a height similar to todays Himalayas) slowly eroded (NPS, 2021b).

Blue Ridge Physiographic Province The Blue Ridge Province is bounded on the northwest by the Valley and Ridge physiographic province and to the southeast by the Piedmont physiographic province. The Blue Ridge Province is a mountainous belt stretching from Pennsylvania southwest to Georgia. The mountains are made of highly deformed metamorphic rocks of largely Precambrian ages. These rocks include schists, gneisses, slates, and quartzites, which are extensively intruded by igneous bodies. To the west, the Blue Ridge Province is structurally divided from the Valley and Ridge Province by thrust faults that overlay in part the younger sedimentary rocks of the Valley and Ridge. In the north, the Blue Ridge is as narrow as 20 km (13 mi.) but increases in width and relief to the south, reaching 113 km (70 mi.) wide with peaks above 1,800 m (6,000 ft.). The Blue Ridge Province includes several mountain ranges, including the following (NPS, 2021c):

• Blue Ridge Range, which is a drainage divide between the Great Valley to the west and the Atlantic Ocean to the east.

• The Great Smoky Mountains along the Tennessee-North Carolina border.

• The Unaka and Cahutta Mountains.

• The Black Mountains, which include the highest peak in the eastern United States:

Mt. Mitchell at 2037 m (6684 ft.).

Piedmont Province The Piedmont Province is located southeast of the Blue Ridge Province and within the region that extends east and south of Dalton, Georgia. The Piedmont Province extends 1,600 km (1,000 mi.) from Alabama to southern New York and consists of highly complex metamorphic and igneous rocks that have been thoroughly weathered to produce a surface of minimum relief.

The metamorphic rocks are primarily schist and gneiss, and the igneous rocks are granites, September 2022 3-27 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment commonly slightly metamorphosed. Structural basins, the result of horst-and-graben faulting, are filled with Mesozoic sediments and are commonly called Triassic-Jurassic basins. These land-derived sediments form sandstones and conglomerates and are host to features such as dinosaur prints, rain imprints, ripple marks, and plant and freshwater fish fossils. These Mesozoic rocks are interbedded with dark lavas in many cases (NPS, 2021d).

A few especially hard rocks have resisted erosion and exist as monadnocks throughout the Piedmont. Stone Mountain is a 380-m (750-ft.) dome of slightly metamorphosed intrusive igneous rock. Pine Mountain is a linear monadnock of quartzite in western Georgia, stretching nearly 100 km (60 mi.) and trending northeast-southwest. Graves Mountain is a significant location for mineral collection, including lazulite, gem-quality rutile, and kyanite. Beyond kyanite, the Piedmont is also a source of granite, granite-gneiss, and marble as building materials (NPS, 2021d).

Valley and Ridge Province The HCS is located within the Valley and Ridge Province, a long, narrow belt trending northeast to southwest that is bordered on the west by the Appalachian Plateau and on the east by the Blue Ridge Province. The province is expansive and extends from Vermont to Alabama (NPS, 2021e) (Figure 3.3.1-2). This physiographic province consists of a series of northeast/southwest- trending synclines and anticlines composed of Early Paleozoic sedimentary rocks. Limestones and shales are more susceptible to erosion and make up much of the valleys, whereas more resistant sandstones and conglomerates form the ridges. Many of these folds are plunging, meaning that the axes (fold creases) are not horizontal but are tilted to the northeast or southwest (NPS, 2021e).

The general features that distinguish this province from adjacent areas are:

• Parallel ridges and valleys are commonly aligned from northeast to southwest.

• Topographic relief is caused by erosion of interstratified weak and strong formations that are exposed at the surface by exhumation of a relatively strongly folded and faulted terrain.

• Drainage networks comprise a few major transverse superimposed streams with subsequent streams forming a trellis-like drainage pattern (drainages are mostly dendritic in the headwaters with a trellis pattern downstream).

• Many ridges with accordant summit levels suggest a history of erosion.

• Many water and wind gaps occur through resistant ridges.

The southern section of the Valley and Ridge Province is similar to the northern section but differs from the northern section by exhibiting the following features (Hatcher et al., 1992):

• More exposed thrust faults

• Lower ridges

• More distinct longitudinal river systems September 2022 3-28 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Drainage patterns in the Valley and Ridge Province generally follow the northeast-southwest trend of topography. However, segments of major rivers cut across the regional topographic alignment following deeply entrenched, ancient stream courses. These include the Powell, Clinch, Holston, and French Broad rivers that join to form the Tennessee River after flowing many miles in northeast/southwest-trending valleys (Hatcher et al., 1992).

Stratigraphy of Valley and Ridge Province Stratigraphy of the Valley and Ridge Province is characterized by Hatcher et al. (1992) in conjunction with the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) (Figure 3.3.1-3). This stratigraphy formed as part of the early Paleozoic drift (ocean-opening) succession. The carbonate bank developed, then uplift and erosion of the carbonate bank occurred in early Middle Ordovician time (post-Knox unconformity). The carbonate bank was reestablished during the Middle Ordovician, then destroyed again during development of a clastic wedge in the Middle and Late Ordovician. The clastic wedge persisted into the Late Ordovician and Silurian. This was followed by erosion and formation of another unconformity, then by deposition of the Upper Devonian-Early Carboniferous clastic wedge (Hatcher et al., 1992).

The Rome Formation and the Conasauga, Knox, and Chickamauga Groups and associated formations comprise the majority of the underlying bedrock of the Valley and Ridge Province and are characterized below.

3.3.1.6.1 Rome Formation The Rome Formation is the oldest rock unit exposed in the ORR and underlies Haw Ridge, Pine Ridge, and the valley and some small ridges northwest of Pine Ridge. From a distance, Rome topography is recognized by narrow, steep ridges broken by closely spaced wind and water gaps that give it a cockscomb appearance. The lower stratigraphic contact is not exposed in eastern Tennessee because it commonly is cut off by the basal decollement. The upper contact with the Pumpkin Valley Shale is located at the last thick sandstone bed below a consistent section of shale, thin sandstone, and siltstone of the Pumpkin Valley Formation. A thicker sequence of the Rome Formation is present within the Whiteoak Mountain thrust sheet than within the Copper Creek thrust sheet (Hatcher et al., 1992).

3.3.1.6.2 Conasauga Group The Conasauga Group crops out throughout the southern Valley and Ridge Province but shows lithofacies transitions from clastics in the west to carbonates in the east. North-to-south changes in the amount of carbonate and clastic facies in the Conasauga Group have also been recognized. As reported in Hatcher, et al. (1992), the Conasauga Group is divided into three phases that occur in parallel, north/south- or northeast/southwest-trending belts. The phases are subparallel and cross-structural strike. The central phase consists of six formations that represent interfingering of carbonate and clastic facies. To the west of the ORR, most of the carbonate formations are absent and only two formations are recognized. To the northeast, in the eastern phase, the clastics are reduced in number and three formations can be identified.

The ORR lies near the western margin of the central phase of the Conasauga Group, where the group consists primarily of calcareous shale interbedded with shaly to silty limestone. The average thickness of the Conasauga Group is 567 m (1860 ft.) in Melton Valley and 557 m (827 ft.) in Bear Creek Valley (Hatcher et al., 1992). Contributing formations with increasing depth include the Maynardsville Limestone, Nolichucky Shale, Dismal Gap Formation, September 2022 3-29 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Rogersville Shale, Friendship Formation, and Pumpkin Valley Shale (Hatcher et al., 1992)

(Figure 3.3.1-3).

3.3.1.6.3 Knox Group Faunal evidence indicates that the age of the Knox Group is Late Cambrian and Early Ordovician. The Knox was deposited in a peritidal environment on the extensive Late Cambrian-Early Ordovician continental shelf. It forms the principal strong (competent) unit to support the folding and low-angle thrust faulting that occurs throughout the Valley and Ridge Province and the Cumberland Plateau. The Knox Group underlies Copper Ridge, Chestnut Ridge, Blackoak Ridge, and McKinney Ridge in the ORR. Surface differentiation of the Knox Group in the field is based primarily on the characteristics of weathered materials preserved in the residuum. The Knox Group in eastern Tennessee and adjacent States is divisible into the following five formations, listed from oldest (deepest) to most recent (shallowest) (see Figure 3.3.1-3):

• Cambrian Copper Ridge Dolomite

• Ordovician Chepultepec Dolomite

• Longview Dolomite

• Kingsport Formation

• Mascot Dolomite Total thickness of the Knox Group ranges from approximately 700 to 1000 m (approximately 2000 to 3000 ft.) in eastern Tennessee with the Copper Ridge Dolomite making up roughly one-third of the total. (Hatcher et al., 1992).

3.3.1.6.4 Chickamauga Group The Middle and Upper Ordovician Chickamauga Group in the vicinity of the ORR and the HCS represents deposition on the regionally extensive disconformity at the top of the Knox Group.

The Chickamauga Group underlies East Fork Valley (Oak Ridge Valley) in the Kingston thrust sheet and Bethel Valley in the Whiteoak Mountain thrust sheet. The East Fork Valley is more relevant to the HCS and is therefore discussed herein.

The Chickamauga Supergroup in the Kingston thrust sheet of East Fork Valley (Oak Ridge Valley) consists almost entirely of limestone-dominated lithologies that include the Pond Spring Formation, Murfreesboro/Pierce Limestone, Cannon Limestone, Hermitage Formation, Carters Limestone, Lebanon Limestone, and Ridley Limestone (Figure 3.3.1-3). Thickness of these formations varies between 6 and 138 m (20 and 453 ft.) (Hatcher et al., 1992).

Formations that overly the Chickamauga Supergroup include the Fort Payne Formation (uppermost), Chattanooga Shale, Rockwood Formation, Sequatchie Formation, and Reedsville Shale (Figure 3.3.1-3).

September 2022 3-30 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.3.2 KARST FEATURES Karst is a unique hydrogeologic feature in which the surface water and groundwater regimes are highly interconnected and often constitute a single, dynamic flow system. The presence of karst usually is indicated by the occurrence of distinctive physiographic features that develop as a result of the dissolution of soluble bedrock, such as limestone or dolostone. In well-developed karst, these physiographic features may include sinkholes, sinking (or disappearing) streams, caves, and karst springs. The presence of karst is also generally associated with distinctive hydrologic characteristics (Taylor and Green, 2008):

• Internal drainage of surface runoff through sinkholes.

• Underground diversion or partial subsurface piracy of surface streams (that is, sinking streams and losing streams).

• Temporary storage of groundwater within a shallow, perched epikarst zone

• Rapid, turbulent flow through subsurface pipelike or channel-like solutional openings called conduits.

• Discharge of subsurface water from conduits by way of one or more large perennial springs.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (2008), the region containing the HCS may contain carbonate rocks that can become karstified. These folded and faulted carbonate rocks are Paleozoic in age and are subject to dissolution that may produce a range of features that include solution, collapse, cover-collapse sinkholes and caves.

The USGS further refines the definition of karst hydrogeology, explaining the formation and interconnected balance of these five general characteristics noted above. Karst hydrogeology is typified by a network of interconnected fissures, fractures and conduits emplaced in a relatively low-permeability rock matrix. Most of the groundwater flow and transport occurs through the network of openings, while most of the groundwater storage occurs in the matrix. As a result, most karst aquifers are highly heterogeneous and anisotropic (USGS, 2021b).

Karst features previously reported on lands adjacent to the HCS have included springs and sinkholes of various sizes (DOE, 2013). Based on the topography of the HCS, several shallow draws and depressions exist which may reveal karst features beneath the surface. One such feature is represented by a sinking stream within the western portion of the HCS that had been mapped by USGS as an intermittent stream but was not identified to be present in conjunction with the delineation of surface waters on the HCS (see Section 3.4.2). Karst features are caused by dissolution of carbonate rocks and deep weathering along prevailing fractures and strike-oriented bedding, creating conduits and voids (open and/or clay-filled). Voids within the dolomite and limestone bedrock were encountered during the geotechnical drilling program.

Voids ranged from as thin as 0.2 ft. (0.1 m) to as much as 4.1 ft. (1.2 m) within all seven of the borings that penetrated and cored rock. A total of 21 voids were encountered. Occurrence of voids were primarily (15 of the 21 voids encountered) limited to the upper 25 ft. (7.6 m) below ground surface. These voids were found within limestone, limestone interbedded with shale, and dolomite. Additional investigation was performed to better characterize subsurface conditions within the TRISO-X FFF building footprints. An additional six borings were advanced.

Voids ranged from as thin as 0.3 ft. (0.1 m) to as much as 3.8 ft. (1.2 m) within four of the six September 2022 3-31 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment borings. Occurrence of voids were limited to the upper 40 ft. (12.2 m) below ground surface.

More details regarding these findings are provided in Section 3.3.3.

3.3.3 PHYSIOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY IN THE VICINITY OF THE HORIZON CENTER SITE The area of the HCS is located within the Valley and Ridge physiographic province. Several ridges, oriented northeast to southwest, form the undulating topography associated with the HCS. The site is underlain by bedrock associated with formations within the Knox and Chickamauga Groups. Each of the formations (as mapped) are oriented northeast to southwest and dip 30 degrees to 38 degrees southeast, consistent with the regional structural trends. Of the five dolomitic-dominated formations associated with the Knox Group (discussed in Section 3.3.1.6.3), the Kingsport formation and Mascot dolomite have been mapped across the northwest half of the HCS, with the Mascot most dominant (Figure 3.3.3-1). Of the seven limestone-dominated formations associated with the Chickamauga Group (discussed in Section 3.3.1.6.4), only four have been mapped within the HCS. The Pond Springs formation is the most dominant, with the largest distribution across the site. To a lesser extent, the Murfreesboro/Pierce, Lebanon, and Ridley limestones are also present near the surface (Figure 3.3.3-1), with possible exposure aligned along the southeast side of the HCS.

Formations likely to be present as consolidated bedrock and/or associated residuum soils beneath the HCS are described below and shown on Figure 3.3.3-1, which identifies the formation by its associated symbol. These six formations with increasing depth are the Lebanon, Ridley, Murfreesboro/Pierce, and Pond Springs formations and the Mascot Dolomite and Kingsport formations.

• Lebanon (Olb) Limestone is typically light- to dark-gray, thin to medium-bedded, even-regular; with irregular, cobbly beds, micritic to coarse-grained limestone lenses, thin laminae of calcareous mud, and brachiopods, bryozoans, gastropods, and cephalopods present. Minor thick to massive beds may be present. Fucoidal texture is common, and rare chert may be encountered.

• Ridley (Ord) Limestone is typically dark gray, thick to massively bedded, with a fucoidal texture (tan-brown, irregularly shaped, fine to coarse-grained dolomitic patches) and micritic character. The middle part is shale-rich, yellowish-red, mud cracked, and calcareous. The upper part is thick-bedded, coarse-grained crystalline limestone, gray-black, and fossiliferous, with rare chert.

• Murfreesboro/Pierce (Om) Limestone is typically micritic, fine-grained crystalline, thin-bedded (with rare thick to massive beds), minor argillaceous limestone. The middle part is similar but is typically black and includes bryozoans, chert, and ropy pods. The upper portion exhibits thick to massive bedding and is ropy, gray-black, with nodular chert and silicified fossils.

• Pond Springs (Ops) Limestone is typically maroon, green, gray, argillaceous, thin to medium bedded. These are even-regular beds to bioturbated, uneven beds. Where present, mudstone is typically gray-green, red, with uneven, medium to massive beds, and calcareous. Limestones within the middle are typically dark-gray, thick to massive-bedded, and micritic, with chert pods, and very rare fossils consisting of silicified gastropods. Basal contact is typically calcareous shales and argillaceous limestone.

September 2022 3-32 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment

• Mascot (Oma) Dolomite is typically light gray with pinkish streaks and hues, fine to coarse crystalline, and thick to massive bedded. Limestone, where present, is medium gray, fine-grained, also thick to massive-bedded, with irregular dolomitic patches and black chert jasperoidal and flinty, stromatolitic laminations. Its base is defined by sequences of closely spaced chert matrix sandstone beds.

• The deepest, the Kingsport (Ok) Formation, is similar to the overlying Mascot Dolomite but can be darker in color (light to dark gray), with a similar crystalline structure, and it can be medium to massive bedded. Where present, limestone can be darker as well (light to medium gray). Gastropods are rare, as are oolites and quartz sand grains.

The Mascot Dolomite underlain by the Kingsport Formation dominates the northwest half of the site. The overlying limestones, present in the southeastern half of the site (Figure 3.3.3-1),

include the Pond Springs (deepest, overlying unconformably the Mascot as an unconformity),

the Murfreesboro/Pierce, Ridley, and Lebanon (progressively shallower) formations (Lemiszki, 2000 and 2015).

Physiography The physiography in the vicinity of the site is illustrated on Figure 3.3.3-1 and Figure 3.3.3-2 and is typical of the Valley and Ridge Province. The HCS is situated on a terrace within the valley of East Fork Poplar Creek and consists of undulating terrain. Several ridges oriented northeast to southwest are present within the vicinity of the HCS. Blackoak Ridge is located immediately to the northwest of the site. The Poplar Creek Valley is the next valley north and parallels Blackoak Ridge. East Fork Ridge is located to the south and east of the HCS and is interrupted by the valley of Bear Creek and Tennessee State Route 95. Pine Ridge is located south and east of East Fork Ridge.

Site Geology The understanding of geologic conditions for the HCS is based upon subsurface investigation activities that included drilling and subsequent installation of groundwater monitoring wells as part of the hydrologic investigation and a separate drilling program consisting of geotechnical borings to support facility design.

The groundwater well installation program and geotechnical characterization program provided information to characterize the geology directly beneath the HCS. Locations of geotechnical borings and the monitoring wells initially installed at the site are illustrated on Figure 3.3.3-3.

Figure 3.3.3-4 provides a representative fence diagram cross-section view of the underlying lithology.

Drilling logs from the groundwater monitoring wells (GW-1, GW-1R, GW-2, GW-3, and GW-4) depict a heterogeneous residuum beneath the HCS. Wells were drilled using sonic methods to collect continuous core. In general, the upper strata encountered at these well locations comprise a moderately thick to thick residuum ranging from 13.5 ft. (4.1 m) bgs to 50 ft. (15.2 m) bgs. The residuum is composed of slightly silty clays and lean clays with varying amounts (5 percent to 30 percent) of fine to coarse chert and dolomitic fragments from 0 ft. to 36 ft. (0-11.0 m) bgs that typically overlays a silt stratum of varying thickness and at varying depths from 5 ft. (1.5 m) to 25 ft. (7.6 m) bgs. At well locations GW-1, GW-1R, and GW-3, overburden and bedrock encountered appear to be representative of residual soils, weathered to moderately weathered dolomite, associated with the Knox Group, likely the Mascot Dolomite. In contrast, September 2022 3-33 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment residual soils encountered at well bore locations GW-2 and GW-4 along the south boundary of the HCS are likely associated with the Chickamauga Group, likely the Pond Springs Formation, but may also include an upper veneer of residual clays associated with Ridley Limestone and possibly Lebanon Limestone.

Geotechnical subsurface exploration included the advancement of 22 geotechnical test borings (B-1 to B-22) (Figure 3.3.3-3) at predetermined locations across the site. Exploration included extending the borings to either refusal, target rock core lengths, or target depths of 30 ft. (9.1 m) or 100 ft. (30.5 m). Seven of the borings (B-01, B-02, B-03, B-05, B-07, B-09, and B-10) were extended through the overburden into the bedrock using diamond core barrel drilling wireline drilling methods. Samples were recovered using Shelby tubes at prescribed intervals within cohesive soils. A field geologist provided oversight and on-site documentation of the exploration and characterization of the soil samples with respect to material type and consistency, and the bedrock core was logged at these seven locations for lithology, weathering, and physical weaknesses. Selected soil samples were retained for analysis by geotechnical laboratories for the following properties in conjunction with facility engineering:

• Grain-size analysis and soil classification

• Natural moisture content

• Organic content

• Unit weight

• Atterberg limits

• Unconfined compression of rock cores

• Unconsolidated undrained triaxial

• Consolidation

• Unconfined compressive strength of soils

• pH

• Sulfate

• Chloride

• Soil resistivity

• Soil thermal conductivity Based on the geotechnical borings conducted within the proposed footprint of the HCS, overburden consisting of residual soils was encountered in each boring to depths ranging from about 3.6 ft. (1.1 m) to 31.5 ft. (9.6 m) bgs.

As noted previously (Section 3.3.2), voids caused by dissolution of carbonate rocks and deep weathering along prevailing fractures and strike-oriented bedding can form conduits within the September 2022 3-34 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment dolomite and limestone. A number of voids were encountered during the geotechnical drilling program. Voids (open and/or clay-filled) ranged from as thin as 0.2 ft. (0.1 m) to as much as 4.1 ft. (1.2 m) within all seven of the borings that penetrated and cored rock (B-01, B-02, B-03, B-05, B-07, B-09, and B-10). Voids primarily (15 of the 21 voids encountered) occur within the upper 25 ft. (7.6 m) bgs. These voids were found within limestone, limestone interbedded with shale, and dolomite. The majority of these voids were filled with stiff clay.

Geotechnical boring B-01 penetrated the most voids (11). Six of these voids were encountered at depths to up to 36 ft. (11.0 m) within the overlying limestone. The remaining five were encountered much deeper, within the underlying dolomite, beginning at approximately 82.2 ft (25 m) bgs with the largest estimated to be 2.6 ft. (0.8 m) vertical opening and the other four much smaller with each void forming 0.2 to 0.5 ft (0.06 to 0.15 m) openings. The largest void at B-01 (82.2) bgs was encountered 25 ft. (7.6 m) below the transition from limestone to dolomite.

The largest void, estimated at 4.1 ft. (1.2 m) thick in the vertical, was encountered in the relatively shallow limestone at 9.4 ft. (2.9 m) bgs in boring B-09. This large void was found beneath a shallower void (1.5 ft. [0.5 m], vertical) encountered in the same boring at 6 ft. (1.8 m) bgs.

A surface geophysical investigation conducted at the HCS identified the potential for the presence of voids not encountered in the geotechnical subsurface exploration. Therefore, to further characterize the subsurface conditions an additional six borings were advanced at predetermined locations representing the area where the TRISO-X FFF buildings (including the Process Building) would be located on the HCS. Voids within the limestone bedrock were encountered during the supplemental geotechnical drilling program. Voids ranged from as thin as 0.3 ft. (0.1 m) to as much as 3.8 ft. (1.2 m) within four of the six borings. Occurrence of voids were limited to the upper 40 ft. (12.2 m) below ground surface. These voids were found within limestone and limestone interbedded with shale. No large voids were encountered around the target depths of anomalies reported in the surface geophysical investigation.

Faults Figure 3.3.3-5 provides a representative cross-sectional view of the faults within the vicinity of the HCS. The Whiteoak Mountain Fault is the predominant fault within the project vicinity. This fault is a thrust fault located just to the southeast of the HCS along the north side of Pine Ridge (see Figure 3.3.3-1). The geologic structure of the Valley and Ridge Province is characterized by numerous elongate folds and thrust faults that trend northeast-southwest. In the southern section of the province, the faults, and in most places the bedding, dip southeast. These orientations are the result of folding and fracturing during a mountain building episode 230 to 260 million years ago. However, no evidence exists that any of the thrust faults in the Valley and Ridge Province are considered to be active faults still undergoing movement. Geologic evidence indicates that the final episode of movement occurred during the Pennsylvanian or Permian periods or at least 230 million years ago (TVA, 2009).

3.3.4 SOILS Soils in the Vicinity of the Horizon Center site The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soil survey data base identified 36 soil map units digitally within the 3-mi. (1.8-km) radius of the HCS. However, current digital soils data are not available for approximately 54 percent of the 3-mi. (1.8-km) radius area (USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022).

September 2022 3-35 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment The following soil types comprise greater than 3 percent of the soils mapped within a 3-mi. (1.8-km) radius of the HCS that are digitally available:

• Montevallo channery silt loam, 20-35 percent slopes with approximately 10.4 percent of the area.

• Armuchee silt loam, 12-20 percent slopes with approximately 4.6 percent of the area.

• Armuchee silt loam, 5-12 percent slopes, with approximately 3.9 percent of the area.

Montevallo channery silt loam, 20-35 percent slopes, soils are derived from loamy-skeletal residuum weathered from acid shale and occupy convex backslopes (USDA-NRCS, 2009).

These soils are typically shallow, well drained, with low runoff potential. Soils of the Armuchee series are formed from residuum of acid shale on rolling to very steep uplands. The Armuchee silt loam,12-20 percent slope, soil map unit is found on backslopes, and the 5-12 percent slope soil map unit is located on summits. The Armuchee soils are moderately shallow, well drained, and have medium to high runoff potential (USDA-NRCS, 2009).

Soils Mapped on the Horizon Center Site Modern soil survey data produced by the NRCS are not available for the HCS as it is located on land previously designated as Federal property; however, the 1942 Soil Survey for Roane County includes the HCS (Swann et al., 1942). Because the 1942 survey does include a description of properties of soils that remain on the HCS, data from the survey are incorporated into the soil descriptions given below.

Soils data from the 1942 U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Soil Survey for Roane County were used to review the mapped soils in the 151-acre HCS. According to the survey, most of the site is mapped as Fullerton, Colbert, or Talbott soils, which are uplands soils derived from the residuum of either cherty dolomitic or clayey limestone (Swann et al., 1942). The mapped Fullerton cherty silt loam (Fc) occupies upland backslopes of rolling and hilly areas. This unit consists of deep soils with chert fragments throughout. These soils have medium runoff potential and are well drained (Swann et al., 1942; USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022a).

Fullerton cherty silt loam, hilly phase (Fcl), which is mapped to a lesser extent in the site, has the same characteristics as Fullerton cherty silt loam but is located on steeper slopes (15-30 percent), commonly has a thinner surface soil, and likely has greater runoff potential because of the steeper relief (Swann et al., 1942).

Colbert silty clay loam (Cs) and Talbott silty clay loam (Ts) occur on nearly level to steep uplands of limestone valleys. Colbert soils are deep, moderately well drained, and formed in residuum weathered from argillaceous limestone or shaley limestone. They have rapid to slow run-off potential, and flat limestone fragments are common throughout the soil (Swann et al.,

1942; USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022b). Talbott soils contain few to no chert fragments, are moderately deep, well drained, and have high runoff potential (Swann et al., 1942; USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022c). The Talbott silty clay loam, hilly phase soil has similar characteristics as the Talbott silty clay loam but is located on steeper slopes (15-30 percent) that have greater runoff potential and likely a thinner solum (Swann et al., 1942).

The miscellaneous land type, Rolling Stony Land (Colbert and Talbott soil materials) (RsC),

ranges from undulating to hilly, but mostly rolling, with slopes of 5-15 percent. This map unit is commonly referred to as rock land as it contains numerous outcroppings and weathered September 2022 3-36 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment fragments of limestone bedrock. In most areas of the map unit, the soil material among the outcrops is similar to Talbott or Colbert soils (Swann et al., 1942). This map unit occupies the largest area of the HCS.

Three other smaller soil map units in the HCS are Greendale silt loam (Gs), Melvin silt loam (Mi), and Clarksville cherty silt loam, hilly phase. Greendale silt loam is derived from loamy alluvium of toeslopes and talf. These soils are deep to very deep, well drained, and have very low runoff potential (Swann et al., 1942; USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022d).

Melvin silt loam are bottomland soils consisting of silty limestone, shale, sandstone, and loess weathered alluvial materials. They are poorly drained, occupying nearly level areas of upland depressions and floodplains. Runoff is negligible, and most areas are subjected to flooding or ponding (Swann et al., 1942; USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022e).

Clarksville cherty silt loam, hilly phase, consists of very deep, somewhat excessively drained soils formed in hillslope sediments and the underlying clayey residuum from cherty dolomite or cherty limestone on steep side slopes and narrow ridgetops. Runoff of these soils is medium to very high (USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022f). This phase of the Clarksville soil averages a thinner solum with more chert on slopes ranging from 15 to 30 percent (Swann et al., 1942).

3.3.5 SEISMICITY The East Tennessee Seismic Zone (ETSZ) is the second most active zone in the eastern United States in terms of small magnitude (M<5) seismicity, second in frequency to the New Madrid seismic zone. Activity in the ETSZ has remained high for several decades, however there were only a few events having magnitudes as large as M 4.6 (Hatcher et al., 2012). Generally, earthquakes in the ETSZ produce minor or no damage: the largest observed earthquakes have produced only minor damage to buildings, typically chimney collapse, cracks in plaster, and broken windows, consistent with intensity VI on the Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale (Stover and Coffman, 1993). The USGS Did You Feel It? website (USGS, 2021a) collects and compiles individual observations of macroseismic effects from earthquakes as reported by citizens in the aftermath of an earthquake. A map of cumulative responses in the United States from 1991 to 2017 shows that in eastern Tennessee the observed intensities ranged from II to V MMI. Figure 3.3.5-1 identifies recent seismic events within the ETSZ between 2000 and 2021.

In 2012, the Central and Eastern U.S. Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities (CEUS SSC) Project was published as NUREG-2115. The study was conducted over the period from April 2008 to December 2011 to provide a regional seismic source model for use in probabilistic seismic hazard analyses for nuclear facilities. According to the CEUS SSC report, the ETSZ is a well-defined, northeasterly trending belt of seismicity, 300 km (186 mi.) long by less than 100 km (62 mi.) wide, within the Valley and Ridge and Blue Ridge physiographic provinces of eastern Tennessee and parts of North Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama (NUREG-2115).

Structural models presented in the CEUS SSC report explain the association of seismicity with potential field anomalies in the ETSZ, such as the association of the western margin of the ETSZ with a prominent gradient in the total intensity magnetic field marked by the New York-Alabama lineament. One possible interpretation is that seismogenic faulting is localized along a sharp contrast in crustal strength between the relatively weak Ocoee block and relatively stronger crust to the northwest. Hypocenter locations suggest that possible east/west-trending fault sources lie east of, but adjacent to, the New York-Alabama magnetic lineament. An September 2022 3-37 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment alternative interpretation is that intraplate earthquakes occur in crust that may be weakened by the presence of anomalously high fluid pressures. Another interpretation is that the seismicity may be related to a reactivation of a basement fault by the modern stress field and that a marginal correlation may exist between the seismicity and major drainage pattern and general topography of the region, suggesting a possible hydrological element linkage. Stearns et al.

(2013), however, did not find a clear link between watershed morphology and active tectonics in the ETSZ. Powell (2014) looks at the potential for the ETSZ to extend into Kentucky and concludes that the zone follows the New York-Alabama lineament, and the southern portion of the zone includes thrust faults reactivated as normal faults. Cameron et al. (2017) conclude that hydroseismicity is an implausible control on seismicity in the ETSZ and that the evidence for a link between crustal loading and seismicity is inconclusive.

Recent geologic and paleoseismologic studies suggest that the ETSZ may have produced large prehistoric earthquakes. Evidence of outcrop-scale faulting and fracturing, and disrupted features in river terrace alluvium, along with minor paleoliquefaction as reported by Vaughn et al. (2010), was considered in the CEUS SSC study. Although this preliminary evidence suggests that the ETSZ may have produced one or more large magnitude earthquakes in the Quaternary, the CEUS SSC study assessed it to be insufficient to qualify the ETSZ as a repeated large-magnitude earthquake (RLME) source. Additional evidence of past large-magnitude earthquakes in the ETSZ has been observed near the Douglas Reservoir by Hatcher et al. (2012). Fractures and displacements in Quaternary alluvium along Douglas Reservoir suggest they resulted from earthquakes with magnitudes greater than 6.0 and 6.5 (TVA, 2019).

Significant uncertainties exist regarding the origin and age of the features identified by Hatcher et al. (2012). Warrell et al. (2017) use paleoseismology to conclude that the ETSZ has generated three large-magnitude earthquakes, including at least one earthquake on the moment magnitude (MW) scale 6 in the late Pleistocene. The magnitude of the largest event is assessed to be MW 6.5+/-0.2 based on a 1-m (3-ft.) displacement on a thrust fault.

Cox et al. (2022) summarize recent paleoseismic investigations in the ETSZ and re-evaluate the paleoseismic evidence identified by Hatcher et al. (2012) and Warrell et al. (2017) at the Dandridge site (Douglas Reservoir) in light of recalculated optically stimulated luminescence.

They also discuss paleoseismic evidence collected at two additional sites (Alcoa and Vonore, Tennessee). Their interpretation of the evidence is that the Dandridge-Vonore Fault Corridor (DVFC) has experienced at least two MW 6.5 earthquakes in the last 40,000 years, but they conclude that further research and field investigations are needed to obtain recurrence intervals of MW 6.5 earthquakes in the DVFC. This conclusion is consistent with the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA, 2019) evaluation of the paleoseismic evidence reported by Hatcher et al. (2012) and Warrell et al. (2017) that the current recent studies do not quantify parameters (i.e.,

recurrence interval, magnitude) necessary to demonstrate that the ETSZ produces RLMEs.

Therefore, studies conducted by TVA at the Clinch River Nuclear Site (TVA (2019) confirms the interpretation of the CEUS SSC and does not define a RLME source for the ETSZ. The potential for large-magnitude earthquakes in the ETSZ is accommodated in the CEUS SSC model by the maximum magnitude distribution of the distributed seismicity zones in which the ETSZ lies, which ranges from M 6 to M 8. Sensitivity analyses conducted for the TVA Clinch River Nuclear Site (TVA, 2019) confirm that the inclusion of paleoseismic events in the ETSZ would not determine the need to revise magnitude of the largest possible earthquake (Mmax) for the seismic source zones. A second sensitivity test conducted as part of the Clinch River Nuclear Site Safety Analysis Report (TVA, 2019) further shows that the CEUS SSC seismic hazard model generates moderate- to large-magnitude earthquakes with sufficient frequency in the ETSZ area to explain Hatcher et al.s (2012) interpretation of field observations.

September 2022 3-38 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.4 WATER RESOURCES 3.4.1 GROUNDWATER This section describes groundwater conditions associated with the Horizon Center site (HCS),

including a description of regional aquifers and aquitards and those present at the HCS. The HCS region generally refers to the Valley and Ridge physiographic province in which the HCS is located. This section also includes a review of groundwater resources within the vicinity, a 3-mi.

(4.8-km) radius from the proposed HCS. The geologic units within the Valley and Ridge physiographic province are discussed in Section 3.3, Geology and Soils and comprise the aquifers and aquitards found at the HCS (See Figure 3.3.1-3 in Section 3.3, Geology and Soils).

Regional Groundwater The HCS is situated within the Valley and Ridge province (See Figure 3.3.1-2 in Section 3.3, Geology and Soils). The primary aquifers of the Valley and Ridge province are made up of carbonate Mississippian, Cambrian, Ordovician rocks. The aquifers underlie more than one-half of the Valley and Ridge province in Tennessee and are typically present in valleys and rarely present on broad, dissected ridges. The carbonate-rock aquifers are typically connected to rivers or lakes that serve as sources of recharge. The movement of water from the recharge sources through the carbonate rocks has resulted in solution activity and enlargement of original openings. Rock types other than carbonate in the province can yield large quantities of water if they are fractured, contain solution cavities, and or have direct hydraulic connection to a source of recharge (Lloyd and Lyke,1995).

The primary carbonate aquifers in the Valley and Ridge province are the Chickamauga Group, the Knox Group, and the Conasauga Group. The aquifers are typically overlain by the aquitards of the Fort Payne Formation, Chattanooga Shale, Rockwood Formation, Sequatchie Formation, and Reedsville Shale, and underlain by the aquitards of the Nolichucky Shale, Dismal Gap Formation, Rogersville Shale, Friendship Formation, Pumpkin Valley Shale, and Rome Formation (See Figure 3.3.1-3 in Section 3.3., Geology and Soils). However, due to thrust faulting in the area the aquifers and aquitards can be repeated several times across the fault including the confining Rome Formation (Lloyd and Lyke,1995).

The carbonate aquifers have little primary porosity, and permeability and groundwater movement in the Valley and Ridge aquifers is primarily a function of fractures, bedding planes, and solution openings in the rocks that form as secondary features after the rocks were deposited and lithified (Figure 3.4.1-1). The fractures and bedding planes in the carbonate rocks have been enlarged through dissolution by slightly acidic water, especially in the upper 200 ft.

(70.0 m) to 300 ft. (91.4 m) of the zone of saturation. The acidic water dissolves some of the calcite and dolomite mostly along fractures and bedding planes where the largest volumes of acidic groundwater flow. While secondary permeability is the primary mechanism for groundwater movement in the carbonate rocks, primary pore spaces that constitute the alluvium along streams and the residuum of weathered material that overlies most of the rocks in the area provides connectivity for shallow groundwater movement (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

The repeating lithology created by thrust faulting and the location and presence of streams within the Valley and Ridge province of eastern Tennessee, in part, results in localized groundwater movement. The major streams within the Valley and Ridge province run parallel to the northeast-trending valleys and ridges, and tributary streams typically run perpendicular to the valleys and ridges. Where older rocks are typically stratigraphically deeper, the older rocks September 2022 3-39 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment in eastern Tennessee (primarily the Conasauga Group and the Rome Formation) have been displaced upward over the top of younger rocks (the Chickamauga and the Knox Groups) along thrust fault planes (Figure 3.4.1-1). The thrust faulting has resulted in the repeating sequences of permeable and less permeable hydrogeologic units. The combination of the repeating sequences, coupled with the stream network, divides the area into a series of isolated, shallow groundwater flow systems adjacent to these features. Most of the groundwater movement associated with these local flow systems takes place within 300 ft. (91.4 m) of land surface.

Typically, in recharge areas, most of the groundwater flows across the strike of the rocks, and from the ridges where the water levels are high toward lower water levels adjacent to major streams that flow parallel to the valleys where it discharges (Figure 3.4.1-1). However, some of the groundwater moves along the strike of the rocks, following highly permeable fractures, bedding planes, and solution zones where it can travel further and discharge at more distant springs or streams. Additionally, while fracture zones locally are present in the clastic rocks, the highly permeable zones primarily present in the carbonate rocks allow for the movement of groundwater (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

Recharge also occurs from the percolation of precipitation through the residuum overlying the aquifer system. The discharge of groundwater occurs at springs, as base flow to streams and rivers, through pumping of wells. However, where enough water is present in the residuum for domestic wells, the domestic wells may go dry when water levels decline during drier periods in late summer to early autumn (Brahana et al., 1986). The groundwater that discharges to springs occurs with up to 10 times more water during periods of abundant precipitation (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

3.4.1.1.1 Regional Hydrogeology Rome Formation While the Cambrian Rome Formation is one of the oldest rock units in the Valley and Ridge province, due to thrust faulting it is near the surface and underlies Haw Ridge, Pine Ridge, and the valley and some small ridges northwest of Pine Ridge (Figure 3.4.1-1). The Rome Formation lithology is comprised of sandstone, shale and siltstone, and the geologic unit is considered an aquitard and a confining unit (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

Conasauga Group The Cambrian Conasauga Group in the Valley and Ridge province has been displaced upward over the top of younger rocks along thrust fault planes and overlies the Cambrian Rome Formation (Figure 3.4.1-1). The Conasauga Group is considered a principal aquifer of the Valley and Ridge Province and is comprised of the Maynardville Limestone and Honaker Dolomite geologic nuts. The aquifer lithology is comprised of alternating beds of cherty dolomite, limestone, dolomite, and shale with groundwater flow through secondary permeability. The Conasauga Group has the largest reported well yields of the principal Valley and Ridge aquifers. Wells completed in the Honaker Dolomite of the Conasauga Group have reported yields of 2500 gallons per minute (gpm) [9463 liters per minute (lpm)]. Reported median yield for the middle part of the Conasauga Group is 100 gpm (378 lpm). Springs in the Upper Conasauga Group have median discharges of 40 gpm (151 lpm), with spring discharge rates up to 1000 gpm (3785 lpm) for both the Upper and Middle Conasauga Group (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

September 2022 3-40 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Chickamauga Group The Ordovician Chickamauga Group in the Valley and Ridge province has been displaced upward over the top of younger rocks along thrust fault planes, overlies the Knox Group, and is overlain by the Cambrian Rome Formation (Figure 3.4.1-1). The lower Chickamauga Group is considered a principal aquifer of the Valley and Ridge province which is comprised of the Holston Formation and Lenoir Limestone geologic units. The lithology of the Chickamauga Group aquifer units is comprised of limestone and shale. Large well yields of up to approximately 500 gpm (1892 lpm) are reported for the Chickamauga Group. Some of the largest springs are found to discharge from the Chickamauga Group with rates up to 5000 gpm (18,927 lpm) (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

Knox Group The Knox Group in the Valley and Ridge province has been displaced upward over the top of younger rocks along thrust fault planes and is overlain by the Ordovician Chickamauga Group (Figure 3.4.1-1). The Knox Group is considered a principal aquifer of the Valley and Ridge province which is comprised of several geologic units comprised of cherty dolomite, dolomite, and limestone lithology. Large well yields of up to approximately 500 gpm (1892 lpm) are reported for the Knox Group. Springs issuing from the Knox Group have reported discharges of up to 4000 gpm (15,141 lpm) with median discharge of 50 gpm (189 lpm) (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

3.4.1.1.2 Groundwater Use The Conasauga, Knox, Chickamauga Groups and Rome Formation are the primary underlying bedrock aquifers of the Valley and Ridge province.

Eastern Tennessee fresh groundwater withdrawals from the Valley and Ridge province aquifers were about 82 million gallons per day (310 million liters per day) during 1985. The Valley and Ridge province aquifers withdrawals accounts for approximately 16 percent of the groundwater used in the State of Tennessee. Approximately 37.8 percent was withdrawn for public supply, 24.4 percent for industrial, mining, and thermoelectric power, 23.2 percent for domestic and commercial and 14.6 percent for agriculture (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Sole Source Aquifer Program interactive map was used to determine that there are no sole source aquifers within the area of interest (USEPA, 2022).

3.4.1.1.3 Groundwater Quality The water quality within the freshwater parts of the Valley and Ridge aquifers is similar for shallow wells and springs. The groundwater typically has total dissolved solids concentrations of 170 milligrams per liter or less and is hard with a calcium magnesium bicarbonate water type.

The concentrations of dissolved constituents are thought to be indicators of depth and the rate of groundwater movement through the carbonate-rock aquifers. Lower concentrations are generally associated with groundwater that is moving rapidly through shallow, short flow paths from areas of recharge to discharge locations. Higher concentrations represent groundwater that is moving more slowly through deep, long flow paths and has had longer contact with aquifer minerals and greater opportunity to dissolve minerals. The Valley and Ridge aquifers are September 2022 3-41 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment more susceptible to contamination where the residuum that overlies the carbonate rocks is thin (Lloyd and Lyke, 1995).

The highly anisotropic nature and occurrence of water bearing zones with high permeability and rapid groundwater movement associated with solution cavities in the carbonate aquifers of the Valley and Ridge province results in potential contamination of the Valley and Ridge groundwater (Brahana et al., 1986).

As noted in Section 1.3.1 (Site Location and Layout), the HCS is located approximately 6.6 mi.

(10.6 km) southwest of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Historical site operations at the ORR generated a variety of radioactive, non-radioactive and mixed hazardous waste. These wastes have contaminated surface water and sediment outside of the ORR property boundaries. Down-gradient groundwater monitoring in the vicinity of the Clinch River has shown low-levels of contamination have migrated to the Clinch River and some low levels of contamination have been detected off-site directly across from the Clinch River. The off-site contamination is not consistently detected, and when detected is at very low levels that are not considered to pose a threat to human health or the environment. Further studies of the potential for off-site groundwater contamination are currently being investigated by the USEPA as part of ORR cleanup activities. (USEPA, 2021).

3.4.1.1.3.1 Groundwater Wells Within the Vicinity of the HCS A comprehensive well screening report was developed from several database sources: the Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation (TDEC, 2022b); the Oak Ridge Environmental Information System (OREIS) and the National Water Quality Monitoring Councils portal service for public access to Federal agencies (including United States Geologic Survey

[USGS]) databases. The search area included the 3-mi (4.8-km) radius from the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) boundary (Figure 3.4.1-2).

Within the search radius a total of 37 groundwater wells were identified in the TDEC Database (TDEC, 2022b). Thirty-four of these wells are residential, one is recorded as farming use, and two are listed as use unknown. None of the wells recorded in the TDEC water well database is noted as industrial or commercial water supply use. The majority of the wells are located in Roane County (32), two are reportedly in Anderson County (the farm use well and one of the residential wells); and two are listed as Polk County. It should be noted that these coordinates may be incorrect because Polk County is well beyond the 3-mile radius, at nearly 60 to 70 miles south of TRISO-X FFF. While the search data does not include municipal wells, as those are considered confidential under Tennessee Code Annotated § 10-7-504 (a)(21)(A) and Tennessee Compilation Rules and Regulations 0400-01-01-.01(4)(c), it was confirmed by Annabelle Dempsey of TDEC via email communication that no public water supply wells exist within the area of the HCS (TDEC, 2022c). A single public supply wellhead protection area is partially included within the 3-mi. (4.8-km) radius from the TRISO-X FFF center point, however that area is currently classified as inactive.

The closest well to the HCS is a residential well at 1.12 mi. (0.1.80 km) north-northwest (Figure 3.4.1-2). This well is developed within the Poplar Creek Valley which is separated from the HCS by Blackoak Ridge. Another residential well is included in the TDEC database that was reportedly installed at coordinates within 0.08-mi. (128.7-m) southwest of the HCS. Field reconnaissance to confirm the location of this well conducted on March 04, 2022, demonstrated that no wellhead, water service connections, power service, or any evidence of a former well September 2022 3-42 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment casing were present. As such, it was concluded that the recorded coordinates for this well are erroneous and no well is present on the adjacent parcel (see Figure 3.4.1-2).

The well search of the OREIS (OREIS, 2022) and USGS databases (USGS, 2022a) identified 952 groundwater monitoring and observation wells within the 3-mi (4.8-km) search radius.

These wells are associated with the adjacent DOE facilities Y-12 National Security Complex and East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP, former K25 Plant) as well as parts of the general area defined as the ORR. Most of these wells are located within the ETTP (484). The ORR has responsibility for 249 of the monitoring wells; the Y-12 Plant, 215; and four wells are listed simply as off-site locations. Of these DOE facility-related wells, eight are also associated with the USGS Tennessee Water Science Center. Six of the eight USGS well co-serve as ETTP (former K-25) monitoring wells and two are also used as ORR monitoring wells. The monitoring wells located south and southwest of the HCS within the 3-mi. (4.8 km) radius are part of the National Priorities List (NPL) site where preexisting groundwater contamination exists. However, these locations are located downstream within the Poplar Creek valley and are therefore, downgradient of the HCS (Figure 3.4.1-2).

Groundwater at the HCS 3.4.1.2.1 Site Hydrogeology As described in Section 3.3.3, the area of the HCS is underlain by bedrock associated with formations within the Knox and Chickamauga Groups. Formations likely to be present as bedrock and/or associated residuum soils beneath the HCS are described below and shown on Figure 3.3.3-1, which identifies the formation by its associated symbol. These six formations with increasing depth are the Lebanon, Ridley, Murfreesboro/Pierce, and Pond Springs formations and the Mascot Dolomite and Kingsport formations.

Groundwater at the HCS was characterized for both water quality and physical properties as well as identifying hydrogeologic properties during drilling and well installation. Drilling and associated consolidated monitoring well installation activities were conducted in summer and fall of 2021. In total, four on-site (on HCS Lot 6) wells (GW-1, GW-2, GW-3, and GW 4) and two wells in an adjacent off-site area (GW-5 and GW-6) were installed. A seventh well (GW-1R) was installed and developed in February 2022 and was added to the network for subsequent sampling and monitoring (See Figure 3.4.1-3). Soils and bedrock lithology were logged during drilling of each bore hole prior to being completed as observation wells. Geotechnical borings presented in Section 3.3 Geology and Soils were used to supplement the interpretation of the HCS hydrogeology from monitoring well drilling and well installation data.

The observation wells are completed within the upper bedrock at depths of up to approximately 75 ft. (22.9 m) from ground surface. The underlying bedrock in which the observation wells are completed is primarily comprised of dolomite and is the first type of bedrock encountered at all well locations. At one location, GW-5, limestone was encountered below the dolomitic bedrock at a depth of 52 ft. (18.8 m) below ground surface, and the well is screened across the dolomite limestone interface between 50 to 60 ft. (15.2 to 18.3 m) below ground surface.

Karst features previously reported on lands adjacent to the HCS have included springs and sinkholes of various sizes. Geologic logging during drilling and installation of monitoring wells and geotechnical drilling resulted in identification of karst features at the site including a number of voids (See Section 3.3.2, Karst Features).

September 2022 3-43 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment An overview of the groundwater observation well network is presented in Table 3.4.1-1. The two off-site wells, GW-5, and GW-6, were subsequently eliminated from the well network but are used to support the interpretation of HCS hydrogeologic conditions, including the potentiometric surface within the vicinity of the HCS.

3.4.1.2.1.1 Groundwater Levels and Elevations Groundwater levels were measured at the HCS observation wells monthly starting in September 2021 extending to August 2022 (Table 3.4.1-2, Figure 3.4.1-4). The monthly measured groundwater levels collected between September 2021 and August 2022 vary from 9.58 to 56.68 ft. below the top of casing. Groundwater level elevations posted for the site and contoured indicate groundwater flow varies across the HCS seasonally. Figure 3.4.1-4 is a hydrograph of the groundwater levels represented as potentiometric elevations that represents changes in groundwater elevations on a monthly basis. Varied groundwater level changes were observed for the twelve-month period between September 2021 and August 2022. This period coincides with the end of the active growing season cycle, transitioning into the winter season (when evapotranspiration is at its lowest).

Groundwater hydraulic gradients are based on potentiometric level contours of water levels collected on September 16, 2021 and January 12, 2022, shown on Figure 3.4.1-5 and Figure 3.4.1-6, respectively. These two months were selected for their seasonal influence (summer and winter) on potentiometric levels, as it is apparent that lower evapotranspiration levels during colder shorter days (i.e., decreases naturally as vegetation is dormant, and less need of infiltrating water) influences groundwater availability. During such times, a greater part of seepage occurs through the overburden and into bedrock (fissures, joints, and karst-influenced fracture-conduits, voids) where it adds to groundwater storage and results in a rising potentiometric head. This has the effect of steepening hydraulic gradients within the bedrock as well as shifting potentiometric surface. As is evident in Figure 3.4.1-5, the potentiometric contours during the summer period are arcuate in shape from west to northeast across the HCS. Whereas the winter orientation of this surface shifts and follows a more regular southwest to northeast pattern and is steeper, particularly on the northwest side of the HCS, as shown on Figure 3.4.1-6. These potentiometric levels influence flow; however, remnant structural features within the bedrock may provide influence and control as well. The general directions of flow, based on potentiometric surface, are inferred as red dashed lines normal to the contours. These inferred flowlines represent hydraulic gradients. Southwest of HCS in the adjacent parcel the pattern shifts and steepens. Immediately adjacent to southwest side of the site, contours broaden their spread while creating a concave-arcuate pattern indicating a change in potentiometric head that may be influenced by structural feature(s) within the bedrock that influence its transmissive nature and/or flow toward and discharge to East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC). This hydraulic gradient shift is broader and less steep in summer versus the winter and may be redirecting some of the groundwater southward because of the steeper gradients.

3.4.1.2.1.2 Hydraulic Parameters Hydraulic parameters evaluated for the HCS groundwater include hydraulic conductivity and storativity. The analyses of parameters were performed using the AQTESOLV software package (Duffield, 2004). A range of derived values for each of these parameters is provided in Table 3.4.1-3. The results support a low water yield and low to moderate hydraulic conductivity of these bedrock materials across the site.

September 2022 3-44 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Hydraulic conductivity values for the bedrock aquifer units beneath the HCS were determined from analyses of aquifer slug tests. Analyses of the test data were performed using four solution methods provided in the AQTESOLV software package (Duffield, 2004), including Cooper, Bredehoeft, Papadopulos (1967) solution and KGS (Hyder et al., 1994) solution, both curve matching methods as well as Bouwer-Rice (1976 solution) and Hvorslev (1951) solution, both straight-line methods. The results support very-low to low hydraulic conductivity values for the northwestern-most observation wells GW-1, GW-3 and well GW2 in the southeast area of the HCS. The geometric mean of conductivity values range for these wells range from 0.0011 ft/d (3.8 E-07 cm/sec) to 0.0037 ft/d (1.3 E-06 cm/sec). Whereas GW-4, located in the southwest area of HCS, was reported to have a moderate hydraulic conductivity with a geometric mean value of 6.3 ft/d (2.2 E-03 cm/sec) for these dolomitic bedrock materials. Results for observation wells GW-5 support a low-moderate hydraulic conductivity of 0.23 ft/d (8.1 E-05 cm/sec) for dolomite and limestone bedrock (Table 3.4.1-3).

Storativity is a term used to describe the volume of water released from an aquifer per unit surface area per unit decline in head. Conversely, a volume of water addedvia infiltration and seepageto an aquifer per unit surface area affects a unit increase in head. Estimates of storativity for the carbonate bedrock materials HCS are provided Table 3.4.1-3 using the two curve matching solutions (CBP and KGS, noted above) analyses for each observation well.

Geometric mean values of storativity properties were estimated between 9.6 E-11 (GW-3) to 0.00033 ft3/ft3 (GW-2).

3.4.1.2.1.3 Groundwater Velocity Groundwater average linear velocity (also referred to as seepage velocity) is calculated from the combination of data collected from on-site observation wells, including well elevations, water levels, calculated hydraulic gradients, and hydraulic conductivity described in the preceding paragraphs, and from literature values for effective porosity.

Generally, carbonate rock with original (primary) and secondary porosity is reported to have an effective porosity of 0.10 to 0.20 ft3/ft3 (10 - 20 percent, Bouwer, 1978). Based on the hydraulic properties associated with GW-4 (i.e., moderate hydraulic conductivity and storativity values),

0.20 ft3/ft3 was selected to calculate average linear velocity for groundwater flow through the southwest area of HCS (area surrounding GW-4). However, the remaining observation wells exhibit aquifer characteristics of tighter, much less permeable carbonates with low storage properties. As reported by others, studies at the Oak Ridge Reservation that included pumping tests, tracer tests and analyses of hydrographs (Solomon, D.K., et al, 1992) provide relevant information for comparable conditions at the HCS. These effective porosities reported to be between 10E-03 to 10E-05 ft3/ft3. This same reference also indicates that average specific yield (drainable portion of an aquifer and reasonable estimate of effective porosity) for the Chickamauga Group is 0.0025 ft3/ft3. The average linear groundwater velocity is calculated for the site as the product of hydraulic conductivity and the range of gradients, divided by the effective porosity resulting in a value of 0.004 ft/d (0.001 m/d) to 3.12 ft/d (0.95 m/d) (Freeze and Cherry, 1979).

3.4.1.2.1.4 Site Groundwater Quality Groundwater water quality was determined through quarterly sampling of the HCS observation wells. Groundwater sample collection was attempted quarterly using low flow (low purge) sampling methodology with a submersible bladder pump from the six observation wells (GW-1 through GW-6) for the first sampling event in September 2021 (summer), and from the four September 2022 3-45 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment observation wells (GW-1 through GW-4) for the subsequent sampling in November 2021 (fall).

The first quarter started in September 2021 and five of the wells yielded sufficient water to collect samples. Only GW-1 did not have enough water to collect a sample.

NUREG-1748 does not provide any specific guidance regarding water quality parameters; therefore, the parameter list contained in NUREG-1555 was used to support the characterization of water quality at the HCS. Water quality analysis included field measurements (temperature, pH, conductivity, oxidation reduction potential, dissolved oxygen, color, odor, salinity, and turbidity) and a range of laboratory analytes. Results of water quality sampling from the summer, fall, winter, and spring sampling periods are provided in Tables 3.4.1-4 through 3.4.1-7.

Overall, the groundwater sample analytical results indicate a water of good quality with low total dissolved solids (110 to 390 mg/L) and relatively low concentrations of trace metals and radioactivity. However, detections of fecal and total coliforms are at relatively elevated levels with reported values up to 178.5 and 2,419.6 mpn/mL, respectively, indicating impaired groundwater with respect to these parameters. None of the reported groundwater analytical results exceeded TDEC or USEPA regulatory values. While the TDEC and USEPA regulatory standards are provided as reference for assessing the quality of the water in general terms they do not constitute any violations if a result is in exceedance of a regulatory value.

3.4.2 SURFACE WATER Surface water hydrologic features and characteristics, including site drainage, within the HCS and vicinity, are summarized in Section 3.4.2.1. Surface water use and surface water quality are summarized in Sections 3.4.2.2 and 3.4.2.3, respectively.

Hydrology 3.4.2.1.1 Regional and Local Hydrology The HCS is located within the Valley and Ridge physiographic province as described in Section 3.3. The HCS is located within the East Fork Valley, a valley between two parallel ridges, Blackoak Ridge on the north and East Fork Ridge to the south (USGS 2019a) (see Figure 3.4.2-1). East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC) flows southwesterly through this valley and along the southern side of the HCS. The HCS and the EFPC channel are separated by Renovare Boulevard. The EFPC drainage area at the Novus Drive crossing location near the southwestern end of the HCS is 20.38 sq. mi. (52.8 km2). The EFPC watershed extends to the northeast and encompasses much of the western portion of the City of Oak Ridge. EFPC is a tributary to Poplar Creek, which flows southwesterly in the valley north of East Fork Valley and Blackoak Ridge. The EFPC confluence with Poplar Creek is located southwest of HCS. Poplar Creek is a tributary to the Clinch River at Clinch River Mile 12.0 above the Tennessee River and Watts Bar Lake (USGS 2019b).

Numerous small tributaries drain to EFPC from the ridges along the East Fork Valley. Named tributaries to EFPC identified on USGS quadrangle maps (USGS 2019a) near the HCS include Gum Hollow Branch and Pinhook Branch upstream of the HCS as well as Bear Creek downstream of the HCS. Bear Creek flows southwesterly in the valley south of the East Fork Valley and cuts through Pine Ridge to flow into EFPC southwest of the HCS.

September 2022 3-46 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment The EFPC headwaters are located east of the HCS and in the City of Oak Ridge. The upper reaches of the EFPC watershed consist predominantly of developed land such as residential subdivisions and commercial development, particularly near the Oak Ridge center (USGS 2019a). The downstream portion of the watershed is substantially less developed and is mostly wooded.

