ML22266A273

Enclosure 3: TRISO-X Environmental Report Chapters 4-10 - Part 3 of 3

ML22266A273
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: ML22266A273 (259)

Text

TX0-LTR-0004_0 ENCLOSURE 3 TRISO-X ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT CHAPTERS 4-10 PART 3 OF 3 (74 MB)

NON-PROPRIETARY

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Table of Contents CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 4.1 LAND USE IMPACTS ............................................................................................... 4-11 4.1.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................... 4-11 4.1.2 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................. 4-11 4.1.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 4-13 4.2 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS ................................................................................ 4-14 4.2.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................... 4-14 4.2.2 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................. 4-14 4.2.3 RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TRANSPORTATION .................................................... 4-16 4.2.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 4-18 4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS IMPACTS ........................................................................... 4-23 4.3.1 SITE SOILS .............................................................................................................4-23 4.3.2 GEOLOGICAL IMPACTS ........................................................................................ 4-25 4.4 WATER RESOURCES IMPACTS............................................................................. 4-29 4.4.1 GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................... 4-29 4.4.2 SURFACE WATER .................................................................................................. 4-32 4.4.3 FLOODPLAINS ....................................................................................................... 4-40 4.4.4 WETLANDS............................................................................................................. 4-41 4.5 ECOLOGY IMPACTS................................................................................................ 4-45 4.5.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................... 4-45 4.5.2 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................. 4-45 4.5.3

SUMMARY

OF ECOLOGY IMPACTS ..................................................................... 4-51 4.5.4 MITIGATION MEASURES ....................................................................................... 4-51 4.5.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 4-51 4.6 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS ........................................................................................... 4-53 4.6.1 REGIONAL AIR QUALITY ....................................................................................... 4-53 4.6.2 ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION CHARACTERISTICS ............................................ 4-53 4.6.3 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................... 4-53 4.6.4 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................. 4-53 4.6.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 4-57 4.7 NOISE IMPACTS ...................................................................................................... 4-61 4.7.1 NO-ACTION ALTERATIVE ...................................................................................... 4-61 4.7.2 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................. 4-61 4.7.3 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ........................................................................................ 4-66 September 2022 4-1 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Table of Contents 4.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES IMPACTS ............................................ 4-71 4.8.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................... 4-71 4.8.2 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................. 4-71 4.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES IMPACTS .............................................................. 4-73 4.9.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................... 4-73 4.9.2 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................. 4-73 4.9.3 MITIGATION MEASURES ....................................................................................... 4-77 4.9.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 4-77 4.10 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS .................................................................................. 4-79 4.10.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................... 4-79 4.10.2 PROPOSED ACTION .............................................................................................. 4-79 4.10.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ......................................................................................... 4-86 4.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ................................................................................... 4-97 4.11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE EVALUATION METHODS ........................................ 4-97 4.11.2 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IMPACTS ................................................................. 4-99 4.11.3 POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................ 4-101 4.11.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ....................................................................................... 4-101 4.12 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH IMPACTS ............................................. 4-103 4.12.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE.................................................................................. 4-103 4.12.2 PROPOSED ACTION ............................................................................................ 4-103 4.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT IMPACTS ........................................................................ 4-126 4.13.1 SOURCES AND TYPES OF SOLID RADIOACTIVE AND MIXED WASTE .......... 4-126 4.

13.2 DESCRIPTION

OF WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS ..................................... 4-126 4.13.3 WASTE DISPOSAL PLANS .................................................................................. 4-126 4.13.4 WASTE MINIMIZATION PLAN .............................................................................. 4-127 4.13.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ....................................................................................... 4-127 September 2022 4-2 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Number Title 4.2.2-1 Estimated Impacts from Project-Related Traffic During Construction 4.2.2-2 Estimated Impacts from Project-Related Traffic During Operation 4.2.3-1 Incident-Free Transportation Annual Dose Equivalent to the Public and Worker 4.4.2-1 Pre- and Post-Development Peak Stormwater Flows SD#1 4.4.2-2 Pre- and Post-Development Peak Stormwater Flows Off-site Intermittent Stream 4.6-1 Physical Characteristics of Atmospheric Emissions Sources at the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 4.6-2 Emission Rates from Emergency Operations Equipment at the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 4.6-3 Potential Annual Emissions from the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 4.7.2-1 Attenuated Noise Levels Expected for Operation of Representative Construction Equipment 4.7.2-2 Noise Generating External Equipment for TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 4.7.2-3 Estimated Operational Sound Levels at Closest Receptors during Normal Operation 4.7.2-4 Estimated Operational Sound Levels at Closest Receptors during Loss of Power Operation 4.10.2-1 Construction Workforce Requirements and Estimated ROI Labor Force Availability 4.10.2-2 Estimated Economic Impacts of TRISO-X FFF Construction 4.10.2-3 Peak Operational Workforce Requirements and Estimated ROI Labor Force Availability 4.10.2-4 Population Increases Associated with Operational Workforce 4.10.2-5 Estimated Economic Impacts of TRISO-X FFF Operation 4.10.2-6 Impacts to Housing and Educational Services Associated with Operational Workforce 4.10.2-7 Estimated Economic Impacts of TRISO-X FFF Decommissioning 4.10.3-1 Estimated Cumulative Impact of Earnings through Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning of TRISO-X FFF 4.12.2-1 Summary of Potential Health Impacts Associated with Releases of Non-Radiological Materials Used in Production and Stored Outdoors at the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility September 2022 4-3 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - List of Tables Number Title 4.12.2-2 Summary of Potential Health Impacts Associated with Exposure to Non-Radiological Materials Used in Production and Stored Indoors at the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 4.12.2-3 Site Boundary X/Q and D/Q Factors 4.12.2-4 Distance-Segmented X/Q Values - Undecayed/Undepleted Case 4.12.2-5 Distance-Segmented X/Q Values - 2.26 Day Decayed/Undepleted Case 4.12.2-6 Distance-Segmented X/Q Values - 8 Day Decayed/Depleted Case 4.12.2-7 Distance-Segmented D/Q Values 4.12.2-8 Gaseous Normal Effluent Population Dose September 2022 4-4 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Number Title 4.6-1 Emission Points for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 4.7.2-1 Location of Noise Sources Associated with the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 4.8.2-1 McKamey and Carmichael Family Cemetery and Buffer 4.9.2-1 TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Layout 4.9.2-2 TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Renderings (Sheets 1 - 5) 4.9.2-3 Estimated Viewshed Boundaries for TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 4.12.2-1 Vicinity Sensitive Receptor Map September 2022 4-5 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ac. acre ACS American Community Survey AEGLs Acute Exposure Guideline Levels ALARA As Low As is Reasonably Achievable APE Area of potential effect ASCE American Society of Civil Engineers ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials BEA U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis BLM U.S. Bureau of Land Management BLS U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics BMP Best Management Practice