As noted in Table 3.6-1 (Meteorology, Climatology, and Air Quality), the annual average precipitation near the HCS is approximately 51 in. (129 cm), and average snowfall is approximately 6 in. (15 cm). Evapotranspiration, the amount of water transferred from the land and water surface to the atmosphere by evaporation and plant transpiration, has been estimated for the Oak Ridge area to be approximately 29 to 30 in. (73.7 to 76.2 cm) (Parr and Hughes, 2006). The difference in annual precipitation and evapotranspiration, approximately 21 to 22 in. (53 to 56 cm), is the amount of water in combined surface runoff and the net flow to groundwater. Storm event precipitation data for the HCS vicinity are available from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and selected durations and return periods are summarized in Table 3.4.2-1.

Numerous USGS streamflow monitoring stations are located near the HCS (USGS, 2022a),

including a station on EFPC just upstream of the HCS that is no longer active; however, no streamflow data exist at the HCS for the small surface drainages flowing directly onto the HCS.

There are nine locations within 3.0 mi. (4.8 km) of the HCS at which USGS has measured surface flow at least one time (Table 3.4.2-2). The locations of the USGS streamflow stations are shown on Figure 3.4.2-1.

3.4.2.1.2 Site Drainage As shown on Figure 3.4.4-2, surface water features such as streams with defined banks, lakes, impoundments, and ponds, are absent from the HCS. USGS topographic mapping identifies one intermittent stream within the HCS. USGS defines an intermittent steam as a stream that flows only when it receives water from rainfall runoff or springs, or from some surface source such as melting snow (USGS, 2022c). This feature, however, was investigated in the field and found to lack the required characteristics, such as a channel with bed and bank, and thus is not considered a regulated stream under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) or TDEC. This USGS intermittent stream, perhaps best referred to as a swale, slopes southwesterly, leaving the HCS at SD #1, and flows to a depression located on Lot 5, the adjacent parcel to the southwest. That depression has been referred to as a sinkhole in prior reports (DOE, 1996; DOE, 2003). The depression, defined by closed topographic contours, extends eastward along the drainage course to within approximately 500 ft. of the HCS boundary. The swale drainage area at the HCS boundary is approximately 138 ac. (55.8 ha).

Within the HCS, this broad swale has characteristics similar to a karst swale as described by TDEC (2014) . . much of the length of the headwater stream network in karst terrain is composed of karst swales which appear as wide, shallow, parabolic swales . . . Karst swales lack defined channels, beds, or banks and may only briefly hold water during extreme storm events. A description of karst characteristics near the HCS is provided in Section 3.3.2.

Streams and watersheds near the HCS are shown on Figure 3.4.2-2. The HCS encompasses approximately 110 ac. (44.6 ha) located between Blackoak Ridge to the north and EFPC to the south. There are areas that drain from the southern-facing slopes of Blackoak Ridge onto the HCS. All surface runoff from the HCS flows via small drainages to EFPC with the exception of one drainage which flows to a topographic depression located immediately southwest of the HCS (see surface discharge location #1 [SD #1], Figure 3.4.2-2). This drainage, indicated on September 2022 3-47 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment USGS topographic maps as an intermittent stream (Figure 3.4.2-2), terminates at an off-site depression, suggesting karst topography with apparent surface drainage to groundwater. This mapped USGS intermittent stream was investigated in the field and determined to lack the characteristics of a stream or a wet weather conveyance as defined by Clean Water Act (CWA) and TDEC regulations.

The majority of the HCS, including the northern portion, drains to SD #1. Based on topographic mapping of the HCS, seven locations where surface drainage leaves the HCS as concentrated, or potentially concentrated, flow were identified. The largest and primary location is SD #1 with a drainage area of approximately 138 acres (ac.) (55.8 hectares (ha)). A small area at the northwestern corner of the HCS drains via SD #2 to the off-site depression in addition to drainage via SD #1. The southern portion of the HCS drains southerly to EFPC via two 24-in.

diameter reinforced concrete pipes (RCPs) identified on Figure 3.4.2-2 as SD #5 and SD #6.

Two small drainages, SD #3 and SD #4, located along the eastern end of the HCS drain to an off-site intermittent stream which flows southerly to EFPC, passing under Renovare Boulevard near the eastern boundary of the HCS.

The USGS has used long-term regional streamflow monitoring data to develop regression equations to predict various statistical hydrologic parameters, including peak discharge frequency (Law and Tasker, 2003) as well as low flow frequency, mean daily flow duration, mean annual streamflow, seasonal summer mean flow (Law, Tasker and Ladd, 2009), and geomorphic bankfull flow channel geometry, including width, depth, and cross section area (Bieger et al, 2015). The regression equations for each of these have been implemented in Tennessee by USGS in the web-based tool StreamStats (USGS, 2022b).

Drainage areas to the surface discharge locations at the HCS are small. While the web-based StreamStats tool includes mapped stream threads within the HCS boundary allowing automated calculation of hydrologic parameters using the regional regression equations, the HCS drainage areas are smaller than the lower limit of drainage areas for streams used to develop the regression equations and reliable predictions from the regression equations.

Water Use Surface water is the primary source for water use in the area around the HCS. Water use information has been developed by the USGS (Dieter et al, 2018; Robinson, 2018) and water use data at the State and the county levels through the year 2015 have been made publicly available through the USGS National Water Information System Web Interface (USGS, 2022a).

A further breakdown of water use by public water supply organizations and by other basic types of users (e.g., self-supplied industrial) is available for the year 2010 from Robinson (2018) and is included in the summary below.

In the five-county area around the HCS (Roane, Knox, Loudon, Anderson, and Morgan Counties), the public water supply source is primarily derived from surface water (USGS, 2022a). In 2015, the last year with available data, the five-county total public water supply provided by 24 public water providers from surface water sources was 91.99 million gallons per day (MGD) [4.84 cubic meters per second (m3/s)], which was 97 percent of the total public water supply withdrawal with the remainder coming from groundwater sources. Streams flow generally to the southwest in this five-county area to the Tennessee River and Watts Bar Lake, which flows westerly, and only two of the 24 local public water providers, the Kingston Tennessee River water plant and the Rockwood Water System, use water withdrawn from stream locations hydrologically downstream of the HCS and in Roane County (Robinson, 2018). These two September 2022 3-48 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment public water systems combined withdrew 3.25 MGD, or 5.0 cubic feet per second (cfs) (0.142 m3/s) in 2010 (Robinson 2018). For comparison, the average flow of the Tennessee River at Loudon during the 32-year period from 1923 to 1954 was 18,810 cfs (532.64 m3/s) (USGS, 2022a). For the current condition, the Tennessee River and Clinch River flows and reservoir storages, including Watts Bar Lake, are managed by the Tennessee Valley Authority dam and reservoir system to meet multipurpose objectives of power generation, navigation, water supply, flood control, recreation, and water quality (TVA, 2020).

Self-supplied industrial surface water use in the five-county region in 2015 was 8.73 MGD (0.46 m3/s) (USGS, 2022a). The USGS database indicates no self-supplied industrial surface water use in Roane County in 2015.

The largest self-supplied surface water use in Roane County in 2015 by user category defined by the USGS is 348 MGD (18.31 m3/s) for thermoelectric power once-through cooling water (USGS, 2022a). The USGS estimates that 99 percent of thermoelectric power once-through cooling water is returned to the water source with one percent of the withdrawn water lost to evaporation and other consumptive losses.

Water Quality 3.4.2.3.1 Water Quality Characteristics NUREG-1748 does not provide any specific guidance regarding water quality parameters; therefore, the parameter list contained in NUREG-1555 was used to support the characterization of water quality near the HCS. Surface water features such as streams, lakes, impoundments, and ponds, are absent from the HCS.

Surface water quality samples were obtained from representative waterbodies within the site vicinity including surface water sampling stations on the EFPC as well as sites located along the unnamed tributaries to the EFPC (Figure 3.4.2-3). Seven sampling locations were originally selected to obtain data from the prominent water bodies within representative locations from surface waters located around the site. Two of the sample locations (SW-1 and SW-2) were eliminated after the first sampling event (summer 2021) due to changing project conditions, and SW-6 was dry or near dry with flow too low to sample during three of the four sampling events..

All other locations were sampled seasonally from summer 2021 through spring 2022.

A summary of the data collected during surface water quality monitoring is presented in Tables 3.4.2-3 through 3.4.2-6. Most of the parameters monitored were within the water quality standards for fish and aquatic life established by TDEC (Rule 0400-40-03-03) and USEPA (National Primary Drinking Water Regulations [NPDWR] maximum contaminant level [MCL] for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides), with the exception of elevated fecal coliform and total coliform levels in all four sampling events, which exceeded TDEC numeric criteria (TDEC, 2019). Additionally, alpha radiation particles exceeded the USEPA NPDWR standard of 15 pCi/L in the fall sample from SW-4 at a reported concentration of 22 pCi/L. The alpha radiation result from the sample collected previously in summer and in subsequent winter and spring samples from SW-4 were non-detect for alpha radiation (< 3 pCi/L).

EFPC surface water quality is monitored for metals and inorganic compounds annually as a part of the Oak Ridge Reservation integrated monitoring and surveillance program (TDEC, 2020a). A summary of water quality monitoring data from 2018-2019 monitoring can be found in Table 3.4.2-7. Uranium concentrations were three times the USEPA uranium MCL for drinking September 2022 3-49 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment water at one site in EFPC (TDEC, 2020a). Historic contamination of the creek with mercury and monomethylmercury has also been documented, both of which have implications for biotic exposure. Monitoring in 2018-2019 indicated that mercury levels in EFPC exceeded the 0.051

µg/L Tennessee recreation criterion at four locations (TDEC, 2020a). Nitrite and nitrate levels are also of concern on EFPC as these parameters exceeded the criterion of 1.22 mg/L.

Similarly, phosphorus concentrations at several of the EFPC sites also exceed the water quality criterion of 0.04 mg/L.

Mean total mercury concentration in fish tissue for redbreast sunfish (Lepomis auritus) and rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris) in 2019 was 0.52 µg/g (DOE, 2020). Bioaccumulation monitoring for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in EFPC in 2019 in redbreast sunfish and rock bass showed a mean total PCB concentration of 0.44 µg/g, well above the TDEC water quality criterion that triggers impairment for fish tissue concentration of 0.02 µg/g and the water quality criteria under the Tennessee recreation designated-use classification for PCBs of 0.00064 µg/L (DOE, 2020).

3.4.2.3.2 Impaired Waters and Total Maximum Daily Load Water quality standards are mandated by the CWA and define the goals for a waterbody by designating its uses, setting criteria to protect those uses, and establishing provisions to protect water quality from pollutants (40 CFR Part 131). The USEPA has passed this mandate to TDEC to establish water quality standards for surface waters in Tennessee. The CWA requires States to identify all waters where required pollution controls are not sufficient to attain or maintain applicable water quality standards and to establish priorities for the development of limits based on the severity of the pollution and the sensitivity of the established uses of those waters. States are required to submit reports to the USEPA. The term 303(d) list refers to the list of impaired and threatened streams and water bodies identified by the State.

The TDEC 303(d) report lists EFPC as impaired in both Roane County and the upstream segment of the creek in Anderson County. The 303(d) listing is related to elevated nutrients (e.g., phosphorus and nitrates), PCBs, sedimentation, and mercury. Sources for impairment are related to municipal and industrial point source discharges (TDEC, 2020b). Additionally, E. coli contamination related to sanitary sewage overflows has been documented in the creek (TDEC, 2020b). Surface water features such as streams, lakes, impoundments, and ponds, are absent from the site thus there are no impaired waterbodies within the HCS.

States are required to develop Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDLs) for 303(d)-listed waterbodies. The TMDL process establishes the maximum amount of a pollutant that a waterbody can assimilate without exceeding water quality standards and allocates this load among all contributing pollutant sources. The purpose of the TMDL is to establish water quality objectives required to reduce pollution from both point and nonpoint sources and to restore and maintain the quality of water resources. Regionally, four TMDL studies have been completed for the Lower Clinch River watershed: pathogens, siltation and habitat alteration, E. coli, and PCBs and chlordane (TDEC, 2022a). Sediment loading levels in EFPC during the TMDL study in 2006 averaged 567 lbs/ac/yr (635.5 kg/ha/yr), well above the target sediment load of 279 lbs/ac/yr (312.7 kg/ha/yr) (TDEC, 2006). Fecal coliform was found in EFPC and a total of 21 miles (33.7 km) were designated as impaired due to high level of pathogens in the 2005 study (TDEC, 2005a). Elevated fecal coli levels within EFPC were determined to be attributable to a collection system failure of the City of Oak Ridge sewage treatment plant. EFPC had a total of 21 miles (33.7 km) that were impaired due to presence of E. Coli in 2008-2013 water quality monitoring (TDEC, 2017).

September 2022 3-50 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment In 2005, TDEC reported that almost 25 percent of the Lower Clinch River Watersheds stream miles were listed as not supporting or partially supporting designated uses and 100 percent of the lakes in the watershed were not supporting their designated uses (TDEC, 2005b). As part of the States efforts to accomplish long-term nutrient reduction in the water resources, TDEC developed the Draft Tennessee Nutrient Reduction Framework in 2015 (TDEC, 2015). The framework is intended to guide permitting as well as nutrient reduction strategies for both point and nonpoint sources.

3.4.3 FLOODPLAINS A floodplain is the land area along a stream or river that is subjected to periodic flooding. The area subject to a one percent chance of flooding in any given year is normally called the 100-year floodplain. The area subject to a 0.2 percent chance of flooding in any given year is normally called the 500-year floodplain. A regulatory floodway is a regulatory tool normally associated with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) that refers to the channel of a river or other watercourse and the adjacent land areas that must be reserved to convey the 100-year flood without cumulatively increasing the water surface elevation more than a designated height.

As shown in Figure 3.4.2-1 (FEMA, 2007), the HCS is located within a valley between two parallel ridges. The EFPC flows southwesterly through the valley and to the south of the HCS.

The NFIP Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) depicting floodplain mapping within and in the vicinity of the HCS is presented on Figure 3.4.3-1. The FIRM map indicates that the HCS and the area surrounding the site are Zone X (unshaded), which is defined as areas determined to be outside of the 0.2 percent annual chance floodplain. Near the vicinity of the site, only the EFPC and Poplar Creek have NFIP-mapped floodplains. An NFIP regulatory floodway is also defined on the EFPC. However, detailed mapping of EFPC on the FIRM ends upstream of the HCS at the Highway 95 crossing of EFPC. The EFPC channel downstream of the detailed study area and adjacent to the HCS is encompassed by the Zone X (unshaded) area. However, the FIRM does not appear to accurately depict the EFPC 100-year or 500-year floodplain through this Zone X (unshaded) area near the HCS (i.e., no floodplain shown along this segment of the EFPC channel).

A floodplain study for EFPC was completed by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) in 1991.

The TVA floodplain study demonstrates that the maximum 100-year flood elevation along EFPC in the vicinity of the HCS is 764.9 ft. (233.1 m) mean sea level at Mile 2.94 (KM 4.73) upstream of the HCS, and 759.9 ft. (231.6 m) at Mile 2.14 (KM 3.44) in the vicinity of the TRISO-X FFF structures on the HCS (Figure 3.4.3-2). A tabulation of water surface elevations at hydraulic model cross sections is provided in that report, but no mapping of the floodplain was provided.

The USACE subsequently obtained the TVA floodplain information for EFPC and created EFPC floodplain maps and a report (USACE,1992). The TVA study data was also recently used to create a floodplain map for EFPC for another project located near the HCS (Leidos, 2020)

(Figure 3.4.3-3). The map shows EFPC backwater flood elevations extending upstream (north) along a tributary to EFPC that is located along the eastern boundary of the HCS. However, the map does not show the EFPC 100-year or 500-year floodplain extending onto the HCS. At the southern corner of the HCS, immediately west of the intersection of Novus Drive and Renovare Boulevard, the lowest ground elevation along the HCS boundary is approximately 760 ft. (231.6 m) and the TVA 100-year flood elevation is approximately 759.4 ft. (231.5 m) mean sea level (Mile 1.92 (KM 3.1) of the hydraulic model) .

September 2022 3-51 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.4.4 WETLANDS As defined in 33 CFR 328.3, wetlands are those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or ground water at a frequency and duration sufficient to support a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Types of wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands and wetland fringe areas can also be found along the edges of many watercourses and impounded waters (both natural and man-made). Wetland habitat provides valuable public benefits including flood storage, erosion control, water quality improvement, wildlife habitat, and recreation opportunities [33 CFR 328.39(b)].

Wetlands located within the HCS may potentially be regulated under Section 404 and 401 of the CWA (33 USC 1251). The USACE regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. (WOTUS), including wetlands, under the CWA Section 404 Permit program (33 US Code 1344). In Tennessee, physical alterations to properties of waters of the State require an Aquatic Resource Alteration Permit (ARAP) or a Section 401 Water Quality Certification, both of which are administered by TDEC.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), through its online Wetland Mapper tool, produces the National Wetland Inventory (NWI). NWI mapping within the HCS includes a very small amount of freshwater forested wetland and a riverine feature located in the northeast portion of the HCS, north of Renovare Boulevard (Table 3.4.4-1 and Figure 3.4.4-1). Additionally, NWI and USGS mapping indicated a blueline stream entering HCS from the northwest, turning to the southwest and flowing across the central part of the site. NWI features mapped within the 3-mi.

(4.8-km) vicinity include lacustrine, riverine, palustrine scrub-shrub, palustrine forested, and open water wetlands as summarized in Table 3.4.4-1 (USFWS, 2022).

As TDEC regulates watercourses based on Tennessee-specific regulations, potential WOTUS were also evaluated based on TDEC guidance. At the State-level, watercourses are classified as either a stream or WWC. TDEC defines a WWC as man-made or natural watercourses, including natural watercourses that have been modified by channelization: that flow only in direct response to precipitation runoff in their immediate locality; whose channels are at all times above the ground water table; that are not suitable for drinking water supplies; and in which hydrological and biological analyses indicate that, under normal weather conditions, due to naturally occurring ephemeral or low flow there is not sufficient water to support fish, or multiple populations of obligate lotic aquatic organisms whose life cycle includes an aquatic phase of at least two months [TDEC Rule 0400-40-03-.05(9)]. A stream is simply defined as a surface water that is not a wet weather conveyance [TDEC Rule 0400-4-3-.04(20)].

The HCS was reviewed in the field for the presence of potential wetlands, including the area of an NWI-mapped forested wetland; however, wetlands were not identified. This mapped stream feature was reviewed in the field and was determined to be a vegetated swale lacking wetland, stream, or WWC characteristics (Figure 3.4.4-2).

September 2022 3-52 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-1 Summary of Observation Well Installation Details and Monitoring Program TOC In-situ Water-Level Northing Easting Total Screen Elevation Depth Length Target Chemical Hydraulic Well ID US feet, US feet, US feet, Aquifer Conductivity NAD83 NAD83 NAD83 ft. bgs feet Monitoring Testing Testing GW-1 Upper 597,860.10 2,451,011.18 841.55 75.2 10 x x x Bedrock GW-2 Upper 596,811.83 2,452,480.08 787.11 42.4 10 x x x Bedrock GW-1R Upper 597,641.48 2,450,984.06 826.70 80.0 15 x x Bedrock GW-3 Upper 596,131.16 2,449,329.48 802.75 49.0 10 x x x Bedrock GW-4 Upper 595,321.09 2,450,833.61 769.72 39.0 10 x x x Bedrock GW-5 Upper 593,948.01 2,450,147.20 784.23 65.0 10 x Bedrock GW-6 Upper 593,281.51 2,449,409.50 768.17 47.0 10 x Bedrock ID - Identification TOC - top of casing Ft. bgs - feet below ground surface Survey vertical datum: North America Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD88)

September 2022 3-53 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-2 (Sheet 1 of 3)

Summary of Observation Well Groundwater Levels Ground Water TOC Elevation Date Depth to Water Well ID Elevation (ft.

(ft. NAVD88) Measured (ft. btoc)

NAVD88)

GW-1 841.55 9/16/2021 56.68 748.87 10/26/2021 47.44 794.11 11/17/2021 42.89 798.66 12/16/2021 44.85 796.7 1/12/2022 34.69 806.86 2/28/2022 31.25 810.30 3/25/2022 38.33 803.22 4/22/2022 36.63 804.92 5/23/2022 39.21 802.34 6/16/2022 45.69 795.86 7/26/2022 44.94 796.61 8/8/2022 43.01 798.54 GW-1R 826.70 2/28/2022 9.76 816.94 3/25/2022 28.64 798.06 4/22/2022 26.91 799.79 5/24/2022 46.40 780.30 6/16/2022 51.61 775.09 7/26/2022 45.84 780.86 8/8/2022 39.83 786.87 GW-2 787.11 9/15/2021 22.74 764.37 10/26/2021 23.09 764.02 11/19/2021 22.6 764.51 12/16/2021 22.07 765.04 1/12/2022 21.96 765.15 2/28/2022 21.61 765.5 3/25/2022 21.84 765.27 4/22/2022 21.7 765.41 5/31/2022 21.72 765.39 6/16/2022 21.53 765.58 7/26/2022 21.39 765.72 8/8/2022 21.43 765.68 September 2022 3-54 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-2 (Sheet 2 of 3)

Summary of Observation Well Groundwater Levels Ground Water TOC Elevation Date Depth to Water Well ID Elevation (ft.

(ft. NAVD88) Measured (ft. btoc)

NAVD88)

GW-3 802.75 9/14/2021 37.79 764.96 10/26/2021 38.57 764.18 11/17/2021 41.36 761.39 12/16/2021 42.19 760.56 1/12/2022 18.82 783.93 2/28/2022 12.64 790.11 3/25/2022 23.97 778.78 4/22/2022 25.64 777.11 5/25/2022 39.40 763.35 6/16/2022 41.34 761.41 7/26/2022 43.44 759.31 8/8/2022 38.26 764.49 GW-4 769.72 9/16/2021 13.26 756.46 10/26/2021 12.7 757.02 11/18/2021 13.2 756.52 12/16/2021 12.26 757.46 1/12/2022 10.48 759.24 2/28/2022 9.58 760.14 3/25/2022 11.81 757.91 4/22/2022 12.14 757.58 5/25/2022 12.73 756.99 6/16/2022 13.32 756.4 7/26/2022 11.18 758.54 8/8/2022 12.47 757.25 GW-5 784.23 9/17/2021 24.95 759.28 10/26/2021 24.27 759.96 11/19/2021 24.41 759.82 12/16/2021 24.24 759.99 1/12/2022 23.90 760.33 2/28/2022 23.46 760.77 3/25/2022 24.06 760.17 4/22/2022 24.11 760.12 6/16/2022 24.34 759.89 7/26/2022 24.94 759.29 8/8/2022 24.07 760.16 September 2022 3-55 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-2 (Sheet 3 of 3)

Summary of Observation Well Groundwater Levels Ground Water TOC Elevation Date Depth to Water Well ID Elevation (ft.

(ft. NAVD88) Measured (ft. btoc)

NAVD88)

GW-6 768.17 9/20/2021 44.37 723.8 10/26/2021 39.33 728.84 11/19/2021 34.69 733.48 12/16/2021 30.32 737.85 1/12/2022 27.36 740.81 2/28/2022 25.34 742.83 3/25/2022 25.14 743.03 4/22/2022 25.28 742.89 6/16/2022 25.98 742.19 7/26/2022 25.48 742.69 8/8/2022 26.18 741.99 btoc - below top of casing ft. - feet ID - Identification TOC - Top of Casing Survey vertical datum: North America Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD88)

September 2022 3-56 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-3 Groundwater Parameters Associated with the Horizon Center Site Hydraulic Hydraulic Storativity Storativity Conductivity Conductivity Geometric Range Well ID Range Geometric Average Average Low High Low High (ft/d) (ft/d) (ft/d) (cm/sec) (ft3/ft3) (ft3/ft3) (ft3/ft3)

GW-1 3.25E-04 2.19E-03 1.1E-03 3.8E-07 8.84E-11 1.00E-08 1.5E-09 GW-2 8.43E-05 7.72E-03 2.2E-03 7.6E-07 5.04E-04 1.00E-01 3.3E-04 GW-3 1.86E-03 6.11E-03 3.7E-03 1.3E-06 9.23E-11 1.00E-10 9.6E-11 GW-4 3.53E+00 1.59E+01 6.27E+00 2.2E-03 3.36E-07 5.81E-03 7.9E-05 GW-5 1.54E-01 4.54E-01 2.3E-01 8.1E-05 8.33E-07 4.66E-04 8.1E-05 All analyses performed using AQTESOLV-provided solutions (Cooper, Bredehoeft, Papadopoulos; KGS; Bouwer-Rice; &

Hvorslev solution methods) ft2/d = feet squared per day ft/d = feet per day cm/sec = centimeters per second ft3/ft3 = cubic feet per cubic feet September 2022 3-57 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-4 (Sheet 1 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Summer 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-5 GW-5 Sample Date: 9/16/2021 9/15/2021 9/14/2021 9/16/2021 9/17/2021 9/17/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Alkalinity, Total:

Alkalinity, Total (as A2320 mg/L NA 280 190 350 390 370 CaCO3)

A2320 Carbon dioxide mg/L NA 7.9 < 5.0 U 13 11 9.4 Anions:

E300 Chloride mg/L NA 7.6 9.8 1.9 1.9 2 E300 Fluoride mg/L 4 NA 0.38 0.53 0.15 0.35 0.33 E300 Sulfate mg/L NA 23 35 7.2 37 37 Biochemical Oxygen Demand:

Biochemical Oxygen A5210B mg/L NA 8.2 < 2.0 U 2.5 < 2.0 U < 2.0 U Demand (BOD)

Chemical Oxygen Demand:

Chemical Oxygen A5220D mg/L NA < 10 U 5.3 JQ < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U Demand (COD)

Coliform:

CD137MPN Fecal Coliform mpn/mL NA 5.2 < 1.0 U 178.5 JL < 1.0 U < 1.0 U CD137MPN Total Coliforms mpn/mL NA 2419.6 2419.6 2419.6 195.6 344.8 J September 2022 3-58 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-4 (Sheet 2 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Summer 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-5 GW-5 Sample Date: 9/16/2021 9/15/2021 9/14/2021 9/16/2021 9/17/2021 9/17/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Cyanide:

E1677 Cyanide, Free mg/L 0.2 0.2 NA < 0.006 U < 0.006 U < 0.006 U < 0.02 U < 0.02 U Field Parameters:

E360.1 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 1.4 1.12 1.02 0.28 0.17 0.17 Oxidation Reduction A2580A mV 122.3 100.5 149.8 1.2 -90 -90 Potential E150.1 pH pH units 7.69 7.27 7.6 6.96 7.05 7.05 E120.1 Specific Conductance mS/cm 0.377 0.61 0.393 0.65 0.75 0.75 E170.1 Temperature deg C 24.5 25.1 21.6 16.5 15.7 15.7 E180.1 Turbidity NTU 125 155 6.85 4.04 3.98 3.98 Hardness:

Hardness, Total as A2340 mg/L NA 280 190 370 330 330 CaCO3 Metals, Total:

E200.7 Aluminum ug/L NA 310 51 JQ < 200 U < 200 U < 200 U E200.8 Antimony ug/L 6 6 NA 1.6 JQ < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U E200.8 Arsenic ug/L 10 10 NA < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U E200.7 Barium ug/L 2000 2000 NA 24 32 41 78 75 September 2022 3-59 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-4 (Sheet 3 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Summer 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-5 GW-5 Sample Date: 9/16/2021 9/15/2021 9/14/2021 9/16/2021 9/17/2021 9/17/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.7 Beryllium ug/L 4 4 NA < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U E200.7 Boron ug/L NA 120 B < 100 U < 100 U 520 B 510 B E200.8 Cadmium ug/L 5 5 NA < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U E200.7 Calcium ug/L NA 82000 40000 110000 57000 56000 E200.7 Chromium ug/L 100 NA < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Cobalt ug/L NA < 10 U < 10 U 2.5 JQ < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Copper ug/L NA < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U E200.7 Iron ug/L NA 280 44 JQ 110 B 110 130 E200.8 Lead ug/L NA < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Magnesium ug/L NA 16000 20000 15000 39000 38000 E200.7 Manganese ug/L NA 230 49 1800 22 24 E245.1 Mercury ug/L 2 2 NA < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U E200.7 Nickel ug/L 100 NA 3.7 JQ < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U E200.7 Potassium ug/L NA 3900 2300 1200 11000 11000 E200.8 Selenium ug/L 50 50 NA < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Silver ug/L NA < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Sodium ug/L NA 34000 24000 4000 38000 37000 E200.8 Thallium ug/L 2 2 NA < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U September 2022 3-60 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-4 (Sheet 4 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Summer 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-5 GW-5 Sample Date: 9/16/2021 9/15/2021 9/14/2021 9/16/2021 9/17/2021 9/17/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.8 Uranium ug/L 30 NA 0.00069 JQ 0.0011 0.00057 JQ < 0.001 U < 0.001 U E200.7 Vanadium ug/L NA 1.2 JQ 1.2 JQ 1.5 JQ 1.3 JQ < 10 U E200.7 Zinc ug/L NA < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U Minerals, Dissolved:

E200.7 Quartz ug/L NA 7800 B 11000 B 8500 B 14000 13000 E200.7 Silicon ug/L NA 3600 B 5000 B 4000 B 6400 6200 Nitrogen Series:

SM4500-Ammonia mg/L NA 0.21 B < 0.25 U < 0.25 U 0.9 B 0.95 B NH3G September 2022 3-61 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-4 (Sheet 5 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Summer 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-5 GW-5 Sample Date: 9/16/2021 9/15/2021 9/14/2021 9/16/2021 9/17/2021 9/17/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E300 Nitrogen, Nitrate mg/L 10 10 NA < 0.05 U 0.034 JQ < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U E300 Nitrogen, Nitrite mg/L 1 1 NA < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U CALC Nitrogen, Organic mg/L NA 1.2 B 0.21 B 0.22 B 0.7 B 0.35 B E351.2 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L NA 1.4 B 0.21 B 0.22 B 1.6 B 1.3 B Orthophosphate:

SM4500-PF Phosphate as P, Ortho mg/L < 0.05 U 0.02 JQ < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U Phosphorus E365.4 Phosphorus, Total mg/L NA 0.044 B < 0.1 U < 0.1 U 0.062 B 0.093 B Radioactivity:

E900 Alpha Radiation Particles pCi/L 15 NA < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 UL < 3.0 U < 3.0 U Beta Particles & Photon E900 pCi/L 1719(c) NA 3.72 B 5.03 0.555 B 3.67 J 7.57 J Emitters Residue Series:

A2540C Total Dissolved Solids mg/L NA 300 220 340 390 380 A2540D Total Suspended Solids mg/L NA 180 7.7 < 2.5 U 7.4 7 September 2022 3-62 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-4 (Sheet 6 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Summer 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-5 GW-5 Sample Date: 9/16/2021 9/15/2021 9/14/2021 9/16/2021 9/17/2021 9/17/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Notes:

a) Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Criteria for Fish and Aquatic Life Water Use, Numeric Criteria of Rule 0400-40-03-.03 subparagraph (3) b) USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides c) USEPA NPDWR MCL for Beta Particles & Photon Emitters is based on the specific radionuclide(s) concentration(s) in pCi/L units that produce a 4 millirem per year dose.

The average concentration for listed radionuclides resulting in a 4 millirem per year dose is 1719 pCi/L and the actual site specific concentration could vary significantly depending on the radionuclide deg C = degrees Celsius mg/L = milligrams per liter mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter mpn/mL = most probable number per milliliter mS/cm = millisiemens per centimeter mV = millivolts NTU = nephelometric turbidity unit pCi/L = picocuries per liter ug/L = micrograms per liter Data Qualifier Definitions:

B = The analyte was detected, estimated, blank contamination J = The analyte was detected, estimated due to QC criteria JH = Estimated, may be biased high JL = Estimated, may be biased low JQ = Value listed is estimated, reported between the Method Detection Limit (MDL) and the Reporting Limit (RL)

UJ = The analyte was not detected; however, the result is estimated due to discrepancies in meeting certain analyte-specific quality control criteria UL = The analyte was not detected; however, the reported value may be biased low U = Not Detected above the Reporting Limit shown September 2022 3-63 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-5 (Sheet 1 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Fall 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 11/17/2021 11/19/2021 11/17/2021 11/18/2021 11/18/2021 Sample Date: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Alkalinity, Total:

A2320 Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) mg/L 180 290 210 380 380 A2320 Carbon dioxide mg/L < 5.0 U 8.1 < 5.0 U 22 26 Anions:

E300 Chloride mg/L 7.1 8.0 31 1.7 1.5 E300 Fluoride mg/L 4 0.4 0.48 0.4 0.12 0.1 E300 Sulfate mg/L 10 21 33 12 5.3 Biochemical Oxygen Demand:

Biochemical Oxygen Demand A5210B mg/L 4.3 53 3.3 < 2.0 U < 2.0 U (BOD)

Chemical Oxygen Demand:

Chemical Oxygen Demand A5220D mg/L 8.6 JQ 20 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U (COD)

Coliform:

CD137MPN Fecal Coliform mpn/mL < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U 18.5 6.3 CD137MPN Total Coliforms mpn/mL 178.9 2419.6 613.1 238.2 290.9 September 2022 3-64 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-5 (Sheet 2 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Fall 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 11/17/2021 11/19/2021 11/17/2021 11/18/2021 11/18/2021 Sample Date: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Cyanide:

E1677 Cyanide, Free mg/L 0.2 0.2 < 0.006 U < 0.006 U U U U 0.006 0.006 0.006 Field Parameters:

E360.1 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 2.32 0.36 1.86 0.41 0.41 A2580A Oxidation Reduction Potential mV 89.9 -47.5 27.6 33.8 33.8 E150.1 pH pH units 7.56 7.56 7.65 7.0 7.0 E120.1 Specific Conductance mS/cm 0.35 0.59 0.52 0.66 0.66 E170.1 Temperature deg C 21.3 13.5 22.6 15.9 15.9 E180.1 Turbidity NTU 33 30.9 46.5 4.51 4.51 Hardness:

A2340 Hardness, Total as CaCO3 mg/L 290 250 370 580 590 Metals, Total:

E200.7 Aluminum ug/L 73 JQ 74 JQ 76 JQ < 200 U < 200 U E200.8 Antimony ug/L 6 6 1.1 JQ 5.5 < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U E200.8 Arsenic ug/L 10 10 < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U September 2022 3-65 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-5 (Sheet 3 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Fall 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 11/17/2021 11/19/2021 11/17/2021 11/18/2021 11/18/2021 Sample Date: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.7 Barium ug/L 2000 2000 13 20 40 28 25 E200.7 Beryllium ug/L 4 4 0.15 JQ < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U E200.7 Boron ug/L 140 190 < 100 U < 100 U < 100 U E200.8 Cadmium ug/L 5 5 < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U 11000 11000 E200.7 Calcium ug/L 42000 67000 49000 0 0 E200.7 Chromium ug/L 100 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U J J E200.7 Cobalt ug/L < 10 U 1.4 JQ < 10 U 2.2 2.4 Q Q E200.7 Copper ug/L < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U E200.7 Iron ug/L 120 1100 96 380 350 E200.8 Lead ug/L < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Magnesium ug/L 18000 14000 27000 16000 16000 E200.7 Manganese ug/L 31 270 160 1200 1200 E245.1 Mercury ug/L 2 2 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U E200.7 Nickel ug/L 100 < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U E200.7 Potassium ug/L 3400 5400 2200 1300 1200 September 2022 3-66 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-5 (Sheet 4 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Fall 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 11/17/2021 11/19/2021 11/17/2021 11/18/2021 11/18/2021 Sample Date: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.8 Selenium ug/L 50 50 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Silver ug/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Sodium ug/L 7600 46000 22000 1700 1600 E200.8 Thallium ug/L 2 2 < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U E200.8 Uranium ug/L 30 0.0033 0.00079 JQ 0.001 U U 0.001 0.001 E200.7 Vanadium ug/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Zinc ug/L < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U Minerals, Dissolved:

E200.7 Quartz mg/L 6800 8300 12000 8300 8400 E200.7 Silicon mg/L 3200 3900 5500 3900 3900 Nitrogen Series:

SM4500-NH3G Ammonia mg/L 0.26 0.25 JQ < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U E300 Nitrogen, Nitrate mg/L 10 10 < 0.05 U < 0.05 U 0.07 < 0.05 U < 0.05 U E300 Nitrogen, Nitrite mg/L 1 1 0.029 JQ < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U CALC Nitrogen, Organic mg/L 0.3 0.29 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U September 2022 3-67 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-5 (Sheet 5 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Fall 2021 Location ID: GW-1 GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 11/17/2021 11/19/2021 11/17/2021 11/18/2021 11/18/2021 Sample Date: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

J E351.2 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.56 0.54 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U 0.11 Q

Orthophosphate:

J SM4500-PF Phosphate as P, Ortho mg/L < 0.05 U < 0.05 U 0.038 < 0.05 U < 0.05 U Q

Phosphorus:

E365.4 Phosphorus, Total mg/L < 0.1 U < 0.1 U < 0.1 U < 0.1 U < 0.1 U Radioactivity:

E900 Alpha radiation particles pCi/L 15 4.91 < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U 9.74 Beta Particles & Photon E900 pCi/L 1719 (C) 2.96 4.86 1.63 < 4.0 U 4.55 Emitters Residue Series:

A2540C Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) mg/L 160 330 260 360 350 A2540D Total Suspended Solids (TSS) mg/L 78 21 21 4.4 3.2 September 2022 3-68 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-5 (Sheet 6 of 6)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Fall 2021 Notes:

a) Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Criteria for Fish and Aquatic Life Water Use, Numeric Criteria of Rule 0400-40-03-.03 subparagraph (3) b) USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides c) USEPA NPDWR MCL for Beta Particles & Photon Emitters is based on the specific radionuclide(s) concentration(s) in pCi/L units that produce a 4 millirem per year dose. The average concentration for listed radionuclides resulting in a 4 millirem per year dose is 1719 pCi/L and the actual site specific concentration could vary significantly depending on the radionuclide deg C = degrees Celsius mg/L = milligrams per liter mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter mpn/mL = most probable number per milliliter mS/cm = millisiemens per centimeter mV = millivolts NTU = nephelometric turbidity unit pCi/L = picocuries per liter ug/L = micrograms per liter Data Qualifier Definitions:

B = The analyte was detected, estimated, blank contamination J = The analyte was detected, estimated due to QC criteria JH = Estimated, may be biased high JL = Estimated, may be biased low JQ = Value listed is estimated, reported between the Method Detection Limit (MDL) and the Reporting Limit (RL)

UJ = The analyte was not detected; however, the result is estimated due to discrepancies in meeting certain analyte-specific quality control criteria UL = The analyte was not detected; however, the reported value may be biased low U = Not Detected above the Reporting Limit shown September 2022 3-69 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-6 (Sheet 1 of 5)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Winter 2021/2022 Location ID: GW-1 GW-1R GW-1R GW-1R GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 Sample Date: 2/28/2022 3/3/2022 3/3/2022 3/11/2022 3/2/2022 3/4/2022 3/3/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample Sample Sample TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Alkalinity, Total:

SM2320B Alkalinity, Total mg/L 160 130 130 NA 320 200 340 (as CaCO3)

SM2320B Carbon dioxide mg/L < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U NA 11 6.6 16 Anions:

E300.0 Chloride mg/L 7.9 1.1 1.1 NA 3.4 55 1.4 E300.0 Fluoride mg/L 4 0.47 0.088 JQ 0.092 JQ NA 0.53 0.37 0.15 E300.0 Sulfate mg/L 7.6 0.97 JQ 1.0 NA 14 55 5.9 Biochemical Oxygen Demand:

SM5210B Biochemical mg/L 8.2 B 4.6 JB 6.5 JB 3.5 JB 8.8 JB 7.3 B < 2.0 U Oxygen Demand (BOD)

Chemical Oxygen Demand:

SM5220D Chemical mg/L 8.7 JQ < 10 U < 10 U NA 7.7 JQ < 10 U < 10 U Oxygen Demand (COD)

Coliform:

CD137MPN Fecal Coliform mpn/mL < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U NA < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U CD137MPN Total Coliforms mpn/mL 25.3 24.1 J 396.1 J NA 52.1 75.4 13.2 J H

Cyanide:

E1677 Cyanide, Free mg/L 0.2 0.2 < 0.002 U 0.0094 JQ < 0.02 U NA <0.002 U < U 0.0015 J 0.002 Q Field Parameters:

Dissolved mg/L 3.98 4.43 4.43 4.31 1.86 1.03 0.32 E360.1 Oxygen September 2022 3-70 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-6 (Sheet 2 of 5)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Winter 2021/2022 Location ID: GW-1 GW-1R GW-1R GW-1R GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 3/3/202 Sample Date:

2/28/2022 3/3/2022 3/3/2022 3/11/2022 3/2/2022 3/4/2022 2 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample Sample Sample TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Oxidation mV -105 52.9 52.9 92.2 -80.8 -9.6 25.7 SM2580A Reduction Potential E150.1 pH pH units 7.6 7.71 7.71 7.67 7.07 7.59 6.79 Specific ms/cm 0.332 0.266 0.266 0.24 0.66 0.7 0.65 E120.1 Conductance 2 E170.1 Temperature deg C 16.2 22.9 22.9 19 16.3 19.8 16.8 E180.1 Turbidity NTU 3.56 31.3 31.3 7.21 66.1 3.23 2.3 Hardness:

SM2340C Hardness, Total mg/L 160 140 130 NA 260 260 630 as CaCO3 Metals, Total:

E200.7 Aluminum ug/L < 200 U 120 JQ 110 JQ NA 1900 < 200 U < 200 U E200.8 Antimony ug/L 6 6 < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U NA 0.86 JQ < 5.0 U < 5.0 U E200.8 Arsenic ug/L 10 10 < 3.0 U 0.9 JQ 0.92 JQ NA 1.3 JQ < 3.0 U < 3.0 U E200.7 Barium ug/L 2000 2000 19 9.8 JQ 9.4 JQ NA 32 62 28 E200.7 Beryllium ug/L 4 4 < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U NA < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U E200.7 Boron ug/L 27 JQ < 100 U < 100 U NA 170 < 100 U < 100 U E200.8 Cadmium ug/L 5 5 < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U NA < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U E200.7 Calcium ug/L 34000 30000 31000 NA 81000 59000 120000 E200.7 Chromium ug/L 100 < 10 U 1.1 JQ 1.4 JQ NA 4.1 JQ < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Cobalt ug/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U NA < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Copper ug/L < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U NA < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U E200.7 Iron ug/L 410 51 JQ 52 JQ NA 5300 31 JQ 74 J Q

September 2022 3-71 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-6 (Sheet 3 of 5)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Winter 2021/2022 Location ID: GW-1 GW-1R GW-1R GW-1R GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 Sample Date: 2/28/2022 3/3/2022 3/3/2022 3/11/2022 3/2/2022 3/4/2022 3/3/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample Sample Sample E200.8 Lead ug/L < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U NA 0.82 B < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Magnesium ug/L 17000 15000 16000 NA 20000 31000 18000 E200.7 Manganese ug/L 150 4.0 JQ 1.5 JQ NA 290 51 680 E245.1 Mercury ug/L 2 2 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U NA < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U E200.7 Nickel ug/L 100 < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U NA < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U E200.7 Potassium ug/L 2800 730 JQ 1400 B NA 4600 4800 1400 B E200.8 Selenium ug/L 50 50 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U NA < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Silver ug/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U NA < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Sodium ug/L 7500 950 JQ 1100 JQ NA 40000 40000 2200 E200.8 Thallium ug/L 2 2 < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U NA < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U E200.8 Uranium mg/L 30 0.003 0.0006 JQ 0.000 JQ NA 0.0011 0.001 <0.00 U 1 4 59 2 1 E200.7 Vanadium ug/L < 10 U 1.0 JQ 1.2 JQ NA 2.4 JQ 1.1 JQ < 10 U E200.7 Zinc ug/L < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U NA < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U Minerals, Dissolved:

E200.7 Quartz ug/L 6900 7400 7700 NA 9200 11000 8300 E200.7 Silicon ug/L 3200 3400 3600 NA 4300 5300 3900 Nitrogen Series:

SM4500- Ammonia mg/L 0.11 JQ < 0.25 U 0.12 JQ NA 0.26 < U < U NH3G 0.25 0.25 E300.0 Nitrogen, nitrate mg/L 10 10 < U 0.08 J 0.088 J 0.11 < 0.05 U 0.89 < U 0.05 0.05 E300.0 Nitrogen, nitrite mg/L 1 1 < U < 0.05 UJ < UJ <0.0 U < 0.05 U < U < U 0.05 0.05 5 0.05 0.05 CALC Nitrogen, mg/L 0.23 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U NA < 0.2 U 0.31 < 0.2 U Organic E351.2 Total Kjeldahl mg/L 0.34 0.18 JQ 0.19 JQ NA 0.32 0.31 B < 0.2 U Nitrogen September 2022 3-72 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-6 (Sheet 4 of 5)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Winter 2021/2022 Location ID: GW-1 GW-1R GW-1R GW-1R GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 Sample Date: 2/28/2022 3/3/2022 3/3/2022 3/11/2022 3/2/2022 3/4/2022 3/3/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample Sample Sample TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Orthophosphate:

SM4500-PF Phosphate as P, mg/L < 0.05 U < 0.05 UJ < 0.05 UJ 0.02 JQ < 0.5 U < 0.05 U < U Ortho 1 0.05 Phosphorus:

E365.4 Phosphorus, mg/L < 0.1 U 0.14 < 0.1 U NA 0.062 JQ 0.083 B < 0.1 U Total Radioactivity:

E900.0 Alpha radiation pCi/L 15 < 3.0 U 3.68 JH < 3.0 U NA < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U particles E900.0 Beta Particles & pCi/L 1,7193 3.03 JQ 0.989 JQ 2.24 JQ NA < 4.0 U 4.81 < 4.0 U Photon Emitters J Residue Series:

SM2540C Total Dissolved mg/L 170 120 110 NA 330 380 320 Solids (TDS)

SM2540D Total mg/L 3.1 86 J 14 J NA 160 < 2.5 U 3.1 Suspended Solids (TSS)

Notes:

a) Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Criteria for Fish and Aquatic Life Water Use, Numeric Criteria of Rule 0400-40-03-.03 subparagraph (3) b) USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides c) USEPA NPDWR MCL for Beta Particles & Photon Emitters is based on the specific radionuclide(s) concentration(s) in pCi/L units that produce a 4 millirem per year dose. The average concentration for listed radionuclides resulting in a 4 millirem per year dose is 1,719 pCi/L and the actual site specific concentration could vary significantly depending on the radionuclide deg C = degrees Celsius mg/L = milligrams per liter mpn/mL = most probable number per milliliter ms/cm = millisiemens per centimeter mV = millivolts NTU = nephelometric turbidity unit pCi/L = picocuries per liter ug/L = micrograms per liter September 2022 3-73 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-6 (Sheet 5 of 5)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Winter 2021/2022 Data Qualifier Definitions:

B = Blank contamination, detected above the Reporting Limit NA = Not Analyzed J = Detected, estimated due to QC criteria U = Undetected JB = Estimated due to blank contamination, detected below the Reporting Limit UJ = Not detected, estimated due to discrepancies in meeting certain analyte-specific JH = Estimated, may be biased high quality control criteria JQ = Estimated, reported between the Method Detection Limit and the Reporting Limit < = Not Detected above the Reporting Limit shown September 2022 3-74 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-7 (Sheet 1 of 4)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Spring 2022 Location ID: GW-1 GW-1R GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/31/2022 5/25/2022 5/25/2022 5/25/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Alkalinity, Total:

SM2320B Alkalinity, Total (as mg/L 150 130 310 210 340 340 CaCO3)

SM2320B Carbon dioxide mg/L 7.2 < 5.0 U 8.1 5.0 41 38 Anions:

E300.0 Chloride mg/L 7.6 0.75 3.2 5.3 1.5 1.5 E300.0 Fluoride mg/L 4 0.46 0.093 JQ 0.59 0.60 0.18 0.17 E300.0 Sulfate mg/L 6.0 0.48 JQ 13 27 5.5 5.6 Biochemical Oxygen Demand:

SM5210B Biochemical Oxygen mg/L 12 2.3 3.6 3.3 < 2.0 U < 2.0 U Demand (BOD)

Chemical Oxygen Demand:

SM5220D Chemical Oxygen mg/L 8.2 JQ < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U Demand (COD)

Coliform:

CD137MPN Fecal Coliform mpn/mL < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U 3.1 CD137MPN Total Coliforms mpn/mL 5.1 < 1.0 U 5.2 < 1.0 U 16.1 91 Cyanide:

E1677 Cyanide, Free mg/L 0.2 0.2 <0.002 U <0.0020 U <0.0020 U <0.0020 U 0.00079 JQ <0.0020 U 0

Field Parameters:

E360.1 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 0.78 4.96 1.87 4.49 0.14 0.14 Oxidation Reduction mV 99.4 111.4 -43.1 116.4 4.5 4.5 SM2580A Potential E150.1 pH pH units 7.81 7.92 7.48 7.63 6.93 6.93 E120.1 Specific Conductance mS/cm 0.313 0.221 0.62 0.54 0.67 0.67 E170.1 Temperature deg C 19.5 21.2 26.4 22.4 17.3 17.3 E180.1 Turbidity NTU 4.41 15.6 28.3 48.2 3.15 3.15 September 2022 3-75 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-7 (Sheet 2 of 4)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Spring 2022 Location ID: GW-1 GW-1R GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/31/2022 5/25/2022 5/25/2022 5/25/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Hardness:

SM2340C Hardness, Total as mg/L 170 150 240 220 390 390 CaCO3 Metals, Total:

E200.7 Aluminum ug/L < 200 U < 200 U 370 57 JQ < 200 U < 200 U E200.8 Antimony ug/L 6 6 < 5.0 U < 5.0 U 0.95 JQ < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U E200.8 Arsenic ug/L 10 10 < 3.0 U 1.0 JQ < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U E200.7 Barium ug/L 2000 2000 20 10 33 39 21 24 E200.7 Beryllium ug/L 4 4 < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U E200.7 Boron ug/L 32 JQ < 100 U 190 < 100 U < 100 U < 100 U E200.8 Cadmium ug/L 5 5 < 0.50 U < 0.50 U < 0.50 U < 0.50 U < 0.50 U < 0.50 U E200.7 Calcium ug/L 32000 28000 65000 39000 110000 110000 E200.7 Chromium ug/L 100 < 10 U < 10 U 1.2 JQ 1.5 JQ < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Cobalt ug/L 1.4 JQ < 10 U 1.5 JQ < 10 U 1.7 JQ < 10 U E200.7 Copper ug/L < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U E200.7 Iron ug/L 130 < 100 U 2000 22 JQ 160 210 E200.8 Lead ug/L < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Magnesium ug/L 16000 14000 17000 22000 16000 16000 E200.7 Manganese ug/L 48 < 10 U 180 3.0 JQ 640 700 E245.1 Mercury ug/L 2 2 < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U E200.7 Nickel ug/L 100 < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U E200.7 Potassium ug/L 2600 820 JQ 4900 1800 930 JQ 970 JQ E200.8 Selenium ug/L 50 50 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Silver ug/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Sodium ug/L 6500 660 JQ 48000 26000 1800 JQ 1700 JQ September 2022 3-76 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-7 (Sheet 3 of 4)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Spring 2022 Location ID: GW-1 GW-1R GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/31/2022 5/25/2022 5/25/2022 5/25/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.8 Thallium ug/L 2 2 < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U E200.8 Uranium mg/L 30 0.0026 0.00067 JQ 0.0013 0.0020 < U < U 0.0010 0.0010 E200.7 Vanadium ug/L < 10 U 1.2 JQ < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Zinc ug/L < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U Minerals, Dissolved:

E200.7 Quartz ug/L 12000 8800 29000 15000 20000 11000 E200.7 Silicon ug/L 5800 4100 13000 7000 9200 5000 Nitrogen Series:

SM4500- Ammonia mg/L 0.12 JQ 0.13 JQ 0.22 JQ < 0.25 U < 0.25 U 0.14 JQ NH3G E300.0 Nitrogen, nitrate mg/L 10 10 < 0.050 U 0.12 < 0.050 U 1.2 < U < U 0.050 0.050 E300.0 Nitrogen, nitrite mg/L 1 1 < 0.050 U < 0.050 U < 0.050 U < 0.050 U < U < U 0.050 0.050 CALC Nitrogen, Organic mg/L < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U E351.2 Total Kjeldahl mg/L < 0.20 U < 0.20 U 0.21 < 0.20 U < 0.20 U < 0.20 U Nitrogen Orthophosphate:

SM4500-PF Phosphate as P, mg/L < 0.050 U < 0.050 U < 0.050 U 0.016 JQ < U < U Ortho 0.050 0.050 Phosphorus:

E365.4 Phosphorus, Total mg/L 0.051 JQ < 0.10 U 0.074 JQ < 0.10 U < 0.10 U < 0.10 U Radioactivity:

E900.0 Alpha radiation pCi/L 15 < 3.00 U < 3.00 U < 3.00 U < 3.00 U < 3.00 U < 3.00 U particles September 2022 3-77 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.1-7 (Sheet 4 of 4)

Groundwater Quality Summary Data - Spring 2022 Location ID: GW-1 GW-1R GW-2 GW-3 GW-4 GW-4 Sample Date: 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/31/2022 5/25/2022 5/25/2022 5/25/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E900.0 Beta Particles & pCi/L 1,719(c) 1.78 < 4.00 U < 4.00 U 1.64 < 4.00 U < 4.00 U Photon Emitters Residue Series:

SM2540C Total Dissolved mg/L 150 130 320 230 340 340 Solids (TDS)

SM2540D Total Suspended mg/L 2.5 5.4 12 17 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U Solids (TSS)

Notes:

a) 1 Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Criteria for Fish and Aquatic Life Water Use, Numeric Criteria of Rule 0400-40-03-.03 subparagraph (3) b) 2 USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides c) 3 USEPA NPDWR MCL for Beta Particles & Photon Emitters is based on the specific radionuclide(s) concentration(s) in pCi/L units that produce a 4 millirem per year dose. The average concentration for listed radionuclides resulting in a 4 millirem per year dose is 1,719 pCi/L and the actual site specific concentration could vary significantly depending on the radionuclide deg C = degrees Celsius mg/L = milligrams per liter mpn/mL = most probable number per milliliter mS/cm = millisiemens per centimeter mV = millivolts NTU = nephelometric turbidity unit pCi/L = picocuries per liter ug/L = micrograms per liter Data Qualifier Definitions:

JQ = Estimated, reported between the Method Detection Limit (MDL) and the Reporting Limit (RL)

U = Undetected

< = Not Detected above the Reporting Limit shown September 2022 3-78 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-1 Precipitation Depth - Duration - Frequency Data for Oak Ridge, TN Precipitation (inches) for Given Return Period (years)

Precipitation Duration 1 2 5 10 25 50 100 5 min 0.34 0.40 0.47 0.54 0.62 0.69 0.77 15 min 0.68 0.80 0.95 1.08 1.26 1.40 1.54 30 min 0.93 1.11 1.35 1.57 1.86 2.11 2.36 60 min 1.16 1.39 1.74 2.05 2.48 2.85 3.25 3 hr 1.48 1.77 2.18 2.56 3.09 3.55 4.04 6 hr 1.85 2.19 2.66 3.09 3.70 4.22 4.77 12 hr 2.30 2.73 3.30 3.82 4.52 5.12 5.75 24 hr 2.81 3.35 4.09 4.68 5.49 6.16 6.84 2 days 3.43 4.11 5.01 5.72 6.71 7.50 8.31 4 days 3.93 4.70 5.69 6.46 7.47 8.27 9.06 7 days 4.80 5.72 6.87 7.74 8.88 9.74 10.60

Reference:

NOAA, 2022 September 2022 3-79 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-2 USGS Streamflow Stations within 3.0 Miles of Horizon Center Site Coordinates Period of Record USGS Station Drainage Area Map No.(a)

No. Name Longitude Latitude (sq. mi./ac.) Begin End 03538225 Poplar Creek near Oak Ridge, TN -84.33964830 35.99887210 82.5 / 52,800 9/1/1960 9/30/1989 1 03538250 East Fork Poplar Creek near Oak -84.35826000 35.96618840 19.5 / 12,480 9/1/1960 6/30/1988 2 Ridge, TN 035382672 Bear Creek Tributary above Bear -84.32409119 35.94479970 0.3 / 192 10/1/1986 9/30/1991 3 Creek Road near Wheat, TN 035382673 Bear Creek near Wheat, TN -84.32403560 35.94429970 3.2 / 2048 10/1/1986 9/30/1991 4 035382677 Bear Creek Tributary near Wheat, TN -84.33186930 35.94118850 0.14 / 90 1/19/1987 4/23/1993 5 03538270 Bear Creek at TN 95 near Oak Ridge, -84.33936969 35.93729950 4.34 / 2778 3/1/1985 11/21/2000 6 TN 03538272 Bear Creek Tributary at TN 95 near -84.34214770 35.94063285 0.14 / 90 10/1/1986 9/30/1989 7 Wheat, TN 03538273 Bear Creek at Pine Ridge, near Wheat, -84.34378670 35.94225507 5.0 / 3200 9/25/1986 9/1/1989 8 TN 03538275 Bear Creek near Oak Ridge, TN -84.36360450 35.94724100 7.15 / 4576 9/1/1960 9/29/1964 9 a) Gauge station number on Figure 3.4.2-1.

Reference:

USGS, 2022b.

September 2022 3-80 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-3 (Sheet 1 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Summer 2021 Location ID: SW-1 SW-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 9/13/2021 9/9/2021 9/9/2021 9/13/2021 9/14/2021 9/14/2021 9/14/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate Sample TN USEPA Analytical Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Alkalinity, Total:

A2320 Alkalinity, Total mg/L 150 150 140 160 150 160 160 (as CaCO3)

A2320 Carbon dioxide mg/L < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U Anions:

E300 Chloride mg/L 19 15 14 16 14 14 14 E300 Fluoride mg/L 4.0 0.28 0.22 0.21 0.26 0.23 0.24 0.23 E300 Sulfate mg/L 22 19 19 22 21 21 21 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD):

A5210B BOD mg/L 7.1 B 2.5 B < 2.0 U 6.5 B < 2.0 U <2.0 U < 2.0 U Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD):

A5220D COD mg/L < 10 U < 10 U 8.5 JQ 5.0 JQ 7.5 JL <10 U < 10 U Chlorophyll SM10200H Chlorophyll-a mg/m3 0.89 B 0.89 B 0.89 B 1.8 B 1.8 B <0.033 UJ 1.8 B Coliform:

CD137MPN Fecal Coliform mpn/mL 240 344.8 344.8 365.4 365.4 461.1 517.2 CD137MPN Total Coliforms mpn/mL 28.8 2419.6 2419.6 2419.6 2419.6 2419.6 2419.6 2419.6 Cyanide:

E1677 Cyanide, Free mg/L 0.200 0.2 < 0.006 U < 0.006 U < 0.006 U < U < 0.006 UJ < 0.006 UJ < 0.006 UJ 0.006 Field Parameters:

Dissolved mg/L >5.0 6.7 8.08 7.86 8.44 6.54 6.54 7.46 E360.1 Oxygen September 2022 3-81 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-3 (Sheet 2 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Summer 2021 Location ID: SW-1 SW-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 9/13/2021 9/9/2021 9/9/2021 9/13/2021 9/14/2021 9/14/2021 9/14/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate Sample TN USEPA Analytical Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

A2580A Oxidation- mV 242.1 221.4 196.7 248 250.4 250.4 234.8 Reduction Potential E150.1 pH pH units 6.0-9.0 8.03 8.11 8.02 8.47 8.11 8.11 8.17 E120.1 Specific mS/cm 0.443 0.487 0.438 0.457 0.429 0.429 0.418 Conductance E170.1 Temperature deg C <30.5 22.8 22.1 23.7 21.4 21.5 21.5 22.1 E180.1 Turbidity NTU 2.36 5.02 3.81 2.88 4.85 4.85 5.98 Hardness:

A2340 Hardness, Total mg/L 190 180 190 200 190 190 190 as CaCO3 Metals, Total:

E200.7 Aluminum µg/L 32 JQ 39 JQ 42 JQ 43 JQ 68 JQ 71 JQ 90 JQ E200.8 Antimony µg/L 6 < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U E200.8 Arsenic µg/L 34 10 < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U <3.0 U < 3.0 U E200.7 Barium µg/L 2000 44 44 42 41 45 46 46 E200.7 Beryllium µg/L 4 < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U <4.0 U < 4.0 U E200.7 Boron µg/L 85 JQ 120 62 JQ 68 JQ 72 JQ 71 JQ 67 JQ E200.8 Cadmium µg/L 1.8 5 < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U <0.5 U < 0.5 U E200.7 Calcium µg/L 570 100 52,000 56,000 54,000 51,000 55,000 55,000 55,000 E200.7 Chromium µg/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U <10 U < 10 U E200.7 Cobalt µg/L 13 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U <10 U < 10 U September 2022 3-82 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-3 (Sheet 3 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Summer 2021 Location ID: SW-1 SW-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 9/14/2021 9/13/2021 9/9/2021 9/9/2021 9/13/2021 9/14/2021 9/14/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate Sample TN USEPA Analytical Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.7 Copper ug/L 13 3.0 JQ 2.4 JQ 1.9 JQ 2.3 JQ 2.4 JQ 2.7 JQ E200.7 Iron ug/L 77 67 79 110 120 130 E200.8 Lead ug/L 65 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U <2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Magnesium ug/L 12000 11000 10000 11000 12000 12000 12000 E200.7 Manganese ug/L 13 14 13 10 30 30 30 E245.1 Mercury ug/L 1.4 2 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U 0.08 JQ < 0.2 U < 0.2 U <0.2 U < 0.2 U E200.7 Nickel ug/L 470 < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U 2.2 JQ 2.2 JQ E200.7 Potassium ug/L 4100 3700 3400 3400 3400 3400 3400 E200.8 Selenium ug/L 20 50 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U <2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Silver ug/L 3.2 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U <10 U < 10 U E200.7 Sodium ug/L 15000 12000 11000 13000 12000 12000 12000 E200.8 Thallium ug/L 2 < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U <1.0 U < 1.0 U E200.8 Uranium ug/L 30.0 0.0056 0.0057 0.0058 0.0065 0.0073 0.0077 0.0077 E200.7 Vanadium ug/L 1.1 JQ 1.2 JQ < 10 U 1 JQ 1.4 JQ 1.5 JQ 1.5 JQ E200.7 Zinc ug/L 120 13 JQ 8.5 B < 20 U 8.9 JQ 11 JQ 8.6 JQ 8.6 JQ Minerals Dissolved:

E200.7 Quartz ug/L 6800 6700 6900 6700 7000 7000 7000 E200.7 Silicon ug/L 3200 3100 3200 3100 3300 3300 3300 September 2022 3-83 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-3 (Sheet 4 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Summer 2021 Location ID: SW-1 SW-2 SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 9/13/2021 9/9/2021 9/9/2021 9/13/2021 9/14/2021 9/14/2021 9/14/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate Sample TN USEPA Analytic Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Nitrogen Series:

SM4500-NH3G Ammonia mg/L < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U E300 Nitrogen, Nitrate mg/L 10 5.4 4.5 4.2 4 3.4 3.4 3.2 E300 Nitrogen, Nitrite mg/L 1 < 0.1 U 0.025 JQ 0.024 JQ < 0.05 U < 0.05 U < 0.05 U 0.024 JQ CALC Nitrogen, Organic mg/L 0.28 0.34 0.35 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U 0.34 0.33 E351.2 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.28 0.34 0.35 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U 0.34 0.33 Orthophosphate:

SM4500-PF Phosphate as P, Ortho mg/L 1.1 J 0.69 0.67 0.8 J 0.67 0.64 0.72 Phosphorus:

E365.4 Phosphorus, Total mg/L 1.1 0.68 0.64 0.75 0.64 0.72 0.63 Radioactivity:

E900 Alpha Radiation Particles pCi/L 15 < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U 7.1 E900 Beta Particles & Photon Emitters pCi/L 1719(c) 6.66 B 2.42 B < 4.0 U 5.71 B < 4.0 U 4.48 B 5.82 B Residue Series:

A2540C Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 240 220 230 240 220 240 240 mg/L < 2.5 U 2.5 3.6 2.6 3.5 3.9 < 2.5 U A2540D Total Suspended Solids Notes:

a) Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Criteria for Fish and Aquatic Life Water Use, Numeric Criteria of Rule 0400-40-03-.03 subparagraph (3) b) USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides c) USEPA NPDWR MCL for Beta Particles & Photon Emitters is based on the specific radionuclide(s) concentration(s) in pCi/L units that produce a 4 millirem per year dose. The average concentration for listed radionuclides resulting in a 4 millirem per year dose is 1719 pCi/L and the actual site specific concentration could vary significantly depending on the radionuclide deg C = degrees Celsius mg/L = milligrams per liter mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter mpn/mL = most probable number per milliliter, September 2022 3-84 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-3 (Sheet 5 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Summer 2021 mS/cm = millisiemens per centimeter mV = millivolts NTU = nephelometric turbidity unit pCi/L = picocuries per liter ug/L = micrograms per liter Data Qualifier Definitions:

B = The analyte was detected, estimated, blank contamination J = The analyte was detected, estimated due to QC criteria JH = Estimated, may be biased high JL = Estimated, may be biased low JQ = Value listed is estimated, reported between the Method Detection Limit (MDL) and the Reporting Limit (RL)

UJ = The analyte was not detected; however, the result is estimated due to discrepancies in meeting certain analyte-specific quality control criteria UL = The analyte was not detected; however, the reported value may be biased low U = Not Detected above the Reporting Limit shown September 2022 3-85 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-4 (Sheet 1 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Fall 2021 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/16/2021 11/16/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample TN USEPA Analytical Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Alkalinity, Total:

A2320 Alkalinity, Total mg/L 150 160 160 180 140 (as CaCO3)

A2320 Carbon dioxide mg/L < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U Anions E300 Chloride mg/L 16 13 13 14 9 E300 Fluoride mg/L 4.0 0.22 0.21 0.21 0.19 <0.1 U E300 Sulfate mg/L 19 18 18 19 2.7 Biochemical Oxygen Demand (BOD):

A5210B BOD mg/L <2.0 U < 2.0 U 3.2 <2.0 U < 2.0 U Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD):

A5220D COD mg/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U Chlorophyll:

SM10200H Chlorophyll-a mg/m3 1.8 <0.033 U 0.89 3.6 <0.033 U Coliform CD137MPN Fecal Coliform mpn/mL 240 344.8 344.8 365.4 CD137MPN Total Coliforms mpn/mL 28.8 2419.6 1986.3 1986.3 1986.3 2419.6 Cyanide:

E1677 Cyanide, Free mg/L 0.200 0.2 < 0.006 U < 0.006 U < 0.006 U < 0.006 U < 0.006 U September 2022 3-86 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-4 (Sheet 2 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Fall 2021 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/16/2021 11/16/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample TN USEPA Analytical Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Field Parameters:

Dissolved mg/L >5.0 13.46 J 9.72 9.72 18.7 R 10.97 E360.1 Oxygen A2580A Oxidation mV 162.3 129.3 129.3 183.3 88.4 Reduction Potential E150.1 pH pH 6.0 - 9.0 7.95 7.42 7.42 7.76 7.67 units E120.1 Specific mS/cm 0.435 0.403 0.403 0.419 0.3 Conductance E170.1 Temperature deg C < 30.5 11.6 10.5 10.5 10.5 12.7 E180.1 Turbidity NTU 2.85 2.35 2.35 2.24 2.59 Hardness A2340 Hardness, Total mg/L 180 190 180 190 150 as CaCO3 Metals Total:

E200.7 Aluminum ug/L <200 U <200 U <200 U 38 JQ 43 JQ E200.8 Antimony ug/L 6 < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U E200.8 Arsenic ug/L 34 10 < 0.3 U < 0.3 U < 0.3 U < 0.3 U < 0.3 U E200.7 Barium ug/L 2000 33 32 32 33 B 20 B E200.7 Beryllium ug/L 4 0.18 JQ 0.19 JQ 0.19 JQ < 4.0 U < 4.0 U E200.7 Boron ug/L 75 JQ 65 JQ 62 JQ 51 JQ <100 U E200.8 Cadmium ug/L 1.8 5 < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U September 2022 3-87 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-4 (Sheet 3 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Fall 2021 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/16/2021 11/16/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample TN USEPA Analytical Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.7 Calcium ug/L 53000 53000 53000 53000 53000 E200.7 Chromium ug/L 570 100 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Cobalt ug/L 2.3 JQ 1 JQ 1.7 JQ < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Copper ug/L 13 1.8 JQ 2.1 JQ <20 U <20 U <20 U E200.7 Iron ug/L 58 58 52 100 140 E200.8 Lead ug/L 65 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Magnesium ug/L 11000 11000 11000 11000 12000 E200.7 Manganese ug/L 8.3 JQ 7.2 JQ 7.3 JQ 30 46 E245.1 Mercury ug/L 1.4 2 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U E200.7 Nickel ug/L 470 4.9 JQ 3.8 JQ 3.5 JQ 3.5 JQ < 40 U E200.7 Potassium ug/L 4200 3700 3700 3700 1000 E200.8 Selenium ug/L 20 50 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Silver ug/L 3.2 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Sodium ug/L 13000 11000 11000 11000 3700 E200.8 Thallium ug/L 2 < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U E200.8 Uranium ug/L 30 0.0047 0.0051 0.0051 0.0057 <0.001 U E200.7 Vanadium ug/L <10 U <10 U < 10 U <10 U <10 U E200.7 Zinc ug/L 120 9.9 JQ 7 JQ 7 JQ 8.3 JQ <20 U Minerals Dissolved:

E200.7 Quartz ug/L 6500 6300 6300 6600 8300 E200.7 Silicon ug/L 3000 3000 3000 3100 3900 September 2022 3-88 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-4 (Sheet 4 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Fall 2021 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/16/2021 11/16/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample TN USEPA Analytical Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Nitrogen Series:

SM4500- Ammonia mg/L < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 U NH3G E300 Nitrogen, Nitrate mg/L 10 3.3 3.2 4.3 3.7 0.071 E300 Nitrogen, Nitrite mg/L 1 < 0.1 U <0.1 U <0.01 U < 0.1 U < 0.05 U CALC Nitrogen, Organic mg/L <0.2 U 2.3 <0.2 U 0.49 < 0.2 U E351.2 Total Kjeldahl mg/L <0.2 U 2.3 <0.2 U 0.49 0.14 JQ Nitrogen Orthophosphate:

SM4500-PF Phosphate as P, mg/L 0.28 2.3 2.3 2.2 0.18 JL Ortho Phosphorus:

E365.4 Phosphorus, mg/L 0.94 0.69 0.77 0.58 <0.1 UL Total Radioactivity:

E900 Alpha Radiation pCi/L 15 < 3.0 U 22 18.2 < 3.0 U < 3.0 U Particles E900 Beta Particles & pCi/L 1719(c) 4.56 13.1 13.4 5.34 B < 4.0 U Photon Emitters Residue Series:

A2540C Total Dissolved mg/L 220 220 210 210 130 Solids A2540D Total Suspended mg/L < 2.5 U <2.5 U <2.5 U <2.5 U <2.5 U Solids September 2022 3-89 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-4 (Sheet 5 of 5)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Fall 2021 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 Sample Date: 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/15/2021 11/16/2021 11/16/2021 Sample Type: Sample Sample Duplicate Sample Sample TN USEPA Analytical Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Method Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Notes:

a) Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Criteria for Fish and Aquatic Life Water Use, Numeric Criteria of Rule 0400-40-03-.03 subparagraph (3) b) USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides c) USEPA NPDWR MCL for Beta Particles & Photon Emitters is based on the specific radionuclide(s) concentration(s) in pCi/L units that produce a 4 millirem per year dose. The average concentration for listed radionuclides resulting in a 4 millirem per year dose is 1719 pCi/L and the actual site-specific concentration could vary significantly depending on the radionuclide Bolded values indicate an exceedance of the above referenced criteria deg C = degrees Celsius mg/L = milligrams per liter mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter mpn/mL = most probable number per milliliter mS/cm = millisiemens per centimeter mV = millivolts NTU = nephelometric turbidity unit pCi/L = picocuries per liter ug/L = micrograms per liter Data Qualifier Definitions:

B = The analyte was detected, estimated, blank contamination J = The analyte was detected, estimated due to QC criteria JH = Estimated, may be biased high JL = Estimated, may be biased low JQ = Value listed is estimated, reported between the Method Detection Limit (MDL) and the Reporting Limit (RL)

UJ = The analyte was not detected; however, the result is estimated due to discrepancies in meeting certain analyte-specific quality control criteria UL = The analyte was not detected; however, the reported value may be biased low U = Not Detected above the Reporting Limit shown September 2022 3-90 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-5 (Sheet 1 of 4)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Winter 2021/2022 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-6 SW-7 SW-7 Sample Date: 3/2/2022 2/28/2022 3/2/2022 2/28/2022 3/1/2022 3/1/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Alkalinity, Total:

SM2320B Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) mg/L 120 B 110 B 110 B 74 JB 70 B 70 B SM2320B Carbon dioxide mg/L < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U 5.7 JB 8.4 B 7.4 B Anions:

E300.0 Chloride mg/L 7.8 6.4 6.5 0.67 2.2 2.3 E300.0 Fluoride mg/L 4.0 0.10 0.077 JQ 0.083 JQ < 0.1 U 0.042 JQ 0.042 JQ E300.0 Sulfate mg/L 11 9.9 9.6 1.9 2.1 2.1 Biochemical Oxygen Demand:

SM5210B Biochemical Oxygen mg/L < 2.0 U 2.1 B 15 B 4.9 B 4.3 JB 5.3 JB Demand (BOD)

Chemical Oxygen Demand:

SM5220D Chemical Oxygen Demand mg/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U (COD)

Chlorophyll:

SM10200H Chlorophyll-a mg/m3 3.6 1.8 3.6 0.89 4.5 3.6 Coliform:

CD137MPN Fecal Coliform mpn/mL 125.9 260.3 45.9 J 58.6 13.4 14.6 CD137MPN Total Coliforms mpn/mL 28.8 1986.3 1011.2 2419.6 J 2419.6 579.4 770.1 Cyanide:

< U < U < U < U < U < U E1677 Cyanide, Free mg/L 0.2 0.2 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 Field Parameters:

E360.1 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L > 5.0 7.36 9.06 8.23 8.85 8.38 8.38 Oxidation Reduction SM2580A mV 236.1 107.3 120.4 60.5 160.1 160.1 Potential pH E150.1 pH 6.0 - 9.0 6.85 7.92 7.84 7.98 7.63 7.63 units September 2022 3-91 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-5 (Sheet 2 of 4)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Winter 2021/2022 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-6 SW-7 SW-7 Sample Date: 3/2/2022 2/28/2022 3/2/2022 2/28/2022 3/1/2022 3/1/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E120.1 Specific Conductance ms/cm 0.304 0.277 0.289 0.164 0.161 0.161 E170.1 Temperature deg C < 30.5 10.9 11.2 13 14.4 14.6 14.6 E180.1 Turbidity NTU 5.9 10.2 7.3 10.3 11.2 11.2 Hardness:

SM2340C Hardness, Total as CaCO3 mg/L 130 130 120 81 70 69 Metals, Total:

E200.7 Aluminum ug/L 220 440 340 520 630 670 E200.8 Antimony ug/L 6 < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U E200.8 Arsenic ug/L 34 10 < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U E200.7 Barium ug/L 2000 33 29 32 20 18 18 E200.7 Beryllium ug/L 4 < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U E200.7 Boron ug/L < 100 U < 100 U < 100 U < 100 U < 100 U < 100 U E200.8 Cadmium ug/L 1.8 5 < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U E200.7 Calcium ug/L 43000 38000 39000 24000 21000 21000 E200.7 Chromium ug/L 570 100 1.1 JQ < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Cobalt ug/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Copper ug/L 13 < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U E200.7 Iron ug/L 190 290 230 240 340 350 E200.8 Lead ug/L 65 0.41 JQ 0.46 JQ 0.46 JQ < 2.5 U 0.46 JQ 0.75 JQ E200.7 Magnesium ug/L 7400 6000 7200 4000 5100 5000 E200.7 Manganese ug/L 18 19 20 12 14 14 E245.1 Mercury ug/L 1.4 2 < 0.2 U 0.13 JQ < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U E200.7 Nickel ug/L 470 < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U < 40 U E200.7 Potassium ug/L 1700 1500 1400 570 JQ 760 JQ 760 JQ E200.8 Selenium ug/L 20 50 < 2.5 U 1.4 B < 2.5 U 1.7 B < 2.5 U < 2.5 U September 2022 3-92 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-5 (Sheet 3 of 4)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Winter 2021/2022 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-6 SW-7 SW-7 Sample Date: 3/2/2022 2/28/2022 3/2/2022 2/28/2022 3/1/2022 3/1/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.7 Silver ug/L 3.2 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Sodium ug/L 5500 4900 4300 770 JQ 900 JQ 910 JQ E200.8 Thallium ug/L 2 < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U E200.8 Uranium mg/L 30 0.0061 0.0049 0.0062 < U < U < U 0.001 0.001 0.001 E200.7 Vanadium ug/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U 1.4 JQ 1.2 JQ E200.7 Zinc ug/L 120 < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U Minerals, Dissolved:

E200.7 Quartz ug/L 6000 6000 7000 6600 6600 6700 E200.7 Silicon ug/L 2800 2800 3300 3100 3100 3100 Nitrogen Series:

SM4500-NH3G Ammonia mg/L < 0.25 U < 0.25 U < 0.25 UJ < 0.25 U < U < U 0.25 0.25 E300.0 Nitrogen, nitrate mg/L 10 2.2 1.3 1.6 0.055 0.058 0.059 E300.0 Nitrogen, nitrite mg/L 1 < 0.1 U < 0.05 U 0.046 JQ < 0.05 U < U < U 0.05 0.05 CALC Nitrogen, Organic mg/L 0.35 0.28 0.25 < 0.2 U < 0.2 U < 0.2 U E351.2 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.35 B 0.28 B 0.25 B 0.13 B < 0.2 U 0.15 B Orthophosphate:

SM4500-PF Orthophosphate mg/L 0.20 0.13 0.14 < 0.05 U < U < U 0.05 0.05 Phosphorus:

E365.4 Phosphorus, Total mg/L 0.21 0.15 0.16 < 0.1 U < 0.1 U 0.041 JQ Radioactivity:

E900.0 Alpha radiation particles pCi/L 15 < 3.0 U < 3.0 U 3.65 JH < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U Beta Particles & Photon (c)

E900.0 pCi/L 1,719 1.73 1.46 3.16 1.82 < 4.0 U < 4.0 U Emitters September 2022 3-93 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-5 (Sheet 4 of 4)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Winter 2021/2022 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-6 SW-7 SW-7 Sample Date: 3/2/2022 2/28/2022 3/2/2022 2/28/2022 3/1/2022 3/1/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Residue Series:

SM2540C Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 130 150 140 91 86 84 SM2540D Total Suspended Solids mg/L 3.8 B 6.9 B 4.1 B 6.2 B < 2.5 U 3.0 B Notes:

a) 1 Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Criteria for Fish and Aquatic Life Water Use, Numeric Criteria of Rule 0400-40-03-.03 subparagraph (3) b) 2 USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides c) 3 USEPA NPDWR MCL for Beta Particles & Photon Emitters is based on the specific radionuclide(s) concentration(s) in pCi/L units that produce a 4 millirem per year dose. The average concentration for listed radionuclides resulting in a 4 millirem per year dose is 1,719 pCi/L and the actual site specific concentration could vary significantly depending on the radionuclide deg C = degrees Celsius mg/L = milligrams per liter mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter mpn/mL = most probable number per milliliter mS/cm = millisiemens per centimeter mV = millivolts NTU = nephelometric turbidity unit pCi/L = picocuries per liter ug/L = micrograms per liter Data Qualifier Definitions:

B = Blank contamination, detected above the Reporting Limit J = Detected, estimated due to QC criteria JB = Estimated due to blank contamination, detected below the Reporting Limit JH = Estimated, may be biased high JQ = Estimated, reported between the Method Detection Limit and the Reporting Limit U = Undetected UJ = Not detected, estimated due to discrepancies in meeting certain analyte-specific quality control criteria

< = Not Detected above the Reporting Limit shown September 2022 3-94 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-6 (Sheet 1 of 4)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Spring 2022 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 SW-7 Sample Date: 5/23/2022 5/23/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Alkalinity, Total:

SM2320B Alkalinity, Total (as CaCO3) mg/L 140 140 140 140 140 SM2320B Carbon dioxide mg/L 5.0 < 5.0 U < 5.0 U 5.0 < 5.0 U Anions:

E300.0 Chloride mg/L 22 20 18 17 18 E300.0 Fluoride mg/L 4.0 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.21 E300.0 Sulfate mg/L 20 20 22 22 22 Biochemical Oxygen Demand:

SM5210B Biochemical Oxygen Demand mg/L < 2.0 U < 2.0 U < 2.0 U < 2.0 U < 2.0 U (BOD)

Chemical Oxygen Demand:

SM5220D Chemical Oxygen Demand mg/L < 10 U < 10 U 9.6 B 23 B 23 B (COD)

Chlorophyll:

SM10200H Chlorophyll-a mg/m3 1.8 0.89 1.8 J 0.89 2.7 J Coliform:

CD137MPN Fecal Coliform mpn/mL 613.1 325.5 613.1 410.6 461.1 CD137MPN Total Coliforms mpn/mL 28.8 2419.6 J 2419.6 J 2419.6 J 2419.6 J 2419.6 J Cyanide:

E1677 Cyanide, Free mg/L 0.2 0.2 < 0.002 U < 0.002 U < 0.002 U 0.00091 JQ < 0.002 U Field Parameters:

E360.1 Dissolved Oxygen mg/L > 5.0 4.87 5.19 5.7 6.25 6.25 SM2580A Oxidation Reduction Potential mV 201.3 157.3 187.3 175.9 175.9 E150.1 pH pH units 6.0 - 9.0 7.88 7.65 7.58 7.59 7.59 E120.1 Specific Conductance mS/cm 0.421 0.41 0.407 0.406 0.406 E170.1 Temperature deg C < 30.5 21.4 21.3 20.4 19.5 19.5 September 2022 3-95 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-6 (Sheet 2 of 4)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Spring 2022 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 SW-7 Sample Date: 5/23/2022 5/23/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E180.1 Turbidity NTU 6.75 4.71 6.84 6.64 6.64 Hardness:

SM2340C Hardness, Total as CaCO3 mg/L 180 180 190 200 180 Metals, Total:

E200.7 Aluminum ug/L 97 JQ 130 JQ 98 JQ 130 JQ 74 JQ E200.8 Antimony ug/L 6 < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U < 5.0 U E200.8 Arsenic ug/L 34 10 < 3.0 U 0.87 JQ < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U E200.7 Barium ug/L 2000 42 40 44 43 44 E200.7 Beryllium ug/L 4 < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U < 4.0 U E200.7 Boron ug/L 77 JQ 69 JQ 38 JQ 38 JQ 39 JQ E200.8 Cadmium ug/L 1.8 5 < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U < 0.5 U E200.7 Calcium ug/L 48000 46000 48000 48000 50000 E200.7 Chromium ug/L 570 100 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Cobalt ug/L < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Copper ug/L 13 < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U E200.7 Iron ug/L 120 130 120 120 J 74 JQ E200.8 Lead ug/L 65 0.36 JQ < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Magnesium ug/L 12000 11000 12000 12000 12000 E200.7 Manganese ug/L 25 19 19 33 9.2 JQ E245.1 Mercury ug/L 1.4 2 0.11 JQ < 0.2 U < 0.2 U 0.098 JQ < 0.2 U E200.7 Nickel ug/L 470 10 B 15 B 6.3 JQ 5.3 JQ 6.1 JQ E200.7 Potassium ug/L 4700 4000 3700 3600 3700 E200.8 Selenium ug/L 20 50 < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U < 2.5 U E200.7 Silver ug/L 3.2 < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Sodium ug/L 18000 16000 15000 15000 15000 E200.8 Thallium ug/L 2 < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U < 1.0 U September 2022 3-96 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-6 (Sheet 3 of 4)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Spring 2022 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 SW-7 Sample Date: 5/23/2022 5/23/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

E200.8 Uranium mg/L 30 0.0035 0.004 0.0054 0.0048 0.0053 E200.7 Vanadium ug/L < 10 U < 10 U 1.0 JQ < 10 U < 10 U E200.7 Zinc ug/L 120 11 JQ 10 JQ < 20 U < 20 U < 20 U Minerals, Dissolved:

E200.7 Quartz ug/L 39000 6800 14000 J 13000 JL 8000 J E200.7 Silicon ug/L 18000 3200 6300 J 6000 JL 3800 J Nitrogen Series:

SM4500-NH3G Ammonia mg/L 0.11 JQ 0.11 JQ 0.19 JQ < 0.25 U 0.15 JQ E300.0 Nitrogen, nitrate mg/L 10 3.6 2.8 2.7 2.4 2.7 E300.0 Nitrogen, nitrite mg/L 1 < 0.1 U < 0.1 U < 0.1 U < 0.1 U 0.024 JQ CALC Nitrogen, Organic mg/L 0.21 0.33 0.38 < 0.2 U 0.24 E351.2 Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/L 0.32 0.44 0.57 < 0.2 U 0.39 Orthophosphate:

SM4500-PF Orthophosphate mg/L 1.2 0.95 0.81 0.75 0.8 Phosphorus:

E365.4 Phosphorus, Total mg/L 1.0 0.85 0.85 0.51 JH 0.8 Radioactivity:

E900.0 Alpha radiation particles pCi/L 15 < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U < 3.0 U E900.0 Beta Particles & Photon pCi/L 1,719(c) 6.05 4.21 3.09 < 4.0 U 3.73 Emitters Residue Series:

SM2540C Total Dissolved Solids mg/L 220 240 220 210 210 SM2540D Total Suspended Solids mg/L 4.7 3.9 3.8 5.0 3.6 September 2022 3-97 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-6 (Sheet 4 of 4)

Surface Water Quality Summary Data for the Horizon Center Site Spring 2022 Location ID: SW-3 SW-4 SW-5 SW-7 SW-7 Sample Date: 5/23/2022 5/23/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 5/24/2022 Sample Type: Sample Sample Sample Sample Duplicate TN USEPA Analytic Method Constituent Units Numeric NPDWR Criteria(a) MCL(b)

Notes:

a) Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Criteria for Fish and Aquatic Life Water Use, Numeric Criteria of Rule 0400-40-03-.03 subparagraph (3) b) USEPA National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NPDWR) Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) for Inorganic Chemicals and Radionuclides c) USEPA NPDWR MCL for Beta Particles & Photon Emitters is based on the specific radionuclide(s) concentration(s) in pCi/L units that produce a 4 millirem per year dose. The average concentration for listed radionuclides resulting in a 4 millirem per year dose is 1,719 pCi/L and the actual site specific concentration could vary significantly depending on the radionuclide deg C = degrees Celsius mg/L = milligrams per liter mg/m3 = milligrams per cubic meter mpn/mL = most probable number per milliliter mS/cm = millisiemens per centimeter mV = millivolts NTU = nephelometric turbidity unit pCi/L = picocuries per liter ug/L = micrograms per liter Data Qualifier Definitions:

B = Detected, estimated due to blank contamination J = Detected, estimated due to QC criteria JH = Estimated, may be biased high JL = Estimated, may be biased low JQ = Estimated, reported between the Method Detection Limit (MDL) and the Reporting Limit (RL)

U = Undetected

< = Not Detected above the Reporting Limit shown September 2022 3-98 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.4.2-7 Mean Concentrations of Metals and Inorganics in East Fork Poplar Creek from Annual Ambient Surface Water Monitoring: July 2018-June 2019 Sampling Location within EFPC EFPC EFPC EFPC EFPC EFPC Criteria(f) Units Parameter 25.1(a) 24.4(b) 23.4(c) 3.8(d) 6.3(e)

Ammonia (mg/L) 0.795 0.0822 0.0264 U U Arsenic (µg/L) U U U U U 10 µg/L Cadmium (µg/L) 0.46 0.194 U U U 2 µg/L Calcium (mg/L) 52.2 53.8 52.7 50.6 46 Chloride (mg/L) 16 21.2 18.6 8.05 8.91 Chromium (µg/L) U U U U U 570 µg/L Copper (µg/L) 9.17 6.09 4.11 1.18 1.08 13 µg/L Inorganic Nitrogen 3.79 3.54 2.9 1.09 2.65 1.22 mg/L (mg/L)

Lead (µg/L) 0.545 U U 0.171 0.276 65 µg/L Magnesium (mg/L) 12.4 13.9 13.6 9.06 7.77 Mercury (µg/L) 0.411 0.286 0.171 0.0484 0.0518 0.051 µg/L Nickel (µg/L) 1.53 1.4 1.37 1.31 1.39 470 µg/L Phosphorus (mg/L) 0.333 0.271 0.184 0.0516 0.173 0.04 mg/L Selenium (µg/L) U U U U U 20 µg/L Sodium (mg/L) 12.5 17.8 13.6 5.95 6.7 Sulfate (mg/L) 43.5 38.5 31.4 16.3 12.2 Total Dissolved 271 283 261 205 192 Solids (mg/L)

Total Suspended 3.96 0.62 1.22 2.09 3.23 Solids (mg/L)

Uranium (µg/L) 92.1* 52.9* 52.9* 39.5 11.4 Zinc (µg/L) 36.7 16.6 9.56 1.48 2.9 120 µg/L Source: TDEC 2020a.

U = undetected Bolded values indicate an exceedance from Tennessee Fish and Aquatic or Tennessee Recreation limits (whichever is more stringent). Ecoregion values are used for nitrate and phosphorus.

• Exceeds USEPA MCL for drinking water of 30 ug/l a) Creek headwaters.

b) Sampling location between sites 25.1 and 23.4.

c) Location between DOE property and Oak Ridge.

d) Upstream of Oak Ridge sewage treatment outfall.

e) Downstream of Oak Ridge.

f) Tennessee Fish and Aquatic or Tennessee Recreation Limit Criteria September 2022 3-99 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.4.4-1 NWI-Mapped Wetland Habitats within the Horizon Center Site and Vicinity HCS 3-Mile Vicinity Wetland Type (ac.) (ac.)

Wetlands Emergent Forested 0.001 418.62 Scrub shrub Open Water Lacustrine and Palustrine Habitats 273.28 Riverine Habitats 1.11 351.47 September 2022 3-100 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.5 ECOLOGY This section describes and characterizes the terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems potentially affected by the construction and operation of the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) at the Horizon Center site (HCS). A topographic map of the HCS is shown on Figure 3.3.3-2 in Section 3.3 Geology and Soils. The ecological vicinity is defined as the area within a 5-mi.

(8-km) radius of the HCS bounding limits, as described in Section 1.3.1.2, to capture the context of vegetation communities and habitats, especially forests, that support sensitive plant and animal species in the region. Ecological features that are in proximity (adjacent) to the HCS are defined as within a 0.5-mi. (0.8-km) radius of the HCS. The ecological study area includes the HCS (Lot 6a) and the wooded lot in proximity to and northeast of the HCS (Lot 6b), as shown in Figure 3.5-1. Correspondence with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency (TWRA) was initiated in March 2022 to obtain information regarding ecological resources near the HCS. A response was received from the USFWS on April 15, 2022. Correspondence with USFWS and TWRA is included in Chapter 1, Appendix 1A (Regulatory Correspondence).

Listings of Federal- and State-listed threatened or endangered species currently listed or proposed for listing that may occur within the project site were obtained from the USFWS Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) website (USFWS, 2021) and the Tennessee Department of Environmental and Conservation (TDEC) natural heritage rare species online database (TDEC, 2021a) in September 2021. Federal- and State-listed threatened and endangered species are discussed in Section 3.5.5.

The consultation process was used in combination with online agency databases to obtain information regarding threatened and endangered species, sensitive habitats, commercial and recreational species, and other ecological characteristics for the site and vicinity. Ecological resources described herein are based on recorded information provided by resource agencies and supplemental field surveys. Field surveys for ecological resources were conducted within the ecological study area in summer 2021 (September 8-10, 2021), fall 2021 (November 16-17, 2021), and spring 2022 (April 26-27, 2022). No seasonal survey was conducted during the winter months because the fall survey was performed in late fall and was considered to also be indicative of faunal use during the winter season. Field surveys are used in part to characterize the assemblage of terrestrial plant species and to aid in the identification of any Federally listed threatened or endangered species or Tennessee-listed threatened, endangered, or special concern species potentially occurring within and in proximity to the HCS.

3.5.1 BIOTIC COMMUNITIES The HCS is located in a valley of the Southern Limestone/Dolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills ecoregion within the Ridge and Valley level III ecoregion of eastern Tennessee. Also known as the Great Valley of East Tennessee, the Ridge and Valley level III ecoregion is a relatively low-lying region between the Blue Ridge Mountains to the east and the Cumberland Plateau to the west. As a result of extreme folding and faulting events, the regions roughly parallel ridges and valleys come in a variety of widths, heights, and geologic materials, including limestone, dolomite, shale, siltstone, sandstone, chert, mudstone, and marble. Springs and caves are relatively numerous. Present-day forests cover about 50 percent of the region (Griffith et al., 1998). The Southern Limestone/Dolomite Valleys and Low Rolling Hills level IV ecoregion is characterized by low rolling hills and valleys underlain by limestone and dolomite. Prevalent natural communities include white oak forests, bottomland oak forest, and sycamore-ash-elm September 2022 3-101 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment riparian forests. Grassland barrens intermixed with pine/cedar glades are also found, to a lesser extent (Griffith et al., 1998).

Several rare plant communities that are representative of the Ridge and Valley ecoregion have been documented on the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), which is located in the vicinity of the HCS. These communities include northern white-cedar woodland, oak-hickory-ash limestone woodland, rocky limestone woodland, limestone cliff, limestone sinkhole, limestone barren, calcareous mixed mesophytic forest, floodplain pool, sweetflag pond, boggy forested wetland, streamhead seepage swamp, swamp forest, and wet meadow shrub-herb complex (Baranski, 2009). The ORR is one of the largest remaining areas in the Ridge and Valley ecoregion with relatively intact natural communities (especially those of valley bottoms and lower slopes)

(Nature Conservancy, 1995).

As noted in Section 3.1.1 and 3.1.8, the development areas on the HCS are separated by dedicated green belts which are zoned as Greenbelt Districts by the City of Oak Ridge. The green belts were established by the DOE in 1996 as a mitigative measure to reduce impacts of development of the Horizon Center. Development of the green belt areas has effectively protected wildlife habitat, plant communities, threatened, or endangered species threatened and endangered species and maintained habitat connections to reduce the ecological effects of fragmentation . Much of the HCS is previously disturbed and periodically mowed. It does not contain intact, high-quality native plant communities. Rare plant communities such as those that have been documented on portions of the ORR are not present on the HCS 3.5.2 TERRESTRIAL RESOURCES Plant Communities Qualitative surveys characterizing the presence of terrestrial plant communities and vascular plant species within the ecological study area were performed during seasonal field surveys in 2021 and 2022.

Most of the land cover on the HCS is characterized by herbaceous cover (105.2 ac. [42.6 ha]).

Mixed forest comprises the second greatest land cover category (4.8 ac. [1.9 ha]), and the remaining 0.2 ac. (0.1 ha) is evergreen forest (Table 3.5.2-1). As depicted on Figure 3.5.2-1 and in Table 3.5.2-1, the National Landcover Database (NLCD) (Dewitz and U.S. Geological Survey, 2021) indicates that the most prevalent land cover type found within the 5-mi (8-km) radius of the HCS is deciduous forest (30,836 ac. [12,479 ha]), followed by hay/pasture (7,361 ac. [2,979 ha]), mixed forest (5,035 ac. [2,038 ha]), and developed-open space (3,872 ac. [1,567 ha]). The NLCD mapped landcover within the 5-mi. (8-km) radius was ground-verified utilizing drive-by and pedestrian surveys and determined to be accurate.

The study area was categorized by landcover types based on dominant species of vegetation observed during the field surveys (Figure 3.5.2-1). Qualitative descriptions of plant communities encountered are provided below, including dominant (abundant to common relative abundance) species occurring in each stratum (tree, shrub, herb, and woody vine layers). Plant species observed during the pedestrian field surveys are summarized in Table 3.5.2-2.

3.5.2.1.1 Plant Communities within the HCS and Ecological Study Area Herbaceous vegetation is the predominant landcover on the HCS, occupying approximately 95 percent of the site. The large, periodically mowed and overgrown field located behind the September 2022 3-102 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Philotechnics Building is almost entirely in herbaceous cover, with the exception of small islands and fence rows of shrub-scrub and individual, stand-alone mature trees. Around the perimeter of the field, soils are largely undisturbed, and a fairly diverse, old field vegetation community was observed. The most prevalent species recorded here include woody species like sawtooth blackberry, Japanese honeysuckle, autumn olive, and Chinese lespedeza; and herbaceous species such as soft brome, weeping lovegrass, perennial ryegrass, Kentucky bluegrass, Appalachian ragwort, tall goldenrod, tall fescue, yellow crownbeard, plantains, asters, Virginia strawberry, and lyreleaf sage (Table 3.5.2-2).

In the more stripped soils in the center of the herbaceous field on the HCS, Chinese lespedeza grows in a near monoculture with small amounts of poverty oatgrass. Shrub-scrub islands were observed growing in low spots in the field that could not be mowed and along occasional strips of silt fence. Commonly observed species here include autumn olive, sawtooth blackberry, sweetgum, redbud, and black cherry. A very small number of individual or clustered mature trees were scattered throughout the field, including southern red oak, tulip poplar, and snags of American elm (Table 3.5.2-2).

Mixed forest, the dominant forested landcover type in the study area, is mostly concentrated along low hillslopes and the slopes of draws on Lot 6b, and it also borders the edge of the large old field in the western part of the study area (see Figure 3.5-1). Only 4.8 ac. (1.9 ha) of mixed forest occurs on the HCS, with 16.6 ac. (6.7 ha) on Lot 6b, in proximity to the HCS. Mesophytic mixed forest is the most common mixed forest type observed in the study area. Species typical of deciduous mesophytic forests were observed along with a component of loblolly, white pine, Virginia pine, eastern red cedar, and, less commonly, shortleaf pine in the canopy. Ruderal mesic mixed forest was observed growing along the terraces of the narrow intermittent stream valley that bisects the eastern third of Lot 6b. American elm, tulip poplar, and black walnut are dominant species in the canopy, but small amounts of loblolly pine are also present. A dense thicket overgrown with invasive species, including Chinese privet and Japanese stiltgrass, occupy the shrub and herb layer here. During the spring 2022 field survey, a diversity of rich mesic forest wildflowers was observed outside the HCS in Lot 6b growing on the stream terrace and, most abundantly, on the east facing hillslope just above the stream. Representative wildflowers observed include Jacobs ladder, perfoliate bellwort, eastern shooting star, bloodroot, yellow wakerobin, and white baneberry.

Coniferous forest patches are scattered in the eastern third of the study area in Lot 6b (see Figure 3.5-1). Only 0.2 ac. (0.1 ha) of evergreen forest occurs on the HCS, with 15.4 ac. (6.2 ha) on Lot 6b (Table 3.5.2-1). Early- to mid-successional loblolly forest is the representative evergreen forest community. Tulip poplar is commonly subdominant in the overstory, and species like sweetgum, red maple, and American beech were also commonly encountered, depending on the moisture level. The midstory is typically sparse in older stands of loblolly pine, where little sunlight penetrates to the understory. A large, young stand of evergreen forest in the northeastern corner of Lot 6b (see Figure 3.5-1) has a more prevalent midstory that includes species such as red maple and flowering dogwood. Common and abundant herb species observed in the evergreen forest areas include Christmas fern, muscadine, Japanese honeysuckle, and seedlings of southern red oak and white ash.

Two large patches of deciduous forest were documented in the study area on Lot 6b, in proximity to the HCS, on mid-slopes and low ridges mostly north of the North Boundary Greenway Trail (see Figure 3.5-1). These forest patches appear to represent the oldest successional community within the study area. Topographic and edaphic variation within the study area contributes to subtle shifts in plant associations observed within the deciduous forest September 2022 3-103 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment landcover type. Southern red oak trees are the tallest species in the canopy and contribute to the greatest percent cover; additional dominant canopy species include red maple, sassafras, and black cherry. In the shrub layer, flowering musclewood, and beech are dominant and grow over a sparse herb layer composed mostly of tree and woody vine seedlings, including muscadine, Japanese honeysuckle, sweetgum, and white ash. Southern red oak and sassafras become more common in the tree layer as elevation increases and conditions become drier. In slightly more protected, mesic topographic positions, sweet gum, white oak, and northern red oak were observed to be more prevalent in the overstory.

3.5.2.1.2 Plant Communities in Proximity to the Ecological Study Area A small forested area located outside the ecological study area to the south was supplementally characterized because of its unique plant assemblage and mature successional age relative to the immediate area. In the canopy, mature beech trees were observed to be codominant with large tulip poplars, along with scattered large oak trees that are approximately 40 in. (100 cm) diameter at breast height. Sugar maple and beech are dominant in the sparse shrub layer; seedlings of white ash, paw paw (Asimina triloba), muscadine, and sugar maple are abundant in the scattered herb layer.

Wildlife Because most of the HCS is previously disturbed and maintained as periodically mowed, the wildlife communities associated with the small habitat areas remaining on the site generally consist of common species tolerant of fragmented or altered habitats. Therefore, this area is not likely to support any unique or rare wildlife species. However, the ORR is located in the vicinity of the HCS (see Section 3.5.4 Important Ecological Systems) and is largely undeveloped. The ORR provides adjacent wildlife habitat in the form of forested land, extensive areas of undisturbed wetlands, open waterways, and riparian vegetation, and several hundred acres of grassland communities and fallow fields (DOE, 2021).

Habitat types within the HCS include herbaceous and forest (evergreen and mixed)

(Table 3.5.2-1 and Figure 3.5-1). Methods used to document wildlife in the study area and in proximity to the study area included direct observation and indirect observation (skat, signs, and calls). The field surveys for wildlife included surveys for avifauna, mammals, and herpetofauna.

Lists of wildlife observed and that have the potential to use the HCS for habitat are provided in Tables 3.5.2-3 through 3.5.2-5. The lists of species likely to occur on the HCS were created based upon species lists from the ORR (ORNL, 2019).

Several species of terrestrial mammals, such as white-tailed deer, bobcat, gray fox, red fox, raccoon, eastern cottontail, groundhog, gray squirrel, striped skunk, eastern chipmunk, Virginia opossum, coyote, eastern mole, several bat species, and many small rodents and shrews are likely to inhabit the study area. A list of mammals occurring or potentially occurring on the HCS is provided in Table 3.5.2-3 (ORNL, 2019). White-tailed deer, gray squirrel, and eastern cottontail are recreationally valuable as game species.

Some reptile and amphibian species expected to occur in the vicinity of the ephemeral and intermittent streams in the study area and the EFPC in proximity to the study area include northern cricket frog, American bullfrog, northern green frog, northern spring peeper, southern leopard frog, gray treefrog, red-spotted newt, northern dusky salamander, painted turtle, snapping turtle, and northern water snake. Herpetofauna expected to occur within the herbaceous and forested upland areas of the study area include eastern box turtle, eastern September 2022 3-104 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment American toad, northern fence lizard, common five-lined skink, eastern worm snake, black racer, gray ratsnake, black kingsnake, and eastern garter snake. A list of reptiles and amphibians observed or likely to occur on the HCS is provided in Table 3.5.2-4 (ORNL, 2019).

Abundant and common bird species observed during the summer field survey include American crow, blue jay, mourning dove, white-eyed vireo, Carolina wren, downy woodpecker, and tufted titmouse. Abundant and common species observed during the fall field survey include blue jay, northern cardinal, Carolina chickadee, Eastern phoebe, American goldfinch, and Carolina wren.

Abundant and common species observed during the spring field survey include northern cardinal, tufted titmouse, common yellowthroat, yellow-breasted chat, and field sparrow. Based on the methodology and observed species, no protected bird species (State or Federally listed) or colonial nesting sites (e.g., heronries) are documented within the study area. A list of birds occurring or potentially occurring on the HCS during all seasons is provided in Table 3.5.2-5.

Wild turkey and mourning dove are the only avian species observed in the study area that are recreationally valuable since they are game species. Wood duck, mallard, and Canada goose are other recreationally valuable bird species likely to occur in the study area (ORNL, 2019; eBird, 2022).

Migratory birds are Federally protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which prohibits the take of migratory bird species without prior authorization by the USFWS. Review of the USFWS IPaC database identified six migratory birds of conservation concern that have the potential to be impacted by the Proposed Actions: cerulean warbler (Dendroica cerulea), Kentucky warbler, prairie warbler, prothonotary warbler (Protonotaria citrea), red-headed woodpecker, and wood thrush (USFWS, 2021). Several of these species of migratory birds, including prairie warbler, Kentucky warbler, red-headed woodpecker, and wood thrush, have been recorded on the ORR (ORNL, 2019) and are likely to inhabit or use the forested and herbaceous habitats of the HCS during migration and/or the breeding season.

Information regarding rare, threatened, and endangered species within the HCS is included in Section 3.5.5.

Location of Important Travel Corridors for Terrestrial Wildlife Travel corridors are passageways used by species to access various foraging, nesting, and breeding habitats (USDA NRCS, 2004). Depending upon the species of interest, travel corridor requirements vary widely in size, quality, and biotic community.

3.5.2.3.1 Travel Corridors in the Vicinity of the HCS The Clinch River/Melton Hill Reservoir is approximately 2.7 mi. (4.4 km) from the HCS.

According to the Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group, stream corridors, and other types of naturally vegetated corridors as well, can provide migrating forest and riparian species with their preferred resting and feeding habitats during migration stopovers (FISRWG, 1998). The ORR, much of which is within the vicinity of the HCS, is bordered by the Clinch River and has large expanses of mature hardwood forest and other undeveloped habitats (National Audubon Society, 2022). These habitats make the ORR attractive to a large and diverse number of species that use the reservation as a migratory and/or travel corridor. Forested areas present significant sites for migrating and breeding woodland neotropical migrant birds.

Largely undeveloped, forested mountainous ridges associated with the Valley and Ridge province (see Figure 3.3.3-2 in Section 3.3, Geology and Soils), including Blackoak Ridge, East September 2022 3-105 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Fork Ridge, Pine Ridge, Haw Ridge, and Chestnut Ridge, also may act as migratory and/or travel corridors for wildlife. These ridges are oriented northeast to southwest within the vicinity of the HCS, and Blackoak Ridge is located immediately to the north of the HCS.

The Cumberland Plateau, a dissected plateau within the foothills of the Cumberland Mountain range, is another important travel corridor in eastern Tennessee. The plateau, approximately 5 mi. (8 km) northwest of the site, contains some of the largest stretches of contiguous forest in the eastern United States and provides ample food and cover for migrating and breeding terrestrial wildlife species (Nature Conservancy, 2022).

The Oak Ridge Greenways project is an effort to weave nonmotorized trails through the City of Oak Ridge to community resources such as parks, schools, cultural centers, shopping areas, and areas of employment. These linear, vegetated greenways typically follow natural corridors, such as floodway zones or existing rights-of-way, and many are laid out within the approximately 1500 ac. (607 ha) of forested greenbelts within the city (City of Oak Ridge, 2022).

The citys greenways likely act as travel corridors for many wildlife species that are adapted to urban/suburban environments, and they can connect the HCS with other habitat areas within and surrounding the city. The North Boundary Greenway is an Oak Ridge Greenway trail system that connects to and traverses the forested area north of the HCS and connected undeveloped areas (City of Oak Ridge, 2022).

3.5.2.3.2 On-Site Travel Corridors Mobile animals on the HCS, such as white-tailed deer, coyotes, bobcats, foxes, raccoons, rodents, rabbits, and other terrestrial mammals, collectively create diffuse travel corridors across various biotic communities on the site and to and from adjacent properties, such as the ORR.

The longest and most complex travel corridors are typically established by white-tailed deer.

Other species may use portions of these regularly traveled trails.

Tracks of common wildlife species, such as white-tailed deer, coyote, and raccoon, were observed across the entire HCS during the 2021 and 2022 field surveys, indicating that travel corridors are highly variable. Use of undeveloped areas within the site by these common species does not appear to be impacted by the current level of human and industrial activities occurring on and in proximity to the study area. The animals likely take advantage of connected forested parcels and human-induced corridors, such as wet weather conveyances and other riparian areas, fence lines, edge habitat, road corridors, and utility corridors (USDA NRCS 2004).

With respect to reptiles and amphibians, no specific travel corridors were identified on the HCS during the field surveys. In general, these species are smaller and have smaller home ranges than mammals, and they may only use travel corridors seasonally, rather than daily, to travel to habitats used for breeding or for hibernation. Amphibians and many reptiles utilize both aquatic or wetland habitat as well as nearby uplands (USDA NRCS, 2006); therefore, travel corridors may be present between breeding and foraging habitat.

Much of the habitat areas on the HCS are previously disturbed, periodically mowed, and not considered high-value ecological systems. However, the HCS does provide habitat for many different bird species, including resident and migratory birds (Table 3.5.2-5). Resident and breeding migratory bird species likely use variable on-site flight corridors, mostly within the undeveloped portions of the site, for obtaining food, traveling to and from nesting sites, and as escape routes from predators.

September 2022 3-106 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.5.3 AQUATIC RESOURCES Characterization of the Aquatic Environment Aquatic communities in the ecological study area consist of streams within and in proximity to the study area; however, no streams occur within the HCS. Aquatic communities in the vicinity of the HCS include the EFPC, a tributary of Poplar Creek which drains to the nearby Clinch River Arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir.

Aquatic habitats present within Lot 6b of the study area include one ephemeral stream and one intermittent stream (see Figure 3.4.4-2 in Section 3.4.4). The lower portion of the ephemeral stream has characteristics of an intermittent stream prior to merging with the intermittent stream channel. No ponds are located on the HCS. All the streams within or in proximity to the study area drain into the EFPC to the south of the HCS.

The ephemeral stream within Lot 6b of the study area does not support fish. The intermittent stream and streams located in the vicinity of Lot 6b, however, do support fish and other aquatic biota. Five stream habitats in proximity to the study area were evaluated during summer and fall 2021 and spring 2022 field surveys to assess the potential to support aquatic organisms and any observed aquatic biota. Seasonal surveys consisted of sampling at five sites in proximity to the HCS for fish and crustaceans. A full list of species found in these surveys can be found in Table 3.5.3-1. The most common species captured across all seasons of sampling included emerald shiner, striped shiner, and blacknose dace. Crayfish was the only crustacean observed.

EFPC, located in proximity to the study area, flows through the urbanized and suburbanized section of Oak Ridge before its confluence with Poplar Creek (TDEC, 2020a). Benthic macroinvertebrate communities were analyzed for the EFPC in 2018. Tennessee Macroinvertebrate Index scores were determined for each of the six monitoring stations.

Tennessee Macroinvertebrate Index scores for East Fork Poplar Creek ranged from 14 (C rating, moderately impaired) to 42 (A rating, non-impaired). Across the six sampling stations within the EFPC, taxa richness, a measure of overall diversity, for benthic macroinvertebrates ranged from 21 to 41 taxa present (TDEC, 2020a). In general, in the EFPC, total taxa richness of benthic macroinvertebrates has increased since historical lows in the 1980s (DOE, 2020).

Surveys documented 33 fish species present in the EFPC (Table 3.5.3-2; ORNL, 1997). The fish community in the EFPC was monitored in 2019 at six sites along the creek. In general, species richness, density, biomass, and number of pollution-sensitive species has increased since 1986 within the creek (DOE, 2020). Fish species and aquatic biota present in this creek are typical for low-flow tributary streams.

While some aquatic species characteristic of the Clinch River may be found within lower reaches of the tributaries in proximity to the HCS, such as Poplar Creek (especially during high flow conditions), the aquatic biota of the more permanently flowing portions of these streams are likely to be more characteristic of low-flow tributary streams, such as EFPC. Fish sampling within Clinch River upstream of the confluence with Poplar Creek was conducted by TVA in February, May, July, and October 2011. The survey found an average of 33 species at the downstream sampling location (i.e., those nearest the confluence with Poplar Creek) (TVA, 2013). Common fish species within the Clinch River include bluegill, Mississippi silverside (Menidia audens), gizzard shad, spotted sucker, white bass (Morone chrysops), yellow bass (Morone mississippiensis), yellow perch (Perca flavescens), green sunfish, redear sunfish (Lepomis microlophus), black redhorse, and sauger (Sander canadensis) (TVA 2013). A mollusk survey conducted in 2011 in the Clinch River upstream of the confluence with Poplar September 2022 3-107 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Creek found a total of 74 living native mussels from six different species: pimpleback (Quadrula pustulosa), fragile papershell (Leptodea fragilis), purple wartyback (Cyclonaias tuberculata),

pink heelsplitter (Potomilus alatus), giant floater (Pyganodon grandis), and elephant ear (Elliptio crassidens) (Third Rock Consultants, 2011). Zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha), an invasive species, was also observed to be growing on most of the native mussels (Third Rock Consultants, 2011).

Invasive species present in the Clinch River include clams and mussels, fish, and aquatic plants. In addition to zebra mussels, other nonnative aquatic species present include the Asiatic clam (Corbicula fluminea), Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum L.), hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata), curly-leaved pondweed (Potamogeton crispus L.), common carp (Cyrpinius carpo),

Mississippi silverside, redbreast sunfish, striped bass (Morone saxatilis), and yellow perch (USGS, 2019). Some of these species, including striped bass, are stocked for recreational fishing activities.

Commercial and Sport Fisheries The only recreationally important aquatic species found in 2021 aquatic surveys of streams in proximity to the HCS was bluegill. The EFPC has a recreational fishery, with targeted fish species including white bass and white crappie (Pomoxis annularis). Due to historical mercury contamination on the ORR, including the EFPC, a roving creel study has been initiated (as of 2020) to assess angling effort and potential consumption of fish harvested downstream from EFPC at the confluence of Poplar Creek and Bear Creek as well as at the confluence of Poplar Creek and the Clinch River, however, results of this study are not yet available (TDEC, 2020b).

As a result of mercury accumulation as well as bacteriological contamination in EFPC, the TDEC has posted an advisory against the consumption of all fish from EFPC (TDEC, 2020c).

Recreational fisheries also exist within Clinch River. The main target species within the Watts Bar Reservoir, including the lower Clinch River, include largemouth bass, smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu), black crappie (Pomoxis nigromaculatus), white crappie, bluegill, blue catfish (Ictalurus furcatus), channel catfish (Ictalurus punctatus), and striped bass (TWRA 2016). Stocking programs exist for largemouth bass, walleye (Sander vitreus), and striped bass within the Watts Bar Reservoir (TWRA, 2016). Upstream in the Clinch River, in the Melton Hill Reservoir, target species for recreational fisheries include muskellunge (Esox masquinongy),

striped bass, hybrid striped bass (M. chrysops X M. saxatilis), white crappie, largemouth bass, and skipjack herring (Alosa chrysochloris) (Visit Knoxville, 2020).

Commercial fishing is specifically not allowed in the Watts Bar Reservoir of the Clinch River (Tennessee Fish and Wildlife Commission, 2021).

Key Aquatic Indicator Organisms According to NUREG-1748, key aquatic indicators are expected to gauge changes in the distribution and abundance of species populations that are particularly vulnerable to impacts from the Proposed Action. Historically, benthic macroinvertebrates have been monitored within EFPC to assess impacts of previous activities and remediation, as these communities can serve as indictors of overall system health (TDEC 2020a). Benthic macroinvertebrate monitoring in 2019 indicated that the macroinvertebrate score in EFPC ranged from non-impaired to moderately impaired along its length (TDEC, 2020a). The macroinvertebrate score is based upon measures of presence, species richness, and community diversity within the stream.

September 2022 3-108 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.5.4 IMPORTANT ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS Ecological Systems in the Vicinity of the HCS According to NUREG-1748, important ecological systems are areas that are especially vulnerable to change or that contain important species habitats, such as breeding areas (e.g.,

nesting areas), nursery areas, feeding areas, resting areas, wintering areas, or other areas of seasonally high concentrations of individuals of important species. Important ecological areas may include national or state forests, wilderness areas, scenic areas, nature preserves, wildlife management areas, Nationwide Rivers Inventory streams, and wild and scenic rivers. This section addresses important ecological systems that are within the vicinity (within a 5-mi. [8-km]

radius) of the HCS. Important ecological areas within the vicinity of the HCS are illustrated on Figure 3.5.4-1.