CBG Census block group CO Carbon monoxide CRN Clinch River Nuclear CROET Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee CSX CSX Transportation Railroad cu. yd. cubic yard CWA Clean Water Act dBA Weighted decibels DEM Digital evaluation model DOE U.S. Department of Energy D/Q Atmospheric Deposition Factor EFPC East Fork Poplar Creek EO Executive Order EOC Security/Emergency Operation Center ER Environmental Report September 2022 4-6 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ERPGs Emergency Response Planning Guidelines ETSZ East Tennessee Seismic Zone ETTP East Tennessee Technology Park ft. feet GIS Geographical Information System GMP Graphite matrix powder HALEU High-assay low enriched uranium HAP Hazardous air pollutant HCS Horizon Center site ha hectare HEPA High efficiency particulate air HMDSO Hexamethyldisiloxane HVAC Heating, Ventilation and Air-Conditioning I-40 Interstate 40 I-75 Interstate 75 IBC International Building Code IPaC Information for Planning and Consultation IROFS Items Relied on for Safety ISA Integrated Safety Analysis km kilometer km2 square kilometer kV Kilovolt Leq Equivalent noise level Ldn Day-night average sound level LiDAR Light Detection and Ranging m meter m3 cubic meter MDCT Mechanical-Draft Cooling Tower MEI Maximally Exposed Individual Mgd Million gallons per day September 2022 4-7 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition mg/m3 milligrams per cubic meter mi. mile mrem millirem mrem/hr millirem per hour mrem/yr millirem per year MSA TN Metropolitan Statistical Area MTS Methyltrichlorosilane MTU Metric tons uranium NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards NFIP National Flood Insurance Program NLCD National Landcover Database NLM National Library of Medicine NM Noise monitoring NMSS Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOx Nitrogen oxides NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places ORED Oak Ridge Electric Department ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory ORR Oak Ridge Reservation OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration PHRS Process Heat Removal System PM Particulate matter PM10 Particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns September 2022 4-8 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition PM2.5 Particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns rem Roentgen equivalent man RIMS II Regional Input-Output Modeling System ROI Region of Influence SD Surface Discharge SHPO Tennessee State Historic Preservation Office SMART Stormwater Management Assistance Research and Training SMR Small modular reactor SOx Sulfur oxides SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures Sv/yr Sievert per year SWPPP Site stormwater pollution prevention plan TDEC Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation TDOT Tennessee Department of Transportation TEDE Total Effective Dose Equivalent TN 95 Tennessee Highway 95 TNRRAT Tennessee Runoff Reduction Assessment Tool TPY Tons per year TRISO Tri-structural ISOtropic TRISO-X FFF TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility TRU TRU Waste Processing Center TSDF Treatment, storage, or disposal facility TSP Temporary Sediment Pond TVA Tennessee Valley Authority TWPC TRU Waste Processing Center U3O8 Triuranium octoxide 235U Uranium-235 September 2022 4-9 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition UCO Uranium dioxide and uranium dicarbide mixture g U/L grams uranium per liter USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USCB U.S. Census Bureau USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service USGS U. S. Geologic Survey VOCs Volatile organic compounds VP-55 Versa-Pac 55 VRM Visual Resource Management WASH-1238 Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene technical report 1238 WOTUS Waters of the United States WQV Water quality volume WWC Wet weather conveyance X/Q Atmospheric Dispersion Factor Y-12 Y-12 National Security Complex yd3 cubic yard yr Year September 2022 4-10 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4 Environmental Impacts 4.1 LAND USE IMPACTS This section assesses the impacts of construction, operation, and decommissioning on land use for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) Horizon Center site (HCS) and region.