The ORR, a Federally owned site covering over 32,000 ac. (13,000 ha) located in Anderson and Roane counties, is within the vicinity of the HCS. The ORNL Natural Resources Management program maintains a list of special habitats within the ORR that are collectively termed Sensitive Areas. Sensitive Areas are those containing State- or Federal-listed species, ecologically significant habitat, and/or particular management requirements (ORNL, 2015). Sensitive Areas on the ORR and other ecologically important areas in the vicinity of the HCS are shown on Figure 3.5.4-1.

With the support of the TWRA, this reservation has been designated as an Important Bird Area by the National Audubon Society (National Audubon Society, 2022). According to the TWRA, the Oak Ridge Reservation has large expanses of mature hardwood forest, unbroken by development or farmland; brushy corridors and cutover forest; abandoned pastures; grasslands; cedar glades and barrens; and wetlands. These habitats make the area attractive to a large and diverse number of species (TWRA, 2021). Several access points on the reservation are open to the public and available for hiking and bird watching. Nearly 200 species of birds have been documented on the reservation, including the following State-threatened and State-designated as in need of management species: wood thrush, golden-winged warbler (Vermivora chrysoptera), cerulean warbler, Henslow's sparrow (Ammodramus henslowii), little blue heron (Egretta caerulea), least bittern (Ixobrychus exilis), loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus), and black-crowned night-heron (Nycticorax nycticorax) (National Audubon Society, 2022).

Forested areas provide important habitat for migrating and breeding woodland neotropical migrant species. During the breeding season, 23 out of 27 species found on the ORR were determined to be of top conservation priority in the Appalachian Mountains Bird Conservation Region by Partners in Flight. Biologically and ecologically significant natural areas and habitats on the reservation, including forests, grasslands, bogs, barrens, bluffs, outcrops, and other areas, represent high-quality examples of natural communities and/or habitats for populations of rare species and species of concern (National Audubon Society, 2022). In April 2005, U.S.

Department of Energy (DOE) and the State-designated almost 3,000 acres of ORR land in the vicinity of the HCS (see Figure 3.5.4-1) as the Black Oak Ridge Conservation Easement. This natural area, managed by TWRA in cooperation with TDEC, contains the largest block of unfragmented forest on the ORR. It provides valuable rare forest interior that serves as habitat for uncommon wildlife and nesting and migratory birds. An analysis by the ORNL of natural areas, managed areas, and other designated areas within the ORR identified the following categories and numbers of terrestrial or wetland areas (Baranski, 2009; ORNL, 2015):

September 2022 3-109 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment

• 47 Natural Areas (NA) Terrestrial or Aquatic NAs are systems classified primarily on the basis of the presence of listed species.

• 18 Reference Areas (RA) Terrestrial or Aquatic RAs are areas that contain uncommon habitat or ecologically sensitive features, such as wetlands, barrens, caves, or springs, that may also serve as reference or control areas for biological monitoring.

• Five Cooperative Management Areas (CMA) CMAs are areas being used for nonecological purposes (e.g., mowed areas) that contain sensitive habitat for which close cooperation among programs is required to achieve multiple management objectives.

• Eight Habitat Areas (HA) HAs are areas designated as such because of the presence of plants listed by the State as rare and/or commercially exploited.

• Eight Potential Habitat Areas (PH) PH areas are areas with habitat characteristics suitable for habitation by State- or Federal-listed species but that have no recorded presence of those species.

Figure 3.5.4-1 provides a map of the ORR designated ecologically significant areas within approximately 5 mi. (8 km) of the HCS. The following four designated areas on the ORR are in proximity (within 0.5 mi. [0.8 km]) of the site (Baranski, 2009; AFORR 2022):

• Poplar Creek Cliffs (NA20) is a 476-ac. (193-ha) NA within the Black Oak Ridge Conservation Easement with a steep, southwest-facing slope in the water gap that bisects Blackoak Ridge. It is located a short distance upstream from the confluence of EFPC with Poplar Creek. Small limestone cliffs occur near the stream. Many species that are unusual within the ORR occur here, including hemlock (Tsuga canadensis),

rhododendron (Rhododendron maximum), fringe tree (Chionanthus virginicus), spider lily (Hymenocallis occidentalis), and mock orange (Philadelphus hirsutus). Pink lady's-slipper (Cypripedium acaule) and spreading false-foxglove (Aureolaria patula) also occur at this site.

• East Fork Limestone Quarry/Blackoak Ridge Limestone Quarry/Blackoak Ridge Forest (NA46) is a 300-ac. (121-ha) NA with mature mixed hardwoods and pines. NA46 is located northwest of Lambert's Quarry within the Black Oak Ridge Conservation Easement. Much of the forest is oak-hickory-tuliptree, but native forests of shortleaf pine and white pine dominate some areas. This large, forested area includes commercially exploited pink lady's-slipper. This area has the only confirmed occurrence of white-topped sedge (Rhynchospora colorata) in Tennessee.

• East Fork (Poplar Creek) Floodplain (NA47). This 609-ac. (246-ha) NA includes floodplain hardwood forest with large sycamores and an abundant understory of giant cane in places. Floodplain forests with canebrakes are rapidly disappearing in the southeastern United States because of development. The site also includes adjacent upland areas with rare plant communities, including cedar barrens and beech-maple forest. Rare species found within NA47 include goldenseal (Hydrastis canadensis),

American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius), the southeastern shrew, and pink lady's-slipper. The Tennessee dace (Phoxinus tennesseensis) occurs in small tributaries in the floodplain.

September 2022 3-110 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment

• HA4 is an area of mature mixed hardwoods and pines within the Black Oak Ridge Conservation Easement. This area of forest interior includes habitat for rare species (Parr and Hughes, 2006).

Upland forested and open-land community types on Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA)-owned land parcels surrounding TVA reservoirs and reservations provide a broad range of habitats that can support a wide array of terrestrial wildlife species. Habitat Protection Areas are managed by TVA to protect populations of species identified as threatened or endangered by the USFWS, State-listed species, and any unusual or exemplary biological communities/geological features (TVA, 2021).

The Grassy Creek Habitat Protection Area is located along and south of Grassy Creek in the vicinity of the HCS (see Figure 3.5.4-1). The 265-ac. (107-ha) Grassy Creek Habitat Protection Area provides a buffer for sensitive habitat surrounding and immediately south of Grassy Creek and the Grassy Creek embayment of the Clinch River arm of the Watts Bar Reservoir. A State-threatened plant species, shining ladies-tresses (Spiranthes lucida), is among the species with habitat protected by the Grassy Creek Habitat Protection Area. Two caves that would provide suitable habitat for a variety of bat species have also been identified on or near this area (TVA, 2021).

The Campbell Bend Barrens and Crowder Cemetery Barrens are both registered as State natural areas within the vicinity of the HCS (see Figure 3.5.4-1). Campbell Bend Barrens is a 35-acre (14-ha) natural area that is approximately 1 mile (0.6 km) to the northeast of the 15-acre (6.1-ha) Crowder Cemetery Barrens. These areas were once part of a larger natural area complex on the ORR before the land was sold in the mid-1980s. Barrens natural communities are rare in the Ridge and Valley Physiographic Province of East Tennessee. They occur on thin, cherty soil over dolomitic limestone and are dominated by warm-season grasses, legumes, and composites with eastern red cedar, white pine, and hardwoods scattered throughout. These natural areas support a variety of plants associated with cedar barrens and glades, including spreading false foxglove, naked-stem sunflower (Helianthus occidentalis), slender blazing star (Liatris cylindracea), and prairie dock (Silphium terebinthinaceum) (TDEC, 2022).

The Clinch River is another important ecological resource within the vicinity of the HCS. A section of the Clinch River, from Melton Hill Dam upstream to the Pellissippi Parkway, is designated as a Class III Partially Developed River Area under the Tennessee Scenic Rivers Program (TDEC, 2021b). A partially developed river is defined by TDEC as rivers or sections of rivers that are free flowing, unpolluted and with shorelines and vistas essentially more developed. The Tennessee Scenic Rivers Program is a voluntary community-based partnership intended to preserve and protect the free flowing, unpolluted, and outstanding scenic, recreational, geologic, botanical, fish, wildlife, historical, or cultural values of selected rivers or river segments in the State (TDEC, 2021b).

Ecological Systems on the HCS The potential presence of ecological systems, including potentially suitable bat roosting habitat, was investigated for the ecological study area, as illustrated in Figure 3.5-1. Habitats on the study area include significant portions of previously disturbed and periodically mowed areas that are not considered high-value important ecological systems. However, ecological areas found on the study area include one ephemeral stream, one intermittent stream with a headwater seep, and potentially suitable bat foraging and roosting habitat. For more information on September 2022 3-111 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment distribution of Waters of the United States on the HCS, refer to Section 3.4.4 (Wetlands) and Figure 3.4.4-2.

Limited areas throughout the study area provide potential suitable summer roosting habitat for the Indiana bat and northern long-eared bat, as well as potential foraging habitat for these and other species of bats. On the northeastern 1/3 of the study area, deciduous, mixed, and evergreen forest communities were identified with potential suitable summer bat habitat totaling 44.3 ac. (17.9 ha) of forested land. However, only 5.0 ac. (2.0 ha) of this forested land is located on the HCS (see Table 3.5.2-1). These forested areas also provide potential suitable habitat for migrating and breeding neotropical migrant bird species.

Fourteen potentially suitable bat roost trees consisting of six different tree species were identified in the study area due to the presence of cavities, hollows, crevices, and exfoliating bark. Seven of these trees are located with the HCS. More information regarding potentially suitable bat habitat can be found in Section 3.5.5 (Rare, Threatened and Endangered Species).

The following categories of important ecological systems were considered but are not present on the HCS: cave habitats, areas that are designated as wilderness areas, State-designated natural areas, and wild and scenic rivers. No commercially valuable species, species essential to the maintenance and survival of rare or commercially or recreationally valuable species, species critical to the structure and function of local terrestrial ecosystems, or species that could serve as biological indicators of effects on local terrestrial ecosystems were observed during field surveys of the study area.

Potential Sources of Ecological Stress As human populations continue to increase and expand in the Oak Ridge area, available large tracts of contiguous forest are becoming smaller and more fragmented. Forest area is lost to clearing of land for residential development, industry, and agriculture uses, and the remaining forest is further disturbed by associated roads and utility corridors. Fragmentation creates an edge effect that alters habitat conditions, such as moisture regime and light penetration, and can result in the introduction and spread of invasive species and predators harmful to forest-dependent species (ORNL, 2019).

Certain nonnative species are considered invasive and pose a significant threat to ecological systems. Executive Order 13112, Invasive Species signed February 3, 1999 (published February 8, 1999, in 64 Federal Register [FR] 6183), directs all Federal agencies to address invasive-species concerns and refrain from actions likely to increase invasive-species problems.

This executive order was issued for the following purposes:

• Prevent the introduction of invasive species.

• Provide for their control.

• Minimize the economic, ecological, and human health impacts such species cause.

Nonnative terrestrial animal species observed on the HCS and/or on the ORR include the European starling, Eurasian collared dove, and rock dove. Nonnative aquatic species are discussed in Section 3.5.3 (Aquatic Resources). The ORR has developed integrated pest management programs for invasive insects that pose a threat to forest health, including September 2022 3-112 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment southern pine beetle (Dendroctonus frontalis), hemlock woolly adelgid (Adelges tsugae), and emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis), and for nonnative invasive plants (ORNL, 2015).

Nonnative, invasive plant species are prevalent on the HCS likely because it was previously disturbed, resulting in the introduction and spread of these species. Common nonnative invasive plant species occurring on the study area include the following:

• Japanese honeysuckle

• Chinese privet

• Multiflora rose

• Autumn olive

• Chinese (sericea) lespedeza

• Japanese stiltgrass Industrial contamination of the natural environment also can cause stress to ecological systems.

The DOE constructed three facilities on the Oak Ridge Reservation in the 1940s: ORNL, Y-12, and K-25 (ETTP). Activities at these facilities have resulted in the release of hazardous substances (e.g., polychlorinated biphenyls and mercury) and radioactive compounds, leading to the contamination of natural resources both at the reservation and in the surrounding environment (Industrial Economics, Inc., 2009).

The effects of climate change may also be a potential source of ecological stress. Projected changes in climate can have adverse consequences for natural landscapes, such as forest ecosystems, including shifts in the distribution of plant and animal species. Ecosystem disturbances associated with extreme weather events may become more common, as might invasive and pest species. Freshwater ecosystems and water quality are likely to be adversely affected by rising stream and lake temperatures that influence suitable habitat for Tennessees wildlife (Sustainable Tennessee Organization, 2012).

3.5.5 RARE, THREATENED, AND ENDANGERED SPECIES The Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 United States Code [USC] §§ 1531-1543) was passed to conserve the ecosystems upon which endangered and threatened species depend, and to conserve and recover those species. An endangered species is defined by the ESA as any species in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range. A threatened species is likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant part of its range. Critical habitats, essential to the conservation of listed species, also can be designated under the ESA. The ESA establishes programs to conserve and recover endangered and threatened species and makes their conservation a priority for Federal agencies.

Provisions under Section 7 of the ESA, as amended, require that any action likely to adversely affect a species classified as Federally protected be subject to review by the USFWS. Other species may receive additional protection under separate laws. A listing of Federally threatened or endangered species currently classified or proposed for classification that may occur within the site was obtained from the USFWS IPaC website in September 2021 (USFWS, 2021). The September 2022 3-113 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment USFWS IPaC identified four endangered species, four threatened species, and one candidate species. According to the IPaC, designated critical habitats do not occur within the HCS.

Under the Tennessee Nongame and Endangered or Threatened Wildlife Species Conservation Act of 1974 (TN Code § 70-8-101-112 [2020]), the State of Tennessee provides protection for species considered threatened, endangered, or deemed in need of management within the State other than those Federally listed under the ESA. The listings are handled by the TDEC; additionally, the Tennessee Natural Heritage Program maintains a database of species that are considered threatened, endangered, special concern, or tracked in Tennessee. A review of the TDEC rare species database in September 2021 resulted in a total of 47 species listed as rare in Tennessee that are known to occur in the areas encompassed by the Bethel-Valley, Tennessee, and/or Elverton, Tennessee, topographic map quadrangles (Table 3.5.5-1) (TDEC, 2021a). No rare, threatened, or endangered species (wildlife or plants) were observed within the HCS as part of the 2021 and 2022 seasonal field surveys.

Aquatic Animals 3.5.5.1.1 Fish No aquatic features are present on the HCS. The only aquatic features in the study area include an ephemeral stream (the lower portion of the channel resembles an intermittent stream) and an intermittent stream, both of which are located within Lot 6b and drain into the EFPC, which is located to the east of the HCS. These streams were evaluated for potential habitat for the listed fish species identified in Table 3.5.5-1, and it was determined that they do not support fish due to lack of permanent flow. These streams are characterized by clay and silt substrates with some rock and gravel, and much of the channel bottoms are full of debris, such as leaves and sticks. Small pools of water were observed during summer and fall 2021 and spring 2022 field surveys, with limited flow likely during or after storm events. No aquatic organisms were observed within the study area streams during the fall 2021 stream delineation survey. These aquatic features within the study area do not provide habitat for the Federally threatened spotfin chub or the State-listed tangerine darter, which require large perennial creeks or medium-sized rivers of moderate gradient (NatureServe, 2022; TDEC, 2021a). Therefore, there is no suitable habitat for these listed fish species on the HCS or within the study area.

The Tennessee dace and flame chub are State-listed fish species in need of management, both with ranks of S3 (vulnerable). Both of these species are found in the Tennessee River watershed. The Tennessee dace is found only in spring-fed, first-order streams and small low-gradient woodland tributaries with gravel, sand, and silt-bottomed pools. The flame chub is found in springs and spring-fed streams with lush aquatic vegetation (NatureServe, 2022; TDEC, 2021a). Since no spring-fed, first-order perennial streams occur within the HCS, these species do not occur on-site. Although habitat for these species may occur in the EFPC in proximity to the site, they were not observed during aquatic surveys conducted in this stream and its tributaries during the summer and fall 2021 and 2022 field surveys.

3.5.5.1.2 Mollusks According to the summer and fall 2021 and spring 2022 field surveys, suitable habitat is not present within the study area for any of the Federal- and State-listed endangered mussels listed in Table 3.5.5-1. All these mussel species require freshwater perennial riverine systems with flowing water (TDEC, 2021a), which is not present on the HCS or within the study area.

September 2022 3-114 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.5.5.1.3 Snails The rare (rank S2 imperiled) spiny riversnail is an aquatic snail that is found in large perennial creeks and rivers with cobble/boulder substrates in the vicinity of riffles (NatureServe, 2022). According to the 2021 and 2022 field surveys, no habitat for the spiny riversnail is present on the HCS or within the study area.

3.5.5.1.4 Crustaceans The valley flame crayfish is State-listed as endangered and is found in open floodplain areas with high water tables (TDEC, 2021a; NatureServe, 2022). According to the 2021 and 2022 field surveys, no habitat with high water tables is present for the valley flame crayfish on the HCS or within the study area.

3.5.5.1.5 Amphibians The hellbender is a completely aquatic salamander that is State-listed as endangered and prefers fast-flowing, clear, well-oxygenated streams and rivers with substrate consisting of large flat boulders and logs (NatureServe, 2022). According to the 2021 and 2022 field surveys, no suitable habitat is present for the hellbender because no perennial streams exist on the HCS or within the study area.

Terrestrial Animals 3.5.5.2.1 Insects The monarch butterfly is a Federal candidate species. In general, breeding areas are virtually all patches of milkweed in North America and some other regions. The critical conservation features for North American populations are coastal migratory stopover areas and overwintering habitats, which include high altitude Mexican conifer forests or coastal conifer or eucalyptus groves in California (NatureServe, 2022). A small amount of milkweed plants were observed during 2021 and 2022 field surveys, and the study area contains herbaceous habitats with potential breeding habitat for the monarch butterfly.

3.5.5.2.2 Amphibians Four-toed salamanders have been observed on the ORR, which is in the vicinity of the HCS.

This species occurs in areas of middle and eastern Tennessee in woodland swamps, shallow depressions, and sphagnum moss mats on acidic soils (TDEC, 2021a). However, no swamps or wetlands occur in the study area, and no specimens of the four-toed salamander were observed during 2021 and 2022 field surveys. Therefore, no suitable habitat for the four-toed salamander occurs on the HCS or within the study area.

The rare (rank S3S4 vulnerable/apparently secure) green salamander inhabits crevices in rock outcrops and cliffs in mature forested landscapes. The green salamander needs moist rock crevices to reproduce and hibernate but is also arboreal, using trees and bark seasonally from May to September (Soto et al., 2021). Rock outcrops and ledges were not observed during the 2021 and 2022 field surveys; therefore, the study area does not provide suitable habitat for the green salamander.

September 2022 3-115 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment The rare (rank S2 imperiled) streamside salamander is found in scattered populations in middle Tennessee, particularly in limestone bedrock habitats. This species is most often found in upland forests close to streams (TWRA, 2022). The HCS does not contain streams, and the ephemeral and intermittent streams in Lot 6b in proximity to the HCS do not have suitable habitat for the streamside salamander, as they do not have exposed limestone beds and larger flat rocks required for streamside salamander breeding habitat.

3.5.5.2.3 Reptiles The northern pinesnake is State-listed as threatened in Tennessee. The northern pinesnakes preferred habitat is characterized by pine or pine-oak dominated woodlands with open understory and well-drained sandy soils for burrowing (TDEC, 2021a). A few small early- to mid-successional loblolly pine-dominated areas occur within the study area; however, these areas do not have open understory with sandy soils, and this species is not expected to occur within the study area.

The eastern slender glass lizard is State-listed as in need of management in Tennessee. It is a secretive species that prefers dry, open grasslands or woodlands, and is typically found in dried grass or burrows (TWRA, 2022). Because the herbaceous and forested habitats on the HCS consist of dense vegetation, habitat for this species is not present on the HCS. In addition, eastern slender glass lizards were not observed during summer and fall 2021 and spring 2022 seasonal field surveys.

3.5.5.2.4 Mammals 3.5.5.2.4.1 Indiana and Northern Long-eared Bats The Indiana bat, northern long-eared bat, and gray bat are the only Federally listed mammal species within Anderson County identified by the USFWS, and they have been observed at the ORR in the vicinity of the HCS. One Indiana bat was caught in a mist net bordering the Clinch River in June and July 2013 (DOE, 2021). The Indiana bat is found throughout much of the eastern half of the United States and has been listed as a Federally endangered species since March 11, 1967. It is also State-listed in Tennessee as endangered. The 2020 Range-Wide Indiana Bat Summer Survey Guidelines defines suitable habitat for the Indiana bat (USFWS, 2020):

Suitable summer habitat for Indiana bats consists of a wide variety of forested/wooded habitats where they roost, forage, and travel and may also include some adjacent and interspersed non-forested habitats such as emergent wetlands and adjacent edges of agricultural fields, old fields and pastures. This includes forests and woodlots containing potential roosts (i.e., live trees and/or snags greater than 5 inches in diameter at breast height that have exfoliating bark, cracks, crevices, and/or hollows.

Other summer habitat may include riparian zones, bottomlands, floodplains, wooded wetlands, and adjacent upland forests (USFWS, 2007a). Individual trees may be considered suitable habitat when they exhibit characteristics of suitable roost trees and are within 1,000 feet of other forested habitat (USFWS, 2020). Tree species that Indiana bats have been known to roost and establish maternity colonies in include hickory (Carya spp.), oak (Quercus spp.), elm (Ulmus spp.), ash (Fraxinus spp.), maple (Acer spp.), and poplar (Populus spp.). Some tree species, primarily hickories and, to a lesser extent, oaks, provide adequate bark characteristics in living trees. Space between exfoliating bark and the trunk of the tree appear to be the primary September 2022 3-116 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment characteristic needed for bats to use a particular tree. In winter, Indiana bats hibernate in caves or abandoned mines (USFWS, 2007a).

The northern long-eared bat occurs statewide in Tennessee but is now uncommon in the State after the introduction of the fungus causing the deadly disease known as white-nose syndrome, which has caused dramatic declines in populations of this species. The northern long-eared bat was Federally listed as a threatened species in April 2015 and is also listed as threatened by the State of Tennessee. In summer months, northern long-eared bats roost singly or in colonies within cavities, underneath bark, crevices, or hollows of both live and dead trees that typically have a diameter at breast height greater than or equal to 3 in. (7.6 cm). Northern long-eared bats appear to be opportunistic, selecting trees based on the presence of cavities, crevices, or peeling bark. If suitable roost trees are not available, northern long-eared bats have been known, although rarely, to roost in man-made structures, such as barns, bridges, and sheds (USFWS, 2020). Northern long-eared bats emerge from their roosts at dusk to forage through the understory of forested hillsides and ridges and feed on insects (USFWS, 2015).

Suitable summer habitat for the northern long-eared bat includes a wide variety of forested lands to roost, forage, and travel. These areas include forests containing potential roosts, such as woodlots, fencerows, riparian forests, and other wooded corridors. These wooded areas may be dense or loose aggregates of trees with variable amounts of canopy closure. Individual trees may be considered suitable habitat when they exhibit characteristics of suitable roost trees and are within 1000 ft. (305 m) of other forested habitat. Non-forested foraging habitats may include adjacent emergent wetlands and edges of agricultural fields, old fields, and pastures. Northern long-eared bats typically occupy their summer habitat from mid-May through mid-August (USFWS, 2020). In winter, the northern long-eared bat hibernates underground in caves or other man-made structures, such as mines (USFWS, 2015).

Northern long-eared bats are known to be present on the ORR, in the vicinity of the HCS. Their calls have been identified in various acoustic surveys of the reservation, and in 2013 their presence was confirmed when a number were captured in mist nets (McCracken et al., 2015).

A total of approximately 44.3 ac. (17.9 ha) of forested/wooded areas (deciduous forest, evergreen forest, and mixed forest) were documented within the ecological study area based upon the 2021 and 2022 field surveys (Figure 3.5-1 and Table 3.5.2-1). Within those forested/wooded areas, a total of 14 potentially suitable bat roost trees were identified.

However, only 5.0 ac. (2.0 ha) of those forested areas and seven potentially suitable bat roost trees are located on the HCS. The location and a description for each of these potentially suitable bat roost trees are presented on Figure 3.5-1 and in Table 3.5.5-2, respectively. No cave or mine habitats were observed on-site that would serve as suitable hibernacula for bats.

Several karst sinkholes were observed just outside the study area; however, none possessed aboveground openings to crevices or caves suitable for hibernating or roosting bats.

The 14 potentially suitable bat roost trees in the study area were identified due to the presence of cavities, hollows, crevices, and exfoliating bark. These trees consisted of six species: four dead southern red oak, two dead and one declining American elm, four dead white ash, one declining black cherry, one dead tulip poplar, and one dead slippery elm. Each of the locations where potentially suitable bat roost trees were identified are also considered suitable foraging habitat due to the presence of relatively open understory or midstory layers that provide accessibility for bats to forage and are in proximity to other open suitable foraging ground and water resources (EFPC).

September 2022 3-117 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.5.5.2.4.2 Gray Bat The gray bat is listed as Federally endangered by the USFWS. Gray bats roost in caves throughout the year and forage over water, including streams and reservoirs, where they consume night-flying aquatic insects near the water surface. Unlike other bat species, gray bats are restricted year-round to cave and cave-like habitats for both hibernation and roosting. Gray bats have been observed over the Clinch River bordering the ORR in 2003 and over a pond on the reservation in 2004 (DOE, 2021). Three gray bats were mist-netted outside a cave on the ORR in 2006, and several gray bats were caught in mist nets bordering the Clinch River in June and July 2013 (DOE, 2021).

No caves or maternal roost sites were observed within or in proximity to the study area during the 2021 and 2022 field surveys. Because neither hibernacula nor maternal roosting habitat for the gray bat is available in the study area, there is no suitable habitat for gray bats within the study area.

3.5.5.2.4.3 Long-Tailed Shrew The long-tailed shrew is State-listed as in need of management in Tennessee. This species prefers cool and damp rocky slopes in coniferous and deciduous forests, sometimes areas with moss-covered rocks, in the mountains of eastern Tennessee. Long-tailed shrews spend most of their time in the deep crevices between rocks about 1 ft. (0.3 m) beneath the surface (TWRA, 2022). Because the study area is not located in a mountainous area and rocky, loose talus habitats are not present, the long-tailed shrew is not expected to occur on the HCS.

3.5.5.2.4.4 Southern Bog Lemming The southern bog lemming is State-listed as in need of management in Tennessee. This species prefers low areas of moist, grassy fields, meadows, or swamps with thick vegetation. It also occurs less frequently in bogs and damp woods. Individuals use runways to make underground tunnels for nesting, feeding, resting, and food storage (TWRA, 2022). No suitable wetland habitat for the southern bog lemming is present on the HCS or within the study area.

3.5.5.2.5 Birds The Bachmans sparrow is State-listed as endangered by the State of Tennessee. This species historically inhabited mature pine forest during the summer breeding season in Tennessee near the northern limit of its range. That habitat is now extremely rare in the State, and the Bachman's sparrow is nearly extirpated. This bird requires evergreen habitat with a high volume of grasses and forbs, some scattered trees and shrubs, and an open understory on dry, upland sites. Only occasionally do these conditions exist in clearcuts, abandoned fields, and possibly on newly planted commercial pine plantations. These sites usually remain suitable for only three to five years unless they are regularly thinned and burned to reduce understory vegetation (TWRA, 2022). The pine forest in the study area is early to mid-successional with a dense understory. Although potentially suitable habitat for Bachmans sparrow may occur on the HCS, this species is not expected to occur on-site because it is nearly extirpated from the State and the pine forest does not have the open understory preferred by this species. In addition, Bachmans sparrows are not known to occur on the ORR (ORNL, 2019).

Bald eagles are Federally protected under the Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act, and suitable nesting and foraging habitats may exist along the Clinch River adjacent to the ORR and September 2022 3-118 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment TVA reservoir lands within the vicinity of the HCS. The TWRA conducts yearly midwinter bald eagle counts along the Clinch River in accordance with a continuing statewide monitoring program. It is part of a count conducted by the agency to monitor population trends for this species, which is increasing in numbers in eastern Tennessee (ORNL, 2019). The ORR supports one or two nests per year, and these are continually monitored (ORNL, 2019).

Bald eagles generally nest near rivers, large lakes, or streams that support an adequate food supply. They often roost and nest in large, mature, or old-growth trees; snags (dead trees);

cliffs; and tall structures, such as power poles and communication towers. In forested areas, bald eagles often select the tallest trees with limbs strong enough to support a nest that can weigh more than 1,000 pounds (USFWS, 2007b). One bald eagle was observed off-site near the Philotechnics Building during the spring 2022 seasonal field survey. However, the study area does not have trees that typically support bald eagle nests or roosting.

The cerulean warbler is State-listed as in need of management in Tennessee. It is a summer resident in Tennessee, arriving in mid-April and departing by the end of August. It prefers large areas of mature forest for nesting and breeds from northernmost Alabama to southern Ontario and west to the Great Plains. Eighty percent of the summer population can be found between the Cumberland Mountains of Tennessee to the mountains of West Virginia. The cerulean warbler breeds in mature deciduous forests with tall trees that have well developed canopies in a variety of forests, including bottomland hardwood forests and steep ridges of upland forests (TWRA, 2022). The study area does not have mature forests that would support cerulean warblers, and no cerulean warblers were observed in the study area during 2021 and 2022 seasonal field surveys.

The Swainsons warbler is State-listed as in need of management in Tennessee. In western and middle Tennessee, the Swainson's warbler breeds during the summer in wooded swamps with canebrakes or dense vine tangles, specifically the Mississippi River valley and the Hatchie River basin. In the mountains of eastern Tennessee, breeding habitat includes rhododendron thickets along mountain ravines (TWRA, 2022). As the study area is not mountainous, habitat for Swainsons warbler is not present in the study area, and this species was not observed during 2021 field surveys.

Other migratory bird species of conservation concern with the potential to occur on the HCS are discussed in Section 3.5.2.

Plants Two species of Federally listed plants have the potential to occur at the HCS, and 19 species of plants listed by the TDEC as threatened, endangered, or species in need of management in Tennessee are known to occur within the areas encompassed by the Bethel-Valley, Tennessee, and Elverton, Tennessee, topographic map quadrangles (see Table 3.5.5-3). Preferred habitat for each species and the possibility of suitable habitat within the HCS are addressed in Table 3.5.5-3. Lands associated with the HCS have been disturbed by current and/or previous land use and mowing. According to the summer and fall 2021 and spring 2022 field surveys, neither the HCS nor the study area contain intact, high-quality native plant communities. Based on a review of habitat requirements for each of the species listed in Table 3.5.5-3, potentially suitable habitat is not present within the HCS for Federal- or State-listed species. No rare, threatened, or endangered plants were observed on-site as part of the 2021 and 2022 seasonal field surveys. However, a small population of American ginseng was observed along a floodplain terrace of the EFPC, east of the HCS.

September 2022 3-119 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment The fen orchid and white fringeless orchid are known to occur along partially shaded seeps of the Ridge and Valley ecoregion, and this habitat occurs at the headwater seep of the intermittent stream that runs under the North Boundary Greenway Trail in the eastern third of the study area, which is in Lot 6b in proximity to the HCS. However, this groundwater-fed seep and stream headwater complex was thoroughly searched during the summer and fall 2021 field surveys, and neither species was observed. Because the forested canopy of the seep is so closed, sufficient light may not reach the herb layer to sustain populations of fen orchid or white fringeless orchid.

Tall larkspur was not observed during field surveys but has the potential to occur in Lot 6b of the study area. Because the HCS is currently maintained by mowing during the growing season, tall larkspur is not able to establish or persist on the HCS. Forested margins on the HCS are too overgrown to support populations of tall larkspur. The mesic forested slopes and forested seep found in the study area, in proximity to the HCS, contain potentially suitable habitat for Schrebers aster; however, no individuals were discovered during 2021 and 2022 field surveys.

September 2022 3-120 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-1 Land Cover within HCS and Vicinity HCS Study Area 5-Mi. (8-km)

Land Cover Class HCS (ac.) (a) Lot 6b (ac.) (a)

Vicinity (ac.) (b)

Barren Land 67 Deciduous Forest 7.3 30,836 Developed, High Intensity 917 Developed, Low Intensity 1.1 3,179 Developed, Medium Intensity 1,767 Developed, Open Space 3,872 Emergent Herbaceous Wetlands 40 Evergreen Forest 0.2 15.4 1,380 Hay/Pasture 7,361 Herbaceous 105.2 0.5 464 Mixed Forest 4.8 16.6 5,035 Open Water 1,015 Shrub/Scrub 640 Woody Wetlands 1,615 Total 110.2 40.9 58,188 a)

Reference:

NLCD data (Dewitz and U.S. Geological Survey, 2021) modified based on site observations.

b)

Reference:

NLCD data (Dewitz and U.S. Geological Survey, 2021).

September 2022 3-121 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-2 (Sheet 1 of 7)

Vascular Plant Species Observed on the HCS Study Area, 2021-2022 Scientific Name Common Name Tree Shrub Herbaceous Woody Layer(a) Layer(a) Layer(a) Vine(a)

Acer negundo Box elder maple U U Acer rubrum Red maple C C C Acer saccharum Sugar maple U R Actaea pachypoda White baneberry U Aesculus flava Yellow buckeye U Agrimonia parviflora Swamp agrimony O Agrimonia pubescens Downy agrimony U Allium canadense Wild garlic O Amelanchier sp. Serviceberry U Heartleaf Ampelopsis cordata U peppervine Amphicarpae bracteata Hog peanut O Andropogon gerardii Big bluestem U Broomsedge Andropogon virginicus C bluestem Anthoxanthum odoratum Sweet vernal grass R Devils walking Aralia spinosa U stick Arisaema triphyllum Jack in the pulpit U Arundinaria gigantea Giant cane U Asclepias sp. Milkweed U Asplenium platyneuron Ebony spleenwort O Berberis thunbergii Japanese barberry R Bignonia capreolata Crossvine U U Botrypus virginianum Rattlesnake fern U Brachyelytrum erectum Bearded shorthusk U Bromus hordeaceous Soft brome A Bromus sterilis Barren brome U Buxus sp. Boxwood R Cardamine concatenata Cutleaf toothwort U Carduus nutans Musk thistle U Carex amphibola Creek sedge U Carex cherokeensis Cherokee sedge R Carex retroflexa Reflexed sedge O Flowering Carpinus caroliniana O musclewood Carya cordiformis Bitternut hickory O Carya glabra Pignut U U Carya tomentosa Mockernut U September 2022 3-122 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-2 (Sheet 2 of 7)

Vascular Plant Species Observed on the HCS Study Area, 2021-2022 Scientific Name Common Name Tree Shrub Herbaceous Woody Layer(a) Layer(a) Layer(a) Vine(a)

Celtis laevigata Sugarberry U Celtis occidentalis Hackberry U Centrosema virginianum Butterfly pea U Cerastium glomeratum Clammy chickweed O Cercis canadensis Eastern redbud O Chaerophyllum tainturieri Hairyfruit chervil U Chimaphila maculata Spotted wintergreen O Cinna arundinacea Wood reed grass O Cirsium altissimum Tall thistle U Cirsium discolor Field thistle O Cocculus carolinus Carolina snailseed R R Coleataenia anceps Beaked panicgrass O Collinsonia canadensis Richweed U Convolvulus arvensis Field bindweed R Coreopsis auriculata Lobed tickseed R Cornus florida Flowering dogwood O O Corylus americana American hazelnut U Crataegus intricata Entangled hawthorne R Crepis pulchra Smallflower U

hawksbeard Cryptotaenia canadensis Canadian hornwort R Cynoglossum virginianum Wild comfrey U Dactylis glomerata Orchard grass U Danthonia spicata Poverty oatgrass O Desmodium paniculatum Panicled ticktrefoil O Dichanthelium boscii Panic grass O Dichanthelium Deertongue grass U clandestinum Openflower Dichanthelium laxiflorum U witchgrass Diphasiastrum digitatum Ground pine O Dodecatheon meadia Eastern shooting star U Elaeagnus umbellata Autumn olive O O Eleusine indica Goosegrass O Elymus hystrix Bottlebrush rye R Epifagus virginiana Beechdrops U Eragrostis curvula Weeping lovegrass O Erigeron annuus Annual fleabane U Erigeron philadelphicus Philadelphia fleabane O September 2022 3-123 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-2 (Sheet 3 of 7)

Vascular Plant Species Observed on the HCS Study Area, 2021-2022 Scientific Name Common Name Tree Shrub Herbaceous Woody Layer(a) Layer(a) Layer(a) Vine(a)

Erigeron strigosus Daisy fleabane O Euonymus alatus Burning bush U Euonymus americanus Strawberry bush O Roundleaf Eupatorium rotundifolium U thoroughwort Fagus grandifolia American beech O O O Festuca subverticillata Nodding fescue O Fragaria virginiana Virginia strawberry C Frangula caroliniana Carolina buckthorn O Fraxinus americana White ash U C Galium aparine Sticky willy U Galium pedemontanum Foothill bedstraw O Galium triflorum Fragrant bedstraw R Geum canadense White avens O Gleditsia triacanthos Honey locust U Gonolobus suberosus Anglepod U Downy rattlesnake Goodyera pubescens R plantain Hedera helix English ivy R Small woodland Helianthus microcephalus U sunflower Heuchera americana Alumroot R Hexastylis arifolia Little brown jug U Houstonia caerula Quaker ladies R Ilex opaca American holly U Juglans nigra Black walnut O Juniperus virginiana Eastern red cedar U O Kummeriowia stipulacea Korean lespedeza O Lamium purpureum Purple deadnettle U Leersia virginica Whitegrass O Lepidium campestre Field pepperweed R Lespedeza cuneata Chinese lespedeza O O Leucanthemum vulgare Oxeye daisy U Ligustrum obtusifolium Border privet U Ligustrum sinense Chinese privet O O Ligustrum vulgare European privet R Lindera benzoin Spicebush U September 2022 3-124 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-2 (Sheet 4 of 7)

Vascular Plant Species Observed on the HCS Study Area, 2021-2022 Tree Shrub Herbaceous Woody Scientific Name Common Name Layer(a) Layer(a) Layer(a) Vine(a)

Liquidambar styraciflua American sweetgum C O O Liriodendron tulipifera Tulip tree C Lithospermum canescens Hoary puccoon U Lobelia inflata Indian tobacco R Lobelia siphilitica Great blue lobelia U Lolium perenne Perennial ryegrass C Japanese Lonicera japonica C C honeysuckle Lonicera maacki Amur honeysuckle O Lotus corniculatus Birdsfoot trefoil U Luzula multiflora Common woodrush R Lyonia ligustrina Maleberry R Magnolia tripetala Umbrella magnolia R Mahonia bealei Leatherleaf mahonia R Maianthemum False Solomon's R

racemosum seal Medicago lupulina Black medic O Melica mutica Twoflower R

melicgrass Menispermum Canadian moonseed R

canadense Microstegium vimineum Japanese stiltgrass O Monarda fistulosa Wild bergamot U Morus rubra Red mulberry R U Myosotis macrosperma Largeseed O

forgetmenot Nyssa sylvatica Black tupelo R Onoclea sensibilis Sensitive fern R Ophioglossum vulgatum Southern adder's tongue U Virginia hop Ostrya virginiana U hornbeam Oxalis dilleniid Southern woodsorrel O Oxalis violaceae Violet woodsorrel O Oxydendrum arboreum Sourwood U O U Packera anonyma Appalachian ragwort O Parthenocisus Virginia creeper C C quinquefolius Paspalum dilatatum Dallisgrass U September 2022 3-125 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-2 (Sheet 5 of 7)

Vascular Plant Species Observed on the HCS Study Area, 2021-2022 Tree Shrub Herbaceous Woody Scientific Name Common Name Layer(a) Layer(a) Layer(a) Vine(a)

Passiflora incarnata Passionflower U Penstemon pallidus Pale beardtongue R Persicaria virginiana Jumpseed U Pinus echinata Shortleaf pine R Phlox amoena Hairy phlox R Phlox divaricatae Wild blue phlox U Pinus strobus Eastern white pine U Pinus taeda Loblolly C Pinus virginiana Virginia pine O Plantago rugelli Rugels plantain O Platanus occidentalis American sycamore U Pleopeltis polypodiales Resurrection fern R Poa alsodes Grove bluegrass R Poa annua Annual bluegrass U Poa autumnalis Autumn bluegrass O Poa pratensis Kentucky bluegrass C Podophyllum peltatum Mayapple U Polemonium reptans Jacob's ladder O Polygonatum biflorum Smooth Solomon's U

seal Polystichum acrostichoides Christmas fern C Populus deltoides Eastern cottonwood R Potentilla simplex Common cinquefoil O Prunus americana American plum U Prunus angustifolia Chickasaw plum R Prunus serotina Black cherry O U O Pyrus calleryana Bradford pear O R Quercus alba White oak O U Quercus falcata Southern red oak C O Quercus muehlenbergii Chinquapin U O Quercus rubra Northern red oak O Quercus shumardii Shumard oak R Quercus stellata Post oak U U Ranunculus abortivus Kidneyleaf buttercup R Ranunculus hispidus Hispid buttercup U Ranunculus recurvatus Hooked buttercup U Ranunculus sardous Hairy buttercup U September 2022 3-126 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-2 (Sheet 6 of 7)

Vascular Plant Species Observed on the HCS Study Area, 2021-2022 Scientific Name Common Name Tree Shrub Herbaceous Woody Layer(a) Layer(a) Layer(a) Vine(a)

Rhus copallinum Winged sumac O Rosa multiflora Multiflora rose O Rubus allegheniensis Allegheny blackberry C Rubus argutus Sawtooth blackberry C Rubus flagellaris Northern dewberry U Rubus occidentalis Black raspberry U Rudbeckia hirta Blackeyed Susan R Rudbeckia triloba Brown eyed Susan U Sabatia angularis Rosepink O Salix humilis Prairie willow U Salix nigra Black willow U Salvia lyrata Lyreleaf sage O Sanguinaria canadensis Bloodroot U Sassafras albidum Sassafras O Sceptridium dissectum Cutleaf grapefern R Schedonorus arundinaceus Tall fescue C Securigera varia Crown vetch U Sherardia arvensis Blue fieldmadder O Silphium astericus Rosinweed O Sisyrynchium albidum Common blue eyed O

grass Smilax glauca Catbriar U Smilax hispida Bristly greenbriar U Smilax rotundifolia Roundleaf greenbrier O Solidago altissima Tall goldenrod C Solidago caesia Wreath goldenrod U Solidago nemoralis Gray goldenrod O Solidago speciosa Showy goldenrod U Sonchus sp. Sow thistle U Spiranthes vernalis Spring ladies' tresses R Sporobolus vaginiflorus Sheathed dropseed U Stellaria media Common chickweed O Symphyotrichum dumosum Bushy aster O Symphyotrichum White panicled aster U lanceolatum Symphyotrichum pilosum Frost aster O Taraxacum officinale Common dandelion O Thalictrum revolutum Waxy meadowrue U Thalictrum thalictroides Rue anemone U September 2022 3-127 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-2 (Sheet 7 of 7)

Vascular Plant Species Observed on the HCS Study Area, 2021-2022 Scientific Name Common Name Tree Shrub Herbaceous Woody Layer(a) Layer(a) Layer(a) Vine(a)

Thelypteris noveboracensis New York fern U Tipularia discolor Cranefly orchid O Toxicodendron radicans Poison ivy C C Tridens flavus Purpletop tridens O Trifolium campestre Hop trefoil O Trifolium pratense Red clover O Trifolium repens White clover O Trillium luteum Yellow wakerobin O Ulmus alata Winged elm U U Ulmus americana American elm U Ulmus rubra Slippery elm R Uvularia perfoliata Perfoliate bellwort O Vaccinium arboreum Farkleberry R R Vaccinium pallidum Lowbush blueberry U U Valerianella radiata Beaked cornsalad O Verbesina alternifolia Wingstem O Verbesina occidentalis Yellow crownbeard C Vernonia gigantea Tall ironweed O Veronica serpyllifolia Thymeleaved O

speedwell Viburnum acerifolium Mapleleaf viburnum R Viburnum dentatum Arrowwood viburnum R Viburnum rufidulum Rusty blackhaw U Vicia sativa Common vetch O Vinca minor Periwinkle O Viola sororia Common blue violet O Vitis rotundifolia Muscadine C C Youngia japonica Oriental false U

hawksbeard a) Relative on-site abundance categories: A = Abundant; C = Common; O = Occasional; U = Uncommon; R =

Rare.

September 2022 3-128 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-3 Mammal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Scientific Name Common Name Blarina brevicauda Northern short-tailed shrew Canis latrans(b, c) Coyote Castor canadensis(c) Beaver Cryptotis parva Least shrew Didelphis virginiana(a, c) Virginia opossum Eptesicus fuscus Big brown bat Glaucomys volans Southern flying squirrel Lasionycteris noctivagans Silver-haired bat Lasiurus borealis Eastern red bat Lynx rufus(b) Bobcat Marmota monax Groundhog Mephitis mephitis Striped skunk Microtus pennsylvanicus Meadow vole Mus musculus House mouse Myotis grisescens Gray bat Myotis lucifugus Little brown bat Myotis septentrionalis Northern long-eared bat Myotis sodalis Indiana bat Nycticeius humeralis Evening bat Odocoileus virginianus(a, b, c) White-tailed deer Ondatra zibethicus Muskrat Peromyscus leucopus White-footed mouse Peromyscus maniculatus Deer mouse Pitymys pinetorum Woodland vole Procyon lotor(a, b, c) Raccoon Rattus norvegicus Norway rat Scalopus aquaticus(c) Eastern mole Sciurus carolinensis(a, b, c) Gray squirrel Sorex longirostris Southeastern shrew Sorex cinereus Masked shrew Sylvilagus floridanus(a, c) Eastern cottontail Tamias striatus Eastern chipmunk Urocyon cinereoargenteus Gray fox Vulpes vulpes Red fox a) Directly or indirectly observed on-site during summer 2021 field survey.

b) Directly or indirectly observed on-site during fall 2021 field survey.

c) Directly or indirectly observed on-site during spring 2022 field survey.

References:

ORNL, 2019 September 2022 3-129 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-4 Herpetofauna Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Scientific Name Common Name Acris crepitans Northern cricket frog Bufo americanus Eastern American toad Carphophis amoenus Eastern worm snake Cemophora coccinea Northern scarletsnake Chelydra serpentina Snapping turtle Chrysemys picta Painted turtle Coluber constrictor(a) Black racer Desmognathus fuscus Northern dusky salamander Diadophis punctatus edwardsii Northern ring-necked snake Gastrophryne carolinensis Eastern narrow-mouthed toad Heterodon platirhinos Eastern hog-nosed snake Hyla versicolor Gray treefrog Lampropeltis getula nigra Black kingsnake Lithobates catesbeianus American bullfrog Lithobates palustris Pickerel frog Lithobates sphenocephalus(a) Southern leopard frog Nerodia sipedon Northern water snake Notophthalmus viridescens Red-spotted newt Opheodrys aestivus Rough greensnake Pantherophis guttatus Corn snake Pantherophis spiloides(a) Gray ratsnake Plestiodon fasciatus(a) Common five-lined skink Pseudacris crucifer crucifer(a) Northern spring peeper Rana clamitans melanota Northern green frog Rana sphenocephala Southern leopard frog Sceloporus undulatus hyacinthinus Northern fence lizard Storeria dekayi DeKays brownsnake Terrapene carolina carolina(a) Eastern box turtle Thamnophis sirtalis Eastern garter snake Virginia valeriae Eastern smooth earthsnake a) Observed on-site during 2021 and 2022 seasonal field surveys.

References:

ORNL, 2019 September 2022 3-130 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-5 (Sheet 1 of 8)

Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Study Area General Off-site General Summer Reconnaissance Reconnaissance Survey Fall Survey Spring Survey Scientific Name Common Name Abundance(a) Abundance(b) Abundance(c) Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring Accipiter cooperii(d,e) Cooper's hawk U X Sharp-shinned Accipiter striatus(e) hawk Red-winged Agelaius phoeniceus(d) U X blackbird Aix sponsa(d) Wood duck X Anas platyrhynchos(d) Mallard X Antrostomus Chuck-wills-widow carolinensis(d)

Antrostomus Eastern whip-poor-vociferus(d) will Ruby-throated Archilochus colubris(d) hummingbird Ardea herodias(d) Great blue heron X (d)

Baeolophus bicolor Tufted titmouse C O C X X X (d)

Bombycilla cedrorum Cedar waxwing O R (d)

Branta canadensis Canada goose X (d,e)

Buteo jamaicensis Red-tailed hawk R R X Red-shouldered Buteo lineatus(d,e) hawk Buteo platypterus Broad-winged hawk Butorides virescens(d) Green heron Cardellina Canada warbler canadensis(d)

Cardellina pusilla(d) Wilsons warbler (d)

Cardinalis cardinalis Northern cardinal C A X X X September 2022 3-131 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-5 (Sheet 2 of 8)

Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Study Area General Off-site General Summer Reconnaissance Reconnaissance Survey Fall Survey Spring Survey Scientific Name Common Name Abundance(a) Abundance(b) Abundance(c) Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring Cathartes aura(d) Turkey vulture O Catharus fuscescens(d) Veery (d,e)

Catharus guttatus Hermit thrush X (e)

Certhia americana Brown creeper (d)

Chaetura pelagica Chimney swift U (d)

Charadrius vociferus Killdeer U (d)

Chordeiles minor Common nighthawk (e)

Circus hudsonius Northern harrier Coccyzus Yellow-billed cuckoo americanus(d)

Colaptes auratus(d,e) Northern flicker R O X Colinus virginianus Northern bobwhite X (d)

Columba livia Rock dove Eastern wood-Contopus virens(d) X pewee Coragyps atratus(d,e) Black vulture U Corvus American crow A O U X X X X X brachyrhynchos(d,e)

Cyanocitta cristata(d) Blue jay A A U X X X X Dendroica Black-throated blue caerulescens warbler Bay-breasted Dendroica castanea warbler Dendroica Chestnut-sided pensylvanica warbler September 2022 3-132 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-5 (Sheet 3 of 8)

Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Study Area General Off-site General Summer Reconnaissance Reconnaissance Survey Fall Survey Spring Survey Scientific Name Common Name Abundance(a) Abundance(b) Abundance(c) Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring (d) Black-throated Dendroica virens green warbler Blackpoll Dendroica striata(d) warbler Dryobates Downy C O X X X pubescens(e) woodpecker Pileated Dryocopus pileatus(d,e) O R X X X woodpecker Dumetella Gray catbird U R X X carolinensis(d)

Empidonax Acadian virescens(d) flycatcher Falco sparverius American kestrel Fulica americana American coot X Kentucky Geothlypis formosa(d) R X warbler Common Geothlypis trichas(d) O C X X yellowthroat Haemorhous House finch mexicanus(d)

Haemorhous Purple finch purpureus(d,e)

Haliaeetus Bald eagle X leucocephalus Helmitheros Worm-eating vermivorus(d) warbler Hirundo rustica(d) Barn swallow O September 2022 3-133 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-5 (Sheet 4 of 8)

Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Study Area General Off-site General Summer Reconnaissance Reconnaissance Survey Fall Survey Spring Survey Scientific Name Common Name Abundance(a) Abundance(b) Abundance(c) Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring Hylocichla mustelina(d) Wood thrush X Yellow-breasted Icteria virens(d) U A X chat Icterus galbula Baltimore oriole Icterus spurius(d) Orchard oriole R (e)

Junco hyemalis Dark-eyed junco Tennessee Leiothlypis peregrina(d) R warbler Leuconotopicus Hairy R

villosus(d) woodpecker Limnothlypis Swainsons swainsonii(d) thrush Megaceryle alcyon Belted kingfisher Red-bellied Melanerpes carolinus(d) U O X X woodpecker Melanerpes Red-headed erythrocephalus(d) woodpecker Meleagris gallopavo(e) Wild turkey X X X (d)

Melospiza melodia Song sparrow O X Northern Mimus polyglottos(d) O R O X X X X mockingbird Black-and-white Mniotilta varia(d) warbler Brown-headed Molothrus ater(d) U O X cowbird Great-crested Myiarchus crinitus(d) flycatcher September 2022 3-134 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-5 (Sheet 5 of 8)

Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Study Area General Off-site General Summer Reconnaissance Reconnaissance Survey Fall Survey Spring Survey Scientific Name Common Name Abundance(a) Abundance(b) Abundance(c) Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring (d) Louisiana Parkesia motacilla X waterthrush Parkesia Northern noveboracensis(d) waterthrush Passer domesticus House sparrow Passerella iliaca(e) Fox sparrow R (d)

Passerina caerulea Blue grosbeak R Passerina cyanea Indigo bunting O X Petrochelidon Cliff swallow O O pyrrhonota(d)

Pheucticus Rose-breasted ludovicianus(d) grosbeak Hairy Picoides vollosus woodpecker Pipilo Eastern towhee U O X X erythrophthalmus(d)

Piranga olivacea(d) Scarlet tanager R X (d)

Piranga rubra Summer tanager U R Carolina Poecile carolinensis(d,e) O C O X X X chickadee Blue-gray Polioptila caerulea(d) O X X gnatcatcher Progne subis(d) Purple martin U (d)

Quiscalus quiscula Common grackle R Ruby-crowned Regulus calendula(d,e) kinglet September 2022 3-135 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-5 (Sheet 6 of 8)

Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Study Area General Off-site General Summer Reconnaissance Reconnaissance Survey Fall Survey Spring Survey Scientific Name Common Name Abundance(a) Abundance(b) Abundance(c) Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring Golden-crowned Regulus satrapa(d,e) U kinglet Sayornis phoebe(d) Eastern phoebe R C O X American Scolopax minor(d) X woodcock Seiurus aurocapillus Ovenbird O X (d)

Setophaga americana Northern parula U X X X (d)

Setophaga citrina Hooded warbler X Yellow-rumped Setophaga coronata(d,e) U X warbler Setophaga discolor(d) Prairie warbler O X Yellow-throated Setophaga dominica(d) R X warbler Setophaga magnolia Magnolia warbler Setophaga palmarum(d) Palm warbler U Setophaga petechia(d) Yellow warbler X Setophaga pinus(d) Pine warbler R X Setophaga ruticilla American redstart X Cape may Setophaga tigrina(d) warbler Sialia sialis(d) Eastern bluebird O O U X X X X White-breasted Sitta carolinensis(d,e) O R R X X X nuthatch Brown-headed Sitta pusilla(d) nuthatch September 2022 3-136 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-5 (Sheet 7 of 8)

Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Study Area General Off-site General Summer Reconnaissance Reconnaissance Survey Fall Survey Spring Survey Scientific Name Common Name Abundance(a) Abundance(b) Abundance(c) Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring Yellow-bellied Sphyrapicus varius(d,e) sapsucker Spinus pinus(e) Pine siskin American Spinus tristis(d) O C U X X X X goldfinch Spizella passerina(d) Chipping sparrow R O (d)

Spizella pusilla Field sparrow R A X Streptopelia decaocto Eurasian collared R

dove Strix varia(d) Barred owl X Eastern Sturnella magna(d) U meadowlark Sturnus vulgaris European starling O O Stelgidopteryx Northern rough-serripennis(d) winged swallow Tachycineta bicolor(d) Tree swallow O Thryothorus Carolina wren C C O X X X X X ludovicianus Toxostoma rufum(d) Brown thrasher U R U X X X (d)

Troglodytes aedon House wren (d,e)

Troglodytes hiemalis Winter wren (d)

Turdus migratorius American robin O U X X X X (d)

Tyrannus tyrannus Eastern kingbird R Blue-winged Vermivora cyanoptera(d) warbler September 2022 3-137 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.2-5 (Sheet 8 of 8)

Avifaunal Species Observed or Potentially Occurring on or in Proximity to the HCS Study Area General Off-site General Summer Reconnaissance Reconnaissance Survey Fall Survey Spring Survey Scientific Name Common Name Abundance(a) Abundance(b) Abundance(c) Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring Yellow-throated Vireo flavifrons(d) X X vireo Vireo gilvus(d) Warbling vireo Vireo griseus White-eyed vireo C O X X (d)

Vireo olivaceus Red-eyed vireo O X X X Blue-headed Vireo solitarius(d) vireo Zenaida macroura(d) Mourning dove C O X X X X White-throated Zonotrichia albicollis(d) U O U X sparrow White-crowned Zonotrichia leucophrys sparrow Relative study area abundance categories: A=abundant; C=common; O=occasional; U=uncommon; R=rare.

X = observed during other 2021-2022 ecology field surveys.

a) Species identified along the bird transect route at designated stopping points during Summer 2021 field survey.

b) Species identified along the bird transect route at designated stopping points during Fall 2021 field survey.

c) Species identified along the bird transect route at designated stopping points during Spring 2022 field survey.

d) eBird spring (March-June) bird observation in proximity to HCS.

e) eBird winter (December-February) bird observation in proximity to HCS.