As described in Section 3.1, the land use for the site and region is analyzed using the National Landcover Database (NLCD) (Dewitz, 2019). Impacts to land use include effects from activities associated with construction, operation, and decommissioning, including excavation, grading, placement of fill material, temporary staging and construction laydown, construction of permanent features, and potential operational disturbances.

4.1.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X FFF would not be constructed and the HCS would remain in its current state. Consequently, there are no impacts on land uses.

4.1.2 PROPOSED ACTION Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated at the HCS.

4.1.2.1 Impacts from Construction The HCS consists of approximately 110 ac. (44.5 ha). It is conservatively assumed that all areas are affected by construction activities in order to account for future activities or alterations to construction plans.

The potential construction-related land use impacts to the HCS and near off-site areas are discussed in the following paragraphs. Much of the HCS has been disturbed and contains limited intact, high-quality native plant communities, with construction-related direct impacts to the site and near site areas are limited to herbaceous upland vegetation.

As discussed in Chapter 1, the City of Oak Ridge is in the process of rezoning the HCS from IND-2 to IND-3 (see Table 1.4-1) which is compatible with the construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF. Section 3.1.1 describes the dedicated green belts separating the development areas at the Horizon Center industrial park. 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. Construction at the HCS has no impact on these areas.

Of the 110 ac. (44.5 ha) comprising the HCS, construction does not permanently convert any agricultural/cultivated crops to industrial facilities. Permanent conversions to industrial facilities include the construction of facility buildings, employee parking lot, facility access road/driveway, equipment yard area, loading dock, and landscaping area as well as grading and drainage work required for site suitability. Direct construction impacts include the temporary use for construction lay down, parking, sedimentation basin, and ditches. Once construction is complete, temporary use areas are replanted with non-invasive herbaceous plant species. As such, impacts to land use from construction are SMALL.

September 2022 4-11 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.1.2.2 Special Land Uses Special land uses in the region are discussed in Section 3.1.4. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction of the facility do not occur within these special land use areas. No direct or indirect impacts occur to special land use classification areas. Therefore, impacts to special land use classification areas are SMALL.

4.1.2.3 DOE Oak Ridge Reservation As discussed in Section 3.1.4.1, special land uses within the region include all three sites on the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR), the East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP), formerly known as the K-25 Site, the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), and the Y-12 National Security Complex. These sites are located approximately 2.3 mi. (3.6 km) southwest, 4 mi. (6.4 km) southeast, and 6.6 mi. (10.5 km) east respectively, of the HCS (see Table 2.3-1). Permanent and temporary impacts from construction of the facility occur are limited to the HCS, consequently, impacts to ORR land uses from construction of the facility are SMALL.

4.1.2.4 Other Land Uses As described in Section 3.1.4.2, other land uses within the vicinity include the Manhattan Project National Historical Park, Campbell Bend Barrens and Crowder Cemetery State Natural Areas, the North Boundary Greenway, and the McKamey-Carmichael Cemetery. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction of the facility occur only on-site, with no impacts within the special land use areas. Consequently, impacts to other land uses from construction of the facility are SMALL.

4.1.2.5 Agricultural Resources and Facilities The agricultural resources and facilities on-site and within the region of the HCS are described in Section 3.1.5. There are no permanent or temporary impacts to cultivated crops or hay/pastureland on-site as result of construction. As discussed in Chapter 3, it is estimated that 13 percent of the soils in the HCS region are designated prime farmland. However, because the HCS lies wholly within the City of Oak Ridge, the prime farmland designation is waived, and other uses of the land, such as industrial development, are permitted. No other agricultural resources within the region of the HCS are located on-site or near off-site, and therefore, are not impacted by construction-related impacts.

There is no loss of agricultural lands on-site, including prime farmland or farmland of State-wide importance. As such, direct and indirect impacts to agricultural resources and facilities from construction are SMALL.

4.1.2.6 Mineral Resources As described in Section 3.1.6, there is currently no coal, oil, or gas production in the HCS site Region. Tennessees non-fuel mineral production includes Portland cement, sand and gravel, stone, zinc, and ball clay. None of the mineral resources are located on-site. Permanent and temporary impacts from construction of the facility occur on-site and in near off-site areas.

Consequently, there are no direct or indirect impacts to mineral resources. Impacts to mineral resources from construction of the facility are SMALL.

September 2022 4-12 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.1.2.7 Major Population Centers and Infrastructure Section 3.1.3 summarizes the major population centers and infrastructure located within the HCS Region, which include the major population center of Oak Ridge, several major transportation corridors, CSX Transportation (CSX) railroad, McGhee Tyson Airport, and the Clinch River. None of the major population centers or infrastructure are located on-site.

Permanent and temporary impacts from construction of the facility occur on-site and in near off-site areas. Therefore, construction-related direct and indirect impacts on major population centers and infrastructure are SMALL.

4.1.2.8 Impacts from Operation Impacts to land use after construction is complete and during operation of the TRISO-X FFF would not occur. Therefore, no impacts to land use would occur during facility operation.

4.1.2.9 Impacts from Decommissioning Construction of the TRISO-X FFF is expected to begin in 2023 and to conclude in 2025. The facility will operate until 2065 when the license would be renewed, or decommissioning would begin. Decommissioning activities, however, are typically similar to construction activities and involve heavy equipment to remove building materials, such as wood, concrete, and steel, and process equipment from the site. Decontaminated and non-radiologically impacted building structures and roadways are likely to remain in place post-decommissioning for future reuse. As such, direct and indirect impacts from decommissioning are anticipated to be SMALL, similar to or less than the impacts associated with construction, and contained within the previously disturbed 110 ac. site boundary.

4.1.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The HCS is located in a greenfield business park owned by the City of Oak Ridge Industrial Development Board, dedicated to industrial development. Current site occupants include Philotechnics, Carbon Fiber Technology Facility, and LeMond Composites. Several lots remain undeveloped in the Horizon Center Industrial Park; however, no future projects have currently been identified. The impacts of the change in land use from greenfield site to industrial are anticipated to be SMALL.

The geographic area of interest for land use impacts is the HCS as impacts are limited to the HCS. The construction of the 69 kV transmission line would occur along the edge of the HCS but would not result in a notable aggregate effect in conjunction with the effects of the Project.

All other planned projects discussed in Section 2.3 would be constructed outside the limits of the HCS and similarly, would result in localized effects to each project site. Because the identified past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities would result in localized effects only, the cumulative effect of the Project, added to effects associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, is SMALL. Because the Project would not result in noticeable impacts to land use beyond the HCS, the impact of the incremental contribution of either the preconstruction activities or the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on land use is not a significant contributor to the SMALL cumulative impact. The cumulative land use impacts to the TRISO-X FFF during the construction and operation phases is SMALL.

September 2022 4-13 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.2 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS Transportation facilities near the HCS are described in Section 3.2 (Transportation). Figures showing regional highways and local access routes are shown in Figure 3.2-1 and Figure 3.2-2.

This section describes the potential impacts on transportation resources resulting from the No-Action Alternative (Section 4.2.1) and the Proposed Action (Section 4.2.2). Section 4.2.3 describes the impacts from the transportation of radioactive material due to the normal operation. A description of the anticipated cumulative impacts of the facility on transportation resources assuming implementation of the Proposed Action is presented in Section 4.2.4.

4.2.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X FFF would not be constructed and the HCS would remain in its current state. Consequently, there are no impacts on transportation resources.

4.2.2 PROPOSED ACTION Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated at the HCS.

4.2.2.1 Impact of Construction of an Access Road The HCS is bounded by an existing municipal road (Renovare Boulevard) to the adjoining-south. Temporary areas, such as construction laydown and craft parking are located adjacent to the municipal road to facilitate site access and minimize impact to the facility construction areas.

Primary and secondary access roads are perpendicular to Renovare Boulevard, extending approximately 840 ft. (250 m) to the facility perimeter road. Due to the existing municipal road infrastructure, the impacts of an access road are minimal.

4.2.2.2 Transportation Mode As described in Section 3.2, the TRISO-X FFF uses trucks and common carrier for shipments during construction and operations. Therefore, the impacts of rail traffic are not evaluated. If rail shipments are needed for construction to bring large items to locations where rail service is available, they are not expected to significantly impact rail traffic since the shipments are infrequent and managed as routine railroad freight. Similarly, the impacts of air traffic are not evaluated. If air shipments are needed for construction to bring specific items to the HCS, they are not expected to significantly impact air traffic since the shipments are infrequent and managed as routine air freight. Therefore, the mode of transportation for construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF consists of over-the-road trucks, ranging from heavy-duty 18-wheeled delivery trucks, concrete mixing trucks, dump trucks and flatbed light-duty trucks.

Vehicles and equipment are typical of those used in industrial/commercial construction. The primary transportation mode for the workforce to and from the HCS is by car, truck or van.