Reference:

ORNL, 2019; eBird, 2022 September 2022 3-138 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.3-1 Fish and Crustacean Species from 2021-2022 Aquatic Surveys of Streams in Proximity to the Horizon Center Site Summer 2021 Fall 2021 Spring 2022 Percent Percent Percent Scientific Name Common Name Count Total Count Total Count Total Fish Campostoma Central stoneroller 18 16.2 1 0.6 1 0.5 anomalum Cottus carolinae Banded sculpin 2 1.8 14 8.0 16 8.8 Etheostoma Redline darter - - - - 1 0.5 rufilineatum Etheostoma Tennessee

- - 6 3.4 9 4.9 simoterum snubnose darter Western Gambusia affinis - - 22 12.6 - -

mosquitofish Hybopsis amblops Bigeye chub 1 0.9 - - 4 2.2 Hypentelium Northern hogsucker 2 1.8 2 1.1 - -

nigricans Labidesthes sicculus Brook silverside 1 0.9 10 5.7 - -

Lepomis Bluegill 1 0.9 - - - -

macrochirus Luxilus Striped shiner 31 27.9 35 20.0 100 54.9 chrysocephalus Lythrurus ardens Rosefin shiner - - - - 1 0.5 Notropis Emerald shiner 49 44.1 46 26.3 35 19.2 atherinoides Percina caproides Logperch darter - - 1 0.6 3 1.6 Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow 1 0.9 1 0.6 - -

Rhinichthys Blacknose dace - - 37 21.1 10 5.5 atratulus Semotilus Creek chub 5 4.5 - - 2 1.1 atromaculatus Total 111 100 175 100.0 182 100 Crustaceans Orconectes spp. Crayfish 3 100 3 100 9 100 Total 3 100 3 100 9 100 September 2022 3-139 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.3-2 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Fish Species Present in East Fork Poplar Creek, March-May 1997 Scientific Name Common Name Catostomidae Catostomus commersonii White sucker Hypentelium nigricans Northern hogsucker Minytrema melanops Spotted sucker Moxostoma duquesnei Black redhorse Moxostoma erythrurum Golden redhorse Centrarchidae Ambloplites rupestris Rock bass Lepomis auritus Redbreast sunfish Lepomis cyanellus Green sunfish Lepomis gulosus Warmouth Lepomis macrochirus Bluegill Lepomis sp. Hybrid sunfish Micropterus punctulatus Spotted bass Micropterus salmoides Largemouth bass Clupidae Dorosoma cepedianum Gizzard shad Cyprinidae Campostoma anomalum Central stoneroller C. anomalum x. L. chrysocephalus Central stoneroller x. striped shiner hybrid Cyprinella spiloptera Spotfin shiner Luxilus chrysocephalus Striped shiner Lythrurus ardens Rosefin shiner Notropis amblops Bigeye chub Pimephales notatus Bluntnose minnow Rhinichthys atratulus Blacknose dace Semotilus atromaculatus Creek chub Ictaluridae Ameiurus natalis Yellow bullhead Poecilidae Gambusia affinis Western mosquitofish Cottidae Cottus carolinae Banded sculpin Percidae Etheostoma blennioides Greenside darter Etheostoma jessiae Blueside darter Etheostoma kennicotti Stripetail darter September 2022 3-140 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.3-2 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Fish Species Present in East Fork Poplar Creek, March-May 1997 Scientific Name Common Name Etheostoma rufilineatum Redline darter Etheostoma simoterum Snubnose darter Percina caprodes Logperch Sciaenidae Aplodinotus grunniens Freshwater drum

Reference:

ORNL, 1997 September 2022 3-141 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.5-1 (Sheet 1 of 3)

Protected Species Potentially Occurring within or in Proximity to the HCS Status Suitable Habitat(d)

State(b) Present (a)

Common Name Scientific Name Federal (Rank(c)) within HCS Fish Flame chub* Hemitremia flammea -- D (S3) N Spotfin chub Erimonax monachus LT T (S2) N Tangerine darter* Percina aurantiaca -- D (S3) N Tennessee dace* Chrosomus -- D (S3) N tennesseensis Mollusks N Alabama lampmussel* Lampsilis virescens LE E (S1) N Fanshell* Cyprogenia stegaria LE, EXPN E (S1) N Finerayed pigtoe* Fusconaia cuneolus LE, EXPN E (S1) N Orangefoot pimpleback Plethobasus LE, EXPN E (S1) N (pearlymussel)* cooperianus Pink mucket Lampsilis abrupta LE E (S2) N (pearlymussel)*

Pyramid pigtoe* Pleurobema rubrum -- Rare (S1S2) N Ring pink (mussel)* Obovaria retusa LE, EXPN E (S1) N Rough rabbitsfoot* Quadrula cylindrica LE E (S2) N strigillata Sheepnose mussel* Plethobasus cyphyus LE E (S2S3) N Shiny pigtoe* Fusconaia cor LE, EXPN E (S1) N Spectaclecase (mussel)* Cumberlandia LE E (S2S3) N monodonta Snails Spiny riversnail* Lo fluvialis -- Rare (S2) N Crustacean Valley flame crayfish* Cambarus deweesae -- E (S1) N Insect Monarch butterfly Danaus plexippus C S4 PS Amphibians Four-toed salamander* Hemidactylium -- D (S3) N scutatum Hellbender* Cryptobranchus -- E (S3) N alleganiensis Green salamander* Aneides aeneus -- Rare N (S3S4)

Streamside salamander Ambystoma barbouri -- Rare (S2) N September 2022 3-142 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.5-1 (Sheet 2 of 3)

Protected Species Potentially Occurring within or in Proximity to the HCS Status Suitable Habitat(d)

Common Name Scientific Name State(b) Present Federal(a) (Rank(c)) within HCS Reptiles Northern pinesnake* Pituophis melanoleucus -- T (S3) N Eastern slender glass Ophisaurus attenuatus -- D (S3) N lizard* longicaudus Mammals Gray bat* Myotis grisescens LE E (S2) N Indiana bat Myotis sodalis LE E (S1) PS Long-tailed shrew* Sorex dispar -- D (S2) N Northern long-eared bat Myotis septentrionalis LE T (S1S2) PS Southern bog lemming* Synaptomys cooperi -- D (S3) N Birds Bachmans sparrow* Peucaea aestivalis -- E (S1B) PS Bald eagle* Haliaeetus P S3 N leucocephalus Cerulean warbler* Setophaga cerulea -- D (S3B) N Swainsons warbler* Limnothlypis swainsonii -- D (S3) N Flowering Plants American ginseng* Panax quinquefolius -- S-CE (S3S4) N Branching Whitlow-grass* Draba ramosissima -- S (S2) N Butternut* Juglans cinerea -- T (S3) N Earleaved false-foxglove* Agalinis auriculata -- E (S2) N Fen orchid* Liparis loeselii -- T (S1) N Hellers catfoot* Pseudognaphalium -- S (S2) N helleri Mountain honeysuckle* Lonicera dioica -- S (S2) N Mountain witch-alder* Fothergilla major -- T (S2) N Naked-stem sunflower* Helianthus occidentalis -- S (S2) N Northern bush- Diervilla lonicera -- T (S2) N honeysuckle*

Prairie goldenrod* Oligoneuron album -- E (S1S2) N River bulrush* Bolboschoenus -- S (S1) N fluviatilis Schrebers aster* Eurybia schreberi -- S (S1) N Shining ladies-tresses* Spiranthes lucida -- T (S1S2) N Slender blazing star* Liatris cylindracea -- T (S2) N Small-headed rush* Juncus brachycephalus -- S (S2) N September 2022 3-143 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.5-1 (Sheet 3 of 3)

Protected Species Potentially Occurring within or in Proximity to the HCS Status Suitable Habitat(d)

Common Name Scientific Name State(b) Present Federal(a) (Rank(c)) within HCS Spreading false-foxglove* Aureolaria patula -- S (S3) N Tall larkspur* Delphinium exaltatum -- E (S2) N Tubercled rein-orchid* Platanthera flava var. -- T (S2) N herbiola Virginia spiraea Spiraea virginiana LT E (S2) N White fringeless orchid Platanthera integrilabia LT E (S2S3) N a) Federal Status Codes:

LT = Listed Threatened; LE = Listed Endangered; P = Protected; EXPN = Experimental nonessential population; C = Candidate.

b) State Status Codes:

E = Listed Endangered; S = Species of special concern; T = Listed Threatened; Rare = Rare, but not state listed; D = Deemed in Need of Management; CE = Commercially Exploited.

c) State Rank:

S1 = Critically Imperiled; S2 = Imperiled; S3 = Vulnerable; S4 = Apparently Secure; B = Breeds in Tennessee.

S#S# = Denotes a range of ranks because the exact rarity of the element is uncertain (e.g., S1S2).

Migratory species may have separate ranks for different population segments (e.g., S1B, S2N, S4M);

S#B = rank of breeding population S#N = rank of nonbreeding population.

d) Habitat Codes:

N = No, no records of species within or near HCS and no suitable habitat is present.

PS = Potentially suitable habitat is present, but no records of species at or near HCS.

(*) According to the TDEC Natural Heritage Program, records exist within the Bethel-Valley, Tennessee, and Elverton, Tennessee, topographic quadrangles.

Reference:

USFWS, 2021, TDEC, 2021a September 2022 3-144 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.5-2 Potentially Suitable Bat Roost Trees Identified within the Study Area Diameter at breast Label Common Name Scientific Name height (cm) Condition Horizon Center Site (HCS)

BRT-001 American elm Ulmus americana 67.8 Dead BRT-002 American elm Ulmus americana 68.0 Dead BRT-003 Southern red oak Quercus falcata 65.9 Dead BRT-004 Southern red oak Quercus falcata 58.7 Dead BRT-005 White ash Fraxinus americana 63.3 Dead BRT-006 Southern red oak Quercus falcata 49.4 Dead BRT-007 Southern red oak Quercus falcata 29.4 Dead Lot 6b BRT-008 White ash Fraxinus americana 31.6 Dead BRT-009 American elm Ulmus americana 60.5 Declining BRT-010 Black cherry Prunus serotina 32.2 Declining BRT-011 Tulip poplar Liriodendron tulipifera 47.7 Dead BRT-012 White ash Fraxinus americana 46.3 Dead BRT-013 Slippery elm Ulmus rubra 20.4 Dead BRT-014 White ash Fraxinus americana 62.8 Dead September 2022 3-145 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.5.5-3 Habitat Requirements for Plant Species of Conservation Concern Listed within the Area Encompassed by the Bethel-Valley, Tennessee, and Elverton, Tennessee, Topographic Map Quadrangles Potential Habitat within Common Name Scientific Name Habitat Requirements HCS(a)

Slopes of shaded, rich American ginseng Panax quinquefolius N woodlands Branching Whitlow-Draba ramosissima Calcareous bluffs N grass Butternut Juglans cinerea Rich woods and hollows N Earleaved false-Agalinis auriculata Barrens N foxglove Fen orchid Liparis loeselii Calcareous seeps N Pseudognaphalium Hellers catfoot Dry sandy woods N helleri Mountain honeysuckle Lonicera dioica Mountain woods and thickets N Mountain witch-alder Fothergilla major Rocky slopes and river banks N Naked-stem sunflower Helianthus occidentalis Limestone glades and barrens N Northern bush-Diervilla lonicera Rocky woodlands and bluffs N honeysuckle Prairie goldenrod Oligoneuron album Barrens N Bolboschoenus River bulrush Marshes N fluviatilis Mesic woods and seepage Schrebers aster Eurybia schreberi N slopes Shining ladies-tresses Spiranthes lucida Alluvial woods and moist slopes N Slender blazing star Liatris cylindracea Barrens N Small-headed rush Juncus brachycephalus Seeps and wet bluffs N Spreading false-Aureolaria patula Oak woods and edges N foxglove Tall larkspur Delphinium exaltatum Glades and barrens N Platanthera flava var.

Tubercled rein-orchid Swamps and floodplains N herbiola Wetlands and high-gradient Virginia spiraea Spiraea virginiana N mountain stream banks Partially shaded seepage White fringeless orchid Platanthera integrilabia N slopes or stream heads a) Habitat Codes: PS = Potentially suitable habitat present within HCS; N = No suitable habitat present within HCS.

Reference:

TDEC, 2021a; NatureServe, 2022 September 2022 3-146 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.6 METEOROLOGY, CLIMATOLOGY, AND AIR QUALITY 3.6.1 CLIMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGY Climate is a statistical description of weather conditions that occur during a long period of time, usually several decades. Sources of data typically used to analyze the climate at a site include weather maps (depictions of areal weather phenomena at one instant of time), records of weather at specific monitoring stations at single instants of time, and long-term climatic statistics recorded from specific monitoring stations.

General Climate The TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) is located at the Horizon Center site (HCS), in northern Roane County, Tennessee southwest of Oak Ridge. Oak Ridge is located in the broad Tennessee River valley between the Cumberland Mountains, which lie to the northwest, and the Great Smoky Mountains, to the southeast. The Cumberland Mountains moderate the local climate by retarding the flow of cold air from the north during winter (NCEI, 2020a).

Both mountain ranges are generally oriented in a northeast-southwest direction. The valley between them is corrugated by broken ridges approximately 300 to 500 ft. (90 to 150 m) high and oriented parallel to the main valley in an approximate northeast-southwest direction. During periods of light winds, daytime winds are usually southwesterly and nighttime winds are northeasterly in the valley. The ridges generally decrease the wind velocities (NCEI, 2020a).

Direct deflection of the winds by terrain is a dominant mechanism that drives the winds in the valley. This mechanism acts approximately 50 - 60 percent of the time, resulting in winds that blow in directions generally along the approximate northeast-southwest axis of the valley.

Atmospheric pressure gradients acting on the valley drive winds along the axis of the valley.

This occurs approximately 10 percent of the time. Other mechanisms, such as differential heating of sloped surfaces, result in transient winds that blow in directions other than the northeast-southwest axis of the valley (ORR, 2020).

The climate of Oak Ridge is classified as humid subtropical. The term humid indicates that the region receives an overall surplus of precipitation compared to the level of evaporation and transpiration normally experienced during the year. The subtropical designation indicates that the region experiences a wide range of seasonal temperatures. Such areas are typified by significant temperature differences between summer and winter. More specifically, the coldest months average temperature is above 27°F (-3 C), and at least one summer month has an average temperature above 72°F (22 C). Also, the definition of the humid subtropical climate means that at least four months of the year have an average temperature above 50°F (10 C)

(ORR, 2020). Temperatures of 100°F (37.7 C) or greater have occurred during less than one-half of the years of the period of record, and temperatures of 0°F (-17.8 C) or below are rare (NCEI, 2020a).

Light snows usually occur in all of the months from November through March, but the total monthly snowfall is often only a trace. Snowfalls sufficiently heavy to interfere with traffic and outdoor activities occur infrequently (NCEI, 2020a).

The types of weather systems that produce precipitation vary during the year. During winter, synoptic-scale mid-latitude frontal systems produce significant precipitation events September 2022 3-147 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment approximately every three to five days. Precipitation events are occasionally followed by arctic air outbreaks. Although snow and ice are generally not associated with many of these systems, occasional snowfall results (ORR, 2020).

During summer, occasional frontal systems may produce organized lines of thunderstorms and relatively rare, damaging tornadoes. More frequently, however, summer precipitation results from air mass thunderstorms that form from the interaction of daytime heating, rising humid air, and local terrain features (ORR, 2020).

Although precipitation is usually adequate during the fall season, August through October are often the driest months of the year. Precipitation during the fall tends to be less cyclical than other seasons but is occasionally enhanced by weakening tropical cyclones moving north from the Gulf of Mexico. In November, mid-latitude frontal systems again begin to dominate the weather patterns and continue until May (ORR, 2020).

Table 3.6-1 summarizes 30-year climatological normals and means from an automated meteorological station operated by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (station identifier KOQT; data extracted from NCEI, 2020a). The meteorological station is located approximately 8.7 mi. (14.0 km) northeast of the HCS.

Normal daily dry bulb temperatures range from 37.7°F (3.2 C) in January to 78.5°F (25.8 C) in July. The normal daily maximum temperatures range from 46.6°F (8.1 C) in January to 88.4°F (31.3 C) in July. The normal daily minimum temperatures range from 28.9°F (-1.7 C) in January to 68.6°F (20.3 C) in July.

The mean annual wind speed is 2.8 mph (1.3 m/s), with the lowest average monthly wind speeds (ranging from 1.9 mph [0.85 m/s] to 2.1 mph [0.94 m/s]) occurring in August through October. The distribution of prevailing monthly wind directions is bimodal, with winds from the northeast (50 - 60 degrees), or from the southwest (210 - 220 degrees).

The bimodality of the wind direction distribution is visually illustrated by the annual wind rose from Oak Ridge in Figure 3.6-1 (NCEI, 2020e). Prevailing winds are largely parallel to the mountain ranges, which are oriented along an approximate northeast-southwest axis due to the effects of atmospheric pressure gradients and terrain deflection as described above. Figure 3.6-2 shows the seasonal wind roses from Oak Ridge. The bimodal wind direction distribution is evident during each season.

Table 3.6-1 shows that the normal liquid equivalent annual precipitation in Oak Ridge is 50.91 in. (129.31 cm), with the lowest monthly average precipitation occurring in August (2.76 in. [7.01 cm]), and the highest monthly average precipitation occurring in July (5.27 in. [13.39 cm]).

The average annual snowfall at Oak Ridge is 5.9 in. (15.0 cm). The lowest average measurable monthly snowfall occurs in November (0.1 in. [0.25 cm]) and the highest average measurable monthly snowfall occurs in February (2.1 in. [5.3 cm]) (ORNL, 2020i).

Table 3.6-2 summarizes 30-year climatological normals and means from another automated meteorological station at the McGhee Tyson airport in Knoxville, Tennessee (station identifier KTYS; data extracted from NCEI, 2020b). The station is located approximately 23.9 mi. (38.5 km) southeast of the HCS.

September 2022 3-148 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Seasonal trends in normal daily temperatures, liquid equivalent precipitation and snowfall in Knoxville are similar to those observed at Oak Ridge.

Table 3.6-2 shows that the mean annual wind speed at Knoxville (6.0 mph [2.7 m/s]) is higher than the annual mean annual wind speed at Oak Ridge (2.8 mph [1.3 m/s] from Table 3.6-1).

The monthly average wind speeds at Knoxville range from 4.8 mph (2.2 m/s) in August and September to 7.3 mph (3.3 m/s) in March. The distribution of prevailing monthly wind directions is bimodal, with winds from the northeast (30 or 50 degrees), or from the southwest (240 degrees).

An annual wind rose from the Knoxville airport is shown in Figure 3.6-3 (NCEI, 2020f). The wind direction distribution is also bimodal and overall looks similar to that at Oak Ridge in Figure 3.6-1, except the wind speeds are generally higher, as described above.

Figure 3.6-4 shows the seasonal wind roses from Knoxville. The bimodal wind direction distribution is evident in each season as it is in the seasonal wind roses from Oak Ridge (Figure 3.6-2.).

Climate Variations Decadal-scale and global-scale climate variations regularly affect eastern Tennessee. Most of these variations appear related to the hemispheric temperature and precipitation effects caused by the frequency and phase of the global-scale El Nino - southern oscillation (ENSO), the Pacific decadal oscillation (PDO), and the Atlantic multi-decadal oscillation (AMO).

The ENSO and PDO patterns, with cycles of three to seven years and approximately 60 years, respectively, affect Pacific Ocean sea surface temperature patterns. The AMO, with a cycle of 40 to 70 years, affects Atlantic sea surface temperature similar to the PDO. These medium- and long-range sea surface temperature patterns collectively modulate decadal-scale and longer regional temperature and precipitation trends in eastern Tennessee (ORR, 2020).

Temperature averages for individual years may vary significantly, as noted by a recent contrast of greater than 1.8°F (1 C) between 2014 (58.6°F [14.8 C] average) and 2015 (60.8°F [16.0 C]

average), largely the result of the recent strong El Nino in 2015 - 2016. During the post-El Nino years of 2017 and 2018, the annual average temperature at ORNL returned to approximately the same level as in 2014 (i.e., 58.1°F [14.5 C] in 2018). However, values rose again in 2019 under the influence of weak El Nino conditions to 59.4°F (15.2 C) (ORR, 2020).

Human activity may be producing some effect on local temperatures via interacting influences that include well-mixed greenhouse gases, land cover changes, carbon soot and aerosols.

Beyond these possible anthropogenic factors, solar influences on the jet stream, via changes to the stratospheric temperature gradient due to an 11-year solar cycle (and perhaps longer cycles), also play a role in inter-annual climate variability (Ineson et al., 2011; ORR, 2020).

Perhaps partially due to the effects of the AMO and ENSO, the Oak Ridge climate has warmed approximately 2.2°F (1.2 C) from the 1970s to the 1990s but has remained within 0.24°F (0.2 C) of the 1990s observed value through the 2010s. This late-20th-century warming appears to have lengthened the growing season (i.e., the period with temperatures above 32°F [0 C]) by approximately two to three weeks during the last 30 years. This warming has primarily affected minimum temperatures; the effect is possibly related to changes in the interaction of the surface boundary layer with greenhouse gases and/or aerosol concentration changes (ORR, 2020).

September 2022 3-149 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Meteorological and Air Quality-Related Data Sources Meteorological and air quality-related data are available from the sources described below.

a. Digital records from cooperative (COOP) weather monitoring stations (NCEI, 2020c)

Cooperative weather observing stations record parameters of particular interest to agricultural, industrial, and engineering applications. Depending upon the station, those parameters include daily and monthly high and low dry bulb temperatures, liquid precipitation, and snowfall.

COOP stations do not generally record humidity related parameters, such as relative humidity, dew point or wet bulb temperatures. Therefore, wet bulb temperatures that are coincident with extreme dry bulb temperatures, which are of interest in regional climate analysis, are generally not available from COOP stations.

b. Digital records and other reports from Automated Surface Observing Stations (ASOS)

An ASOS may be operated by NOAA, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) or other agencies. Hourly meteorological data files are available in TD-3505 format (NCEI, 2011) from NCEI, 2020c.

c. Annual and monthly local climatological data (LCD) summaries from the National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) (NCEI, 2020a and NCEI, 2020b)

LCD annual summaries are typically available for meteorological stations located at major airports and select automated weather stations. Those summaries include climatic normals, averages and extremes. Thirty-year monthly histories are generally provided for the following parameters: mean temperature, total precipitation, total snowfall, and heating/cooling degree days. The summaries also include a narrative description of the local climate.

Monthly LCDs contain much of the same type of information as annual LCDs but are focused on a particular month of a specific year.

LCDs are available for the ASOS station in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (station identifier KOQT; NCEI, 2020a) and an ASOS station at the McGhee Tyson airport in Knoxville, Tennessee (station identifier KTYS; NCEI, 2020b).

d. Statistical summaries of climatological data from the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE) (ASHRAE, 2017)

ASHRAE provides climatic information for worldwide locations including many U.S.

airports and other locations with hourly surface weather observing stations. Parameters include dry bulb, wet bulb and dew point temperatures. Also included are statistical design values of dry bulb with mean coincident wet bulb temperature; design wet bulb temperature with mean coincident dry bulb temperature; and design dew point with mean coincident dry bulb temperature. ASHRAE also provides a methodology and key inputs for estimating extreme dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures for various return intervals.

September 2022 3-150 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment

e. American Society of Civil Engineers/Structural Engineering Institute (ASCE/SEI) structural design standards (ASCE, 2016)

The ASCE/SEI standards provide minimum load requirements for the design of buildings and other structures that are subject to building code requirements. Particularly useful are maps of 100-year, mean return-interval 3-s wind gusts. ASCE also provides maps of 50-year return interval snowpack and a methodology for converting 50-year values extracted from those maps to other return intervals.

f. 100-year 48-hour duration liquid equivalent precipitation The 100-year return interval 48-hour duration liquid equivalent precipitation is available for the HCS from NOAA, 2020a.

g. Tornado and other weather event statistics from NCEIs online storm events database and Storm Data publications The storm events database (NCEI, 2020d) contains a chronological listing, by State and county, of climate statistics of interest for climate analysis. Those statistics describe tornadoes, thunderstorms, hail, lightning, high winds, snow, temperature extremes, and other weather phenomena. Also included are statistics on personal injuries and property damage estimates.

The Storm Data publications are monthly summaries of severe weather events published by NCEI. These publications provide details about specific severe weather events.

h. Climatological summaries and hourly meteorological data for the Oak Ridge area from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL)

A network of 10 meteorological towers and two sound detection and ranging instruments (SODARs) have been installed around ORNL and the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) as part of the environmental monitoring program supporting the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) (ORR, 2020; Chapter 6).

ORNL provides on-line summaries of climatological parameters that include temperature, humidity, wind, precipitation, adverse and extreme weather conditions.

Other data include air dispersion parameters from meteorological instrumentation platforms including instrumented towers and SODARs (ORNL, 2020a and ORNL, 2020b). Real-time meteorological data are also available to the public from ORNL, 2020c. ORNL provides a number of climatological summaries online, including ORNL, 2020d-o.

Relevant to this study is a 60-m multi-level tower (Tower D [also known as Tower MT2])

located approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) southeast of the HCS at ORNL. Joint wind-atmospheric stability frequency distributions (JFDs) were developed using the most recent five full years of available meteorological data (2016 - 2020) from Tower D.

Development of the JFDs is described in Section 0.

September 2022 3-151 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment

i. Air quality summaries and air quality monitor data from the USEPA The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) provides summaries of the current compliance status of counties with the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

(USEPA, 2021b).

The agency also provides digital summaries of measured concentrations and related parameters from air quality monitors (USEPA, 2021c). Concentrations from the monitors are compared with the NAAQS to assess compliance with the specific NAAQS.

Regional Meteorological Data Analysis Climatological parameters from the sources described above are presented in the following sections. For purposes of identifying a climate region containing meteorological stations relatively close to the HCS and subject to the same general climatic influences, this analysis concentrates on the four counties surrounding the HCS Anderson, Knox, Roane and Loudon counties.

Table 3.6-3 presents a list of ASOS and COOP stations and supplemental meteorological data sources in the region. The Knoxville airport (Blount county) and a COOP station in Strawberry Plains, Tennessee (Jefferson county) were also included due to their proximity to a county border. Figure 3.6-5 shows the locations of stations and data sources listed in Table 3.6-3.

It should be noted that the ground elevations shown in Table 3.6-3 are listed in meters MSL (above Mean Sea Level) because that is the terminology used by NOAA in describing the ASOS and COOP stations, and by ORR in describing the grade elevations of its meteorological instruments. However, the MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations used elsewhere in this analysis.

3.6.1.4.1 Severe Weather 3.6.1.4.1.1 Tornadoes Tornado intensity is classified according to the enhanced Fujita tornado intensity scale (EF-scale). This scale matches the wind speeds to the degree of observed damage according to 28 indicators. Measuring tornadoes from EF-1 to EF-5, the enhanced Fujita scale uses more specific structural damage indicators than the original Fujita tornado intensity scale (F-scale),

which was established in 1971 (SPC, 2020). Table 3.6-4 shows the original F-scale and EF-scale for reference.

Eastern Tennessee experiences tornado outbreaks of varying magnitudes approximately every three to six years. Tornadoes generally occur more frequently in the western and middle portions of Tennessee (ORR, 2020).

Tornado climatology for Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane Counties from 1950 to 2020 is summarized in Table 3.6-5 (ORNL, 2020d; ORNL, 2020e; ORNL, 2020f; ORNL, 2020g; and NCEI, 2020d). In the four-county area, the highest intensity tornadoes were rated F3 intensity.

All of those storms occurred on February 21, 1993. One of those tornadoes touched down near Oak Ridge, moved northeastward through the Bull Run Steam Plant and into Claxton, Tennessee. This tornado destroyed fifty homes, six mobile homes and two businesses. The September 2022 3-152 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment storm also damaged 10 businesses, portions of Y-12 and 12 electric transmission towers (NCEI, 1993; Fricke and Kornegay, 1993).

3.6.1.4.1.2 Extreme Wind ASCE, 2016 (Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-16) provides site-specific 100-year mean return-interval wind gusts. The 100-year, mean return-interval 3-s gust wind speed at 33 ft. (10 m) above ground level (exposure category C) for Oak Ridge, Tennessee is 89 mph (40 m/s)

(ASCE, 2016; Figure CC.2-4).

3.6.1.4.1.3 Thunderstorms and Lightning A climatology of thunderstorm days from ORNL for 2001-2019 is provided in Table 3.6-7 (ORNL, 2020h). Thunderstorms and associated lightning occur in Oak Ridge at an annual average frequency of 48.5 days per year, with a maximum monthly average occurring during July, which has a monthly average between 10 and 11 days. Approximately 41 of these thunderstorm days occur during the 7-month period that extends from April through October, with the remainder spread nearly evenly throughout the late fall and winter. The highest number of thunderstorm days at ORNL (65) was observed during 2012; the lowest (34) was observed during 2007.

Monthly and annual average numbers of thunderstorm days at the Knoxville Airport during the 72-year period from 1948 - 2019 are shown in Table 3.6-8 (NCEI, 2020b). This table shows an annual distribution similar to that of Oak Ridge in Table 3.6-7, with thunderstorms occurring at an average annual frequency of 48.8 days per year.

The mean frequency of lightning strikes to earth is estimated via a method from the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), per the U. S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service (USDA, 1998). The method assumes a relationship between the average number of thunderstorm days per year (T), and the number of lightning strikes to earth per square mile per year (N). The mathematical relationship is as follows:

N = [0.31][T] (Equation 3.6-1)

The number of lightning strikes to earth per square mile per year is computed for Oak Ridge and Knoxville in Table 3.6-9. Based on the average number of thunderstorm days per year at Knoxville (48.8 days from NCEI, 2020b), which is slightly higher than the value of 48.5 days for Oak Ridge ORNL, 2020h) and is therefore used here), the frequency of lightning strikes to earth per square mile per year is 15.1 (5.9 strikes per square km per year) for the HCS and surrounding area. For comparison, based on a 10-year period from 2009 - 2018 (Vaisala, 2018), indicates four to eight flashes per square kilometer per year in the region. The EPRI value therefore is shown to be a reasonable indicator.

3.6.1.4.1.4 Hail The NCEI Storm Events Database (NCEI, 2020d) was queried to extract statistics on observed hail. Table 3.6-10 summarizes the occurrences of hail in the four-county area around the HCS for 1950-2020. As shown in Table 3.6-10, most hailstorm occurrences (approximately 75 percent, or 243 out of 323 observations) do not produce hailstones larger than 1 in. (2.54 cm) in diameter. During the period from 1950 through 2020, 12 hail events with hailstones larger than 2 September 2022 3-153 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment in. (5.08 cm) were documented. The largest hailstone recorded during the period (4 in. [10.16 cm]) was observed in Loudon County on April 28, 1959). Hailstones ranging from 2.5 in. (6.35 cm) to 3.5 in. (8.89 cm) in diameter were associated with an F3 tornado that struck Oak Ridge on February 21, 1993.

3.6.1.4.2 Ice and Snowstorms Oak Ridge winters are characterized by synoptic mid-latitude cyclones that produce significant precipitation events approximately every three to five days. Although snow is not associated with many of these systems, occasional snowfall does result (ORR, 2020).

Table 3.6-11 summarizes monthly and annual average snowfall at Oak Ridge for the period of record of 1985 through 2019 (ORNL, 2020i; NCEI, 2020a; NCEI, 1999). The average annual snowfall at Oak Ridge is 5.9 in. (15.0 cm). The highest average monthly snowfall is 2.1 in. (5.3 cm) which occurs in February. The highest monthly snowfall for the 1985 - 2019 period of record is 12 in. (30.5 cm) which occurred in March 1993 and February 1996.

Additional historical records for Oak Ridge are available from NCEI, 2020a and NCEI, 1999 for a combined period of record of 72 years beginning in 1947. From these additional sources, the record monthly snowfall is 21.0 in. (53.3 cm) which occurred in March 1960. The record 24-hr snowfall for Oak Ridge is 12.0 in. (30.5 cm) which also occurred in March 1960.

Table 3.6-12 summarizes monthly and annual snowfall from Knoxville from 1944 - 2019 (NCEI, 2020b). The normal annual snowfall is 6.5 in. (16.5 cm). The record monthly snowfall (23.3 in.

[59.2 cm]) was recorded in February 1960. The record 24-hr. snowfall is 18.2 in. (46.2 cm) which occurred in November 1952.

Freezing rain occurs relatively infrequently at Oak Ridge. Table 3.6-13 summarizes the number of days with freezing rain observed at Oak Ridge during 1999-2019 (ORNL, 2020j). Freezing rain is observed on an average of slightly over 1 day/year.

3.6.1.4.3 Atmospheric Stagnation Major air pollution episodes are typically a result of persistent surface high pressure weather systems that cause light and variable surface winds and stagnant meteorological conditions for four or more consecutive days. Estimates of the stagnation frequency are provided in NOAA, 1999; Figures 1 and 2. Those estimates indicate that, on average, the HCS experiences approximately 15 days with stagnation per year. When stagnation occurs, stagnation lasts approximately five days. A more recent analysis from ORNL that used the technique described in NOAA, 1999 applied to the 1980-2012 period found stagnation conditions were most prevalent in Oak Ridge during August and September (ORNL, 2020k).

3.6.1.4.4 Fog Table 3.6-14 summarizes the number of days with heavy fog (defined as fog reducing the horizontal visibility to one-quarter mi. [0.40 km] or less) observed at Oak Ridge during 2000 -

2019 from NCEI, 2020a. Heavy fog was observed an average of 48 days/year and occurred most often during September and October.

Table 3.6-15 summarizes the number of days with heavy fog observed at Knoxville during 1964

- 2019 from NCEI, 2020b. Heavy fog was observed on an average of approximately 28 September 2022 3-154 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment days/year and most frequently during September and October similar annual trend to that observed at Oak Ridge.

3.6.1.4.5 Precipitation Extremes This section examines precipitation extremes from the COOP and ASOS monitoring stations near the HCS. The stations were identified in Section 0.

Table 3.6-16 presents maximum recorded daily (calendar day) liquid equivalent precipitation from the monitoring stations from NCEI, 2020c. The maximum recorded daily liquid-equivalent precipitation is 7.45 in. (18.92 cm) at NOAA Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Division (ATTD) in Oak Ridge. The event occurred from thunderstorms during the afternoon and evening of August 10, 1960. During that event a total of 3.43 in. (8.71 cm) of rain fell in one hour (NCEI, 1960a and NCEI, 1960b). The corresponding 24-hour liquid equivalent precipitation total for the event is 7.48 in. (19.0 cm) (NCEI, 1960b and NCEI, 2020a).

The weather observer in Oak Ridge described the event as follows in the stations monthly log (NCEI, 1960a):

7.45 inches of rain on the 10th [August 10] is maximum for Oak Ridge (Townsite) station. 7.34 inches fell in three hours, 3.43 [in.] in one hour. Extensive flooding of creek beds and streets occurred with some minor but no major damage.

Table 3.6-16 presents the maximum daily (calendar day) snowfall recorded at the monitoring stations from NCEI, 2020c. The highest daily snowfall recorded at any of the stations is 17.5 in.

(44.5 cm), which was recorded at the Knoxville airport on February 13, 1960 (NCEI, 1960c).

This event also set the record for the maximum 24-hour snowfall in February at Knoxville (NCEI, 2020b).

Table 3.6-16 presents the maximum monthly snowfall recorded at the monitoring stations from NCEI, 2020c. The highest monthly snowfall recorded at any of the stations is 23.3 in. (59.2 cm),

which was recorded at the Knoxville airport on February 1960 (NCEI, 1960c).

Another noteworthy regional snowfall is the record 24-hour snowfall at Knoxville (18.2 in. [46.2 cm]) from NCEI, 2020b. This record was set on November 21 - 22, 1952. A total of 16.0 in.

(40.6 cm) of snow fell during the first calendar day of the event. This was followed by 2.2 in. (5.6 cm) during the second day (NCEI, 1952). The weather observer at the Knoxville airport described the event as follows in the stations monthly log (NCEI, 1952):

A heavy wet snow of 18.2 inches which fell within a 24-hour period on November 21 -

22, played havoc with communication and power lines, broke many trees, and brought motor traffic to a near halt. The fall of 18.2 inches is the greatest snowfall in any 24-hour period since these records began in 1884. The snow partially melted as it fell and the greatest depth on the ground at any time was 10 inches.

3.6.1.4.6 Ground Snow Load and 100-Year 48-Hour Duration Liquid Equivalent Precipitation ASCE, 2016; Figure 7.2-1 provides site-specific estimates of the 50-year ground snow load. For the HCS, the 50-year ground snow load is 10 lb/ft2.

September 2022 3-155 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment ASCE, 2016; Section C7.3.3 provides a factor of 1.22 for estimating a 100-year ground snow load from a 50-year ground snow load. The resulting 100-year ground snow load as 12.2 lb/ft2 (10 lb/ft2 x 1.22 = 12.2 lb/ft2) (59.6 kg/m2).

Point estimates of precipitation return intervals are available from NOAA, 2022a. For the HCS, the 100-year return interval, 48-hour duration liquid equivalent precipitation is 8.31 in. (21.07 cm).

3.6.1.4.7 Dry and Wet Bulb Temperatures 3.6.1.4.7.1 Design Dry and Wet Bulb Temperatures Design basis dry bulb temperatures (DBTs) and wet bulb temperatures (WBTs) are defined for the HCS. These include the following temperatures:

a. Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent

b. Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBT

c. Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent

d. MCWB at the 1.0 percent DBT

e. Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent

f. MCWB at the 2.0 percent DBT

g. Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent

h. Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent

i. 100-year return maximum annual DBT

j. 100-year return maximum annual WBT Design temperatures for (a) - (h) are readily available from ASHRAE, 2017 for the ASOS stations in Oak Ridge and at the Knoxville airport. Worst-case (bounding) values for (a) - (h) are selected from those two stations. To maintain thermodynamic consistency between DBT and coincident WBT, DBT/ MCWB pairs are retained for a single station. The design temperatures and bounding values are listed in Table 3.6-17.

The 100-year return-interval maximum annual DBTs and WBTs (items [i], [j] above) were estimated used a technique described in ASHRAE, 2017. The technique estimates the n-year return-interval extreme maximum or minimum temperature using the mean and standard deviation of a series of annual maximum and minimum temperatures. This technique uses the following equation:

Tn = M + I F s (Equation 3.6-2)

Where:

September 2022 3-156 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Tn = n-year return period value of the extreme temperature computed, in years M = mean annual extreme maximum or minimum temperature I = +1 if the maximum temperature is computed; -1 if the minimum temperature is computed s = standard deviation of the annual extreme maximum or minimum temperatures n = return period in years (n =100 for a 100-year return interval).

(Equation 3.6-3)

Where:

F is a function that converts the standard deviation of annual extreme temperature parameters (such as the annual extreme temperature) to a new variable that is linearly related to the n-year return-interval extreme temperature Tn.

ASHRAE, 2017 provides the mean annual extreme maximum and mean annual extreme minimum temperature (M) and the corresponding standard deviations (s) in Equation 3.6-2 for the observing stations in Oak Ridge and at the Knoxville airport.

The inputs and the computed 100-year return interval maximum annual DBTs and WBTs computed for Knoxville and Oak Ridge from Equation 3.6-2 and Equation 3.6-3 are listed in Table 3.6-18 and Table 3.6-19, respectively. Worst-case (bounding) values are selected from those two stations. The bounding values are listed in Table 3.6-20.

3.6.1.4.7.2 Extreme Dry Bulb Temperatures An additional review of regional extreme DBTs is done using COOP meteorological stations in the area. The locations of those stations are shown in Figure 3.6-5.

The COOP stations do not measure WBT and do not record hourly DBTs. Those stations only record maximum and minimum daily DBTs and daily precipitation totals. Therefore, it is not possible to identify WBTs coincident with the extreme DBTs recorded at those stations.

Table 3.6-21 presents extreme DBTs recorded at the COOP and ASOS stations. Many of the COOP stations did not record the dry bulb temperature or had partial temperature records. The extreme temperatures were extracted for each station using the available dry bulb temperature data. Table 3.6-21 also includes the extreme DBTs recorded at the two ASOS stations (Oak Ridge and the Knoxville airport).

Table 3.6-21 shows that the overall extreme DBTs are a maximum of 108°F (42.2 C) recorded on July 29, 1930 at Loudon, 1E in Loudon County, and a minimum of -24°F (-31.1 C) recorded on January 21, 1985 at the Knoxville (NCEI, 1985).

September 2022 3-157 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Local Meteorological Data Analysis 3.6.1.5.1 Temperature and Wind Data Surface wind and temperature data from a location near the HCS were required to develop an input data set for computing relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) and radiological dose assessments.

Surface data were available from the ASOS in Oak Ridge (station KOQT). This station is relatively close, 8.5 mi. (13.7 km) northeast of the HCS. However, this ASOS is unusual in the respect that it is not located in a relatively open location affiliated with an airport or runway.

Instead it is in an urban area between buildings and parking lots of Roane State Community College and U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) buildings of the Oak Ridge Operations Headquarters (Bellinger, 2011).

Due to urban development around the station, NOAA has raised concerned about the data quality from that station (NOAA, 2020b). Also, a relatively high percentage of calm winds reported by the Oak Ridge ASOS (51.12 percent in Figure 3.6-1) raised concerns during preparation of this report about the utility of the wind data from the Oak Ridge ASOS for inputs into air dispersion modeling. Due to these concerns, this report does not use data from the Oak Ridge ASOS to develop an input data set for computing relative atmospheric concentration

(/Q) and radiological dose assessments.

Other potential data sources consist of 10 single- and multi-level meteorological towers near the HCS. These towers are part of the environmental monitoring program supporting the ORR (ORR, 2020; Chapter 6).

The vertical temperature difference (delta-T) is the preferred method for determining Pasquill stability classes because it is an effective indicator of worst-case stability conditions (Pasquill class E, F and G) (Regulatory Guide 1.23). Thus, a multi-level tower close to the HCS was preferred. In using the delta-T method, temperature measurements at the 60 m (196.8 ft) level are important in assessing atmospheric stability.

Of the 10 towers, only two Tower D, also known as Tower MT2 located at ORNL; and Tower W (also known as MT6) located near the western boundary of Y-12 had measurements at 60 m (196.8 ft).

Tower D is located approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) southeast of the HCS, whereas Tower W is located approximately 5.6 mi. (9.0 km) east-northeast of the HCS. Therefore, Tower D is the closest multi-level tower to the HCS with measurements at the 60 m (196.8 m ft) level (ORR, 2020; Table 6.1).

The grade elevation of Tower D is 261 m (856 ft.) MSL (ORR, 2020; Table 6.1). The base elevation of Tower D is reasonably close to the grade elevation of the HCS is approximately 244 m (800 ft.) MSL.

Tower D is instrumented at 2 m (6.6 ft.); 15 m (49.2 ft.); 35 m (114.8 ft.) and 60 m (196.8 ft.).

Tower D measures solar radiation, wind speed/direction, dry bulb temperature and humidity.

Wind speed/direction and standard deviation of the wind direction are measured at 15 m (49.2 ft.), 35 m (114.8 ft.) and 60 m (196.8 ft.). Dry bulb temperatures are measured at 2 m (6.6 ft.);

September 2022 3-158 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 15 m (49.2 ft.) and 60 m (196.8 ft.). Relative humidity and dewpoint are measured at 2 m (6.6 ft.); 15 m (49.2 ft. (ORR, 2020; Table 6.1 and Section 6.1.1).

The University of Tennessee-Battelle manages calibrations of the meteorological instruments. A local environmental firm (Holian Environmental, LLC) conducts independent audits of the tower every six months (ORR, 2020; Chapter 6).

Digital files containing hourly data from Tower D for January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2020 were obtained from ORNL, 2020l. Winds at the 15-m (49.2ft.) level and Pasquill stability class derived from 15 - 60 m (49.2 ft. - 196.8 ft.) delta-T measurements were used to construct JFDs of wind direction and wind speed stratified by Pasquill stability class (Section 0).

Table 3.6-22 shows the annual joint data recovery of 15-m (49.2 ft.) wind speed, wind direction, and the computed Pasquill stability class for 2016 through 2020. Joint data recovery was 100 percent for each year, except for 2018 and 2020 when the data recovery was 99.95 percent.

and 99.99 percent, respectively. Table 3.6-23 through Table 3.6-27 presents annual summaries of meteorological parameters from Tower W for each year during 2016 through 2020 for reference. Table 3.6-28 provides a summary of the parameters for 2016 through 2020.

Figure 3.6-6 through Figure 3.6-19 show the annual, monthly and seasonal wind roses from Tower D. The period of record on which those plots are based is the five years from January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2020. That period of record is also used for the JFD input to /Q and radiological dose assessments presented later in this report.

The annual wind rose from the Oak Ridge ASOS (Figure 3.6-1) provides some context for interpreting the annual wind rose from Tower D (Figure 3.6-6). The annual wind rose from the Oak Ridge ASOS and the annual wind rose from Tower D both show a bimodal distribution with dominant northeasterly and southwesterly wind directions. This is expected given the climate of the area, as explained earlier. However, the percentage of calm winds reported by the Oak Ridge ASOS (51.12 percent in Figure 3.6-1) is much higher than the percentage reported by Tower D (1.01 percent during 2016 through 2020 [based on 444 calm wind readings and valid 43,843 wind measurements] in Figure 3.6-6).

Bellinger, 2011 also observed the higher percentage of calm winds at the Oak Ridge ASOS relative to other stations, including the nearby Tower W. He attributed the higher percentage of calm winds to differences to the definition of a calm wind used the Oak Ridge ASOS. Due to wind sensor starting thresholds, rounding and conventions for reporting calm winds, an ASOS reports a calm wind when the measured wind speed during a two-minute period is less than 2.5 knots (1.3 m/s).

Bellinger compared winds from the Oak Ridge ASOS with winds from nearby Tower W during January 2005 - February 2011, accounting for this definition of calm winds employed by the ASOS. He found that Tower W would report calm winds at approximately the same average frequency as the Oak Ridge ASOS (51.0 percent calm winds at Tower W, versus 46.3 percent calm winds at the Oak Ridge ASOS) if Tower W used the same reporting convention of calms winds employed by the Oak Ridge ASOS (Bellinger, 2011; Figure 9). Thus, the relatively high percentage of calm winds reported by the Oak Ridge ASOS results from the convention for reporting calm wind from an ASOS instead of actual average differences in calm wind percentages measured at Tower W and the Oak Ridge ASOS.

September 2022 3-159 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment The annual wind rose from Tower D (Figure 3.6-6) was compared with the annual wind rose from the Knoxville airport (Figure 3.6-3). The annual wind rose from the Knoxville airport and the annual wind rose from Tower D both show a bimodal distribution with northeasterly and southwesterly wind directions.

Annual variations in the large-scale weather patterns that affect eastern Tennessee provide context for interpreting the seasonal wind roses in from Tower D (Figure 3.6-19), Oak Ridge (Figure 3.6-2) and Knoxville (Figure 3.6-4).

During the spring season the westerly jet stream brings synoptic-scale, mid-latitude frontal systems regularly through eastern Tennessee (NWS, 2020; ORR, 2020). General southerly winds ahead of these systems, and northerly winds behind them, combined with terrain influences, result in an overall pattern of frequent northeasterly and southwesterly winds. This is reflected in the spring season wind roses.

During the summer season, the westerly jet stream recedes northward into Canada (NWS, 2020). As a result, frontal systems are less common in the Tennessee Valley. The subtropical high-pressure system over the Atlantic strengthens over the southeastern United States bringing southwesterly winds to the region. This is reflected in the summer season wind roses in Figure 3.6-2, Figure 3.6-4 and Figure 3.6-19.

The subtropical high-pressure system weakens during late summer and early autumn. The westerly jet stream begins to progress southward into the United States bringing synoptic-scale mid-latitude frontal systems more frequently through eastern Tennessee (NWS, 2020). High pressure systems behind the frontal systems affect the eastern United States, bringing easterly winds to eastern Tennessee (TDEC, 2020). This is reflected in the autumn season wind roses.

As autumn transitions into winter, the westerly jet stream progresses farther southward into the United States, bringing synoptic-scale mid-latitude frontal systems more frequently through eastern Tennessee (NWS, 2020; ORR,2020). General southerly winds ahead of these systems, and northerly winds behind them, combined with terrain influences, result in an overall pattern of frequent northeasterly and southwesterly winds. This is reflected in the winter season wind roses in Figure 3.6-2, Figure 3.6-4 and Figure 3.6-19.

The corresponding monthly wind roses from Tower D are provided for reference in Figure 3.6-7 through Figure 3.6-18. The general bimodal wind pattern is shown in each month of the year with seasonal variations described above. The overall consistency of the wind roses from Tower D, Oak Ridge and Knoxville verifies the representativeness of wind measurements from Tower D.

3.6.1.5.2 Wind Direction Persistence Table 3.6-29 shows the distribution of 15-m (49.2-ft.) wind direction persistence at Tower D during 2016 through 2020. The longest persistence of each wind direction in Table 3.6-29 is listed in Table 3.6-30. Table 3.6-30 shows that the most persistent winds are from the northeast (28 hours3.240741e-4 days <br />0.00778 hours <br />4.62963e-5 weeks <br />1.0654e-5 months <br />), followed by winds from the southwest (20 hours2.314815e-4 days <br />0.00556 hours <br />3.306878e-5 weeks <br />7.61e-6 months <br />) and winds from the west-southwest (18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />). The longest period of persistent wind direction during 2016 through 2020 was 28 hours3.240741e-4 days <br />0.00778 hours <br />4.62963e-5 weeks <br />1.0654e-5 months <br /> which occurred with northeast winds in November 2018.

September 2022 3-160 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.6.1.5.3 Atmospheric Stability The Pasquill stability class is derived from the temperature difference (delta-T) between 15-m (49.2-ft.) and 60 m (196.8 ft.) levels at Tower D, per Regulatory Guide 1.23. Table 3.6-31 presents the annual Pasquill class frequency distributions for the period January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2020 and each individual year in the period.

This table shows that the Pasquill class "D" stability class is the most frequently occurring stability class for each year and for the entire period. Extremely unstable conditions (Pasquill class A) and extremely stable conditions (Pasquill class G) occur relatively less frequently.

All of these results are consistent with generally observed stability class climatology. A similar distribution is also presented, for example, in Stern et al., 1984.

The results in Table 3.6-31 are presented in the form of JFDs of 15-m (49.2-ft.) wind direction and wind speed stratified by Pasquill stability class in Table 3.6-32 through Table 3.6-39. These JFDs are used for /Q and radiological dose calculations presented later in this report.

3.6.1.5.4 Mixing Height SODARs use acoustic waves to estimate wind direction, wind speed and turbulence at vertical levels beyond the vertical reach of meteorological towers (ORR, 2020; Chapter 6.1.1). A SODAR is located adjacent to Tower D at ORNL, or approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) southeast of the HCS. The grade elevation of the SODAR is 261 m MSL (856 ft.) (ORR, 2020; Table 6.1).

Table 3.6-40 shows average monthly and annual mixing heights measured from the ORNL SODAR during 2014 through 2019 (ORNL, 2020m). Average mixing heights are lowest in the winter months (560 m [1837 ft.] above ground level (AGL) in December). Average mixing heights are the highest in summer (1189 m [3900 ft.] AGL in June). The average annual mixing height is 872 m (2860 ft.) AGL.

The grade elevation of the HCS is approximately 244 m (800 ft.) MSL. Accounting for the approximate 17 m (56 ft.) difference in grade elevation between the SODAR and the HCS (261 m - 244 m = 17 m [56 ft.]), the magnitudes of the monthly average mixing heights suggest that there is, on the average, sufficient vertical depth through which an emitted or entrained non-buoyant plume could potentially be mixed, especially during the summer months when the mixing heights are the greatest.

Mixing heights vary during the day, with the lowest mixing heights generally recorded during the morning hours and the highest readings recorded during the afternoon (Holzworth, 1972: Figure 1 and Figure 6). A climatology of hourly mixing heights from the SODAR at ORNL for 2014 through 2019 (ORNL, 2020n) shows that the average mixing heights vary from an average of 376 m (1233 ft.) at 6 am to 1931 m (6334 ft.) at 5 pm local daylight time. Again, accounting for the relatively small (17 m) (56 ft.) difference in grade elevation between the HCS and the SODAR, the magnitudes of the hourly average mixing heights measured at ORNL suggest that there is, on the average, sufficient vertical depth for mixing an emitted or entrained non-buoyant plume.

Another SODAR was installed more recently at Y-12, approximately 7.6 mi. (12.2 km) northeast of the HCS (Figure 3.6-5). The grade elevation of this SODAR is approximately 281 m (922 ft.)

MSL. Data are available for 2019 from ORNL, 2020o. Although the data are available for only September 2022 3-161 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment one year, they provide context for the longer records from the SODAR at ORNL described above.

Table 3.6-41 shows average monthly and annual mixing heights measured from the Y-12 SODAR during 2019 (ORNL, 2020o). Average mixing heights are lowest in the winter months (440 m [1443 ft.] AGL in January). Average mixing heights are the highest in summer (1170 m

[3838 ft.] AGL in June). The average annual mixing height is 813 m (2667 ft.) AGL.

The approximate grade elevation of the HCS is approximately 244 m [800 ft.] MSL. Accounting for the relatively small (37 m [121 ft.]) difference in grade elevation between the HCS and the Y-12 SODAR (281 m - 244 m = 37 m), the magnitudes of the monthly average mixing heights suggest that there is, on the average, sufficient vertical depth through which an emitted or entrained non-buoyant plume could potentially be mixed, especially during the summer months when the mixing heights are the greatest.

A climatology of hourly mixing heights from the SODAR at Y-12 for 2019 (ORNL, 2020o) shows that the average mixing heights vary from an average of 355 m (1164 ft.) at 6 am - 7 am to 1932 m (6337 ft.) at 5 pm local daylight time. Accounting for the relatively small (37 m [121 ft.]

difference in grade elevation between the HCS and the SODAR, the magnitudes of the hourly average mixing heights measured at Y-12 suggest that there is, on the average, sufficient vertical depth for mixing an emitted or entrained non-buoyant plume.

Description of the Local Topography A topographic map of the local area around the HCS is shown in Figure 3.6-20. The HCS is located approximately 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) southeast of a northeast-southwest oriented ridge one of a number of such ridges that punctuates the terrain in the Tennessee River Valley between the Cumberland and Smoky Mountains. The ridge extends southwest of the HCS well into Roane County and northeast of the site into Anderson County, Tennessee. The ridge tops reach approximately 1100 ft. (335 m) MSL within approximately 1.0 mi. (1.6 km) of the HCS. Another northeast-southwest oriented ridge (McKinney Ridge) is located approximately 1.0 mi. (1.6 km) south of the HCS. The ridge tops extend to approximately 1100 ft. (335 m) MSL.

3.6.2 AIR QUALITY Ambient Air Quality Standards The Clean Air Act requires the USEPA to set NAAQS for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment.

The Clean Air Act identifies two types of national ambient air quality standards. Primary NAAQS provide public health protection, including protecting the health of sensitive populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary NAAQS provide public welfare protection, including protection against decreased visibility and damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings (USEPA, 2021a).

The USEPA has specified NAAQS for six principal pollutants, which are called criteria pollutants. The criteria pollutants and their respective NAAQS are listed in listed in Table 3.6-42 (USEPA, 2021a).

September 2022 3-162 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment NAAQS maintenance areas are those geographical areas that have a history of non-attainment with a particular NAAQS but are currently meeting that NAAQS. Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane counties were in non-attainment for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS in the past. Anderson, Knox and Loudon counties were in non-attainment for a 1997 8-hour ozone (O3) standard that was revoked and replaced with an 8-hour O3 standard in 2008 which kept Anderson and Knox counties in non-attainment. Later, Anderson and Knox counties were re-designated as being in maintenance for the 2008 8-hour O3 NAAQS on August 12, 2015. Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane were re-designated as being in maintenance for the 24-hour PM2.5 NAAQS on September 27, 2017. The attainment status of Anderson Knox, Loudon and Roane counties with respect to current NAAQS as of December 31, 2021 is listed in Table 3.6-43 (USEPA, 2021b).

Regional Air Quality Roane County, Tennessee is part of the Eastern Tennessee-Southwestern Virginia Interstate Air Quality Control Region (USEPA, 1971). Air quality monitors measure concentrations of criteria pollutants to demonstrate attainment with the respective NAAQS. Table 3.6-44 through Table 3.6-50 show comparisons of measured concentrations from the nearest air quality monitors to the HCS with the respective NAAQS for 2017-2020 (USEPA, 2021c).

All of the air quality monitors are located in Anderson, Knox, Loudon or Roane counties, with exception of the carbon monoxide (CO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2) monitors. The nearest CO and NO2 monitors are located south of the HCS in rural Blount County, Tennessee. In addition, sulfur dioxide (SO2) data for the year 2020 were not available for Anderson, Knox, Loudon or Roane counties. Table 3.6-44 through Table 3.6-50 show that all of measured concentrations are below (better than) the respective NAAQS.

The nearest county to the HCS that is not in attainment with one or more NAAQS is Sullivan County, Tennessee. A portion of Sullivan County is in non-attainment for the 1-hr SO2 NAAQS as of December 31, 2021 (USEPA, 2021b). Sullivan County is located approximately 100 mi.

(161 km) northeast of the HCS in far northeastern Tennessee along the Virginia border.

Criteria pollutant emissions aggregated at the county level from USEPA, 2017 are provided for reference in Table 3.6-51.

Class I Areas Class I areas are national parks and wilderness areas that are potentially sensitive to visibility impairment. U.S. EPA guidance (USEPA, 1990) states that a Class I visibility impact analysis is necessary for a major source locating within 100 km (62 mi.) of a Class I area.

Table 3.6-52 lists the nearest Mandatory (Federal) or American Indian Class I areas to the HCS (USEPA, 2022 and NPS, 2022). The table shows that the nearest Class I area is the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee/North Carolina which is located approximately 54 km (34 mi.) southeast of the HCS.

September 2022 3-163 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-1 Climatological Normals (1981 - 2010) and Means Oak Ridge, TN (KOQT)

Parameter POR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year Normal daily max. temperature (°F) 30 46.6 51.9 61.4 70.6 78.3 85.7 88.4 88.0 81.7 71.1 59.6 49.6 69.4 Normal daily min. temperature (°F) 30 28.9 31.7 39.3 46.9 55.2 64.5 68.6 67.2 59.7 48.0 38.3 31.1 48.3 Normal dry bulb temperature (°F) 30 37.7 41.8 50.4 58.8 66.8 75.1 78.5 77.6 70.7 59.5 48.9 40.3 58.8 Normal humidity (%) - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mean wind speed (mph) 20 3.3 3.6 3.9 3.7 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.1 1.9 2.1 2.4 2.8 2.8 Prevailing wind direction (tens of degrees) 21 22 05 05 22 22 21 21 06 06 06 05 22 05 Normal liquid equivalent precipitation (in.) 30 4.54 4.57 5.06 4.18 4.29 4.28 5.27 2.76 3.69 2.92 4.49 4.86 50.91 a)

Average snowfall (in.)( 35 1.9 2.1 0.5 0.2 Trace 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Trace 0.1 1.5 5.9 a) Snowfall statistics unavailable from NCEI, 2020a. Average snowfall statistics for 1985-2019 from Oak Ridge extracted from ORNL, 2020i September 2022 3-164 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-2 Climatological Normals (1981 - 2010) and Means Knoxville, TN (KTYS)

Parameter POR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Year Normal daily max. temperature (°F) 30 47.3 52.3 61.4 70.3 78.1 85.4 88.2 87.8 81.8 71.2 60.4 49.8 69.5 Normal daily min. temperature (°F) 30 29.2 32.4 39.2 47.3 56.2 64.7 68.7 67.8 60.4 48.5 39.0 31.7 48.8 Normal dry bulb temperature (°F) 30 38.2 42.4 50.3 58.8 67.2 75.0 78.4 77.8 71.1 59.9 49.7 40.8 59.1 Normal humidity (%) 30 74 70 66 65 73 75 75 76 75 75 74 75 73 Mean wind speed (mph) 36 6.7 7.1 7.3 7.2 6.2 5.6 5.4 4.8 4.8 5.0 5.5 6.1 6.0 Prevailing wind direction (tens of degrees) 46 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 05 05 03 24 24 Normal liquid equivalent precipitation (in.) 30 4.32 4.26 4.34 4.01 4.51 3.81 5.08 3.27 3.24 2.51 4.01 4.50 47.86 Normal snowfall (in.) 30 2.7 1.6 0.9 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.8 6.5 September 2022 3-165 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-3 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Locations of ASOS and COOP Weather Observing Stations and Supplemental Data Sources from ORR Label Elev.