4.2.2.3 Transportation Routes As described in Section 3.2, the TRISO-X FFF is located at the HCS in Roane County in the City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Tennessee Route 95 (TN 95 Oak Ridge Turnpike) is a multi-lane State highway connecting Oak Ridge to Interstates 40 and 75 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 is an east-west oriented highway crossing Tennessee.

September 2022 4-14 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 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 primary access to the HCS site is from the Oak Ridge Turnpike to Novus Drive (Figure 3.2-2). The intersection is located approximately 0.4 mi. (0.6 km) southeast of the entrance to the TRISO-X FFF. A secondary access route to the TRISO-X FFF is from the Oak Ridge Turnpike to Imperium Drive intersection, 0.65 mi. (1 km) northeast (Figure 3.2-2).

These routes are used for construction, operational and decommissioning phases.

4.2.2.4 Impacts from Construction Construction period of the TRISO-X FFF is expected to be two years. Construction activity generally occurs during weekdays and daylight hours subject to any local restrictions from the City of Oak Ridge. Occasional work is required during weekends to meet construction deadlines. The maximum number of construction workers on-site at a given time is estimated at 134. Thus, the maximum potential increase in traffic from the construction workforce is 134 round trips per day.

The maximum potential daily increase in traffic from material deliveries and waste removal is estimated at 12 round trips per day during construction. Thus, the maximum daily increase in construction-related traffic is estimated to be 146 round trips per day. Additionally, as discussed in Section 2.1.2.1.2, the project requires a monthly average of 15,729 truckloads of excavated materials and/or backfill during the first 6 months of the project.

Table 4.2.2-1 compares the anticipated increase in traffic from construction activities to average daily traffic counts from main roads to and from the HCS site from Section 3.2.2.1. Traffic counts are available from Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT, 2021). Table 4.2.2-1 shows that the incremental impacts of the temporary increase in traffic on the regional transportation system from construction-related activity are relatively SMALL.

Additional traffic and equipment movement around the HCS may generate fugitive dust and noise, especially during construction. These impacts are discussed fully in Sections 4.6 and 4.7.

4.2.2.5 Impacts from Operation The operational life of the TRISO-X FFF is 40 years. The maximum operational workforce at full capacity is estimated at 816 employees. The maximum potential increase in traffic during the operational phase is 820 round trips per day (816 employees plus 4 visitors).

The maximum potential increase in truck traffic due to non-radioactive operational deliveries and waste removal is estimated to be 365 roundtrips per year. In addition, an estimated 20 trucks per year of uranium source material; 60 trucks per year of fabricated fuel; and 39 trucks per year of solid radioactive waste. Thus, an average of approximately nine round trips (484/52) for operational deliveries and waste removal occur during a week, or approximately one round trip per day.

September 2022 4-15 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.2.2-2 compares the anticipated increase in traffic from operation activities to average daily traffic counts from main roads to and from the HCS site from Section 3.2.2.2. Table 4.2.2-2 shows that the impacts from the increase in traffic from operations is considered SMALL (approximately 1.9% increase). Potential mitigation measures are discussed in Chapter 5.

4.2.2.6 Impacts from Decommissioning Decommissioning is expected to require an estimated two years. The plans for decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are described in Section 2.1.2.1.4 (Decontamination and Decommissioning [Description of the Proposed Action]). Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF involves removal and decontamination of the used process equipment and materials. Some of the facilities, including the administration building, process building, access roads, and parking areas built for the TRISO-X FFF could remain in place after decommissioning. The number of truck shipments depends upon the quantities of equipment and waste materials resulting from decommissioning. During decommissioning, 940,268 cubic feet of waste is shippedusing B-25 boxes at 90 cubic feet per box. The total number of B-25 boxes is estimated to be 12,291. The estimate of the number of B-25 boxes includes factors for items that are bulkier and does not just estimate the number of boxes based on the volume of the boxes. Assuming eight B-25 boxes per shipment there are 1536 shipments during decommissioning (768 per year). Thus, the average number of truck shipments from the site during decommissioning are bounded by the average daily truck traffic during the construction phase described in Section 4.2.2.4.