Latitude Long. Period of (Figure Station Type County (m, (deg.) (deg.) Record 3.6-5) MSL) 1 Clinton 2 NW COOP Anderson 36.1333 -84.1500 302.1 1961 - 1962 2 Clinton 4.3 SSW COOP Anderson 36.0312 -84.1500 274.3 2007 - 2016 3 Clinton 4.9 S COOP Anderson 36.0199 -84.1255 249.0 2012 - 2020 4 Clinton COOP Anderson 36.1000 -84.1000 259.1 1883 - 1962 5 Concord COOP Knox 35.9000 -84.1833 305.1 1949 - 1962 6 Farragut 1.0 WNW COOP Knox 35.8819 -84.1971 297.2 2000 - 2019 7 Farragut 2.3 NE COOP Knox 35.8969 -84.1511 310.3 2007 - 2020 8 Farragut 2.8 ENE COOP Knox 35.8876 -84.1352 324.9 2012 - 2020 9 Fountain City COOP Knox 36.0333 -83.9333 296.0 1949 - 1953 10 Greenback 2.1 ENE COOP Loudon 35.6672 -84.1423 275.8 2015 - 2020 11 Halls Northern Knox COOP Knox 36.1109 -83.9205 368.8 2007 - 2009 12 Harriman COOP Roane 35.9333 -84.5500 235.0 1893 - 1962 13 Harriman 4.5 SW COOP Roane 35.8843 -84.6149 230.4 2007 - 2020 14 Karns 0.6 SSE COOP Knox 35.9678 -84.1124 313.9 2007 - 2011 15 Kingston COOP Roane 35.8572 -84.5281 248.1 1884 - 2020 16 Kingston Steam Plant COOP Roane 35.9000 -84.5167 232.0 1951 - 1962 17 Knoxville Airport ASOS Blount 35.8181 -83.9858 293.2 1910 - 2020 18 Knoxville 0.8 ESE COOP Knox 35.9709 -83.9335 285.0 2018 - 2019 19 Knoxville 10.6 WSW COOP Knox 35.9400 -84.1306 303.6 2019 - 2020 20 Knoxville 3.1 WNW COOP Knox 35.9961 -83.9944 311.5 2015 - 2020 21 Knoxville 3.5 WSW COOP Knox 35.9523 -84.0019 337.7 2019 - 2020 22 Knoxville 4.5 NNW COOP Knox 36.0344 -83.9793 325.8 2007 - 2016 23 Knoxville 4.6 SW COOP Knox 35.9339 -84.0125 285.6 2013 - 2016 24 Knoxville 5.5 W COOP Knox 35.9831 -84.0442 398.1 2007 - 2020 25 Knoxville 5.7 NNW COOP Knox 36.0512 -83.9862 309.4 2013 - 2020 26 Knoxville 6.2 SSW COOP Knox 35.8875 -83.9755 282.2 2007 - 2013 27 Knoxville 8.0 WSW COOP Knox 35.9168 -84.0693 310.0 2014 - 2018 28 Knoxville Exp. Station COOP Knox 35.8984 -83.9569 253.0 1966 - 2020 29 Knoxville Garage COOP Knox 35.9833 -83.9167 281.0 1949 - 1953 30 Knoxville Univ. of TN COOP Knox 35.9500 -83.9167 272.8 1943 - 1982 31 Knoxville COOP Knox 35.9667 -83.9167 296.0 1948 - 1951 32 Lake City COOP Anderson 36.2333 -84.1667 262.1 1949 - 1950 33 Lenoir City 3.1 NE COOP Loudon 35.8266 -84.2251 260.9 2007 - 2015 34 Lenoir City TN (a) COOP Loudon 35.8400 -84.3308 378.0 2003 - 2020 35 Lenoir City (b) COOP Loudon 35.8000 -84.2500 249.9 1948 - 1962 36 Lenoir City (c) COOP Loudon 35.7875 -84.2622 239.3 1962 - 2020 37 Loudon 1 E COOP Loudon 35.7333 -84.3333 244.1 1885 - 1962 38 Loudon 5.3 E COOP Loudon 35.7490 -84.2650 260.9 2015 - 2020 39 Mascot 1.4 NNE COOP Knox 36.0865 -83.7559 309.1 2007 - 2020 40 McGhee 2 SE COOP Loudon 35.6167 -84.2167 259.1 1927 - 1949 41 McGhee COOP Loudon 35.6167 -84.2167 246.9 1904 - 1962 42 Melton Hill Dam COOP Loudon 35.8833 -84.3000 238.0 1961 - 1962 a) Cooperative observer station identifier USR0000TWES b) Cooperative observer station identifier USC00403229 c) Cooperative observer station identifier USC00403158 September 2022 3-166 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-3 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Locations of ASOS and COOP Weather Observing Stations and Supplemental Data Sources from ORR Label Elev.

Latitude Long. Period of (Figure Station Type County (m, (deg.) (deg.) Record 3.6-5) MSL) 43 Norris 0.6 NW COOP Anderson 36.1997 -84.0765 353.0 2007 - 2020 44 Norris Dam COOP Anderson 36.2167 -84.0833 267.9 1949 - 1970 45 Norris Evap. Station COOP Anderson 36.2000 -84.0833 305.1 1948 - 1953 46 Norris COOP Anderson 36.2130 -84.0602 338.3 1935 - 2020 47 Oak Ridge COOP Roane 35.9333 -84.3167 271.0 1947 - 1964 48 Oak Ridge 3.0 NW COOP Roane 35.9966 -84.3291 328.0 2013 - 2016 49 Oak Ridge 3.3 NNW COOP Anderson 36.0083 -84.3112 360.0 2007 - 2009 50 Oak Ridge 5.4 NE COOP Anderson 36.0182 -84.2280 263.0 2018 - 2020 51 Oak Ridge 5.7 NE (d) COOP Anderson 36.0191 -84.2211 270.1 2007 - 2020 52 Oak Ridge 5.7 NE (e) COOP Anderson 36.0212 -84.2234 260.3 2009 - 2020 53 Oak Ridge 6.9 NNE COOP Anderson 36.0462 -84.2298 327.1 2010 - 2011 54 Oak Ridge 8.1 ENE COOP Anderson 36.0246 -84.1742 269.4 2019 - 2020 55 Oak Ridge ASOS ASOS Anderson 36.0230 -84.2337 274.3 1998 - 2020 56 Oak Ridge ATDD (f) Other Anderson 35.9980 -84.2192 310.6 1948 - 2020 57 Oliver Springs 5.6 SW COOP Roane 35.9695 -84.3855 256.0 2008 - 2020 58 Philadelphia 2.5 SE COOP Loudon 35.6540 -84.3686 329.8 2008 - 2010 59 Powell 1.3 NNW COOP Knox 36.0509 -84.0373 376.1 2007 - 2008 60 Powell COOP Knox 36.0333 -84.0333 323.1 1961 - 1962 61 Riddles Store COOP Loudon 35.6167 -84.5333 310.9 1949 - 1962 62 Ritta COOP Knox 36.0500 -83.8667 313.9 1949 - 1962 63 Rockwood 0.6 WSW COOP Roane 35.8702 -84.6839 277.1 2007 - 2008 64 Rockwood 2 COOP Roane 35.8360 -84.6920 233.8 1962 - 2020 65 Rockwood COOP Roane 35.8667 -84.6833 278.0 1884 - 1962 66 Strawberry Plains COOP Jefferson 36.0667 -83.6833 264.9 1885 - 1962 67 U S Cotton Field Station COOP Knox 35.8833 -83.9333 271.0 1949 - 1962 68 Univ. of TN Farm COOP Knox 35.9500 -83.9500 244.1 1949 - 1956 69 Univ. of TN Lysimeter COOP Knox 35.9500 -83.9500 259.1 1949 - 1962 70 Whittle Springs COOP Knox 36.0167 -83.9167 326.1 1949 - 1953 Supplemental Data Sources from ORR 71 SODAR / Tower D /

- 261 MT2 - ORNL Roane 35.9256 -84.3238 -

72 SODAR - Y-12 - Anderson 35.9930 -84.2407 281 -

73 Tower W / MT6 - Y-12 - Anderson 35.9806 -84.2736 326 -

d) Cooperative observer station identifier US1TNAN0003 e) Cooperative observer station identifier US1TNAN0009 f) ATDD is the NOAA Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Division.

September 2022 3-167 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-4 Fujita Scale and Enhanced Fujita Scales to Determine Tornado Intensity Fastest 3-s 3-s 1/4-mi gust gust EF F number (mi/hr) (mi/hr) number (mi/hr) 0 40 - 72 45 - 78 0 65 - 85 1 73 - 112 79 - 117 1 86 - 110 2 113 -157 118 - 161 2 111 - 135 3 158 - 207 162 - 209 3 136- 165 4 208 - 260 210 - 261 4 166 - 200 5 261 - 318 262 - 317 5 over 200 September 2022 3-168 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-5 Documented Tornadoes in Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane Counties, TN (1950 - 2020)

Tornado Intensity County F0/EF0 F1/EF1 F2/EF2 F3/EF3 F4/EF4 F5/EF5 Anderson 1 1 2 1 0 0 Knox 7 5 3 1 0 0 Loudon 2 3 3 1 0 0 Roane 3 1 0 1 0 0 Total 13 10 8 4 0 0 September 2022 3-169 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-6 Not Used September 2022 3-170 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-7 Monthly and Annual Thunderstorm Days Oak Ridge National Laboratory (2001 - 2019)

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Average 0.9 1.3 2.9 4.8 6.1 8.6 10.7 6.3 3.0 1.7 1.2 1.0 48.5 Maximum 5 4 10 10 10 13 16 10 5 4 4 3 65 Minimum 0 0 1 2 1 4 5 2 0 0 0 0 34 September 2022 3-171 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-8 Monthly and Annual Thunderstorm Days Knoxville Airport (1948 - 2019)

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Average 0.9 1.4 3.3 4.6 6.8 8.6 10.1 6.9 3.1 1.3 1.0 0.8 48.8 September 2022 3-172 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-9 Computed Lightning Strike Density at Oak Ridge and Knoxville, Tennessee Computed Number of Lightning Thunderstorm Period of Strikes per Station Days Record sq. mi.

Knoxville Airport (KTYS) 48.8 1948-2019 15.1 Oak Ridge (ORNL) 48.5 2001-2019 15.0 September 2022 3-173 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-10 Summary of Observed Hail in Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane Counties, Tennessee (1950 - 2020)

Number Hail Diameter of (in.) Events 1.0 in. 243 1 2.0 in. 68 2 3.0 in. 10

> 3 in. 2 Total 323 September 2022 3-174 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-11 Average and Monthly Maximum Snowfall Oak Ridge, TN (1947 - 2019) (a,b,c)

Month (a,b,c) POR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual 35 1.9 2.1 0.5 0.2 Trace 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Trace 0.1 1.5 5.9 Average (in.)

Maximum 72 9.6 17.2 21.0 5.9 Trace Trace Trace Trace 0.0 Trace 6.5 14.8 21.0 Monthly (in.)

Year 1966 1979 1960 1987 1993 1998 1993 1990 1993 1950 1963 1960 Maximum 24-hr. 72 8.3 11.3 12.0 5.4 Trace Trace Trace Trace 0.0 Trace 6.5 10.8 12.0 Snowfall (in.)

Year 1962 1996 1960 1987 1993 1998 1993 1990 1993 1950 1963 1960 a) Monthly and annual average snowfall statistics for 1985-2019 (35 years) extracted from ORNL, 2020i.

b) Monthly maximum and maximum 24-hr. snowfall statistics from NCEI, 2020a and NCEI, 1999. The combined period of record covered by NCEI, 2020a and NCEI, 1999 is 1947-2019 (72 years).

c) Snowfall data comprise all forms of frozen precipitation, including hail. Thus, a trace of snow can be recorded during the warm season.

September 2022 3-175 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-12 Normal and Monthly Snowfall Knoxville Airport (1944 - 2019) (a,b)

Month (a,b) POR Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Normal (in.) 30 2.7 1.6 0.9 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.00 0.8 6.5 Maximum 75 15.1 23.3 20.2 10.7 Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace 18.2 12.2 23.3 Monthly (in.)

Year 1962 1960 1960 1987 2017 2015 2016 1995 2006 2017 1952 1963 1960 Maximum 24-hr. 75 12.0 17.5 14.1 10.7 Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace 18.2 8.9 18.2 Snowfall (in.)

Year 1962 1960 1993 1987 2017 2015 2016 1995 2006 2017 1952 1969 1952 a) Snowfall statistics from NCEI, 2020b. Period of record (POR) reported in NCEI, 2020b is 30 years for the normal snowfall and 75 years for the monthly maximum snowfall and the maximum 24-hr. snowfall.

b) Snowfall data comprise all forms of frozen precipitation, including hail. Thus, a trace of snow can be recorded during the warm season.

September 2022 3-176 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-13 Freezing Rain Days at Oak Ridge (1999 - 2019)

Number Number Number Year Year Year of days of days of days 1999 0 2009 0 2019 0 2000 2 2010 5 2001 0 2011 1 2002 3 2012 0 2003 0 2013 3 2004 0 2014 1 2005 5 2015 3 2006 0 2016 2 2007 0 2017 0 2008 1 2018 2 Average: 1.3 September 2022 3-177 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-14 Number of Days with Heavy Fog at Oak Ridge (KOQT), Tennessee (2000 - 2019)

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Average 2.0 1.6 1.3 2.1 4.4 4.0 5.1 4.8 6.9 7.4 4.9 3.5 48.0 September 2022 3-178 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-15 Number of Days with Heavy Fog at Knoxville Airport (1964 - 2019)

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual Average 2.4 1.7 1.5 1.2 2.1 1.7 1.9 3.0 3.4 3.8 2.6 2.3 27.6 September 2022 3-179 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-16 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Maximum Daily Liquid Equivalent Precipitation and Snowfall from ASOS and COOP Stations (a)

Max. Daily Max. Max.

Liquid Equiv. Daily Monthly Observing Station (a)

Precip. Snowfall Snowfall (in.) (in.) (in.)

Clinton 2 NW (b) 2.74 N/A N/A Clinton 4.3 SSW (b) 2.04 0.1 0.1 Clinton 4.9 S (b) 2.75 0.0 0.0 Clinton 6.00 8.5 22.0 Concord 3.24 6.0 6.0 Farragut 1.0 WNW (b) 4.82 2.2 N/A Farragut 2.3 NE (b) 6.05 7.0 N/A Farragut 2.8 ENE (b) 5.99 5.6 N/A Fountain City 3.33 6.5 6.5 Greenback 2.1 ENE (b) 4.94 0.1 N/A Halls Northern Knox (b) 2.15 0.0 0.0 Harriman (c) 4.50 7.0 11.0 Harriman 4.5 SW 6.30 6.0 11.0 Karns 0.6 SSE (b) 5.02 0.0 0.0 Kingston 7.03 10.5 19.0 Kingston Steam Plant 3.70 N/A N/A Knoxville Airport (d) 6.14 17.5 23.3 Knoxville 0.8 ESE (b) 2.56 N/A N/A Knoxville 10.6 WSW (b) 4.44 1.0 N/A Knoxville 3.1 WNW (b) 4.70 1.0 N/A Knoxville 3.5 WSW (b) 3.02 1.3 N/A Knoxville 4.5 NNW (b) 6.25 2.0 N/A Knoxville 4.6 SW (b) 2.80 6.0 N/A Knoxville 5.5 W 6.56 6.6 12.6 Knoxville 5.7 NNW 4.45 5.5 7.8 Knoxville 6.2 SSW 6.04 2.9 5.6 Knoxville 8.0 WSW 3.39 4.4 N/A Knoxville Exp. Station 6.66 7.4 10.8 Knoxville Garage 3.73 5.8 5.8 Knoxville Univ. of TN 6.09 9.2 16.4 Knoxville (b) 4.60 0.0 0.0 Lake City 2.99 2.0 2.0 Lenoir City 3.1 NE (b) 5.22 1.5 N/A Lenoir City TN N/A N/A N/A Lenoir City 4.15 4.2 5.2 Lenoir City 6.12 10.0 17.2 Loudon 1 E 5.61 9.5 17.8 Loudon 5.3 E (b) 4.39 2.3 N/A a) Maximum values of the respective parameter are in bold front. N/A: Not available.

b) Partial snowfall records available c) No data from 1/1/1912 - 8/31/1948. No snowfall data available after 1/21/1950.

d) Maximum monthly snowfall also listed in NCEI, 2020b. Maximum daily snowfall occurred in February, 1960 (NCEI, 1960c). This event also set the record for the maximum 24-hour snowfall in February at Knoxville (NCEI, 2020b).

September 2022 3-180 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-16 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Maximum Daily Liquid Equivalent Precipitation and Snowfall from ASOS and COOP Stations Max.

Max. Daily Max. Daily Monthly Liquid Equiv. Snowfall Snowfall Observing Station Precip. (in.) (in.) (in.)

Mascot 1.4 NNE 5.88 5.0 6.4 McGhee 2 SE 4.51 10.1 13.8 McGhee 4.78 6.9 12.9 Melton Hill Dam 2.81 N/A N/A Norris 0.6 NW (b) 5.18 11.0 N/A Norris Dam 7.03 5.0 10.5 Norris Evap. Station (b) 3.50 0.0 0.0 Norris 6.70 11.0 14.6 Oak Ridge 4.22 7.5 10.5 Oak Ridge 3.0 NW (b) 3.12 7.4 N/A Oak Ridge 3.3 NNW (b) 2.48 1.2 N/A Oak Ridge 5.4 NE (b) 5.10 2.0 N/A Oak Ridge 5.7 NE (b) 6.35 8.6 N/A Oak Ridge 5.7 NE (b) 6.44 9.7 N/A Oak Ridge 6.9 NNE (b) 5.09 0.0 N/A Oak Ridge 8.1 ENE (b) 4.72 0.7 N/A Oak Ridge ASOS (b) 6.30 1.0 1.5 Oak Ridge ATDD (e) 7.45 12.0 21.1 Oliver Springs 5.6 SW 5.86 6.0 7.2 Philadelphia 2.5 SE 3.27 N/A N/A Powell 1.3 NNW (b) 1.44 0.0 N/A Powell 2.71 0.0 0.0 Riddles store 4.00 6.0 9.0 Ritta 3.33 5.0 5.0 Rockwood 0.6 WSW 2.44 0.0 0.0 Rockwood 2 6.79 14.0 14.0 Rockwood 5.65 8.0 12.0 Strawberry Plains (b) 3.40 6.0 20.0 U S Cotton Field Station(b) 3.91 0.0 N/A Univ. of TN Farm (b) 3.75 0.0 0.0 Univ. of TN Lysimeter (b) 3.73 0.0 0.0 Whittle Springs 3.40 6.0 6.0 e) The corresponding maximum 24-hour liquid equivalent precipitation reported in NCEI, 2020a is (7.48 in.

[19.0 cm]).

September 2022 3-181 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-17 Design Dry- and Wet- Bulb Temperatures and Bounding Values Dry Bulb Temperature Dry Bulb/Mean Coincident

(°F) Wet Bulb Temperature (°F)

Station 99.6% 99.0% 0.4% 1% 2%

Knoxville (KTYS) 17.1 21.6 92.7 / 73.9 90.4 / 73.5 88.3 / 72.9 Oak Ridge (KOQT) 17.1 21.2 92.8 / 73.8 90.7 / 73.5 88.5 / 72.7 Bounding values 17.1 21.2 92.8 / 73.8 90.7 / 73.5 88.5 / 72.7 September 2022 3-182 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-18 Computed 100-Year Return Interval Extreme Temperatures at Knoxville, Tennessee Means and Standard Deviations of Computed 100-Extreme Annual Temperatures (°F) at Year Return Knoxville (KTYS) (from ASHRAE, 2017) Interval Extreme Mean (M) Std. Deviation (s) Temperatures (°F)

Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max Dry Bulb 10.1 95.2 6.2 3.6 -9.3 106.5 Wet Bulb 8.8 78.6 5.9 1.2 -9.7 82.4 September 2022 3-183 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-19 Computed 100-Year Return Interval Extreme Temperatures at Oak Ridge, Tennessee Means and Standard Deviations of Extreme Annual Temperatures (°F) at Computed 100-Oak Ridge (KOQT) (from ASHRAE, Year Return 2017) Interval Extreme Mean (M) Std. Deviation (s) Temperatures (°F)

Min. Max. Min. Max. Min. Max Dry Bulb 11.4 95.7 4.7 3.7 -3.3 107.3 Wet Bulb 9.8 78.6 4.4 1.3 -4.0 82.7 September 2022 3-184 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-20 Bounding Values for the Computed 100-Year Return Interval Extreme Temperatures Min. Max Dry Bulb (°F) -9.3 107.3 Wet Bulb (°F) -9.7 82.7 September 2022 3-185 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-21 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Daily Maximum and Minimum Dry Bulb Temperatures from Local ASOS and COOP Stations (a)

Daily Dry Bulb Temperature (°F)

Observing Station (a) Max. Min.

Clinton 2 NW N/A N/A Clinton 4.3 SSW N/A N/A Clinton 4.9 S N/A N/A Clinton N/A N/A Concord N/A N/A Farragut 1.0 WNW N/A N/A Farragut 2.3 NE N/A N/A Farragut 2.8 ENE N/A N/A Fountain City N/A N/A Greenback 2.1 ENE N/A N/A Halls Northern Knox N/A N/A Harriman (b) 104 -12 Harriman 4.5 SW N/A N/A Karns 0.6 SSE N/A N/A Kingston (c) 106 0 Kingston Steam Plant N/A N/A Knoxville Airport (d) 105 -24 Knoxville 0.8 ESE N/A N/A Knoxville 10.6 WSW N/A N/A Knoxville 3.1 WNW N/A N/A Knoxville 3.5 WSW N/A N/A Knoxville 4.5 NNW N/A N/A Knoxville 4.6 SW N/A N/A Knoxville 5.5 W N/A N/A Knoxville 5.7 NNW N/A N/A Knoxville 6.2 SSW N/A N/A Knoxville 8.0 WSW N/A N/A Knoxville Exp. Station (e) 105 -20 Knoxville Garage N/A N/A Knoxville Univ. of TN 105 -8 Knoxville N/A N/A Lake City N/A N/A Lenoir City 3.1 NE N/A N/A Lenoir City TN 105 -2 a) Regional maximum and minimum values of the respective parameter are in bold front. N/A: Not available.

b) Temperature data available for 1893 - 1911. No data from 1/1/1912 - 8/31/1948.

c) Temperature data available for 2000-2020 d) Values also found in NCEI, 2020b e) Partial temperature records are available.

September 2022 3-186 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-21 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Daily Maximum and Minimum Dry Bulb Temperatures from Local ASOS and COOP Stations Daily Dry Bulb Temperature (°F)

Observing Station Max. Min.

Lenoir City N/A N/A Lenoir City 106 -14 Loudon 1 E (f) 108 -9 Loudon 5.3 E N/A N/A Mascot 1.4 NNE N/A N/A McGhee 2 SE N/A N/A McGhee (e) 90 0 Melton Hill Dam N/A N/A Norris 0.6 NW N/A N/A Norris Dam N/A N/A Norris Evap. Station (e) 103 2 Norris 105 -19 Oak Ridge 103 -8 Oak Ridge 3.0 NW N/A N/A Oak Ridge 3.3 NNW N/A N/A Oak Ridge 5.4 NE N/A N/A Oak Ridge 5.7 NE N/A N/A Oak Ridge 5.7 NE N/A N/A Oak Ridge 6.9 NNE N/A N/A Oak Ridge 8.1 ENE N/A N/A Oak Ridge ASOS 105 1 Oak Ridge ATDD 105 -17 Oliver Springs 5.6 SW N/A N/A Philadelphia 2.5 SE N/A N/A Powell 1.3 NNW N/A N/A Powell N/A N/A Riddles store N/A N/A Ritta N/A N/A Rockwood 0.6 WSW N/A N/A Rockwood 2 (g) 107 -12 Rockwood N/A N/A Strawberry Plains N/A N/A U S Cotton Field Station N/A N/A Univ. of TN Farm N/A N/A Univ. of TN Lysimeter N/A N/A Whittle Springs N/A N/A f) Temperature data available 6/21/1913 - 6/30/1962 g) Temperature data available for 1962 - 2012 September 2022 3-187 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-22 Annual Joint Data Recovery of 15-m Wind Speed, Wind Direction and Pasquill Stability Class from Tower D (2016 - 2020)

Year Data Recovery (%)

2016 100.00 2017 100.00 2018 99.95 2019 100.00 2020 99.99 September 2022 3-188 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-23 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2016 Max.

Liquid 1-hour Relative Equiv. Hours with Liquid Humidity Precip. Measurable Equivalent Dry Bulb Temperature (°F) Dew Point (°F) (%) Wind Speed (mph) (in.) Precip. (in.)

Month Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Average Maximum Average Total January 62.8 11.3 35.4 48.6 -7.2 23.7 66.0 12.3 2.8 3.59 67 0.38 February 73.0 19.4 42.2 60.4 -2.9 29.9 66.2 14.8 3.5 6.06 94 0.43 March 80.4 29.5 55.3 61.3 10.6 39.5 61.4 11.4 3.5 2.94 49 0.44 April 83.8 33.1 60.5 64.2 8.2 41.3 55.0 14.8 3.4 3.29 31 0.90 May 86.4 37.8 65.3 68.5 27.9 53.8 71.1 8.5 2.6 2.85 43 0.54 June 91.6 54.9 75.2 73.8 44.8 62.8 70.5 8.5 2.3 4.61 29 1.23 July 92.7 60.1 77.8 74.1 55.0 68.2 76.7 9.6 2.3 3.67 30 0.65 August 92.3 61.9 78.2 74.3 54.7 68.2 76.1 10.3 2.3 2.41 24 0.78 September 92.3 46.6 73.8 69.6 39.9 59.0 65.3 8.5 2.1 1.38 13 0.49 October 86.2 36.1 64.0 63.5 28.4 49.0 62.9 9.4 2.3 0.07 4 0.03 November 82.8 25.0 52.2 65.3 8.4 37.1 61.2 11.4 2.2 4.77 32 1.04 December 69.6 19.0 41.6 62.2 -5.3 31.7 71.5 13.0 2.8 7.35 101 0.40 September 2022 3-189 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-24 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2017 Max.

Liquid 1-hour Relative Equiv. Hours with Liquid Humidity Precip. Measurable Equivalent Dry Bulb Temperature (°F) Dew Point (°F) (%) Wind Speed (mph) (in.) Precip. (in.)

Month Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Average Maximum Average Total January 66.9 8.2 46.0 61.5 -2.0 37.2 74.8 11.4 3.2 4.08 94 0.63 February 76.8 23.4 48.4 60.6 0.7 34.0 63.4 12.1 2.8 2.69 40 0.44 March 81.0 20.7 51.7 62.2 2.1 33.3 55.2 11.6 3.5 4.83 53 0.67 April 87.3 36.7 64.2 66.9 17.6 49.6 65.6 11.4 3.4 9.66 79 0.96 May 87.3 41.2 66.2 72.0 31.5 55.4 73.4 13.0 3.0 4.56 60 0.45 June 87.1 53.6 71.7 72.7 44.2 61.9 76.0 10.1 2.4 4.22 53 0.37 July 91.6 61.3 76.3 76.1 52.2 67.9 79.9 7.2 2.1 5.07 42 1.03 August 89.1 58.6 74.0 76.1 49.5 65.8 80.0 6.9 2.1 5.54 49 1.45 September 86.4 47.7 67.7 74.5 40.6 59.8 80.2 10.5 2.4 4.45 39 0.92 October 83.8 29.1 59.8 76.5 26.4 51.8 79.8 9.4 2.2 5.54 54 0.69 November 74.5 27.5 50.1 68.2 16.7 41.0 75.1 11.6 2.2 3.06 24 0.56 December 66.4 17.2 40.4 63.1 -1.5 29.6 69.0 13.0 3.0 3.89 53 0.39 September 2022 3-190 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-25 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2018 Max.

Liquid 1-hour Relative Equiv. Hours with Liquid Humidity Precip. Measurable Equivalent Dry Bulb Temperature (°F) Dew Point (°F) (%) Wind Speed (mph) (in.) Precip. (in.)

Month Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Average Maximum Average Total Total January 66.0 4.1 33.8 56.5 -5.1 21.4 64.6 10.7 2.4 1.91 52 0.13 February 78.3 21.0 49.8 65.7 3.4 42.7 80.5 11.0 3.1 9.57 117 0.42 March 75.2 25.2 48.5 58.5 5.9 33.8 62.7 12.1 3.8 4.46 64 0.42 April 79.2 30.7 54.7 64.0 9.3 39.8 63.8 12.5 3.6 4.95 80 0.48 May 88.0 43.9 71.5 73.0 40.8 61.6 75.9 8.1 2.5 4.07 43 0.65 June 91.2 56.7 74.5 74.8 46.8 65.4 78.0 8.1 2.4 4.62 38 0.55 July 92.1 61.9 76.5 77.2 55.9 67.6 78.2 7.2 2.1 5.19 27 1.55 August 88.7 59.7 74.6 74.7 51.6 67.5 82.5 6.9 2.0 3.78 45 0.70 September 90.0 59.7 74.1 75.6 57.0 67.2 83.4 19.2 4.7 7.63 73 0.85 October 86.5 35.8 60.4 72.5 23.5 53.0 80.5 9.6 2.3 3.55 55 0.70 November 69.3 20.1 44.6 61.7 13.6 37.7 79.6 11.4 2.7 5.91 103 0.58 December 70.5 22.6 43.6 61.2 18.3 36.2 78.0 12.1 2.5 7.59 101 0.48 September 2022 3-191 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-26 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2019 Max.

Liquid 1-hour Relative Equiv. Hours with Liquid Humidity Precip. Measurable Equivalent Dry Bulb Temperature (°F) Dew Point (°F) (%) Wind Speed (mph) (in.) Precip. (in.)

Month Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Average Maximum Average Total Total January 67.1 14.4 39.8 55.2 -9.9 29.8 71.0 11.2 3.2 6.52 83 0.43 February 76.5 28.0 47.5 63.5 9.0 37.8 73.6 13.6 3.1 15.21 155 0.61 March 73.6 19.0 48.2 62.1 4.3 31.1 57.3 12.1 3.0 4.46 64 0.42 April 83.7 31.5 61.3 63.3 12.6 46.7 64.3 15.4 3.3 4.95 80 0.48 May 90.3 42.6 70.5 70.0 39.0 59.5 72.7 11.0 2.8 4.07 43 0.65 June 88.9 49.3 72.1 72.9 40.5 63.3 78.1 8.7 2.5 7.02 66 1.04 July 91.2 56.5 76.3 76.1 46.9 68.4 80.7 7.6 2.0 5.19 27 1.55 August 93.0 58.1 75.5 75.0 52.3 66.7 78.4 6.7 1.9 6.81 36 2.23 September 93.2 55.0 75.1 71.4 46.2 63.7 72.5 5.8 1.6 0.01 1 0.01 October 94.1 36.7 61.7 70.0 26.2 52.7 77.3 9.4 2.2 7.78 73 0.83 November 66.2 20.7 44.8 59.9 12.7 35.3 73.2 10.1 2.3 5.35 50 0.40 December 68.5 26.1 45.4 62.6 18.0 37.3 76.2 15.0 2.9 5.65 81 0.43 September 2022 3-192 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-27 Annual Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2020 Max.

Liquid 1-hour Relative Equiv. Hours with Liquid Humidity Precip. Measurable Equivalent Dry Bulb Temperature (°F) Dew Point (°F) (%) Wind Speed (mph) (in.) Precip. (in.)

Month Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Average Maximum Average Total Total January 72.1 20.3 44.1 61.3 0.0 34.4 72.1 12.3 2.8 8.84 94 0.85 February 69.4 23.0 44.1 59.5 9.3 35.5 75.2 10.5 3.2 12.28 132 0.59 March 82.4 25.3 55.7 63.0 19.6 44.6 71.5 12.1 3.3 8.17 110 0.41 April 81.1 31.6 55.8 61.5 9.0 41.5 64.9 11.6 3.1 7.28 70 0.52 May 84.0 33.6 63.5 70.3 21.2 53.3 74.3 10.7 2.7 4.48 46 0.48 June 90.1 55.0 72.3 74.1 43.9 62.9 76.6 8.9 2.7 2.30 32 0.28 July 94.8 64.9 78.1 75.0 52.9 68.3 76.5 6.9 2.1 2.87 25 0.55 August 89.4 62.6 75.2 75.7 55.8 68.2 82.8 9.6 2.1 4.93 49 0.97 September 87.8 45.9 69.2 74.3 40.5 61.7 80.9 8.9 2.5 1.30 10 0.46 October 79.2 36.1 60.6 68.7 27.1 53.7 81.8 11.4 2.0 7.28 63 0.97 November 78.4 30.7 51.5 67.8 11.5 40.1 70.2 12.1 2.3 3.59 41 0.77 December 61.3 12.7 39.6 55.8 7.0 32.5 78.3 10.5 2.4 4.07 58 0.29 September 2022 3-193 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-28 Summary of Dry Bulb Temperature, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed and Precipitation from Tower D for 2016 - 2020 Average Average Max.

Relative Liquid Number of 1-hour Humidity Equiv. Hours with Liquid Dry Bulb Temperature (°F) Dew Point (°F) (%) Wind Speed (mph)

Precip. Measurable Equivalent Month Maximum Minimum Average Maximum Minimum Average Average Maximum Average (in.) Precip. (in.)

January 72.1 4.1 39.8 61.5 -9.9 29.3 69.7 12.3 2.9 4.99 78 0.85 February 78.3 19.4 46.3 65.7 -2.9 36.0 71.8 14.8 3.1 9.16 108 0.61 March 82.4 19.0 51.8 63.0 2.1 36.5 61.6 12.1 3.4 4.97 68 0.67 April 87.3 30.7 59.3 66.9 8.2 43.8 62.7 15.4 3.4 6.03 68 0.96 May 90.3 33.6 67.4 73.0 21.2 56.7 73.5 13.0 2.7 4.00 47 0.65 June 91.6 49.3 73.2 74.8 40.5 63.3 75.9 10.1 2.4 4.56 44 1.23 July 94.8 56.5 77.0 77.2 46.9 68.1 78.4 9.6 2.1 4.40 30 1.55 August 93.0 58.1 75.5 76.1 49.5 67.3 80.0 10.3 2.1 4.70 41 2.23 September 93.2 45.9 72.0 75.6 39.9 62.3 76.5 19.2 2.6 2.96 27 0.92 October 94.1 29.1 61.3 76.5 23.5 52.0 76.4 11.4 2.2 4.84 50 0.97 November 82.8 20.1 48.6 68.2 8.4 38.2 71.8 12.1 2.3 4.53 50 1.04 December 70.5 12.7 42.1 63.1 -5.3 33.5 74.6 15.0 2.7 5.71 79 0.48 September 2022 3-194 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-29 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Frequency of 15-m Wind Direction Persistence at Tower D (2016 - 2020)

Persistence (Hours) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW 1 936 1308 1702 1514 863 495 420 371 650 1304 2120 2494 1937 1263 882 805 2 124 225 518 515 202 82 49 40 118 362 722 818 497 239 144 99 3 25 68 246 200 64 14 8 10 22 117 320 323 170 61 26 23 4 13 16 128 85 23 2 1 0 5 54 196 131 76 28 5 4 5 1 7 54 59 15 2 0 0 1 16 95 58 31 7 1 1 6 2 4 43 29 6 0 0 0 1 15 77 37 18 4 0 1 7 0 1 28 16 3 0 0 0 0 3 49 17 19 1 0 1 8 0 3 18 5 1 0 0 0 2 5 25 9 10 0 0 0 9 0 0 8 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 14 5 8 0 0 0 10 0 0 7 6 1 0 0 0 0 2 10 5 3 0 0 0 11 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 10 2 2 0 0 0 12 0 0 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 7 1 2 1 0 0 13 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 1 0 0 0 14 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 15 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 17 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 18 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 20 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 September 2022 3-195 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-29 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Frequency of 15-m Wind Direction Persistence at Tower D (2016 - 2020)

Persistence (Hours) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 26 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 28 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 34 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 36 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 39 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 43 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

>48 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 September 2022 3-196 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-30 Longest Wind Direction Persistence at Tower D (15 m) (2016 - 2020)

Longest Persistence from Table Wind 3.6-29 Direction (Hours)

N 6 NNE 14 NE 28 ENE 17 E 12 ESE 5 SE 4 SSE 3 S 8 SSW 16 SW 20 WSW 18 W 14 WNW 12 NW 5 NNW 7 September 2022 3-197 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-31 Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from Tower D (2016 - 2020)

Frequency of Occurrence (Percent)

Pasquill Stability 2016 -

Class 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2020 A 0.39 0.47 0.10 0.30 0.27 0.31 B 0.42 0.54 0.32 0.35 0.41 0.41 C 0.91 0.81 0.78 1.08 0.88 0.89 D 35.97 35.27 37.00 35.19 34.89 35.67 E 32.17 35.88 38.82 34.47 36.64 35.60 F 19.69 18.84 17.07 20.14 18.92 18.93 G 10.44 8.20 5.90 8.46 7.99 8.20 Total 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 September 2022 3-198 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.6-32 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class A)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL Calm 0 0.00<WS< 0.50 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0.50<WS< 1.00 1 0 1 2 0 3 0 1 3 1 5 1 5 2 0 0 25 1.00<WS< 1.50 1 0 0 3 2 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 11 1.50<WS< 2.00 0 0 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 8 2.00<WS< 2.50 0 1 17 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 30 2.50<WS< 3.00 0 0 8 21 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 31 3.00<WS< 3.50 0 0 5 14 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 3.50<WS< 4.00 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4.00<WS< 5.00 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5.00<WS< 6.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.00<WS< 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WS > 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 2 2 35 54 7 3 2 2 3 1 10 4 7 2 0 0 134 Frequency of Occurrence (% of Total Observations)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL 0.00<WS< 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.50<WS< 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 1.00<WS< 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 1.50<WS< 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 2.00<WS< 2.50 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 2.50<WS< 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 3.00<WS< 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 3.50<WS< 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 4.00<WS< 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00<WS< 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00<WS< 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WS > 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 0.00 0.00 0.08 0.12 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.31 September 2022 3-199 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.6-33 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class B)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL Calm 0 0.00<WS< 0.50 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 4 0.50<WS< 1.00 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 8 1.00<WS< 1.50 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 10 1.50<WS< 2.00 0 1 11 11 5 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 29 2.00<WS< 2.50 1 1 28 23 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 55 2.50<WS< 3.00 0 0 14 25 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 3.00<WS< 3.50 0 0 2 18 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 3.50<WS< 4.00 0 0 0 5 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 4.00<WS< 5.00 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5.00<WS< 6.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.00<WS< 8.00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 WS > 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 1 4 61 86 13 1 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 0 0 0 179 Frequency of Occurrence (% of Total Observations)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL 0.00<WS< 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.50<WS< 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 1.00<WS< 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 1.50<WS< 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 2.00<WS< 2.50 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.13 2.50<WS< 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.09 3.00<WS< 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 3.50<WS< 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 4.00<WS< 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00<WS< 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00<WS< 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WS > 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 0.00 0.01 0.14 0.20 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.41 September 2022 3-200 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.6-34 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class C)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL Calm 0 0.00<WS< 0.50 1 0 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 9 0.50<WS< 1.00 1 6 3 2 5 1 0 1 3 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 26 1.00<WS< 1.50 7 5 15 13 4 0 0 0 4 10 5 2 0 0 0 4 69 1.50<WS< 2.00 1 2 19 29 7 0 0 0 1 5 5 3 0 0 0 2 74 2.00<WS< 2.50 1 3 26 59 8 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 1 1 104 2.50<WS< 3.00 0 2 13 44 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 75 3.00<WS< 3.50 0 1 0 8 9 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 20 3.50<WS< 4.00 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 4.00<WS< 5.00 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 5.00<WS< 6.00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6.00<WS< 8.00 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 WS > 8.00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Totals 11 19 78 165 50 2 1 1 8 18 18 8 1 0 2 9 391 Frequency of Occurrence (% of Total Observations)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL 0.00<WS< 0.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.50<WS< 1.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 1.00<WS< 1.50 0.02 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.16 1.50<WS< 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 2.00<WS< 2.50 0.00 0.01 0.06 0.13 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.24 2.50<WS< 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.10 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.17 3.00<WS< 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 3.50<WS< 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 4.00<WS< 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 5.00<WS< 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00<WS< 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 WS > 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 0.03 0.04 0.18 0.38 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.89 September 2022 3-201 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.6-35 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class D)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL Calm 14 0.00<WS< 0.50 44 61 77 74 54 61 84 74 93 101 84 52 49 52 49 48 1057 0.50<WS< 1.00 101 104 248 233 223 209 174 159 192 249 327 199 197 109 85 75 2884 1.00<WS< 1.50 65 80 336 404 265 165 97 75 163 396 596 399 252 140 87 90 3610 1.50<WS< 2.00 38 55 266 353 267 60 19 26 102 307 636 359 278 124 45 50 2985 2.00<WS< 2.50 20 23 149 226 181 22 10 7 41 252 560 293 322 112 17 12 2247 2.50<WS< 3.00 4 4 24 63 74 5 4 3 21 148 398 187 266 48 2 5 1256 3.00<WS< 3.50 2 0 2 12 15 0 0 2 20 96 282 110 155 27 0 2 725 3.50<WS< 4.00 0 0 1 3 6 0 0 0 15 77 174 67 58 4 0 0 405 4.00<WS< 5.00 0 0 2 3 8 0 0 0 18 71 175 47 30 3 0 0 357 5.00<WS< 6.00 0 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 2 16 39 15 0 0 0 0 78 6.00<WS< 8.00 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 2 0 0 0 0 18 WS > 8.00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Totals 274 328 1110 1374 1094 522 388 346 667 1717 3280 1730 1607 619 285 282 15637 Frequency of Occurrence (% of Total Observations)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL 0.00<WS< 0.50 0.10 0.14 0.18 0.17 0.12 0.14 0.19 0.17 0.21 0.23 0.19 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.11 0.11 2.44 0.50<WS< 1.00 0.23 0.24 0.57 0.53 0.51 0.48 0.40 0.36 0.44 0.57 0.75 0.45 0.45 0.25 0.19 0.17 6.58 1.00<WS< 1.50 0.15 0.18 0.77 0.92 0.60 0.38 0.22 0.17 0.37 0.90 1.36 0.91 0.57 0.32 0.20 0.21 8.23 1.50<WS< 2.00 0.09 0.13 0.61 0.81 0.61 0.14 0.04 0.06 0.23 0.70 1.45 0.82 0.63 0.28 0.10 0.11 6.81 2.00<WS< 2.50 0.05 0.05 0.34 0.52 0.41 0.05 0.02 0.02 0.09 0.57 1.28 0.67 0.73 0.26 0.04 0.03 5.13 2.50<WS< 3.00 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.14 0.17 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.34 0.91 0.43 0.61 0.11 0.00 0.01 2.86 3.00<WS< 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.22 0.64 0.25 0.35 0.06 0.00 0.00 1.65 3.50<WS< 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.18 0.40 0.15 0.13 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.92 4.00<WS< 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.16 0.40 0.11 0.07 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.81 5.00<WS< 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.09 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.18 6.00<WS< 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 WS > 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 0.63 0.75 2.53 3.14 2.50 1.19 0.89 0.79 1.52 3.92 7.48 3.95 3.67 1.41 0.65 0.64 35.67 September 2022 3-202 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.6-36 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class E)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL Calm 51 0.00<WS< 0.50 295 400 493 351 130 66 71 56 105 172 303 401 410 278 206 218 3955 0.50<WS< 1.00 156 424 1030 450 89 43 19 19 60 232 689 804 359 165 108 99 4746 1.00<WS< 1.50 40 165 628 283 35 10 6 5 34 125 672 604 243 107 49 29 3035 1.50<WS< 2.00 6 52 277 137 14 6 2 2 15 132 465 430 175 32 8 10 1763 2.00<WS< 2.50 2 7 78 38 8 3 1 2 11 89 331 263 131 23 2 1 990 2.50<WS< 3.00 0 1 20 8 4 1 0 0 4 55 216 113 66 10 0 0 498 3.00<WS< 3.50 0 0 9 2 1 0 0 0 3 30 108 51 48 2 0 0 254 3.50<WS< 4.00 0 1 8 0 2 0 0 0 0 31 76 33 13 0 1 0 165 4.00<WS< 5.00 0 1 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 16 50 23 9 0 0 0 114 5.00<WS< 6.00 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 10 7 2 0 0 0 32 6.00<WS< 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 WS > 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 499 1051 2560 1269 283 129 99 84 233 893 2922 2729 1456 617 374 357 15606 Frequency of Occurrence (% of Total Observations)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL 0.00<WS< 0.50 0.68 0.92 1.14 0.81 0.30 0.15 0.16 0.13 0.24 0.40 0.70 0.93 0.95 0.64 0.48 0.50 9.14 0.50<WS< 1.00 0.36 0.97 2.35 1.03 0.20 0.10 0.04 0.04 0.14 0.53 1.57 1.83 0.82 0.38 0.25 0.23 10.82 1.00<WS< 1.50 0.09 0.38 1.43 0.65 0.08 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.08 0.29 1.53 1.38 0.55 0.24 0.11 0.07 6.92 1.50<WS< 2.00 0.01 0.12 0.63 0.31 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.30 1.06 0.98 0.40 0.07 0.02 0.02 4.02 2.00<WS< 2.50 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.09 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.20 0.75 0.60 0.30 0.05 0.00 0.00 2.26 2.50<WS< 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.13 0.49 0.26 0.15 0.02 0.00 0.00 1.14 3.00<WS< 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.07 0.25 0.12 0.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.58 3.50<WS< 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.17 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.38 4.00<WS< 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.11 0.05 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.26 5.00<WS< 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 6.00<WS< 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 WS > 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 1.15 2.41 5.85 2.90 0.65 0.30 0.23 0.19 0.53 2.04 6.67 6.24 3.33 1.42 0.86 0.82 35.60 September 2022 3-203 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.6-37 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class F)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL Calm 134 0.00<WS< 0.50 415 486 728 538 117 32 36 26 47 116 262 613 792 645 435 344 5632 0.50<WS< 1.00 45 85 308 221 21 3 0 1 3 53 295 577 219 70 64 42 2007 1.00<WS< 1.50 2 7 14 14 1 1 0 1 1 16 137 152 32 7 8 2 395 1.50<WS< 2.00 1 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 44 42 7 1 1 0 101 2.00<WS< 2.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 19 4 0 0 0 0 24 2.50<WS< 3.00 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 7 3.00<WS< 3.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50<WS< 4.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 4.00<WS< 5.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.00<WS< 6.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.00<WS< 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WS > 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 463 578 1051 776 139 36 36 28 52 188 762 1389 1050 723 508 388 8301 Frequency of Occurrence (% of Total Observations)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL 0.00<WS< 0.50 0.97 1.13 1.70 1.26 0.27 0.07 0.08 0.06 0.11 0.27 0.61 1.43 1.85 1.51 1.02 0.80 13.15 0.50<WS< 1.00 0.10 0.19 0.70 0.50 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.12 0.67 1.32 0.50 0.16 0.15 0.10 4.58 1.00<WS< 1.50 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.31 0.35 0.07 0.02 0.02 0.00 0.90 1.50<WS< 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.10 0.10 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.23 2.00<WS< 2.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 2.50<WS< 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 3.00<WS< 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.50<WS< 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00<WS< 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00<WS< 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00<WS< 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WS > 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 1.08 1.34 2.44 1.80 0.32 0.08 0.08 0.07 0.12 0.44 1.75 3.20 2.44 1.68 1.18 0.90 18.93 September 2022 3-204 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.6-38 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Pasquill Stability Class G)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL Calm 245 0.00<WS< 0.50 75 140 434 497 118 26 18 18 34 91 308 418 225 142 98 67 2709 0.50<WS< 1.00 3 8 43 74 8 0 1 0 0 2 143 173 40 9 6 2 512 1.00<WS< 1.50 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 47 32 8 2 0 1 93 1.50<WS< 2.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 14 0 0 0 0 30 2.00<WS< 2.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 4 2.50<WS< 3.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3.00<WS< 3.50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50<WS< 4.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.00<WS< 5.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5.00<WS< 6.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6.00<WS< 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WS > 8.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Totals 78 148 477 572 127 26 19 19 34 94 517 639 273 153 104 70 3595 Frequency of Occurrence (% of Total Observations)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL 0.00<WS< 0.50 0.19 0.35 1.08 1.24 0.29 0.06 0.04 0.04 0.08 0.23 0.77 1.04 0.56 0.35 0.24 0.17 6.74 0.50<WS< 1.00 0.01 0.02 0.10 0.17 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.33 0.39 0.09 0.02 0.01 0.00 1.17 1.00<WS< 1.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.11 0.07 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.21 1.50<WS< 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 2.00<WS< 2.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 2.50<WS< 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00<WS< 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.50<WS< 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00<WS< 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00<WS< 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00<WS< 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 WS > 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 0.19 0.37 1.18 1.41 0.31 0.06 0.05 0.05 0.08 0.23 1.24 1.54 0.67 0.38 0.26 0.17 8.20 September 2022 3-205 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.6-39 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from Tower D 2016 - 2020 (Stability Classes A - G)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL Calm 444 0.00<WS< 0.50 830 1088 1734 1461 420 186 211 174 279 480 960 1486 1476 1117 789 678 13369 0.50<WS< 1.00 307 627 1634 982 346 260 194 182 262 539 1463 1754 822 355 263 218 10208 1.00<WS< 1.50 115 259 997 720 308 176 105 82 203 548 1457 1191 536 256 144 126 7223 1.50<WS< 2.00 46 110 578 532 294 66 21 28 118 446 1168 849 461 157 54 62 4990 2.00<WS< 2.50 24 35 298 355 199 25 11 9 53 344 917 561 454 135 20 14 3454 2.50<WS< 3.00 4 7 79 162 95 6 4 3 25 204 620 302 332 58 2 6 1909 3.00<WS< 3.50 2 1 18 54 26 0 0 2 23 126 392 161 203 29 0 2 1039 3.50<WS< 4.00 0 1 9 13 15 0 0 0 15 108 250 102 71 4 1 0 589 4.00<WS< 5.00 0 1 17 6 9 0 0 1 19 87 225 71 39 3 0 0 478 5.00<WS< 6.00 0 1 6 2 1 0 0 0 2 26 49 22 2 0 0 0 111 6.00<WS< 8.00 0 0 2 7 0 0 0 0 0 5 11 2 0 0 0 0 27 WS > 8.00 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Totals 1328 2130 5372 4296 1713 719 546 481 999 2913 7512 6501 4396 2114 1273 1106 43843 Frequency of Occurrence (% of Total Observations)

Speed (m/s) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL 0.00<WS< 0.50 1.96 2.56 4.09 3.44 0.99 0.44 0.50 0.41 0.66 1.13 2.26 3.50 3.48 2.63 1.86 1.60 31.51 0.50<WS< 1.00 0.70 1.43 3.73 2.24 0.79 0.59 0.44 0.42 0.60 1.23 3.34 4.00 1.87 0.81 0.60 0.50 23.28 1.00<WS< 1.50 0.26 0.59 2.27 1.64 0.70 0.40 0.24 0.19 0.46 1.25 3.32 2.72 1.22 0.58 0.33 0.29 16.47 1.50<WS< 2.00 0.10 0.25 1.32 1.21 0.67 0.15 0.05 0.06 0.27 1.02 2.66 1.94 1.05 0.36 0.12 0.14 11.38 2.00<WS< 2.50 0.05 0.08 0.68 0.81 0.45 0.06 0.03 0.02 0.12 0.78 2.09 1.28 1.04 0.31 0.05 0.03 7.88 2.50<WS< 3.00 0.01 0.02 0.18 0.37 0.22 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.06 0.47 1.41 0.69 0.76 0.13 0.00 0.01 4.35 3.00<WS< 3.50 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.12 0.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.29 0.89 0.37 0.46 0.07 0.00 0.00 2.37 3.50<WS< 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.25 0.57 0.23 0.16 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.34 4.00<WS< 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.20 0.51 0.16 0.09 0.01 0.00 0.00 1.09 5.00<WS< 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 0.11 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.25 6.00<WS< 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.06 WS > 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals 3.09 4.94 12.38 9.91 3.94 1.65 1.26 1.11 2.30 6.68 17.21 14.94 10.14 4.91 2.96 2.57 100.00 September 2022 3-206 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-40 Average Monthly and Annual Mixing Heights (m) from SODAR at ORNL / Tower D (2014 - 2019)

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual 2014 687 721 839 1050 1137 1219 1074 1001 932 760 655 548 885 2015 550 604 642 899 1202 1281 967 989 907 626 512 555 811 2016 517 701 771 1048 1090 1263 1256 1209 1187 846 614 530 919 2017 613 690 899 1070 1037 1152 1268 1220 1018 732 576 572 904 2018 598 651 807 871 1169 1234 1197 1100 1041 721 608 566 880 2019 512 611 788 935 1091 988 1134 1086 1058 641 556 592 833 Average 580 663 791 979 1121 1189 1149 1101 1024 721 587 560 872 September 2022 3-207 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-41 Average Monthly and Annual Mixing Heights (m) from SODAR at Y-12 (2019)

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual 2019 440 539 756 937 1098 1170 1137 1042 981 660 541 494 813 September 2022 3-208 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-42 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS)

Primary/

Secondary Averaging Level Level Pollutant Standard Period (g/m3) (ppm)

CO (g) Primary 1 hr. -- 35 CO (g) Primary 8 hr. -- 9 Rolling Primary and 3-month Lead (Pb) (a) secondary average 0.15 --

NO2 (b) Primary 1 hr. -- 0.1 Primary and NO2 secondary Annual -- 0.053 Primary and Ozone (O3) (c) secondary 8 hr. -- 0.070 Primary and PM2.5 (d) secondary 24 hr. 35 --

PM2.5 Primary Annual 12.0 --

PM2.5 Secondary Annual 15.0 --

Primary and PM10 (e) secondary 24 hr. 150 --

SO2 (f) Primary 1 hr. -- 0.075 SO2 (g) Secondary 3 hr. -- 0.5 a) In areas designated non-attainment for the lead (Pb) standards prior to promulgation of the current (2008) standards, and for which implementation plans to attain or maintain the current (2008) standards have been submitted and approved, the previous standards (1.5 g/m3 calendar quarter average) also remain in effect.

b) 98th percentile of 1-hr. daily maximum concentrations averaged over three years c) Annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hr. concentration averaged over three years d) 98th percentile averaged over three years e) Not to be exceeded more than once per year on average over three years f) 99th percentile of 1-hr. daily maximum concentrations averaged over three years g) Not to be exceeded more than once per year September 2022 3-209 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-43 Current NAAQS Attainment Status of Anderson, Knox, Loudon and Roane Counties, Tennessee Whole or/Part of County Current Former Non- Formerly in Attainment Date of Re- Attainment Non-County Current NAAQS Status designation Classification Attainment?

Re-designated Anderson 8-hr. Ozone (2008) to Maintenance 8/12/2015 Marginal Part Re-designated Anderson 24-hr. PM2.5 (2006) to Maintenance 9/27/2017 Moderate Whole Re-designated Knox 8-hr. Ozone (2008) to Maintenance 8/12/2015 Marginal Whole Re-designated Knox 24-hr. PM2.5 (2006) to Maintenance 9/27/2017 Moderate Whole Re-designated Loudon 24-hr. PM2.5 (2006) to Maintenance 9/27/2017 Moderate Whole Re-designated Roane 24-hr. PM2.5 (2006) to Maintenance 9/27/2017 Moderate Part September 2022 3-210 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-44 Measured Carbon Monoxide Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS 1-hr. NAAQS 8-hr. NAAQS In In Max. 1-hr. Compliance Max. 8-hr. Compliance Air Quality 1-hr. Conc. NAAQS with NAAQS 8-hr. Conc. NAAQS with NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (ppm) (ppm) (Y/N)? (ppm) (ppm) (Y/N)?

Great Smoky Mountains 2020 470090101 NP Look Rock, TN Blount 0.3 35 Y 0.2 9 Y Great Smoky Mountains 2019 470090101 NP Look Rock, TN Blount 1.3 35 Y 0.9 9 Y Great Smoky Mountains 2018 470090101 NP Look Rock, TN Blount 0.3 35 Y 0.3 9 Y Great Smoky Mountains 2017 470090101 NP Look Rock, TN Blount 0.3 35 Y 0.3 9 Y September 2022 3-211 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-45 Measured Lead Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS Max. In Quarterly Compliance Air Quality Ave. NAAQS with NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (g/m3) (g/m3) (Y/N)?

1526 New York 2020 470930023 Ave., Knoxville Knox 0.04 0.15 Y 2522 Burnside St.,

2020 470930027 Knoxville Knox 0.02 0.15 Y 1526 New York 2019 470930023 Ave., Knoxville Knox 0.03 0.15 Y 2522 Burnside St.,

2019 470930027 Knoxville Knox 0.01 0.15 Y 1526 New York 2018 470930023 Ave., Knoxville Knox 0.06 0.15 Y 2522 Burnside St.,

2018 470930027 Knoxville Knox 0.02 0.15 Y 1526 New York Ave, 2017 470930023 Knoxville Knox 0.06 0.15 Y 2522 Burnside St.,

2017 470930027 Knoxville Knox 0.02 0.15 Y 1613 Vermont Ave.,

2017 470931017 Knoxville Knox 0.02 0.15 Y September 2022 3-212 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-46 Measured Nitrogen Dioxide Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS 98th Percentile, Daily Max. Max. In 1-hr. 1-hr. In Annual Annual Compliance Air Quality Conc. NAAQS Compliance Conc. NAAQS with NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (ppb) (ppb) (Y/N)? (ppb) (ppb) (Y/N)?