Radioactively contaminated equipment and materials removed during decommissioning that require off-site disposal are shipped to a licensed treatment or disposal facility (as appropriate for the material type) or disposed of in a manner authorized by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The transport of these shipments complies with applicable NRC and U.S.

Department of Transportation requirements in effect at that time of decommissioning. The number of truck trips from the TRISO-X FFF, the destinations for those trips, and the travel routes depend on the quantities and types of equipment and demolition material shipped off-site and the locations of the treatment and disposal facilities open and with capacity to receive the shipments at the time of decommissioning.

The maximum labor force at one time required for decommissioning is expected to be at, or below the labor force required for construction. Given the significant reduction in the number of on-site workers, the level of expected truck traffic, and the relatively short duration of the decommissioning activities, the impacts of the decommissioning-related traffic are anticipated to be SMALL.

4.2.3 RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL TRANSPORTATION This section describes the impacts from the transportation of radioactive material due to the normal operation of the TRISO-X FFF.

4.2.3.1 Radioactive Material Transported Nuclear material is transported to and from the TRISO-X FFF located in Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

The nuclear material transported to the TRISO-X FFF consists of high-assay low enriched uranium (HALEU) triuranium octoxide (U3O8) enriched up to 19.75 percent 235U. The nuclear materials transported from the TRISO-X FFF consist of fabricated HALEU fuel (up to 19.75 percent 235U) and the radioactive wastes generated during the production of the fabricated fuel.

September 2022 4-16 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.2.3.2 Transportation Mode and Projected Destinations The HALEU oxide is transported by truck to the TRISO-X FFF from the American Centrifuge Plant located in Piketon, Ohio. The American Centrifuge Plant is approximately 285 mi. (459 km) by road from Oak Ridge, Tennessee. The radioactive wastes are expected to be transported by truck to the EnergySolutions Clive Facility located in Grantsville, Utah. The EnergySolutions Clive Facility is approximately 1900 mi. (3058 km) by road from Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Fabricated fuel manufactured at the TRISO-X FFF is projected to be transported by truck to the Columbia Generating Station located in Richland, Washington. The Columbia Generating Station is approximately 2400 mi. (3862 km) from Oak Ridge, Tennessee.

4.2.3.3 Shipping and Receiving HALEU oxide is transported in ES-3100 containers. The ES-3100 containers meet the requirements of 10 CFR 71 (CFR, 2021a), 49 CFR 100-180 (CFR, 2021b), and are approved by the NRC (Docket Number 71-9315). The ES-3100 can contain uranium oxide with a mass limit of 15.13 kg of oxide (of which 9.862 kg can be U-235) (NRC, 2021). Twenty shipments of HALEU oxide occur annually with each truck containing 94 ES-3100 containers. Containers meet the surface dose rate limits of 10 CFR 71.47(a) and 49 CFR 173.441(a) and the group of containers meet the 1 m (3.3 ft) dose rate limits of 49 CFR 173.441(d).

Fabricated TRISO-X fuel is transported in Versa-Pac 55 (VP-55) packages. The VP-55 package meets the requirements of 10 CFR 71, 49 CFR 100-180, and is approved by the NRC (Docket Number 71-9342). The VP-55 can contain TRISO-X fuel with a mass limit of 605 g of U-235 (NRC, 2020). Sixty shipments of fabricated fuel occur annually with each truck containing 48 VP-55 packages. Containers meet the surface dose rate limits of 10 CFR 71.47(a) and 49 CFR 173.441(a) and the group of containers meet the 1 m (3.3 ft) dose rate limits of 49 CFR 173.441(d).