Great Smoky Mountains NP Look 2020 470090101 Rock, TN Blount 5 100 Y 0.7 53 Y Great Smoky Mountains NP Look 2019 470090101 Rock, TN Blount 5 100 Y 0.59 53 Y Great Smoky Mountains NP Look 2018 470090101 Rock, TN Blount 5 100 Y 0.62 53 Y Great Smoky Mountains NP Look 2017 470090101 Rock, TN Blount 5 100 Y 0.55 53 Y September 2022 3-213 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-47 Measured Ozone Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS 4th-High, Daily 8-hr. 8-hr. In Compliance Air Quality Max. NAAQS with NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (ppm) (ppm) (Y/N)?

Freels Bend Study Area 2020 470010101 Melton Lake ORNL Anderson 0.056 0.070 Y 2020 470930021 9315 Rutledge Pike, Mascot Knox 0.053 0.070 Y 4625 Mildred Drive, 2020 470931020 Knoxville Knox 0.052 0.070 Y 2020 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 0.059 0.070 Y Freels Bend Study Area 2019 470010101 Melton Lake ORNL Anderson 0.066 0.070 Y 2019 470930021 9315 Rutledge Pike, Mascot Knox 0.063 0.070 Y 4625 Mildred Drive, 2019 470931020 Knoxville Knox 0.059 0.070 Y 2019 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 0.063 0.070 Y Freels Bend Study Area 2018 470010101 Melton Lake ORNL Anderson 0.063 0.070 Y 2018 470930021 9315 Rutledge Pike, Mascot Knox 0.067 0.070 Y 4625 Mildred Drive, 2018 470931020 Knoxville Knox 0.064 0.070 Y 2018 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 0.065 0.070 Y Freels Bend Study Area 2017 470010101 Melton Lake ORNL Anderson 0.063 0.070 Y 2017 470930021 9315 Rutledge Pike, Mascot Knox 0.061 0.070 Y 4625 Mildred Drive, 2017 470931020 Knoxville Knox 0.067 0.070 Y 2017 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 0.063 0.070 Y September 2022 3-214 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-48 Measured Concentrations of Particulate Matter with an Aerodynamic Diameter less than 10 Microns and Comparison with NAAQS Max.

24-hr. 24-hr. In Compliance Air Quality Conc. NAAQS with NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (g/m3) (g/m3) (Y/N)?

939 Stewart St.,

2020 470931013 Knoxville Knox 87 150 Y 939 Stewart St.,

2019 470931013 Knoxville Knox 37 150 Y 939 Stewart St.,

2018 470931013 Knoxville Knox 39 150 Y 939 Stewart St.,

2017 470931013 Knoxville Knox 40 150 Y September 2022 3-215 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-49 (Sheet 1 of 4)

Measured Concentrations of Particulate Matter with an Aerodynamic Diameter less than 2.5 Microns and Comparison with NAAQS 24-hr. Primary NAAQS 98th Percentile 24-hr. In Compliance Air Quality 24-hr. Conc. NAAQS with NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (g/m3) (g/m3) (Y/N)?

2020 470930028 1000 Francis Road, Knoxville Knox 16.0 35 Y 2020 470931013 939 Stewart St., Knoxville Knox 15.0 35 Y 2020 470931017 1613 Vermont Ave., Knoxville Knox 17.0 35 Y 2020 470931020 4625 Mildred Drive, Knoxville Knox 15.0 35 Y 2020 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 14.0 35 Y 2020 471450004 1002 N. Roan St., Harriman Roane 15.0 35 Y 2019 470930028 1000 Francis Road, Knoxville Knox 16.0 35 Y 2019 470931013 939 Stewart St., Knoxville Knox 16.0 35 Y 2019 470931017 1613 Vermont Ave., Knoxville Knox 17.0 35 Y 2019 470931020 4625 Mildred Drive, Knoxville Knox 16.0 35 Y 2019 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 14.0 35 Y 2019 471450004 1002 N. Roan St., Harriman Roane 14.0 35 Y 2018 470930028 1000 Francis Road, Knoxville Knox 18.0 35 Y 2018 470931013 939 Stewart St., Knoxville Knox 17.0 35 Y 2018 470931017 1613 Vermont Ave., Knoxville Knox 19.0 35 Y 2018 470931020 4625 Mildred Drive, Knoxville Knox 15.0 35 Y 2018 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 14.0 35 Y 2018 471450004 1002 N. Roan St., Harriman Roane 15.0 35 Y September 2022 3-216 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-49 (Sheet 2 of 4)

Measured Concentrations of Particulate Matter with an Aerodynamic Diameter less than 2.5 Microns and Comparison with NAAQS 24-hr. Primary NAAQS 98th Percentile 24-hr. In Compliance Air Quality 24-hr. Conc. NAAQS with NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (g/m3) (g/m3) (Y/N)?

2017 470930028 1000 Francis Road, Knoxville Knox 17.0 35 Y 2017 470931013 939 Stewart St., Knoxville Knox 20.0 35 Y 2017 470931017 1613 Vermont Ave., Knoxville Knox 21.0 35 Y 2017 470931020 4625 Mildred Drive, Knoxville Knox 17.0 35 Y 2017 471050108 130 Webb Drive, Loudon Loudon 18.0 35 Y 2017 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 11.0 35 Y 2017 471450004 1002 N. Roan St., Harriman Roane 16.0 35 Y September 2022 3-217 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-49 (Sheet 3 of 4)

Measured Concentrations of Particulate Matter with an Aerodynamic Diameter less than 2.5 Microns and Comparison with NAAQS Annual Primary NAAQS Annual Secondary NAAQS In In Annual Annual Compliance Annual Annual Compliance Ave. primary with Ave. Secondary with Air Quality Conc. NAAQS NAAQS Conc. NAAQS NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (g/m3) (g/m3) (Y/N)? (g/m3) (g/m3) (Y/N)?

2020 470930028 1000 Francis Road, Knoxville Knox 7.2 12 Y 7.2 15 Y 2020 470931013 939 Stewart St., Knoxville Knox 7.4 12 Y 7.4 15 Y 2020 470931017 1613 Vermont Ave., Knoxville Knox 7.5 12 Y 7.5 15 Y 2020 470931020 4625 Mildred Drive, Knoxville Knox 6.8 12 Y 6.8 15 Y 2020 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 6.3 12 Y 6.3 15 Y 2020 471450004 1002 N. Roan St., Harriman Roane 6.7 12 Y 6.7 15 Y 2019 470930028 1000 Francis Road, Knoxville Knox 7.6 12 Y 7.6 15 Y 2019 470931013 939 Stewart St., Knoxville Knox 7.5 12 Y 7.5 15 Y 2019 470931017 1613 Vermont Ave., Knoxville Knox 8.1 12 Y 8.1 15 Y 2019 470931020 4625 Mildred Drive, Knoxville Knox 7.3 12 Y 7.3 15 Y 2019 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 7.2 12 Y 7.2 15 Y 2019 471450004 1002 N. Roan St., Harriman Roane 7.1 12 Y 7.1 15 Y 2018 470930028 1000 Francis Road, Knoxville Knox 7.7 12 Y 7.7 15 Y 2018 470931013 939 Stewart St., Knoxville Knox 8.1 12 Y 8.1 15 Y 2018 470931017 1613 Vermont Ave., Knoxville Knox 8.4 12 Y 8.4 15 Y 2018 470931020 4625 Mildred Drive, Knoxville Knox 7.4 12 Y 7.4 15 Y 2018 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 6.2 12 Y 6.2 15 Y 2018 471450004 1002 N. Roan St., Harriman Roane 6.8 12 Y 6.8 15 Y September 2022 3-218 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-49 (Sheet 4 of 4)

Measured Concentrations of Particulate Matter with an Aerodynamic Diameter less than 2.5 Microns and Comparison with NAAQS Annual Primary NAAQS Annual Secondary NAAQS In In Annual Annual Compliance Annual Annual Compliance Ave. primary with Ave. Secondary with Air Quality Conc. NAAQS NAAQS Conc. NAAQS NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (g/m3) (g/m3) (Y/N)? (g/m3) (g/m3) (Y/N)?

2017 470930028 1000 Francis Road, Knoxville Knox 8.2 12 Y 8.2 15 Y 2017 470931013 939 Stewart St., Knoxville Knox 8.3 12 Y 8.3 15 Y 2017 470931017 1613 Vermont Ave., Knoxville Knox 8.9 12 Y 8.9 15 Y 2017 470931020 4625 Mildred Drive, Knoxville Knox 7.9 12 Y 7.9 15 Y 2017 471050108 130 Webb Drive, Loudon Loudon 7.6 12 Y 7.6 15 Y 2017 471050109 2175 Roberts Rd., Loudon Loudon 6.0 12 Y 6.0 15 Y 2017 471450004 1002 N. Roan St., Harriman Roane 7.6 12 Y 7.6 15 Y September 2022 3-219 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.6-50 Measured Sulfur Dioxide Concentrations and Comparison with NAAQS In 99th Percentile, Compliance Daily Max. 1-hr. with Air Quality 1-hr. Conc. NAAQS NAAQS Year Monitor # Monitor Location County (ppb) (ppb) (Y/N)?

2019 470010101 Freels Bend Study Area Melton Lake ORNL Anderson 7.0 75 Y 2018 470010101 Freels Bend Study Area Melton Lake ORNL Anderson 6.0 75 Y 2017 470010101 Freels Bend Study Area Melton Lake ORNL Anderson 6.0 75 Y September 2022 3-220 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-51 Regional Criteria Pollutant Emissions by County (2017)

Carbon Nitrogen Sulfur County Monoxide Lead Oxides PM2.5 PM10 Dioxide (TPY) (lb/yr) (TPY) (TPY) (TPY) (TPY)

Anderson 14805 110 3691 874 1582 637 Knox 62958 1550 10715 2152 5382 271 Loudon 10422 8 2111 597 1392 193 Roane 12361 317 3605 920 1449 2025 September 2022 3-221 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.6-52 Nearest Federal Class I Areas to the Horizon Center Site (32)

Distance from Horizon Direction Center Site from Horizon Class I Area (a) (km) Center Site Mammoth Cave National Park, KY 197 Northwest Linville Gorge Wilderness Area, NC 220 East Great Smoky Mountains National Park, TN/NC 54 Southeast Shining Rock Wilderness Area, NC 145 Southeast Joyce Kilmer-Slickrock Wilderness Area, TN/NC 64 South Cohutta Wilderness Area, TN/GA 106 South-southwest a) Distances extracted from USEPA, 2022 and NPS, 2022 September 2022 3-222 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.7 NOISE 3.7.1 BASELINE NOISE CONDITIONS Site Acoustical Characteristics Land use surrounding the Horizon Center site (HCS) is described in Section 3.1, Land Use. The most acoustically sensitive land use is the North Boundary Greenway, a low-density recreational trail used for hiking and biking, which borders the HCS to the west (Outdoor Knoxville, 2022).

Other land uses adjacent to the site include industrial and commercial businesses associated with the Horizon Center Industrial Park to the south, as well as undeveloped forested land (Figure 3.7.1-1). Except for the North Boundary Greenway, there are no other recreational facilities, schools, churches, or other sensitive noise receptors adjacent to the HCS that would be vulnerable to noise impacts from the proposed TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF).

The Horizon Center Industrial Park is partially developed, with businesses closest to the HCS consisting of Philotechnics, an industrial facility specializing in radioactive waste repackaging, and the headquarters office of the Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee (CROET)

(Figure 3.7.1-1). Extensive forested buffers separate the industrial park from surrounding public areas, including the nearest residential development located approximately 0.6 mi. (1.0 km) northwest of the HCS boundary off Poplar Creek Road. From an acoustical perspective, these densely forested areas provide additional attenuation of industrial park noise for receptors in the vicinity (Cook and Van Haverbeke, 1971).

As described in Section 3.3, Geology and Soils, the HCS is situated on a terrace within the valley of East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC) and consists of undulating terrain, with no dramatic changes in elevation that would significantly affect the propagation of sound across the property. There are several ridges that are oriented northeast to southwest within the vicinity of the HCS. Blackoak Ridge is located immediately to the north of the site. In addition to the dense forest, this ridge provides a natural barrier to sounds from the HCS that could otherwise propagate to the north.

Ambient Noise Survey An ambient noise survey was conducted in January 2022 to characterize the baseline acoustical conditions at the HCS and property boundaries.

3.7.1.2.1 Extent of Survey The ambient noise survey conducted in January 2022 incorporated environmental sound monitors at four locations (noise monitoring location [NM] 1 through 4) around the HCS, as depicted on Figure 3.7.1-1. Monitoring sites were established to characterize the baseline acoustical conditions at the HCS and at the property boundaries adjacent to the nearest noise receptors.

Based on these noise-monitoring objectives, the following sound monitoring locations were identified for inclusion in the survey and are depicted on Figure 3.7.1-1:

September 2022 3-223 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment

• NM-1 is located near the northern corner of the HCS property boundary and is representative of the baseline noise conditions along the adjacent segment of the North Boundary Greenway trail.

• NM-2 is located near the eastern corner of the HCS property boundary.

• NM-3 is located near the western corner of the HCS property boundary and is representative of the baseline noise conditions along the adjacent segment of the North Boundary Greenway trail.

• NM-4 is located along the southern boundary of the HCS and is representative of the baseline noise conditions at the adjacent Philotechnics industrial facility and CROET offices.

3.7.1.2.2 Methodology Environmental sound monitors were set up at each of the four monitoring locations.

Measurements consisted of ambient noise levels measured continuously over approximately 10-minute intervals. A total of five measurements were recorded at each location between Tuesday, January 11, 2022, and Wednesday, January 12, 2022, with three measurements recorded during the daytime period (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) and two measurements recorded during the nighttime period (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.).

Noise measurements were collected using a Quest SoundPro DL-1-1/3 sound level meter, which complies with the requirements of the American National Standards Institute Methods for Electroacoustics Sound Level Meters. The sound level meter was calibrated within the previous 12 months by a certified laboratory and was field-calibrated prior to the field measurements. At each monitoring location, the meter was placed on a tripod at approximately 5.9 ft. (1.8 m) off the ground, and a windscreen was placed over the microphone to minimize the influence of wind noise on the measurements. Instrument settings used the equivalent noise level (Leq) averaging routine in the A-weighted decibel (dBA) scale.

3.7.1.2.3 Weather Conditions during the Sound Survey Based on field observations, the weather conditions at the HCS during the two days that ambient noise measurements were collected were mostly clear to partly cloudy, with temperatures ranging between 24°F and 40°F (-4.4°C and 4.4°C). There were calm winds and no measurable precipitation. The ground was dry and free of snow during the survey; however, some frost was noted during the nighttime and early morning measurements.

See Section 3.6, Meteorology, Climatology and Air Quality, for monthly and annual summaries of meteorological data and a description of the regional climate. Ambient noise levels are somewhat variable based on seasonal changes and weather conditions. However, the results of the noise survey are generally representative of typical conditions due to the absence of precipitation or other weather extremes during the sound survey monitoring events.

September 2022 3-224 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.7.1.2.4 Sources of Noise Observed A number of natural and human-generated noise sources were observed during the ambient noise survey for the HCS. Dominant noise sources included area traffic on nearby TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike and local roadways, as well as some drill rig activity on the HCS. Other occasional sources of noise observed during the survey included recreators on the North Boundary Greenway trail and overhead airplane traffic.

3.7.1.2.5 Monitoring Results Ambient noise monitoring results for each monitoring location are shown in Table 3.7.1-1. The Leq data indicate relatively consistent sound levels across the four monitoring locations and across day and night events. Sound levels at NM-2 and NM-4 tended to be slightly higher than those at NM-1 and NM-3, likely due to their proximity to noise generated by Renovare Boulevard, the existing Horizon Center Industrial Park businesses, and TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike.

Each Leq measurement was converted to sound energy, adding a 10 dBA penalty to nighttime measurements to reflect the sensitivity of receptors during those hours. The average sound power was then calculated by averaging the sound energy from each of the three daytime measurements (weighting the daytime average sound energy by 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> per day) and two nighttime measurements (weighting the nighttime average sound energy by 9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> per day).

The sound energy weighted average was then used to calculate the day-night average community noise level (Ldn) for each monitoring location. The Ldn for each monitoring location is shown in Table 3.7.1-1. These Ldn results are representative of the typical ambient noise level at the HCS and are consistent with the Ldn for quiet to normal suburban areas, which typically ranges from 48 to 57 dBA (USEPA, 1974).

Previous Noise Studies A noise study was conducted in 2020 when the Horizon Center Industrial Park was considered for the development of a motorsports park. On-site noise monitoring was not conducted as part of that study; however, ambient noise was characterized using sound monitoring data from a 2015 study related to the proposed development of a nearby airport. A monitoring location near the George Jones Memorial Baptist Church, located approximately 1.5 miles south of the proposed racetrack (much of which would have been located on the HCS), was considered representative of the site. The daytime ambient background sound level at this monitoring location was calculated to be approximately 45 dBA, based on the L90 metric. The L90 metric indicates the sound level that is exceeded for 90 percent of a given time period and is used to describe the background sound level with minimal influence from noise intrusions, such as dogs barking or traffic noise (Leidos, 2020).

3.7.2 APPLICABLE SOUND LEVEL STANDARDS Municipal Regulations The City of Oak Ridge has established quantitative noise level limits based on adjacent property uses, as codified in Article XII of the City's Zoning Ordinance. The most stringent guidelines apply to properties with adjacent residential uses; however, these guidelines are not applicable September 2022 3-225 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment to the HCS because the nearest residences are approximately 0.6 mi. (1.0 km) to the northwest.

For properties with adjacent business uses (e.g., the Philotechnics facility and CROET offices),

the zoning ordinance sets a maximum noise limit of 80 dBA during both daytime and nighttime hours. Additionally, the sound level should not exceed 70 dBA for more than 50 percent of the survey period or 75 dBA for more than 10 percent of the survey period. These restrictions are specific to outdoor spaces, at the lot boundary (City of Oak Ridge, 2020).

While maximum sound level data were not collected as part of the ambient noise survey, the Ldn and Leq values presented in Table 3.7.1-1 indicate that the typical ambient noise levels associated with current baseline conditions at the HCS are well below noise level limits established by the City of Oak Ridge.

State and County Regulations Neither Roane County nor the State of Tennessee has developed noise regulations that specify acceptable community noise levels.

Federal Guidelines At the Federal level, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has a broad-ranging set of guidelines for environmental noise levels. USEPA guidelines recommend that outdoor noise levels do not exceed an Ldn of 55 dBA, which is sufficient to protect the public from the effect of broadband environmental noise in typical outdoor and residential areas. This level is not a regulatory standard but is intentionally conservative to protect the most sensitive portion of the American population with an additional margin of safety (USEPA, 1974). Based on the results of the ambient noise survey, the Ldn at the HCS property boundary during current conditions ranges from 51.8 to 53.1 dBA (Table 3.7.1-1), below the USEPA Ldn guideline of 55 dBA.

September 2022 3-226 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.7.1-1 Ambient Noise Monitoring Results Measured Measured Measured Measured Measured Daytime(a) Daytime(a) Nighttime(b) Nighttime(b) Daytime(a) Calculated Ambient Ambient Ambient Ambient Ambient Average Monitoring Noise Level; Noise Level; Noise Level; Noise Level; Noise Level; Community Location Event 1 Event 2 Event 3 Event 4 Event 5 Noise Level Number (Leq, dBA) (Leq, dBA) (Leq, dBA) (Leq, dBA) (Leq, dBA) (Ldn, dBA)(c)

NM-1 45.3 45.4 45.3 45.4 46.2 51.8 NM-2 46.3 46.0 45.3 47.6 49.0 53.1 NM-3 45.3 45.3 45.4 45.3 45.3 51.8 NM-4 45.3 46.0 45.8 45.5 45.4 52.1 Notes:

a) Daytime events occur between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m.

b) Nighttime events occur between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.

c) A 10 dBA penalty was added to the measured nighttime Leq sound levels in calculating the average community noise level to reflect the sensitivity of receptors during those hours.

Abbreviations:

Ldn = day-night average community noise level Leq = equivalent noise level dBA = A-weighted decibel September 2022 3-227 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Cultural resources include prehistoric or historic districts, archaeological sites, buildings, structures, or objects considered important to a culture, subculture, or community for scientific, traditional, religious, or any other reason. When cultural resources meet any one of the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (36 CFR 60.4), they may be termed historic properties and be eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP).

A cultural resource survey was conducted to identify the potential occurrence of archaeological and historic resources potentially eligible for the NRHP on and near the Horizon Center site (HCS). The survey included a Phase I archaeological survey and historic architecture viewshed survey. Identified resources were assessed against the criteria for the NRHP in order to determine their potential eligibility.

3.8.1 DEFINING THE AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS The area of potential effects (APE) is determined based upon the potential for both direct and indirect effects. Direct effects are defined as those that result from activities that could damage or destroy the physical integrity of a cultural resource. Thus, the APE for direct effects to cultural resources consists of the areas where construction activities and ground disturbance are proposed, which for this project is considered to be the HCS that covers approximately 110-ac.

(44.5-ha). The archaeological survey areas consist of the HCS and an adjacent parcel, totaling 150-ac. (61-ha) (Figure 3.8.1-1). Results of field investigations from both the archaeological survey area and the APE are reported.

Indirect effects are those that do not directly destroy the physical integrity of a cultural resource but would rather adversely affect contributing elements of the cultural resource. For historic structures, this typically consists of visual effects to the viewshed of the cultural resource that may diminish its overall context. A 0.5-mi. (0.8-km) buffer around the direct-effect APE (i.e., the HCS) is considered the APE for indirect effects to cultural resources.

3.8.2 CULTURAL BACKGROUND AND PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED CULTURAL RESOURCES The cultural background of East Tennessee spans thousands of years. The earliest groups to leave a definitive material record of their presence were early Paleoindians who entered the region during the Late Pleistocene glacial epoch at least 12,000 years ago. Their descendants and the descendants of other Native American groups who migrated to the area later occupied the region for the next 11 millennia. This long prehistoric era lasted until the arrival of European explorers in the 16th and 17th centuries.

While cultural change is a slow and continual process, archaeologists and other researchers divide the human history of a region into distinct cultural periods. Archaeologists and historians recognize four broadly defined prehistoric periods for East Tennessee:

• Paleoindian (approximately 10,000 - 8000 B.C.)

• Archaic (8000 - 1000 B.C.)

• Woodland (1000 B.C. - A.D. 900)

September 2022 3-228 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment

• Mississippian (A.D. 900 - 1540)

The historic period includes the Contact/Protohistoric period (A.D. 1540 - 1672) and coincides with the early exploration of the Southeast by the Spanish and French.

Records on file at the Tennessee Division of Archaeology (TDOA) in Nashville and Tennessee Historical Commission (THC) Geographic Information System (THCGIS) were examined to determine if any cultural resource investigations were previously conducted within the archaeological survey area. Also, to provide a more expansive background and understanding of the cultural context of the area, records of cultural resources investigations previously conducted within a 2-mi. (1.6-km) buffer of the archaeological survey area were also examined.

Additionally, historic map research was conducted to determine the probability for historic cultural resources to be present within the archeological survey area.

Archaeological Sites According to the TDOA site file and database research, no archaeological sites or surveys have been recorded within or adjacent to the archaeological survey area prior to this survey.

However, 22 archaeological sites and nine surveys are recorded within the 2-mi. (1.6-km) buffer surrounding the APE. Of the 22 sites, seven are prehistoric and 15 are historic.

Review of the prehistoric and historic context of the area, previously recorded sites, and completed surveys in the vicinity of the archaeological survey area suggests a high potential for archaeological sites within the archaeological survey area.

Historic-Age Structures As noted in Section 3.8.2 above, the THCGIS database and THC files were reviewed to determine if any architectural resources were previously documented and/or listed on the NRHP within a 2-mi. (1.6-km) buffer around the survey area to provide a more expansive background and understanding of the cultural context of the area. THC files reviewed included available maps, surveys, reports, and/or other relevant data. The review identified 19 properties, including two NRHP-listed resources, located within the 2-mi. (1.6-km) buffer. Of the 19 resources, 17 were recommended as not eligible. Two resources, the George Jones Memorial Baptist Church (92000408) and the TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike Checking Station (92000412), were listed on the NRHP in 1992.

Historic mapping of the archaeological survey area was also reviewed, with the earliest available map dating to 1895. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 1895 Loudon, Tennessee, topographic quadrangle map depicts an unnamed road along the northern boundary of the archaeological survey area. The USGS 1935 Bethel Valley, Tennessee, topographic quadrangle also depicts the unnamed road along the northern boundary. Additionally, four historic structures are shown along this road: three in the northeastern portion of the archaeological survey area and one in the southwestern corner of the archaeological survey area on the 1935 map. On the USGS 1941 Bethel Valley, Tennessee, map, a total of five structures are shown.

One of the structures shown on the 1935 map is no longer present on the 1941 map. However, the 1941 map shows two additional structures that were not on the 1935 map: one adjacent to the unnamed road, and one just north of the road. By 1952, no structures are depicted on the USGS Bethel Valley, Tennessee, topographic quadrangle; however, the unnamed road persists.

In total, six historic structure locations are shown within or adjacent to the archaeological survey September 2022 3-229 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment area. Based on this historic map review, historic sites dating to at least the early 1900s are likely present within the archaeological survey area.

3.8.3 SURVEY METHODS After reviewing obtainable information about cultural resources within and surrounding each of the APEs, a cultural resource survey was conducted by qualified professionals to determine if any unidentified cultural resources were present. As shown in Chapter 10, John A. Hunter, MA, RPA, served as principal investigator for the project. Mr. Hunter is a Registered Professional Archaeologist with a masters degree in Anthropology and more than 20 years of experience.

The architectural survey was completed by Matthew Prybylski. Mr. Prybylski has a Master of Historic Preservation (MHP) and over 20 years of cultural resource experience. The archaeological survey was completed by Tiffany Raymond, Tim Reynolds, Jacob Jepson, Aaron Geary, Andrew May, Stacia Yoakam, Kaylee Blum, Mark Bautista, Sydney Swierenga, and Alejandra May. The architectural survey was completed by Matthew Prybylski and Brittany Sams.

Archaeological Methods Field investigations were conducted according to guidelines established in the Tennessee State Historic Preservation Office (TN SHPO) Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Resource Management Studies (TDOA, 2018). Areas within the cultural resources survey area (Figure 3.8.1-1) that had less than 50 percent surface visibility and less than 20 percent slope were investigated by systematic excavation of soil test pits (STPs). All portions of the archaeological survey area exhibiting greater than 50 percent ground surface visibility and/or greater than 20 percent slope were visually inspected for cultural resources (i.e., artifacts, features, etc.) by a pedestrian survey.

The TN SHPO guidelines for pedestrian surveys call for transects to be spaced no more than 100 ft. (30 m.) apart. The surface of the ground was examined for the entire length of several transects throughout the archaeological survey area. If prehistoric or historic artifacts were encountered, the distance between transects was reduced to 49-ft. (15-m) to determine the presence of any additional cultural resources.

A total of 815 STPs were completed, while areas of slope or disturbance were subjected to a pedestrian survey. Soil from the STPs was screened through 0.25-in. (0.64-cm) steel mesh, and all cultural material identified was collected. The purpose of these excavations was to investigate the underlying stratigraphy and help determine if a site contained, or had the potential to contain, intact cultural deposits.

Historic Architecture Survey Methods The architectural survey area included the APE, as well as a 0.5-mi. buffer (0.8-km) viewshed of the survey area (indirect APE). Buildings over 50 years of age were assessed for NRHP eligibility using NRHP Bulletin #15 (NPS, 2002). Fieldwork entailed inspection and documentation of buildings, cemeteries, or structures over 50 years of age within the architectural survey area. Fieldwork included written and photographic documentation of resources with digital photographs for the purposes of determining the architectural and historic details of each structure or building.

September 2022 3-230 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.8.4 SURVEY FINDINGS Archaeological Findings A total of five archaeological sites and one historic cemetery were documented during the survey: Sites 40RE637, 40RE638, 40RE639, 40RE640, and 40RE641, and the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery. Site 40RE637, Site 40RE638, and a portion of the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery are located within the APE. The remaining sites (40RE639, 40RE640, and 40RE641) are located in the archaeological survey area outside of the APE.

Site 40RE637 is a historic domestic dwelling dating to the mid-19th century that continued to be occupied or was reoccupied in the early 20th century. Due to shallow soils, the loss of site integrity from previous disturbance associated with land-clearing activities, and the low potential for 40RE637 to greatly contribute to the history of the region, it is recommended that 40RE637 is not eligible for the NRHP, and no further archaeological work is necessary.

Site 40RE638 is a historic dwelling dating to the early 19th to early 20th century, with a remnant brick-lined sandstone chimney. Due to the low density of artifacts and the shallow and disturbed nature of the soils, 40RE638 has low potential to further contribute to the history of the region.

For these reasons, it is recommended that 40RE638 is not eligible for the NRHP, and no further archaeological work is necessary.

Site 40RE639 (located outside of the APE) is a historic domestic dwelling dating to the early to mid-19th century into the late 20th century. Due to the presence of an artifact concentration at 40RE639 and the likelihood of affiliation between 40RE639 and 40RE640, it is recommended that this site be avoided. If avoidance is not possible, additional archaeological and archival work is recommended to determine site NRHP eligibility.

Site 40RE640 (located outside the APE) is a multicomponent historic domestic dwelling dating to the early 19th century that continued through the early 20th century. Due to the presence of intact features, an artifact concentration, a wide range of artifact classes present, and the extended duration of site occupation, the site has high potential to greatly contribute to the history of the region. For these reasons, Site 40RE640 is recommended for avoidance. If avoidance is not possible, additional archaeological and archival work is recommended to determine site NRHP eligibility.

Site 40RE641 (located outside the APE) is a multicomponent site containing three pieces of prehistoric lithic debitage of unknown temporal affiliation and a historic domestic dwelling dating to the late 19th to early 20th century. Site 40RE641 has a low potential to further contribute to the history of the region. Site 40RE641 is recommended as not eligible for the NRHP, and no further archaeological work is required.

The McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery is a family cemetery dating to the mid-19th to mid-20th century. The cemetery contains 22 grave markers and may represent a minimum of 16 graves. These markers include decorated headstones, erected cut stones without inscriptions, and two cut-stone piles. The earliest readable death date is Mary J. Carmichael, died Dec. 17, 1867, and the latest readable headstone is Sarah Carmichael, born 1885, aged 62 years, corresponding to a death date of approximately 1947. Though no depressions were encountered outside of the cemetery enclosure that indicate other unmarked burials, it is still possible that unmarked graves are present.

September 2022 3-231 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment According to the National Register Bulletin #41, cemeteries and graves are among those properties that ordinarily are not considered eligible for inclusion in the NRHP unless they meet special requirements. Upon review of these requirements, the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery is recommended as not eligible for the NRHP. However, all human burials are protected under Tennessee State law and a 100 ft. (30.5 m) buffer has been established around the cemetery to protect this resource. Therefore, avoidance of the 100 -ft. (30.5-m) buffer is recommended. If avoidance is not possible, additional archaeological work that includes the use of near-surface geophysics to identify any unmarked graves within or surrounding the cemetery enclosure and archaeological monitoring of all proposed work within the cemetery or associated buffer.

Historic Architecture Survey Findings One resource, the Silvey Cemetery, was identified within the viewshed buffer (indirect APE).

The Silvey Cemetery dates to the early 20th century and contains approximately six graves.

Wood staff assessed the Silvey Cemetery according to several overarching themes developed using three NRHP criteria applicable specifically to architecture and defined by research used to develop the historic context. These themes included the development of the area (Criterion A),

the association with early settlers in Roane County and nearby areas (Criterion B), and the evaluation of headstone architecture within the region (Criterion C). As a result of this assessment, the Silvey Cemetery is recommended not eligible for listing on the NRHP.

3.8.5 REGULATORY COORDINATION Formal coordination with the TN SHPO was conducted on April 13, 2022 and included the submittal of results of the cultural resource survey (see Chapter 1, Appendix 1A, Regulatory Correspondence). This coordination initiates regulatory review pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. However, the full Section 106 consultation process will be conducted by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) through direct coordination with the TN SHPO.

September 2022 3-232 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES 3.9.1 VIEWSHED BOUNDARIES The Horizon Center site (HCS) is located in the partially developed Horizon Center Industrial Park, which consists of several existing industrial and commercial facilities, additional lots available for development, and greenbelt areas to remain undeveloped (City of Oak Ridge, 2018). Lands adjacent to the industrial park are predominantly undeveloped and forested, with the exception of the TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike corridor to the east.

The term viewshed refers to the landscape that is visible from a given vantage point. Viewshed boundaries for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) are defined as the area within 3 miles (mi.) (4.8 km) of the site center point radius, depicted in Figure 3.9.1-1. The viewshed from most of the site vicinity is limited by topography and areas of dense vegetation.

However, the site vicinity shown in Figure 3.9.1-1 represents an estimate of the foreground-middleground distance zone, defined as the areas seen from viewing locations which are less than 3 to 5 mi. (4.8 to 8.0 km) away, in accordance with the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI) Bureau of Land Management (BLM) scenic quality rating assessment described in Section 3.9.10. Due to the relatively small scale of the HCS and the TRISO-X FFF, the viewshed is limited to distances under 3 mi. (4.8 km).

3.9.2 LANDSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS The HCS is located in northern Roane County in the Valley and Ridge physiographic province.

The regional topography near the site is typical of the Valley and Ridge province which is characterized by northeast-southwest trending ridges and intervening valleys (NPS, 2021). The HCS and other developed areas along TN 95 to the northeast and southwest are located on relatively flat or slightly undulating terrain associated with the East Fork Valley, while just northwest of the site, there is a steep incline to the top of Blackoak Ridge (see Figure 3.9.1-1).

The ecological environment of the HCS and its immediate surroundings is characterized by herbaceous cover as well as forest habitat, consisting of communities of evergreen, deciduous, and mixed forests. Section 3.5, Ecological Resources, provides detailed descriptions of the specific ecological features (flora, fauna, and ecosystems) present at the site. In addition, descriptions of the sites soil types are presented in Section 3.3.4, Soils, while surface water features are described in detail in Section 3.4.2, Surface Waters.

Landscape features in the vicinity of the HCS, including the presence of open spaces and uncultivated land, are detailed in Section 3.1, Land Use. The North Boundary Greenway, a low-density recreational trail used for hiking and biking, borders the HCS boundary to the west (Figure 3.9.3-1). The North Boundary Greenway trail provides 16 mi. (25.7 km) of singletrack and gravel paths that offer views of ridge-top woodlands, bluffs, and creek-side habitats showcasing a variety of wildlife and native plants as well as remnants of pre-Manhattan Project settlements and old cemeteries (Outdoor Knoxville, 2022). There are no other parks, wilderness areas, or other recreational areas located within or immediately adjacent to the HCS that offer architectural or aesthetic features that would attract tourists to the area.

3.9.3 LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTED FEATURES Apart from previous vegetation clearing that has occurred over the majority of the HCS, the property has been minimally developed. There are no buildings present on site. As shown in September 2022 3-233 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.3-1 and Figure 3.9.3-2, Photo E, a gravel road travels generally north-south through the center of the site. There are no radar, cell, or transmission towers, or aboveground utility distribution lines within the HCS.

Constructed features immediately adjacent to the HCS include Renovare Boulevard, which borders the site to the southeast, and a warehouse/office building occupied by Philotechnics, located near the southern corner of the property (see Figure 3.9.3-1). Renovare Boulevard is a two-lane divided roadway that provides access to the Horizon Center Industrial Park, and includes a landscaped median, streetlights, and an adjacent sidewalk (see Figure 3.9.3-2, Photo B). The Philotechnics facility, which is bordered by Renovare Boulevard to the southeast and the HCS on the remaining sides, consists of a one-story building with offices and warehouse space as well as paved parking lots. Perimeter fencing separates the Philotechnics facility from the HCS (see Figure 3.9.3-2, Photo F). There are no constructed features on the HCS, the adjacent Philotechnics facility, or the adjacent segment of Renovare Road that are currently visible from TN 95.

3.9.4 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS The HCS is approximately 110 ac. (44.5 ha) in area, and has been previously cleared of most woody vegetation. Figure 3.9.3-1 provides an aerial view of the HCS and indicates various locations from which site photographs were taken. Site photographs are provided in Figure 3.9.3-2.

3.9.5 RESIDENTS AND VISITORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED BY VISUAL IMPACTS Residents The closest residents to the HCS are located in a heavily forested residential development off Poplar Creek Road, approximately 0.6 mi. (1.0 km) northwest of the HCS boundary. However, as these residences are separated from the site by Blackoak Ridge and areas of dense vegetation, they are unlikely to be potentially affected by visual impacts from the HCS. There are also residential neighborhoods located to the east off TN 95, approximately 1.3 mi. (2.1 km) or more from the site. These residents would also have minimal to no view of potential development at the HCS due to distance, intervening topography, and heavily forested buffers.

Area Visitation The City of Oak Ridge is home to a number of museums, parks, and attractions that serve as popular visitor destinations (Explore Oak Ridge, 2022). While the majority of these sites are concentrated near the city center in Anderson County, outside the project vicinity, there are some tourist attractions such as the K-25 History Center, the K-25 Overlook and Visitor Center, the Wheat Community Burial Ground, and the Black Oak Ridge Conservation Easement, that are located in and around the Heritage Center Industrial Park, between 1 and 3 mi. (1.6 and 4.8 km) southwest of the HCS (Roane Tourism, 2022). However, due to factors related to distance, intervening topography and forested areas, views of the HCS are minimal or absent from all of these visitor destinations.

The only recreational area or visitor attraction from which the HCS is readily visible is the North Boundary Greenway trail, described in Section 3.9.2 and shown on Figure 3.9.3-1. There is currently a narrow band of trees and vegetation that separates the majority of the trail from the HCS, somewhat shielding views of the site from trail users. However, as noted in Section 2.3, September 2022 3-234 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment the ORED is planning to construct a 69-kV transmission line from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the intersection of Imperium Drive and TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike, in order to provide electricity to the Horizon Center Industrial Park. The 69-kV transmission line would abut the south side of the North Boundary Greenway trail segment that borders the HCS, requiring the removal of the vegetative buffer. Thus, the HCS would be visible to greenway users along this segment of the trail.

3.9.6 VISIBILITY FROM ACCESS ROADS Renovare Boulevard provides direct access for vehicles traveling to and from the HCS.

Renovare Boulevard is accessible from TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike via intersections at Imperium Drive to the northeast of the site, or Novus Drive to the southeast. The HCS is only visible from the roadways within the Horizon Center Industrial Park (Renovare Boulevard, Imperium Drive, and Novus Drive). A heavily forested area obscures views of the HCS from TN 95 and other local roadways in the vicinity.

3.9.7 HIGH-QUALITY VIEW AREAS Based on site visits and a review of available local information, there are no scenic features or vistas on the HCS that are considered to be regionally or locally important or of high scenic quality. Both the vegetation and topography of the HCS are typical of other land parcels in Oak Ridge and northeastern Roane County.

3.9.8 APPLICABLE REGULATORY INFORMATION Based on the current zoning map for the City of Oak Ridge, the HCS is zoned IND-2 (General Industrial), as are other properties within the Horizon Center Industrial Park that are either currently developed or available for development. The IND-2 general, or medium, industrial district is established to provide areas in which the principal use of land is for processing, manufacturing, assembling, fabrication and for warehousing. Medium industry produces moderate external effects such as smoke, noise, soot, dirt, vibration, and/or odor (City of Oak Ridge, 2020).

Other zoning designations adjacent to the HCS include G (Greenbelt), consisting of areas within the Horizon Center Industrial Park that are designated for environmental preservation or are otherwise unsuitable for development, and FIR (Federal Industry and Research), consisting of U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) land which borders the HCS to the north and surrounds the industrial park in other directions.

Development within the City of Oak Ridge is subject to certain design standards and requirements, as specified in the Citys Zoning Ordinance (City of Oak Ridge, 2020). A number of these requirements regulate aspects of propertys visual attributes, including:

• Off Street Parking and Loading Requirements (Article XI) - prescribes minimum number of parking spaces and loading/unloading areas, lot dimensions and layout, and lighting requirements.

• Performance Standards (Article XII) - sets controls for the emission of smoke, dust, and light/glare from industrial or other business activities.

September 2022 3-235 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment

• Landscaping and Design Standards (Article XIII) - details landscaping and streetscape requirements, architectural compatibility, screening and buffer transitions between zoning districts, and outdoor lighting requirements.

• Sign Regulations (Article XIV) - regulates size, location, design, and illumination of signs.

3.9.9 COORDINATION WITH LOCAL PLANNERS Local zoning designations and the current zoning ordinance were obtained from the City of Oak Ridge Planning Division. In addition, TRISO-X, LLC representatives have been in coordination with local officials, including the City of Oak Ridge Community Development Department, the City of Oak Ridge Industrial Development Board, the Oak Ridge Electric Department, the Oak Ridge City Manager, and the Mayor of Oak Ridge, regarding the proposed development since Summer 2021. No unusual planning, zoning, or building code issues were identified in association with the HCS. Additional coordination and plan review are anticipated to occur as appropriate during the project planning process.

3.9.10 AESTHETIC AND SCENIC QUALITY RATING The BLM has developed and implemented its Visual Resource Management (VRM) policy to evaluate the aesthetic and scenic quality of public lands in the United States and to manage these public lands in a manner which protects the quality of the scenic values (BLM, 1984). This VRM approach has two primary components: inventory and analysis. The inventory component involves assigning the visual resources of an area to an inventory class based on its visual appeal, public concern, and visibility from travel routes and key observation points. The analysis component of the BLM methodology focuses on manipulating the design characteristics of planned buildings and supporting infrastructure (e.g., utility lines, roads) to minimize the contrast between natural and disturbed areas of the landscape. For the purposes of this evaluation, the aesthetic and scenic quality of the HCS were rated using only the inventory component of the VRM methodology.

Scenic Quality Scenic quality is a measure of the visual appeal of a tract of land. In the BLMs visual resource inventory process, lands are given an A, B, or C rating based on the apparent scenic quality which is determined using seven key factors: landform, vegetation, water, color, adjacent scenery, scarcity, and cultural modifications. For a given tract of land, a score is assigned for each of the seven key factors using the BLMs scoring criteria presented in Table 3.9.10-1. The total score, obtained by summing the individual scores for the seven key factors, is then used to apply a scenic quality rating for the site using the following BLM rating designations: A = total score of 19 or more; B = total score of 12 to 18; and C = total score of 11 or less (BLM, 1986).

Due to the homogeneity of the landscape features across the HCS (i.e., similar physiographic characteristics, visual patterns, colors, and impacts from man-made modifications such as vegetation clearing) it was not necessary to subdivide the site into multiple scenic quality rating units. Thus, for the purposes of the scenic quality evaluation, the HCS was rated as a single unit. The results of the scenic quality evaluation are presented in Table 3.9.10-1. The HCS was assigned a total scenic quality score of 5 which places it within the lowest BLM scenic quality rating of C.

September 2022 3-236 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Sensitivity Level The sensitivity level analysis portion of the BLM methodology considers the measure of public concern for scenic quality. Lands are assigned high, medium, or low sensitivity levels by analyzing various indicators of public concern including the type of users, amount of use, public interest, adjacent land uses, and special areas.

Typical users of the land within the HCS would be on-site employees and contractors.

Employees who work at the site or in the surrounding industrial park are expected to be less sensitive to changes in visual quality than the general public. The HCS would, however, be visible to members of the public from the North Boundary Greenway hiking and biking trail which borders the HCS to the west. Thus, the public would have interest in the value of the lands adjacent to the trail as a visual resource. However, development of the site is consistent with the planned use of the industrial park and compatible with current zoning designations. Additionally, the topography and surrounding areas of dense forest would obstruct views of the HCS from the remainder of the trail not directly adjacent to the site. Based on these considerations, the HCS is assigned a medium sensitivity rating overall.

Distance Zones The BLM methodology also subdivides landscapes into three distanced zones based on relative visibility of the area from travel routes and key observation points. The three distance zones are the foreground-middleground, the background, and seldom seen. The foreground-middleground zone typically includes areas visible from highways, rivers, or other viewing locations which are less than 3 to 5 mi. (4.8 to 8.0 km) away; the background zone includes areas visible from 6 to 15 mi. (9.7 to 24.1 km) away; and the seldom-seen zone includes areas not visible from travel routes or other frequently occupied places such residences and public areas.

Figure 3.9.1-1 provides an approximation of the foreground-middleground distance zone, though as previously discussed, visibility from many of these areas is limited by topography and intervening vegetation. Additionally, the majority of undeveloped areas within the site vicinity are rarely occupied and thus the viewshed from these areas would fall under the seldom-seen zone.

Due to the scale of the HCS and the regional topography, the site would not be readily distinguishable from the surrounding landscape at background distances.

Determination of Visual Resource Inventory Class The BLM provides a framework for integrating the results of scenic quality evaluation, sensitivity level analysis, and distance zone delineation. The scenic quality rating of C and the medium sensitivity rating place the HCS within Visual Resource Inventory Class IV for all three distance zones. Of the four visual resource inventory classes, Class IV allows for the greatest degree of landscape modification and is considered the least visual and scenic value. The BLM management objectives for Class IV areas allow for high levels of change, with the understanding that an attempt will be made to minimize the effects of the planned disturbance.

September 2022 3-237 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.9.10-1 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Scenic Quality Inventory Evaluation and Scoring for the Horizon Center Site Evaluation and Assigned Score for the Key Factor BLM Scenic Quality Evaluation Scoring Criteria (a)

Horizon Center Site Landform High vertical relief as Steep canyons, mesas, Low rolling hills,

• While a ridge rises relatively steeply to the expressed in prominent cliffs, buttes, cinder cones, and foothills, or flat valley northwest, no notable landform features spires, or massive rock drumlins; interesting bottoms; or few or no are present within the HCS.

outcrops, or severe surface erosional patterns or variety interesting landscape

• Site characterized by gently to moderately variation or highly eroded in size and shape of features. rolling hills.

formations, including major landforms; detail features Score 1 Landform Score = 1 badlands or dune systems; or that are interesting, though detail features dominant and not dominant or exceptionally striking and exceptional.

intriguing, such as glaciers. Score 3 Score 5 Vegetation A variety of vegetative types Some variety of vegetation, Little or no variety or

• HCS consists primarily of periodically as expressed in interesting but only one or two major contrast in mowed herbaceous cover which grows in forms, textures, and patterns. types. vegetation. near monoculture.

Score 5 Score 3 Score 1

• Small islands of scrub-shrub vegetation and stand alone mature trees provide limited variety.

Vegetation Score = 1 Water Clear and clean appearing, Either flowing, or still, but Either absent, or

• Water features not present within the still, or cascading white water, not dominant in the present, but not HCS.

any of which are a dominant landscape. noticeable. Water Score = 0 factor in the landscape. Score 3 Score 0 Score 5 Color Rich color combinations, Some intensity or variety in Subtle color

• Relatively uniform herbaceous cover and variety or vivid color; or colors and contrast of the variations, contrast, limited areas of woody vegetation provide pleasing contrasts in the soil, soil, rock, and vegetation, or interest; generally little color variation or contrast.

rock, vegetation, water or but not a dominant scenic mute tones. Color Score = 1 snow fields. element. Score 1 Score 5 Score 3 September 2022 3-238 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.9.10-1 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Scenic Quality Inventory Evaluation and Scoring for the Horizon Center Site Evaluation and Assigned Score for the Key Factor BLM Scenic Quality Evaluation Scoring Criteria (a)

Horizon Center Site Adjacent Adjacent scenery greatly Adjacent scenery Adjacent scenery has

• Areas south adjacent to the HCS are Scenery enhances visual quality. moderately enhances little or no influence being developed in association with the Score 5 overall visual quality. on overall visual Horizon Center Industrial Park.

Score 3 quality.

• Forested ridges to the north and west, Score 0 however, moderately enhance the overall visual quality of the site.

Adjacent Scenery Score = 3 Scarcity One of a kind; or unusually Distinctive, though Interesting within its

• Vegetation and scenery within the HCS memorable, or very rare somewhat similar to others setting, but fairly are common throughout the region and within region. Consistent within the region. common within the contain non-native species and chance for exceptional Score 3 region. successional communities typical of areas wildlife or wildflower viewing. Score 1 with significant past disturbance.

Score 5 Scarcity Score = 1 Cultural Modifications add favorably Modifications add little or no Modifications add

• While there are no buildings or structures Modifications to visual variety while visual variety to the area variety but are very within the HCS, human modification promoting visual harmony. and introduce no discordant discordant and including previous vegetation clearing Score 2 elements. promote strong introduces notable discord with the Score 0 disharmony. surrounding areas of forest and natural Score -4 elements.

Cultural Modification Score = -2 Total Key Factor Score = 5

Reference:

BLM, 1986 Note:

a) The BLM Scenic Quality Inventory protocol allows for assigning a score at any integer value within the maximum and minimum score range listed for an individual key factor.

September 2022 3-239 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.10 SOCIOECONOMICS This section describes the population, economic, and community characteristics of the study area surrounding the Horizon Center site (HCS). For the majority of this section, this study area is defined as the five counties surrounding the HCS that are most likely to incur economic, labor force, and infrastructure effects due to the Proposed Action. This study area is also referred to in this section as the Region of Influence (ROI) and includes Roane, Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Morgan counties. However, pursuant to NUREG-1748, Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated with Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) Programs, discussions regarding minority populations and households living below the poverty level focus on the approximately 50 sq. mi. (129.5 km2) area (corresponding to a 4 mi. [6.4 km] radius) surrounding the HCS center point radius, which includes only portions of Roane, Anderson, and Morgan counties.

The data used in this section are the most current and complete data identified to address each topic. In most cases, those data represent relatively current conditions in the study area (for example, 2015-2019 American Community Survey [ACS] 5-year estimates provided by the U.S.

Census Bureau [USCB] and USCB 2020 Decennial Census data), or projected conditions during the expected life of the proposed project. Decennial Census data from 2000 and 2010 are also used to illustrate economic and population trends over time. As these available sources provide sufficient data to address each topic, no additional coordination with local and regional agencies or groups who collect these types of data was necessary.

3.10.1 POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS Population and Projected Growth in the Region of Influence The Horizon Center site (HCS) is located in Roane County, Tennessee, within the limits of the City of Oak Ridge, which spans portions of both Roane and Anderson counties. Oak Ridge had a population of 31,402 in 2020, while Roane County had a population of 53,404 (USCB, 2020).

Figure 3.10.1-1 shows the location of Oak Ridge and the HCS, as well as other cities and towns within the ROI. Knox County, which includes the city of Knoxville and its suburbs, is the most urban and densely developed of the counties that comprise the ROI, with a resident population of 478,971 in 2020. The other four counties are more rural and have smaller resident populations, ranging from 21,035 in Morgan County to 77,123 in Anderson County (Table 3.10.1-1). Together, the counties comprising the ROI accounted for approximately 10 percent of the population of the State of Tennessee in 2020.

In recent years, the ROI has grown at rates very similar to those of the State. Loudon County has experienced the most rapid population growth of the counties in the ROI, growing 24.2 percent between 2000 and 2010, compared to the other ROI counties that experienced growth rates ranging from 4.4 percent in Roane County to 13.1 percent in Knox County over the same time period (Table 3.10.1-1). Together, these growth rates resulted in population growth of 12.0 percent across the ROI, just above Tennessees growth rate of 11.5 percent. Population data for 2020 reveal that population growth in the ROI has continued to be on track with that of Tennessee as a whole. Between 2010 and 2020, the combined population of the ROI grew by 8.4 percent, whereas the total State population grew by 8.9 percent. Loudon and Knox counties continued to grow at rates higher than the State. However, during this same period, the population of Roane and Morgan counties declined by 1.4 percent and 4.3 percent, respectively, while the population of Anderson County increased by 2.7 percent (Table 3.10.1-1).

September 2022 3-240 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Future population projections for the State of Tennessee and each county in the State are produced by the University of Tennessees Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research.

Forecasts are informed by the following data trends from 2000 to 2018 (Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research, 2019):

• Vital statistics data (births and deaths) from the Tennessee Department of Health.

• Predicted net migration patterns.

• Life tables from the Social Security Administration.

• Recent average birth rates by county.

• Race and age of female population.

• Forecasted future U.S. populations.

Based on these projections, the population in the ROI is expected to grow at rates slightly lower than that of the total State population throughout the period of operation of the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) until license renewal or decommissioning, which is anticipated to occur in 2065. The total State population is expected to grow 31.3 percent by 2065 relative to the population in 2020. Over this same time period, the combined population of the ROI is expected to increase by approximately 28.7 percent. This overall growth rate is attributed to the combination of a high growth rate in Knox and Loudon counties (35.2 percent and 43.1 percent, respectively), coupled with lower growth rates in Anderson and Morgan counties (9.6 percent and 7.1 percent, respectively) and a projected decline in population (-7.8 percent) in Roane County (Table 3.10.1-2).

Demographic Characteristics According to Appendix C of NUREG-1748, which describes Environmental Justice Procedures as part of Environmental Reviews for Licensing Actions Affecting NMSS Programs, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) recommends that poverty and minority characteristics be considered for an area within a 0.6 mi. (1.0 km) radius from the center of the site if the facility is located within city limits, or for an area within a 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius from the center of the site if the facility is located outside city limits or in a rural area. Although the HCS is located within the Oak Ridge city limits, the predominantly rural setting supports the use of the larger radius in order to characterize an adequate sample of the surrounding population.

Therefore, in addition to assessing the demographic characteristics of the five counties comprising the ROI and the State of Tennessee, this section also provides a focused discussion of minority populations and households living below the poverty level in the census block groups (CBGs) partially or entirely within a 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius of the proposed HCS center point.

This area includes portions of Roane, Anderson, and Morgan counties.

The most recent demographic data available during the preparation of this report includes 2020 USCB Decennial Census data (USCB, 2020) for race and ethnicity and 2015-2019 ACS data (USCB, 2019) for poverty level. Note that some CBG designations and boundaries were revised between the 2019 and 2020 data reporting.

September 2022 3-241 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.10.1.2.1 Minority Population NUREG-1748 defines minority as individual(s) who are members of the following population groups: American Indian and Alaska Native; Asian; Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander; Black or African American; some other race; two or more races; and Hispanic or Latino (of any race). Table 3.10.1-3 provides 2020 population data for minority groups in each of the 13 CBGs within a 4 mi. (6.4 km) radius of the HCS center point, as well as for minority groups in each of the five counties comprising the ROI and the State of Tennessee. The table also reports the percentage of the total population represented by all minority groups combined. The combined minority population across the five-county ROI accounts for 19.3 percent of the ROIs population. Minorities comprise approximately 29 percent of the population of the State of Tennessee.

Within the portion of the ROI that falls within 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) of the HCS, combined minority populations within individual CBGs range from 2.5 percent to 37.0 percent. Additionally, two CBGs, including the CBG that encompasses the HCS, have no resident population. Minorities represent 16.1 percent of the CBG located adjacent to the HCS to the north (Census Tract 301, CBG 2), with Black or African American residents making up the largest minority group, closely followed by those that identify as two or more races (Table 3.10.1-3). Figure 3.10.1-2 depicts the total minority population percentage by CBG within 4.0 mi.(6.4 km) of the HCS.

As shown in Table 3.10.1-3, one CBG within the 4 mi. (6.4 km) radius surrounding the HCS, Census Tract 201, CBG 2, has a combined minority population share that exceeds that of the county by more than 20 percentage points; 37.0 percent of this CBGs population belongs to one or more minority population groups. Additional detail regarding specific minority groups within this CBG are provided in Table 3.10.1-3. As depicted in Figure 3.10.1-2, Census Tract 201, CBG 2 is located east-northeast of the HCS in Anderson County. Only the westernmost portion of the CBG is located within the 4 mi. (6.4 km) radius of the HCS; residential development in this area is sparse and consists of single-family homes on relatively large lots. The majority of the population resides in the more densely developed eastern portion of the CBG, closer to Oak Ridges city center, in a mixture of single-family and multifamily units (Anderson County, 2022). No churches, institutions, or businesses were identified within this CBG that predominantly serve minority communities. Although not all the residents of Census Tract 201, CBG 2 are of a minority population group, and not all minority residents in the study area live in this CBG, special attention to this community is warranted in the environmental justice analysis (Section 4.11, Environmental Justice) to determine if disproportionately high and adverse impacts occur to the minority population near the site.

3.10.1.2.2 Population with Income Below Poverty Level NUREG-1748 defines low-income populations as those being below the poverty level defined by the USCB. Low-income status was determined for populations in each of the CBGs within a 4 mi. (6.4 km) radius of the center of the HCS, as well as for populations within each of the five counties comprising the ROI and the State of Tennessee, based on 2019 income data (USCB, 2019). Low-income statistics for the ROI are reported in Table 3.10.1-4.

The percentage of population living in poverty within the ROI (14.7 percent) in 2019 is slightly lower than for the State of Tennessee (15.2 percent). Persons below the poverty level in the CBGs that fall within 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) of the HCS, excluding the CBGs with no resident population, range from 0 percent to 28.7 percent (Table 3.10.1-4). Figure 3.10.1-3 depicts the percentage of the population below the poverty level, by CBG within 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) of the September 2022 3-242 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment HCS. Although the CBG that encompasses the HCS has no resident population, only 1.5 percent of the population in the CBG located adjacent to the HCS to the north (Census Tract 301, CBG 2) had an income below the poverty level. As none of the CBGs within 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) of the HCS have low-income populations that exceed their respective county or State figure by 20 percentage points or more, no minority populations were identified that would require consideration of environmental justice in greater detail in Section 4.11, Environmental Justice.

Population Density Population density for each of the ROI counties is provided in Table 3.10.1-5. Population density varies widely among the five counties that make up the ROI. In 2020, Morgan County had the lowest population density, with 40 people/sq. mi., compared to Knox County, which was much more densely populated at 911 people/sq. mi. Figure 3.10.1-4 depicts the population density by CBG within the ROI in the year 2020. Within the ROI, some CBGs are relatively densely populated, and other areas are sparsely populated. For example, in Knox County, some CBGs have population densities above 5,000 people/sq. mi, whereas the rural areas of all five counties have areas with fewer than 100 people/sq. mi. In 2020, the CBG within which the HCS is located had no resident population, while the CBG located north adjacent to the HCS (Census Tract 301, CBG 2) had a population density of 316 residents/sq. mi.

Population projections presented in Table 3.10.1-5 indicate that the ROI population will grow during the period between 2020 and 2065; consequently, population density will also increase.

By 2065, Knox Countys population density is projected to approach 1,232 people/sq. mi. Other ROI counties will continue to be much less densely populated but will experience incremental increases in population density, with the exception of Roane County, where the population is projected to decrease slightly resulting in a density of 125 people/sq. mi by 2065 (Table 3.10.1-5).

3.10.2 ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS Employment and Occupational Patterns Labor force and employment characteristics of the ROI are shown in Table 3.10.2-1. In 2019, the unemployment rate for the ROI was 4.7 percent, slightly lower than that of the State (5.3 percent). Unemployment trends in the ROI counties appear to closely reflect those of the State. As shown in Table 3.10.2-1, unemployment rates across all five counties of the ROI were higher in 2010 than in 2019; rates in 2000 were slightly lower but generally consistent with 2019 unemployment levels.

Employment by industry within the ROI is shown in Table 3.10.2-2. The regional distribution of employment by industry in the five counties surrounding the HCS is generally similar to the distribution of employment in the State as a whole but exhibits several key differences. Across all five counties, a smaller portion of workers are employed in manufacturing and transportation and warehousing activities than the rest of Tennessee. Conversely, a greater portion of workers are employed in the professional, scientific, management, and administrative and waste management sector, as well as in educational services, healthcare and social assistance, and retail trade. These industries represent many of the ROIs largest employers listed in Table 3.10.2-3.

September 2022 3-243 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Income Table 3.10.2-4 reports 2019 per-capita income and median household income for each county within the ROI and State of Tennessee. Per-capita income in the ROI ranged from a low of

$20,204 in Morgan County to a high of $33,229 in Knox County. During that same period, the per-capita income in Tennessee as a whole was $29,859, which was in the general range of incomes in Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Roane Counties. However, per-capita income in Morgan County was only approximately 68 percent of the State per-capita income. Similar patterns were identified when using the median household income measure (Table 3.10.2-4). In Morgan County, the median household income is approximately 78 percent of the value for Tennessee as a whole ($53,320), whereas median household incomes in Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Roane Counties are within the general range of the State.

Tax Structure The State and local tax structure for all of Tennessee, unless specifically noted at the city or county level, is found in Title 67 of the Tennessee Code Annotated (TCA) and its revisions.

Income taxes, privilege and excise taxes, sales and use taxes, and property taxes contribute to the total funds for the State of Tennessee. The State has no personal income tax on salaries and wages.

Corporate income taxes are levied pursuant to guidelines contained in Title 67 of the TCA.

These include franchise taxes, based on the greater of net worth or the book value of real or tangible personal property owned or used in Tennessee, and excise taxes, based on net earnings or income for the tax year. Businesses in Anderson, Knox, Loudon, Morgan, and Roane counties have tax incentives available to them, including capital-investment tax credits.

The appraised value of property is determined by the county assessor and constitutes the base for all property taxes, including those of cities and towns on property located within the municipality. Properties in Tennessee are reappraised on either a 4-year, 5-year, or 6-year cycle. Table 3.10.2-5 shows tax revenue by category for the five counties within the ROI for fiscal year 2021. The percentage of property tax assessments by category for the State of Tennessee are shown in Table 3.10.2-6. Property tax rates vary by county and local municipality. The property tax rates for the City of Oak Ridge and Roane County, where the HCS is located, are shown in Table 3.10.2-7 for tax years 2010 through 2020.

3.10.3 COMMUNITY CHARACTERISTICS Housing Table 3.10.3-1 shows the total number of housing units (298,372) in the ROI in 2019.

Approximately 70 percent of the housing units are located in Knox County. There are 31,317 vacant housing units within the ROI, of which 5,640 units are for rent and 3,257 are for sale.

Most of the vacant units in the ROI were classified as other vacant, followed by vacant units that were available for rent and those that were for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use.

Table 3.10.3-2 shows estimated housing values for owner-occupied units in the ROI. Median home value by county for the ROI ranged from $102,000 to $222,500. Approximately 21 percent of owner-occupied units within the ROI fall below a value of $100,000, while approximately 37 percent of housing units within the ROI are within the $100,000 and $200,000 range, and September 2022 3-244 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment another 21 percent are within the $200,000 to $300,000 range. The remaining 21 percent of owner-occupied housing units within the ROI are valued above $300,000.

Education A total of 210 public and private elementary, middle, and high schools are located in the ROI, the majority of which are located in Knox County. A summary of these school statistics, including student enrollment and student-to-teacher ratios for the 2017-2018 private school year and 2020-2021 public school year, are provided in Table 3.10.3-3. In addition to these primary and secondary schools, several college campuses are located within the ROI, including the University of TennesseeKnoxville, Roane State Community College, Pellissippi State Community College, Johnson University, Tusculum College, South College, Crown College, Knoxville College, and the Tennessee College of Applied Technology. An estimate of the number of individuals within the ROI enrolled in school, by grade level and post-secondary schooling, is shown in Table 3.10.3-4. As shown in this table, during 2019, schools in the ROI served more than 157,800 students.

None of the schools within the ROI are located within the area surrounding the HCS. The closest school to the HCS is Dyllis Springs Elementary School, located 2.49 miles (4.02 km) west of the site, as depicted on Figure 3.10.3-1.

In general, the population of the ROI has more advanced education than the general population in the State (Table 3.10.3-5). In 2019, approximately 27 percent of individuals 25 years and over living in Tennessee had received a bachelors or more advanced degree, whereas 32 percent of individuals within the ROI had received similar degrees.

Health Care Services As shown in Table 3.10.3-6, health care in the ROI is provided by 12 hospitals as well as various other licensed health care facilities. One hospital (Methodist Medical Center) is located in Oak Ridge Tennessee. The Methodist Medical Center is a 301-bed regional medical center offering a variety of clinical services, including emergency trauma care; a birthing center; specialized surgery; and cardiac, cancer, and rehabilitation services (Covenant Health, 2022). In addition to hospitals and other medical facilities, the five counties within the ROI have numerous facilities to serve seniors, including nursing homes, homes for the aged, and assisted care living facilities (Table 3.10.3-6).

To further convey a sense of the availability of healthcare resources to residents of the study area, Table 3.10.3-7 provides a summary of the number of residents per healthcare professional in each county. These data were collected by the Tennessee Department of Health (2022b).

Knox County has more healthcare personnel relative to its population than do the other counties; medical doctors, registered nurses, and dentists in Knox County all have fewer persons per licensed professional than their counterparts in Anderson, Loudon, Morgan, and Roane counties.

Public Safety The City of Oak Ridge Fire Department provides fire and emergency response services to the HCS. The City of Oak Ridge Fire Department employs 74 firefighters at four fire stations. The closest of these is Station 4, located 2.18 miles (3.50 km) southwest of the HCS, on Enrichment Drive north of Tennessee State Route 58 (Oak Ridge Turnpike) in the East Tennessee September 2022 3-245 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Technology Park (ETTP) (Figure 3.10.3-1). The Oak Ridge Fire Department owns the following equipment (City of Oak Ridge, 2020):

• Eight fire trucks (pumpers and ladder).

• Four radio-equipped rescue vehicles.

• Twelve radio-equipped support/command vehicles.

• A HazMat truck.

• Two ambulances.

The Oak Ridge Police Department is the principal law enforcement agency servicing the HCS.

In 2020, the Oak Ridge Police Department employed approximately 85 staff, including 41 patrol officers (City of Oak Ridge, 2020). All five ROI counties also have Sherriffs Departments that could provide additional resources if needed. As of 2019, 618 full-time law enforcement officers were employed in the ROI: 64 in Anderson County, 430 in Knox County, 57 in Loudon County, 25 in Morgan County, and 42 in Roane County (FBI, 2019).

Transportation Services The ROI and the areas encompassing the HCS are served by a transportation network of Federal and State highways, as well as freight rail lines; navigable waterways (the Clinch and Tennessee Rivers); and a reliever airport, Knoxville Downtown Island Airport. For greater detail on transportation services and infrastructure near the HCS, see Section 3.2, Transportation.

Water and Wastewater The HCS would be serviced by the City of Oak Ridge Public Works Department, which manages that citys water and wastewater treatment plants, water distribution system, and wastewater collection system (City of Oak Ridge, 2022a). The City of Oak Ridge Public Works Department obtains its water from the Melton Hill Reservoir, obtaining a maximum capacity of 9.9 million gallons per day (MGD). The average daily consumption is 7.7 MGD with an excess of 2.2 MGD (TVA, 2019). The City of Oak Ridge is planning a new membrane filtration water treatment plant south of Bethel Valley Road on the Clinch River, with a capacity to treat 16 MGD. Construction of the plant is expected to be complete in December of 2022 (Oak Ridge Today, 2021). Wastewater is treated by the City of Oak Ridge which has two wastewater systems. The main system treats 30 MGD and the other treats 0.6 MGD, which serves the Clinch River Industrial Park, East Tennessee Technology Park, Horizon Center and Rarity Ridge (City of Oak Ridge, 2022b).

September 2022 3-246 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.1-1 Population in the Region of Influence (2000-2020)

Percent Percent Percent Change Change Change Geography 2000 2010 2020 2000-2010 2010-2020 2000-2020 Roane County 51,910 54,181 53,404 4.4% -1.4% 2.9%

Anderson County 71,330 75,129 77,123 5.3% 2.7% 8.1%

Knox County 382,032 432,226 478,971 13.1% 10.8% 25.4%

Loudon County 39,086 48,556 54,886 24.2% 13.0% 40.4%

Morgan County 19,757 21,987 21,035 11.3% -4.3% 6.5%

ROI Total 564,115 632,079 685,419 12.0% 8.4% 21.5%

Tennessee 5,689,283 6,346,105 6,910,840 11.5% 8.9% 21.5%

Reference:

USCB, 2000; USCB, 2010; USCB, 2020 September 2022 3-247 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.1-2 Population Projections for Region of Influence through 2065 Percent Percent Percent Change Change Change Geography 2020 2025 2045 2065 2020-2045 2045-2065 2020-2065 Roane County 53,404 53,386 51,318 49,249 -3.9% -4.0% -7.8%

Anderson County 77,123 78,500 81,560 84,524 5.8% 3.6% 9.6%

Knox County 478,971 494,503 568,606 647,574 18.7% 13.9% 35.2%

Loudon County 54,886 57,606 67,203 78,518 22.4% 16.8% 43.1%

Morgan County 21,035 22,100 22,440 22,521 6.7% 0.4% 7.1%

ROI Total 685,419 706,095 791,127 882,387 15.4% 11.5% 28.7%

Tennessee 6,910,840 7,153,758 8,068,601 9,074,458 16.8% 12.5% 31.3%

Reference:

USCB, 2020; Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research, 2019 September 2022 3-248 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.1-3 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Minority Populations in Region of Influence (2020)

Not Hispanic or Latino American Native Indian Hawaiian Black or and and Other Some African Alaska Pacific Other Two or Combined Total White American Native Asian Islander Race More Hispanic Minority Geography Population Alone Alone Alone Alone Alone Alone Races or Latino Population Roane County 53,404 90.1% 2.4% 0.3% 0.6% 0.0% 0.3% 4.3% 1.9% 9.9%

Census Tract 301, 1,606 84.7% 2.8% 0.1% 2.1% 0.4% 0.9% 5.6% 3.5% 15.3%

Block Group 1 Census Tract 301, 1,781 83.9% 5.7% 0.2% 1.7% 0.1% 0.2% 4.9% 3.3% 16.1%

Block Group 2 (a)

Census Tract 302.06, 1,313 92.2% 0.2% 0.5% 1.0% 0.0% 0.2% 4.0% 1.8% 7.8%

Block Group 1 Census Tract 302.06, 905 89.3% 1.1% 0.8% 0.8% 0.0% 0.8% 5.6% 1.7% 10.7%

Block Group 2 Census Tract 302.06, 1,743 90.2% 2.0% 0.2% 1.3% 0.0% 0.2% 4.2% 1.9% 9.8%

Block Group 3 Census Tract 309, 1,325 90.7% 3.2% 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% 3.8% 1.7% 9.3%

Block Group 1 Census Tract 309, 4,413 93.8% 0.7% 0.3% 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% 3.7% 0.8% 6.2%

Block Group 2 Census Tract 9801, 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Block Group 1 (a)(b)

Morgan County 21,035 90.5% 4.6% 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% 0.3% 2.7% 1.4% 9.5%

Census Tract 1104, 1,021 97.5% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.3% 0.2% 2.5%

Block Group 3 September 2022 3-249 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.1-3 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Minority Populations in Region of Influence (2020)

Not Hispanic or Latino Native American Hawaiian Black or Indian and and Other Some African Alaska Pacific Other Two or Combined Total White American Native Asian Islander Race More Hispanic Minority Geography Population Alone Alone Alone Alone Alone Alone Races or Latino Population Anderson County 77,123 85.6% 3.7% 0.3% 1.3% 0.1% 0.4% 5.1% 3.7% 14.4%

Census Tract 201, 1,628 63.0% 22.5% 0.6% 2.0% 0.4% 0.4% 5.8% 5.3% 37.0%

Block Group 2 Census Tract 206, 1,493 85.0% 3.8% 0.1% 1.9% 0.1% 0.0% 4.3% 4.8% 15.0%

Block Group 1 Census Tract 210.02, 1,425 90.8% 2.5% 0.4% 0.2% 0.0% 0.4% 3.9% 1.8% 9.2%

Block Group 2 Census Tract 9801, 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Block Group 1 (b)

Knox County 478,971 78.0% 8.3% 0.2% 2.5% 0.1% 0.4% 4.5% 6.0% 22.0%

Loudon County 54,886 84.6% 1.1% 0.2% 0.8% 0.0% 0.3% 3.3% 9.8% 15.4%

ROI Total 685,419 80.7% 6.6% 0.2% 2.0% 0.1% 0.4% 4.4% 5.6% 19.3%

Tennessee 6,910,840 70.9% 15.7% 0.2% 1.9% 0.1% 0.3% 3.9% 6.9% 29.1%

Reference:

USCB, 2020 Notes:

a) Census block groups (CBGs) encompassing and/or immediately adjacent to HCS.

b) CBGs with no resident population.

September 2022 3-250 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.10.1-4 Populations Below Poverty Level in Region of Influence (2019)

Population Population with Income Percent of for Whom in 2019 Population Poverty below with 2019 Status is Poverty Income below Geography Determined(a) Level Poverty Level Roane County 52,262 7,237 13.8%

Census Tract 301, Block Group 1 1,544 11 0.7%

Census Tract 301, Block Group 2 (b) 1,715 26 1.5%

Census Tract 302.01, Block Group 1 1,431 356 24.9%

Census Tract 302.01, Block Group 4 892 0 0.0%

Census Tract 302.01, Block Group 5 1,192 28 2.3%

Census Tract 309, Block Group 1 2,359 676 28.7%

Census Tract 309, Block Group 2 870 15 1.7%

Census Tract 309, Block Group 3 710 96 13.5%

Census Tract 309, Block Group 4 1,124 160 14.2%

Census Tract 9801, Block Group 1 (b)(c) 0 0 -

Morgan County 18,539 4,232 22.8%

Census Tract 1104, Block Group 3 822 73 8.9%

Anderson County 74,552 12,481 16.7%

Census Tract 201, Block Group 2 1,518 181 11.9%

Census Tract 206, Block Group 1 1,453 118 8.1%

Census Tract 210, Block Group 4 1,310 263 20.1%

Census Tract 9801, Block Group 1 (c) 0 0 -

Knox County 450,053 65,448 14.5%

Loudon County 51,857 5,845 11.3%

ROI Total 647,263 95,243 14.7%

Tennessee 6,542,792 996,930 15.2%

Reference:

USCB, 2019 Notes:

a) USCB does not determine poverty status for certain populations, such as people living in college dormitories and in institutional or military group quarters. Thus, the population for whom poverty status is determined is slightly smaller than the overall population.

b) CBGs encompassing and/or immediately adjacent to HCS.

c) CBGs with no resident population.

September 2022 3-251 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.10.1-5 Population Density in Region of Influence Projected Population Population Total 2020 Total 2065 Land Area per sq. mi. per sq. mi.

Geography Population Population (sq. mi.) (2020) (2065)

Roane County 53,404 49,249 394.9 135.2 124.7 Anderson County 77,123 84,524 344.8 223.7 245.2 Knox County 478,971 647,574 525.9 910.8 1,231.5 Loudon County 54,886 78,518 247.3 221.9 317.5 Morgan County 21,035 22,521 522.4 40.3 43.1 ROI Total 685,419 882,387 2,035.3 336.8 433.5

Reference:

USCB, 2020; Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research, 2019 September 2022 3-252 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.2-1 Labor Force and Employment Characteristics of the Region of Influence 2019 2010 2000 Labor Force Employed Percent Percent Percent Total Labor in Armed Civilian Unemployed Unemployed Unemployed Unemployed Geography Force Services Labor Force Labor Force Labor Force Labor Force Labor Force Anderson County 34,730 9 32,611 2,110 6.1% 7.5% 5.2%

Knox County 242,927 510 232,086 10,331 4.3% 5.6% 4.4%

Loudon County 22,498 49 21,396 1,053 4.7% 9.2% 3.6%

Morgan County 7,891 3 7,370 518 6.6% 8.3% 7.0%

Roane County 23,646 0 22,195 1,451 6.1% 8.4% 5.1%

ROI Total 331,692 571 315,658 15,463 4.7% 6.4% 4.6%

Tennessee 3,301,501 18,830 3,109,872 172,799 5.3% 8.6% 5.0%

Reference:

USCB, 2019; USCB, 2010; USCB, 2000 September 2022 3-253 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.2-2 Employment by Industry in Region of Influence (2019)

Anderson County Knox County Loudon County Morgan County Roane County ROI TN Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Industry Agriculture, forestry, fishing and hunting, 130 0.4% 1,198 0.5% 480 2.2% 183 2.5% 160 0.7% 1,488 0.7% 30,413 1.0%

and mining Construction 2,226 6.8% 13,540 5.8% 1,986 9.3% 746 10.1% 1,472 6.6% 17,238 6.3% 201,677 6.5%

Manufacturing 3,806 11.7% 18,097 7.8% 3,775 17.6% 936 12.7% 2,414 10.9% 24,317 9.2% 405,457 13.0%

Wholesale trade 499 1.5% 7,055 3.0% 444 2.1% 54 0.7% 519 2.3% 8,073 2.7% 79,884 2.6%

Retail trade 3,457 10.6% 31,843 13.7% 2,602 12.2% 754 10.2% 2,755 12.4% 38,055 13.1% 365,401 11.7%

Transportation and warehousing, and 1,659 5.1% 11,141 4.8% 1,430 6.7% 381 5.2% 1,382 6.2% 14,182 5.1% 205,141 6.6%

utilities Information 297 0.9% 5,098 2.2% 197 0.9% 41 0.6% 259 1.2% 5,654 1.9% 51,593 1.7%

Finance and insurance, and real estate and 1,536 4.7% 14,334 6.2% 939 4.4% 149 2.0% 1,009 4.5% 16,879 5.7% 180,763 5.8%

rental and leasing Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and 5,472 16.8% 30,115 13.0% 2,409 11.3% 830 11.3% 3,424 15.4% 39,011 13.4% 308,484 9.9%

waste management services Educational services, and health care and 7,092 21.7% 58,179 25.1% 3,792 17.7% 1,508 20.5% 4,667 21.0% 69,938 24.8% 698,558 22.5%

social assistance Arts, entertainment, and recreation, and 2,732 8.4% 23,894 10.3% 1,721 8.0% 524 7.1% 1,869 8.4% 28,495 9.7% 304,009 9.8%

accommodation and food services Other services, except 1,882 5.8% 9,696 4.2% 1,057 4.9% 408 5.5% 1,039 4.7% 12,617 4.5% 150,297 4.8%

public administration Public administration 1,823 5.6% 7,896 3.4% 564 2.6% 856 11.6% 1,226 5.5% 10,945 3.9% 128,195 4.1%

Total 32,611 100.0% 232,086 100.0% 21,396 100.0% 7,370 100.0% 22,195 100.0% 315,658 100.0% 3,109,872 100.0%

Reference:

USCB, 2019 September 2022 3-254 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.10.2-3 Largest Employers in the Region of Influence (2021)

Total Company County Employees Description Refurbishing nuclear weapon Y-12 National Security Complex Roane 11,627 components and storage and recycling of nuclear material Knox County Schools Knox 9,515 Public education system The University of TennesseeKnoxville Knox 8,959 State university Oak Ridge National Laboratory Roane 5,452 Research and development University of Tennessee Medical Center Knox 5,137 Health care system (UHS)

State of TennesseeRegional Offices Knox 3,307 State administrative offices Knox County Government Knox 2,677 County government City of Knoxville Knox 2,210 Municipal government Roane County Schools Roane 1,930 Public education system Engineering, environmental UCOR Roane 1,842 management, and cleanup East Tennessee Children's Hospital Knox 1,819 Area children's hospital Copper Cellar Corp. Knox 1,576 Full-service restaurants Drugstores and pharmaceutical CVS Caremark Corp. Knox 1,534 distribution Brothers Management Knox 1,500 McDonald's franchise United Parcel Service (UPS) Knox 1,450 Shipping and delivery operation Oak Ridge City Schools Anderson 1,323 Local public education system Regional power authority and Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Knox 1,232 development agency Knoxville Utilities Board (KUB) Knox 1,088 Local utilities provider U.S. Postal Service Knox 1,060 Mail service Anderson County Schools Anderson 1,050 Public education system Pellissippi State Technical Community Two-year technical community Knox 1,043 College college Cable networksHGTV, Food Discovery Inc. Knox 1,035 Network, Do-It-Yourself, Fine Living, and GAC University consortium, partnerships between scientific Oak Ridge Associated Universities Anderson 1,000 research, government, and industry

Reference:

East Tennessee Economic Development Agency, 2022 September 2022 3-255 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.10.2-4 Income Data for Counties within Region of Influence (2019)

Anderson Knox Loudon Morgan Roane County County County County County Tennessee Per Capita

$ 28,455 $ 33,229 $ 31,478 $ 20,204 $ 30,209 $ 29,859 Income Percent of State Per Capita 95.3% 111.3% 105.4% 67.7% 101.2% -

Income Median Household $ 50,392 $ 57,470 $ 58,065 $ 41,333 $ 53,367 $ 53,320 Income Percent of State Median 94.5% 107.8% 108.9% 77.5% 100.1% -

Household Income

Reference:

USCB, 2019 September 2022 3-256 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.10.2-5 County Tax Revenue by Category for Fiscal Year 2021(a)

Category of Anderson Knox Loudon Morgan Roane Tax County County County County County Property $20,545,803 $ 186,269,007 $18,394,113 $6,944,680 $19,193,515 Sales $3,187,447 $ 20,394,798 $2,055,738 N/A $ 1,687,395 Lodging $423,965 $ 7,404,768 $514,708 N/A N/A Business $1,363,386 $ 11,541,602 $767,621 N/A $ 849,951 Additional Local

$ 658,056 $ 17,009,078 $2,011,584 $1,906,705 $ 2,394,125 Taxes Total $ 26,478,657 $ 242,619,253 $23,743,764 $8,851,385 $24,115,986

Reference:

Anderson County, 2021; Knox County, 2021; Loudon County, 2021; Morgan County, 2021; Roane County, 2021 Note:

a) Fiscal Year 2021 extends from July 1, 2020, through June 30, 2021.

Abbreviation:

N/A = not available September 2022 3-257 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.10.2-6 Tennessee Property Tax Classes Description Assessment Percent (%)

Residential Property 25 Farm Property 25 Commercial and Industrial Property 40 Public Utility Property 55 Business Personal Property 30

Reference:

Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury, 2022a September 2022 3-258 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.10.2-7 City of Oak Ridge and Anderson County Property Tax Rates over the Last Ten Tax Years (in $ per $100 assessed value)

City of Oak Ridge Roane County Tax Year Tax Rate Tax Rate Total 2010 2.39 2.19 4.581 2011 2.39 2.18 4.57 2012 2.39 2.18 4.57 2013 2.39 2.18 4.57 2014 2.39 2.18 4.57 2015 2.52 2.575 5.095 2016 2.52 2.575 5.095 2017 2.52 2.575 5.095 2018 2.54 2.575 5.115 2019 2.56 2.685 5.245 2020 2.314 2.471 4.785 2021 2.314 2.47 4.784

Reference:

Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury, 2022b September 2022 3-259 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.3-1 Housing Characteristics in Region of Influence (2019)

Anderson Knox Loudon Morgan Roane County County County County County ROI Total Housing Units 34,971 205,620 23,083 9,041 25,657 298,372 Units in Structure 1-unit, detached 23,961 136,591 18,110 6,249 18,271 203,182 1-unit, attached 893 11,585 934 30 414 13,856 2 units 765 3,524 204 55 613 5,161 3 or 4 units 1,529 6,350 245 32 629 8,785 5 to 9 units 1,207 10,279 500 73 421 12,480 10 to 19 units 1,071 13,655 366 18 169 15,279 20 or more units 1,423 14,687 506 9 596 17,221 Mobile home 4,122 8,809 2,157 2,575 4,512 22,175 Boat, RV, van, etc. 0 140 61 0 32 233 Occupancy Percent Occupied 87.3% 91.1% 89.5% 84.3% 81.5% 89.5%

Percent Vacant 12.7% 8.9% 10.5% 15.7% 18.5% 10.5%

Occupied Housing Units 30,541 187,319 20,669 7,625 20,901 267,055 Percent Owner Occupied 67.9% 64.3% 77.8% 81.6% 77.2% 67.2%

Percent Renter Occupied 32.1% 35.7% 22.2% 18.4% 22.8% 32.8%

Vacant Housing Units 4,430 18,301 2,414 1,416 4,756 31,317 For rent 591 4,221 233 116 479 5,640 Rented, not occupied 132 1,116 21 6 134 1,409 For sale only 396 1,973 326 57 505 3,257 Sold, not occupied 172 832 11 31 81 1,127 For seasonal, recreational, or 429 1,785 610 167 1,062 4,053 occasional use For migrant workers 0 48 5 0 77 130 Other vacant 2,710 8,326 1,208 1,039 2,418 15,701

Reference:

USCB, 2019 September 2022 3-260 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.3-2 Value of All Owner-Occupied Housing Units in Region of Influence (2019)

Number of Housing Units Anderson Knox Loudon Morgan Roane Value County County County County County ROI Less than $50,000 2,106 5,203 692 1,064 1,596 10,661

$50,000 to $99,999 4,262 14,686 2,257 1,988 3,594 26,787

$100,000 to $149,999 4,296 22,599 2,152 1,194 2,857 33,098

$150,000 to $199,999 3,650 24,905 2,062 788 2,800 34,205

$200,000 to $299,999 3,836 26,583 3,502 779 2,340 37,040

$300,000 to $499,999 1,910 17,994 3,321 297 1,826 25,348

$500,000 to $999,999 632 6,934 1,545 82 917 10,110

$1,000,000 or more 54 1,486 545 31 213 2,329 Total Owner-Occupied Units 20,746 120,390 16,076 6,223 16,143 179,578 Median Value Median value for all Owner-

$146,200 $183,200 $222,500 $102,000 $150,300 --

Occupied Housing Units

Reference:

USCB, 2019 September 2022 3-261 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.3-3 Educational Facilities in the Region of Influence (2017-2018 and 2021-2022 School Years)

Total Student to Number of Student Teachers Teacher Geography Schools Elementary Middle Secondary Enrollment (FTEs) (a) Ratio Anderson County Anderson County School District 18 10 4 4 6,222 509.3 12.2 Oak Ridge School District 9 5 2 1 4,643 351.3 13.2 Clinton City Schools 3 3 690 67 10.3 Private Schools 4 303 18.7 16.2 Knox County Knox County School District 91 54 17 20 59,169 3,931.40 15.1 Tennessee School for the Deaf 3 2 1 140 40.7 3.4 Private Schools 38 8,153 669.4 12.2 Loudon County Loudon County School District 9 4 3 2 4,683 393.2 11.9 Private Schools 2 131 15 8.7 Morgan County Morgan County School District 8 1 2 5 2,795 195.6 14.3 Private Schools 2 19 2.6 7.3 Roane County Roane County School District 18 6 6 6 6,341 435.2 14.6 Private Schools 5 663 283.7 2.3 ROI Totals 210 93,952 6,913 13.6

Reference:

National Center for Education Statistics, 2021 Note:

a) FTE = full-time equivalent employee (part-time workers are reported as a fraction of one full-time worker).

September 2022 3-262 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.3-4 Enrollment by Level of School in Region of Influence (2019)

Anderson Knox Loudon Morgan Roane County County County County County ROI Nursery school, preschool 810 6,928 626 170 443 8,977 Kindergarten 867 5,692 323 146 486 7,514 Grade 1 to grade 4 3,650 21,817 2,326 756 2,093 30,642 Grade 5 to grade 8 3,708 21,349 2,443 1,028 2,463 30,991 Grade 9 to grade 12 3,852 21,494 2,388 1,256 2,549 31,539 College, undergraduate years 2,585 32,555 1,359 469 1,834 38,802 Graduate or professional school 450 8,193 265 52 451 9,411 Total 15,922 118,028 9,730 3,877 10,319 157,876

Reference:

USCB, 2019 September 2022 3-263 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.3-5 Level of Educational Attainment in Region of Influence for Persons 25 and Older (2019)

Anderson County Knox County Loudon County Morgan County Roane County ROI Tennessee

% of  % of  % of  % of  % of  % of  % of Level of Schooling Number Total Number Total Number Total Number Total Number Total Number Total Number Total High school graduate 17,839 32.9% 77,939 25.3% 12,394 32.4% 7,546 48.5% 14,192 36.3% 129,910 28.5% 1,472,003 32.1%

(includes equivalency)

Some college, less 3,995 7.4% 18,348 6.0% 2,353 6.1% 1,089 7.0% 3,399 8.7% 29,184 6.4% 293,021 6.4%

than 1 year Some college, 1 or 8,263 15.2% 44,769 14.5% 5,323 13.9% 1,425 9.2% 5,858 15.0% 65,638 14.4% 658,734 14.4%

more years, no degree Associate's degree 4,470 8.2% 25,676 8.3% 2,805 7.3% 974 6.3% 3,617 9.2% 37,542 8.2% 334,362 7.3%

Bachelor's degree 6,864 12.6% 69,085 22.4% 6,406 16.7% 910 5.8% 4,662 11.9% 87,927 19.3% 789,448 17.2%

Master's degree 3,813 7.0% 31,029 10.1% 2,770 7.2% 480 3.1% 2,381 6.1% 40,473 8.9% 327,379 7.1%

Professional school 760 1.4% 8,682 2.8% 436 1.1% 37 0.2% 358 0.9% 10,273 2.3% 79,363 1.7%

degree Doctorate degree 1,200 2.2% 7,290 2.4% 514 1.3% 35 0.2% 334 0.9% 9,373 2.1% 57,955 1.3%

Total (Persons 25 54,265 100% 308,366 100% 38,291 100% 15,570 100% 39,144 100% 455,636 100% 4,012,265 100%

and Older)

Reference:

USCB, 2019 September 2022 3-264 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Table 3.10.3-6 Licensed Health Care Facilities in Region of Influence Assisted Care Living Hospitals Nursing Homes Homes for the Aged Facilities Number of Number of Number of Number of Geography Facilities Total Beds Facilities Total Beds Facilities Total Beds Facilities Total Beds Anderson 1 301 5 580 0 0 7 479 County Knox County 9 2,642 16 1,960 3 200 31 2,327 Loudon County 1 50 1 180 1 49 6 357 Morgan County 0 0 1 124 0 0 0 0 Roane County 1 54 2 287 1 25 3 200 ROI Total 12 3,029 25 3,131 5 274 47 3,363

Reference:

Tennessee Department of Health, 2022a September 2022 3-265 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.10.3-7 Number of Residents per Type of Licensed Health Care Professional in the Region of Influence Residents per Residents per Registered Residents per Geography Medical Doctor Nurse Dentist Anderson County 795 59 1,928 Knox County 249 45 1,530 Loudon County 930 85 2,033 Morgan County 7,002 134 7,012 Roane County 1,526 52 4,450

Reference:

Tennessee Department of Health, 2022b; USCB, 2020 September 2022 3-266 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.11 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH This section describes levels of background radiation, sources and levels of exposure to radioactive materials, major sources and levels of chemical exposure, occupational injury rates, and health effects studies completed in the region.

3.

11.1 BACKGROUND

RADIATION EXPOSURE The major sources and levels of background radiation exposure, both natural and man-made, are discussed in this section.

Based on the information contained in the following sections, there are no abnormal radiation hazards in the vicinity of the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) at the Horizon Center site (HCS). Table 3.11-1 summarizes the background radiation exposure in the vicinity of the TRISO-X FFF. As shown in Table 3.11-1, the background radiation exposure due to both natural and man-made sources is 9.1 millisievert per year (mSv/yr) (910 millirem [roentgen equivalent man] per year [mrem/yr]). Although this annual dose is higher than the national average for background radiation, 6.2 mSv/yr (620 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2021a), this annual dose is not an abnormal radiation hazard since the increase in dose (i.e., above average dose) is due to an above average terrestrial dose contribution that is still below the terrestrial dose contribution in several other States in the U.S. (Section 3.11.1.1.2).

Natural Background Sources The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) divides natural sources of radiation into three categories: cosmic, terrestrial, and internal. Cosmic radiation is the result of radiation received from extraterrestrial sources, such as the sun and other stars, that penetrate the Earths atmosphere. Terrestrial radiation is the result of a dose received from naturally occurring uranium, thorium, and radium found in soil and rock. Also, radon gas seeps through the ground and into the air where it is inhaled. This source represents the majority of the background radiation for an average member of the public. In addition, water contains small amounts of dissolved uranium and thorium, and all organic matter (both plant and animal) contains radioactive carbon and potassium; these materials are ingested with food and water. Lastly, internal radiation is the result of naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) and carbon-14 (C-14) in all humans. (NRC, 2021b)

Based on information in the following sections, the public in the TRISO-X FFF vicinity would receive an average natural background dose of 6.0 mSv/yr (598 mrem/yr; Table 3.11-1).

Although this annual dose is higher than the United States average natural background dose of 3.1 mSv/yr (310 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2021a), this annual dose is not an abnormal radiation hazard since the increase in dose (i.e., above average dose) is due to an above average terrestrial dose contribution that is still below the terrestrial dose contribution in several other States in the U.S. (Section 3.11.1.1.2).

3.11.1.1.1 Cosmic Radiation Cosmic radiation exposure depends on the site elevation. The approximate grade elevation of the HCS is 244 m (800 ft.; Section 3.6.1.5.4). This elevation is well within the national elevation average (Almanac, 2021). Therefore, it is appropriate to use the average annual dose due to cosmic radiation, 0.31 mSV/yr (31 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2021a).

September 2022 3-267 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.11.1.1.2 Terrestrial Radiation The State of Tennessee average annual dose for terrestrial radiation, which includes radon, is 5.36 mSv/yr (536 mrem/yr) and is applicable to the vicinity of the TRISO-X FFF (USEPA, 2005).

An annual dose for terrestrial radiation of 5.36 mSv/yr (536 mrem/yr) is higher than the national average of 2.48 mSv/yr (248 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2021a). However, an annual dose of 5.36 mSv/yr (536 mrem/yr) is below the terrestrial dose contribution in several other States in the U.S. and therefore, is not an abnormal radiation hazard.

3.11.1.1.3 Internal Radiation When comparing to the sources of radioactivity contained in the food and water consumed in major cities throughout the U.S., there are no abnormal sources of radioactivity contained in the food and water consumed in Oak Ridge, Tennessee based on publicly available USEPA data (USEPA, 2009). The average annual dose due to internal radiation, 0.31 mSv/yr (31 mrem/yr),

is applicable (NRC, 2021a).

Man-Made Background Sources Man-made sources of radiation consist of medical sources, consumer product sources, nuclear power sources, and occupational sources. Medical sources (e.g., diagnostic X-rays, whole body CT scans, and nuclear medicine procedures) account for a vast majority of the man-made radiation dose received annually. Consumer products (e.g., combustible fuels, televisions, smoke detectors, and tobacco) also contribute to man-made radiation dose. In addition, the nuclear fuel cycle (from uranium mining and milling to disposal of spent fuel), the transportation of radioactive materials, and the fallout from nuclear weapons testing and reactor accidents contribute to man-made radiation dose. Lastly, occupational sources (e.g., industrial radiography and university research laboratories) contribute to man-made radiation dose.

(NRC, 2021c)

Based on the information in the following sections, there are no abnormal sources of man-made background radiation located in the vicinity of the TRISO-X FFF; therefore, the public receives an average dose due to man-made radiation sources of 3.1 mSv/yr (310 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2021a).

3.11.1.2.1 Medical Sources Radiation dose from medical sources fluctuate based on the individual in question; therefore, a best estimate of the average annual dose to an individual due to medical sources, 2.98 mSv/yr (298 mrem/yr), is used (NRC, 2021a).

3.11.1.2.2 Consumer Product Sources Radiation dose from the use of consumer products fluctuate based on the lifestyle of the individual in question; therefore, a best estimate of the average annual dose to an individual due to consumer products, 0.12 mSv/yr (12 mrem/yr), is used (NRC, 2021a).

September 2022 3-268 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.11.1.2.3 Nuclear Power Sources

/There are no nuclear fuel cycle facilities in the immediate area; however, Highway 95 is less than 1 mi. (<1.6 km) southeast from the TRISO-X FFF, therefore there may be some radiation received from the transportation of radioactive material along that roadway (Google,2022).

In addition, the TRISO-X FFF is located near two nuclear power facilities: Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) (research facility that performs spent fuel examinations and is the location of a 85 Megawatts thermal [MWt] High Flux Isotope Reactor [HFIR]) and Tennessee Valley Authoritys (TVAs) Watts Bar Nuclear Plant (WBNP) (a two-unit pressurized water reactor

[PWR] with a total power generation of 6870 MWt) (DOE, 2020; ORNL, 2021; NRC, 2021d; NRC, 2021e). ORNL is located approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) southeast of the TRISO-X FFF and WBNP is located approximately 35 mi. (56 km) southwest of the TRISO-X FFF (Google, 2022). Based on the distance between ORNL/WBNP and the TRISO-X FFF, the dose to the public near the TRISO-X FFF is very low.

The NRC requires its licensees to limit the maximum radiation exposure to individual members of the public to 1 mSv/yr (100 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2021c). The dose to the general public from nuclear fuel cycle facilities, such as fuel-processing plants, nuclear power plants, and transportation routes, has been estimated at less than 0.01 mSv/yr (1 mrem/yr) (ASER, 2019).

3.11.1.2.4 Occupational Sources As described in Section 3.1.1, the HCS is located on undeveloped land. The current site is dedicated for industrial development.

Philotechnics, LLC, a radiological services and mixed radioactive waste brokerage provider, is located adjacent to the HCS. According to the company website (www.philotechnics.com),

Philotechnics performs waste characterizations, consulting, decontamination and decommissioning, license terminations, and disposals for their clients.

Those members of the public who are employed at Philotechnics may receive a higher dose due to occupational sources than that of the average citizen occupation dose, an average total dose of less than 0.01 mSv/yr (1 mrem/yr) (NRC, 2021a), but the workers do not receive a dose in excess of the occupational limit set in 10 CFR 20, 0.05 Sv/yr (5 rem/yr) (NRC, 2021c).

3.11.2 MAJOR SOURCES AND LEVELS OF CHEMICAL EXPOSURE The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) Envirofacts Multisystem Search Form allows users to search multiple environmental databases for facility information, including toxic chemical releases, water discharge permit compliance, hazardous waste handling processes in compliance with the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Superfund status, and air emission estimates. USEPAs Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO) tool within Envirofacts allows users to access integrated data from a variety of USEPA data systems. A search within a 1-mi radius of the Horizon Center Site (HCS) was conducted using the Envirofacts and ECHO database systems to identify potential sources of chemicals that may represent a potential for exposure to the public. This review identified seven (7) facilities included within the database. Site information and reporting information were reviewed for each facility; however, none of those facilities indicated data pertaining to chemical storage and no violations or enforcement actions were identified for those facilities (USEPA, 2022a). Also, a Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) Division of Air Pollution September 2022 3-269 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Control database search using TDEC Dataviewer indicated that one (1) of the seven (7) facilities has a current active operating air permit (US Department of Energy, Office of Science, UT Battelle, LLC) and the facility is in compliance with its permit (TDEC, 2022).

The Toxics Release Inventory was established under the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986. Six (6) facilities located within a 10-mi radius of the TRISO-X FFF reported releases in 2020, and five (5) of those reported releases to air in 2020 (USEPA, 2022b). Airborne releases from these facilities are a potential source of chemical exposure and are indicative of storage, use and/or production of the reported contaminants at the facility.

Emissions from these five (5) facilities with reported airborne releases for 2020, as reported in the Toxics Release Inventory database, are summarized on Table 3.11-2.

The Toxics Release Inventory data described herein indicate that reported air emissions in the general vicinity of the planned TRISO-X FFF include airborne inhalation toxicants and respiratory irritants that may contribute to regional health conditions (USEPA, 2022c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l; CalEPA, 2022a,b,c,d).

A search within a 10-mi radius of the HCS was conducted using the USEPA Cleanups in My Community database system to identify nearby National Priority List Superfund Sites. This review identified one (1) such site - the Oak Ridge Reservation. The Oak Ridge Reservation includes the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the NNSA Y-12 National Security Complex (USEPA, 2022n), the airborne emissions for which were detailed on Table 3.11-2 and described above.

3.11.3 OCCUPATIONAL INJURY RATES AND OCCUPATIONAL FATALITY RATES Occupational injury and fatality rates for occupations relevant to the construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF are discussed in this section.

Recent Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) data, which list incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry, were reviewed to estimate relevant occupational injury rates to provide a context for analysis of potential project impacts. The incidence rate is defined as the number of recordable cases per 100 full-time workers. For this estimate, the incidence rate of the total number of recordable cases was used.

Table 3.11-3 summarizes the average incidence rates of non-fatal occupational injuries in 2020 for selected industries. Across all private industries, the national rate of recordable cases was 2.7, whereas those for industries that may reflect operations (professional and business services, manufacturing, service providing) ranged from 1.1 to 3.1. Similarly, the rate of recordable cases was 2.7 for Tennessee, whereas those for industries that may reflect operations (professional and business services, manufacturing, service providing) in Tennessee ranged from 1.3 to 3.4. The 2020 incidence rates for non-fatal occupational injuries to construction workers were 2.5 nationally and 2.8 in Tennessee (BLS, 2022a, b).

Comparable BLS data exist for occupational fatal injury rates and are summarized in Table 3.11-3. Fatal injury rates are defined by the BLS as the number of fatal occupational injuries per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. The national average fatality rate across all private industry in 2020 was 3.7 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers and in Tennessee it was 5.1 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers. Fatality rates for construction workers exceeded the fatality rates across all private industry for both the national and Tennessee average in 2020.

The national average and Tennessee average fatality rates for construction workers in 2020 September 2022 3-270 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment was 10.2 and 18.3 fatalities per 100,000 full time equivalent workers, respectively. The 2020 national average fatality rates for manufacturing operations and service providing operations consisted of 2.3 and 3.8 fatalities per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers, respectively. Rates in Tennessee manufacturing operations and professional and business services consisted of 3.6 and 3.4 fatalities per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers, respectively (BLS, 2022c, d).

3.11.4

SUMMARY

OF HEALTH EFFECTS STUDIES RELATED TO CHEMICAL SOURCE EXPOSURES The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a division of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, maintains the Health Hazard Evaluation (HHE) Program to assist stakeholders in learning whether health hazards are present at their workplace and recommends ways to reduce hazards and prevent work-related illness. A search of the NIOSH HHE database identified nine (9) HHE Reports published for facilities in Eastern Tennessee, four (4) are located within a 30-mi. (48 km) of the HCS (NIOSH, 2022). Pertinent findings published in those HHE Reports are summarized, herein.

In 1980, NIOSH initiated an HHE at the Aluminum Company of America facility in Alcoa, Tennessee (NIOSH, 1984). The HHE evaluated possible exposures to asbestos at ingot preheating furnaces, chlorine gas at ingot remelt and casting areas, rolling oil at the hot mill area, rolling oil at the cold mill area, solvent vapors at the coil finish and paint lines, caustic mist at the caustic etch line and lead in the battery repair area. Based on the results of sample analyses, review of medical records and interviews with employees, NIOSH found that elevated concentrations of chlorine gas could be present in the workplace during emergency situations; asbestos present in furnaces and floor areas could become airborne and result in inhalation exposure; formaldehyde present in rolling oil bactericides should be monitored; perchloroethylene releases in the coil finishing area should be controlled and monitored; and solvent exposure during floor cleaning and roller cleaning should be controlled.

In 1989, NIOSH initiated an HHE at the Schlegel Tennessee, Inc. facility in Maryville, Tennessee (NIOSH, 1990). This evaluation focused on potential carbon disulfide exposure in the workplace. NIOSH concluded that many of the chemicals used in the production of weather stripping and their decomposition or reaction products could produce some of the medical issues experience by facility workers, but it was not possible to clearly attribute the medical complaints to workplace exposure to carbon disulfide.

In 1996, NIOSH completed an HHE at the Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., U.S.

Department of Energy Oak Ridge K-25 Site in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (NIOSH, 1996). The HHE evaluated potential sources of cyanide exposure in several operations, installations, substances and areas in the workplace. NIOSH determined that occupational exposure to hydrogen cyanide, cyanide salts, or other compounds that contain the cyanide- ion was not occurring and that the sampling completed did not support a relationship between the health problems reported by the employees and chronic, occupational cyanide intoxication.

In 1999, NIOSH initiated an HHE at the Boeing Commercial Airplane Group facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee (NIOSH, 2001). The HHE evaluated exposure to synthetic metal-working fluid and medical complaints including respiratory conditions, skin conditions as well as kidney, bladder and prostate problems. NIOSH determined that respiratory symptoms experienced by machine shop workers could be linked to reported respiratory and skin conditions.

September 2022 3-271 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.11-1 Summary of Background Radiation Exposure (mrem/yr) in Vicinity of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Source Cosmic Terrestrial Internal Medical Consumer Nuclear Occupational Product Power Natural 31 536 31 N/A N/A N/A N/A Man- N/A N/A N/A 298 12 <1 <1 Made Subtotal 598 312 Total 910 September 2022 3-272 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.11-2 Summary of Facilities within a 10-mi Radius of the Planned TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Reported Toxics Release Inventory Emissions to Air in 2020 TRI-Reporting Approximate Toxics Released to Air(b) Quantity Quantity Facility(a) Distance from Released Released Planned (total pounds) (total kg)

TRISO-X FFF (mi)

DOE Oak Ridge 2.7 Nitric Acid 108 49 National Nitrate Compounds Laboratory NNSA Y-12 6.3 Chromium 11,370 5,157 National Security Cobalt Complex Copper Oak Ridge Diisocyanates Lead and Lead Compounds Manganese Mercury Compounds Methanol Nickel Nitric Acid Diversified 6.9 Mercury and Mercury Compounds 1 0.5 Scientific Polychlorinated Biphenyls Services Inc.

(DSSI)

Advanced 8.3 Methanol 3,050 1,383 Measurement Nitric Acid Technology US TVA Kingston 9.4 Ammonia 145,212 65,867 Fossil Plant Barium Compounds Chromium Hydrochloric Acid Hydrogen Fluoride Manganese Methanol Nickel Sulfuric Acid Zinc Compounds Notes:

a) All listed facilities are located in Tennessee.

b) Ammonia, chromium, diisocyanates, hydrochloric acid, manganese, mercury and mercury compounds, methanol and polychlorinated biphenyls are inhalation toxicants with published USEPA inhalation reference concentrations and/or inhalation unit risk toxicity criteria (USEPA, 2022c,d,e,f,g,h,i,j,k,l). Hydrogen fluoride, lead and lead compounds, nickel and sulfuric acid are inhalation toxicants with published CalEPA chronic inhalation reference exposure levels and/or inhalation unit risk toxicity criteria (CalEPA, 2022a,b,c,d). Cobalt is an inhalation toxicant with a published USEPA Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Value inhalation reference concentration (USEPA, 2022m). Barium is an inhalation toxicant with a chronic inhalation reference concentration published in the USEPA Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables (USEPA, 1997). Copper and nitric acid are inhalation toxicants with OSHA Permissible Exposure Limits (OSHA, 2022). Zinc is not an inhalation toxicant, as USEPA and CalEPA have not published inhalation toxicity criteria for this metal.

September 2022 3-273 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Table 3.11-3 Summary of Occupational 2020 Incidence Rates for Selected Industries Nonfatal Occupational Injuries and Illnesses (Recordable Cases per 100 Full-Time Workers)

Industry Category National Average Tennessee Average All Private Industry 2.7 2.7 Construction 2.5 2.8 Manufacturing 3.1 3.4 Nuclear Electric Power Generation 0.3 --

Service Providing (all) 2.7 2.6 Professional and Business Services 1.1 1.3 Fatal Occupational Injuries (Number of Fatalities per 100,000 Full-Time Equivalent Workers)

Industry Category National Average Tennessee Average All Private Industry 3.7 5.1 Construction 10.2 18.3 Manufacturing 2.3 3.6 Nuclear Electric Power Generation -- --

Service Providing (all) 3.8 --

Professional and Business Services -- 3.4 Notes:

- - Category not reported.

Source: BLS, 2022a,b,c,d September 2022 3-274 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment 3.12 WASTE MANAGEMENT This section provides descriptions of nonradioactive, radioactive, mixed, and hazardous waste currently generated at the Horizon Center site (HCS), where the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) is located. Where applicable, the quantities, composition, and frequency of waste generation are described. Types of radioactive liquid, solid, and gaseous waste material currently generated at the HCS are described, along with a description of direct radiation sources collected on-site as solid waste prior to disposal. Disposal plans, waste minimization, and environmental impacts of the TRISO-X FFF are discussed in Section 4.13, Waste Management Impacts.

3.12.1 NONRADIOACTIVE WASTE Waste generators are regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), as implemented under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Title 40 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Parts 239 through 259 contain the regulations for non-hazardous solid waste. The regulations governing hazardous waste identification, classification, generation, management and disposal are found in Title 40 CFR Parts 260 through 273. (USEPA, 2021)

Sources of nonradioactive waste material, including hazardous waste, currently generated at the HCS are discussed in this section. Nonradioactive liquid and air effluents are discussed in Section 3.4, Water Resources, and Section 3.6, Meteorology, Climatology, and Air Quality.

Solid Waste As described in Section 3.1.1, the HCS is located on undeveloped land. The current greenfield site is dedicated for industrial development. Currently, no solid wastes are generated on the HCS.

Hazardous Waste The HCS is located on undeveloped land. Currently, no nonradioactive hazardous waste is generated at the HCS.

Disposal Activities Since there is no waste generated at the HCS, there are no disposal activities performed.

Planned waste disposal activities for the TRISO-X FFF are discussed in Section 4.13, Waste Management Impacts.

3.12.2 RADIOACTIVE AND MIXED WASTES Radioactive waste disposal is regulated by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements in 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart K. Currently, there are no sources of radioactive liquid, solid, or gaseous waste material stored at the HCS.

Gaseous Effluents The HCS is located on undeveloped land. There are no gaseous effluent releases at the HCS.

September 2022 3-275 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Liquid Effluents The HCS is located on undeveloped land. There are no liquid effluent releases at the HCS.

Solid Waste The HCS is located on undeveloped land. There is no solid waste generated or stored at the HCS.

Mixed Waste Mixed waste is waste that contains both radioactive and hazardous waste (40 CFR Part 266, Subpart N, Section 266.210). Mixed waste is not currently generated or stored at the HCS.

September 2022 3-276 Rev. 0

Environmental Report forWKH Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X )XHO)DEULFDWLRQFacility The Affected Environment Figure 3.1-1 Aerial View of the HCS Vicinity 6HSWHPEHU 2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for WKH Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X )XHO)DEULFDWLRQFacility The Affected Environment Figure 3.1-2 Aerial View of the HCS Region 6HSWHPEHU 2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for WKH Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X )XHO)DEULFDWLRQFacility The Affected Environment Figure 3.1-3 Regional Land Uses 6HSWHPEHU 2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.1-4 Major Population Centers near the HCS September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for WKH Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X )XHO)DEULFDWLRQFacility The Affected Environment Figure 3.1-5 Major Special Land Uses in the HCS Region 6HSWHPEHU 2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for WKH Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X )XHO)DEULFDWLRQFacility The Affected Environment Figure 3.1-6 Other Land Use Features near the HCS North Boundary Greenway McKamey-Carmichael Cemetery 6HSWHPEHU 2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for WKH Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X )XHO)DEULFDWLRQFacility The Affected Environment Figure 3.1-7 Prime Farmland in the Region 6HSWHPEHU 2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility The Affected Environment Figure 3.1-8 Map of HCS Vicinity Zoning HORIZON CENTER SITE 6HSWHPEHU 2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for WKHTRISO-X FXHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.2-1 Regional Highways and Interstates near the HCS 6HSWHPEHU2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for WKHTRISO-X )XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.2-2 Roads in the Vicinity of the HCS Secondary Access Primary Primary Access 6HSWHPEHU 2022 Rev. 

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.2-3 Average Annual Daily Traffic Count Locations Along Routes to the HCS September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.1-1 Physiographic Provinces within the Horizon Center Site Region September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.1-2 Valley and Ridge Province September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.1-3 Typical Stratigraphy Within the Valley and Ridge Province Near Oak Ridge Reservation and the Horizon Center Site Source Hatcher et al., 1992 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.3-1 Geologic Map in Vicinity of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.3-2 Physiography in the Vicinity of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.3-3 Locations of Selected Geotechnical Borings and Groundwater Wells Used to Characterize Subsurface Conditions at the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.3-4 Representative Fence Diagram Illustrating Geologic Cross Section of Horizon Center Site at A-A September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.3-5 Geologic Cross Section in the Vicinity of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.3.5-1 Seismic Events Recorded by USGS from 2000 to 2021 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRIS0-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.1-1 Typical Groundwater Flow Patterns within the Aquifers and Aquitards of the Valley and Ridge Province and at the Horizon Center Site Source: Lloyd and Lyke, 1995 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.1-2 Groundwater Wells Within a 3-mile Radius of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.1-3 Groundwater Monitoring Wells Within and Adjacent to the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.1-4 Hydrograph of Groundwater Potentiometric Elevations: September 2021-August 2022 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.1-5 Groundwater Contours - September 2021 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.1-6 Groundwater Contours - January 2022 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.2-1 Streams and Topography Within 3-Mile Radius of Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.2-2 Surface Drainage Near the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.2-3 Surface Water Quality Sampling Locations for the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.3-1 NFIP Flood Insurance Rate Map for the Horizon Center Site Source: FEMA 2007 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.3-2 East Fork Poplar Creek Flood Elevations Source TVA, 1991 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.3-3 East Fork Poplar Creek Floodplain Map Source: Leidos 2020 September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.4-1 NWI-Mapped Wetland Habitats within the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.4.4-2 Wetland and Stream Delineation of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRIS0-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.5-1 Land Cover, Vegetation Types, and Bat Habitat in the Study Area September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRIS0-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.5.2-1 Land Use/Land Cover within 5 Miles of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRIS0-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.5.4-1 Important Ecological Areas within 5 Miles of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev.0

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

$QQXDO:LQG5RVH2DN5LGJH7HQQHVVHH +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

6HDVRQDO:LQG5RVHV2DN5LGJH7HQQHVVHH +/- 

1257+ 1257+

 

 

 

 

 

(67 ($67  :(67 ($67 6287+ 6287+

6SULQJ 6XPPHU

1257+ 1257+

 

 

 

 

 

(67 ($67  :(67 ($67

6287+ 6287+

$XWXPQ :LQWHU

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

$QQXDO:LQG5RVH.QR[YLOOH7HQQHVVHH +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

6HDVRQDO:LQG5RVHV.QR[YLOOH7HQQHVVHH +/- 

1257+ 1257+

 

 

 

 

 

(67 ($67  :(67 ($67

6287+ 6287+

6SULQJ 6XPPHU

1257+ 1257+

 

 

 

 

 

(67 ($67  :(67 ($67

6287+ 6287+

$XWXPQ :LQWHU

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRIWKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

/RFDWLRQVRI$626DQG&2230HWHRURORJLFDO6WDWLRQVDQG6XSSOHPHQWDO'DWD6RXUFHV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

$QQXDO:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

-DQXDU\:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

)HEUXDU\:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

0DUFK:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

$SULO:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

0D\:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

-XQH:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

-XO\:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

$XJXVW:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

6HSWHPEHU:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

2FWREHU:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

1RYHPEHU:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

'HFHPEHU:LQG5RVH7RZHU' +/- 

1257+











(67 ($67

,1'63(('

PV

! 









6287+ 







&DOPV

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRI

75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ WKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

6HDVRQDO:LQG5RVHV7RZHU' +/- 

1257+ 1257+

 

 

 

 

 

(67 ($67  :(67 ($67 6287+ 6287+

6SULQJ 6XPPHU

1257+ 1257+

 

 

 

 

 

(67 ($67  :(67 ($67 6287+ 6287+

$XWXPQ :LQWHU

6HSWHPEHU 5HY

(QYLURQPHQWDO5HSRUWIRUWKH75,62;)XHO)DEULFDWLRQ)DFLOLW\ &KDSWHU'HVFULSWLRQRIWKH$IIHFWHG(QYLURQPHQW

)LJXUH

7HUUDLQ1HDUWKH+RUL]RQ&HQWHU6LWH

September 5HY

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.7.1-1 Ambient Noise Survey Monitoring Locations September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.8.1-1 Survey Area for Cultural Resources and Area of Potential Effect September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.1-1 Horizon Center Site Vicinity Map September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.3-1 Aerial View of the Horizon Center Site with Photograph Locations September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.3-2 (Sheet 1 of 6)

Horizon Center Site Photographs September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.3-2 (Sheet 2 of 6)

Horizon Center Site Photographs September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.3-2 (Sheet 3 of 6)

Horizon Center Site Photographs September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.3-2 (Sheet 4 of 6)

Horizon Center Site Photographs September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.3-2 (Sheet 5 of 6)

Horizon Center Site Photographs September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 3 - Description of TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility the Affected Environment Figure 3.9.3-2 (Sheet 6 of 6)

Horizon Center Site Photographs September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.10.1-1 Population Centers within the Region of Influence September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.10.1-2 Minority Percentage by Census Block Group within 4.0 MI. (6.4 Km) of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.10.1-3 Percentage of Population below Poverty Level by Census Block Group within 4.0 MI. (6.4 Km) of the Horizon Center Site September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.10.1-4 Population Density by Census Block Group within the Region of Influence September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 3 - Description of the Affected Environment Figure 3.10.3-1 Community Facilities September 2022 Rev. 0