Dry radioactive waste is transported in 55-gallon drums. Thirty-nine shipments of radwaste occur annually with each truck containing 96 drums. Containers meet the surface dose rate limits of 10 CFR 71.47(a) and 49 CFR 173.441(a) and the group of containers meet the 1 m (3.3 ft) dose rate limits of 49 CFR 173.441(d).

4.2.3.4 Incident-Free Radiological Doses The incident-free radiological doses are determined for members of the public and the workers that are involved with the transportation of the fuel raw material, fabricated fuel, and radioactive wastes.

The incident-free dose is calculated based on location-specific results using population data from the U.S. Census Bureau (USCB) (USCB, 2010). The 2020 USCB data shows that the United States has increased population by 7.4% (USCB, 2020). Applying the US increase in population between the 2010 and 2020 census to the incident-free dose calculated using the 2010 USCB population data is reasonable (even though the population growth in some of the States along the transportation routes are greater than 7.4%) since the transportation routes are mainly through rural areas, and the majority of population increases tend to be in urban areas.

To account for the population increase, a scaling factor of 1.074 was used to adjust the general public dose. A Geographical Information System (GIS)-based model is used to determine the highway route distance traveled and population density along the route. Route population September 2022 4-17 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts density data was generated for the fuel feedstock route, fabricated fuel route, and radwaste route.

The dose rate limits from packaged radioactive material shipments are prescribed in 10 CFR 71.47 (CFR, 2021a) and 49 CFR 173.441 (CFR, 2021b). For non-exclusive shipments, external surface, single package dose rate may not exceed 200 mrem/hr, and the Transport Index may not exceed 10 (10 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft.] from package). Conveyance limits on the sum of the package transport indices for a non-exclusive use shipment may not exceed 50 (50 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft.] from the total group of packages). Using 50 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft.] from the shipment as the shipment dose rate is overly conservative. It is expected that the actual dose rates for shipments of nuclear materials for the TRISO-X FFF is significantly below the allowable limit. The analysis performed in Water, Sanitation, and Hygiene technical report 1238 (WASH-1238) (WASH, 1972) assumes a shipment surface dose rate of 1 (1 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft.] from the total group of packages) for fresh fuel. The WASH-1238 analysis also showed that it could be as low as 0.1 (0.1 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft.] from the total group of packages. Therefore, it is assumed that radiation dose from a shipment to or from the TRISO-X FFF is 1 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft.] from the shipment based on the methodology outlined in WASH-1238 (WASH, 1972).

Table 4.2.3-1 presents the annual incident-free transportation dose equivalent to the public and workers at 1 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft.] from the shipment. The collective dose equivalent at 1 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft.] from the shipment for all transportation routes to the general public is 8.23E-02 person-Sv/yr (8.23E+00 person-rem/yr) to the transportation workers is 2.81E-02 person-Sv/yr (2.81E+00 person-rem/yr) and to the material handling workers is 1.50E-02 person-Sv/yr (1.50E+00 person-rem/yr).

The collective dose equivalent at 1 mrem/hr at 1 m [3.3 ft] from the shipment for all transportation routes to the general public is 8.23E-02 person-Sv/yr (8.23E+00 person-rem/yr),

to the transportation workers is 2.81E-02 person-Sv/yr (2.81E+00 person-rem/yr), and to the material handling workers is 1.50E-02 person-Sv/yr (1.50E+00 person-rem/yr).

4.2.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS The general construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF results in an incremental increase in the daily vehicle trips on TN 95, Tennessee Route 58 and other local connecting roadways in the vicinity of the facility. Additionally, several lots remain undeveloped in the Horizon Center Industrial Park; however, no future projects have currently been identified.

The impacts of the cumulative daily vehicle trips on local traffic from the HCS flow are anticipated to be SMALL. However, the geographic area of interest for transportation impacts also extends to the surrounding vicinity of the HCS.

The other planned projects discussed in Section 2.3 would be constructed in the area of interest and would contribute to cumulative transportation impacts. The construction of the 69 kV transmission line would occur along the edge of the HCS but would not result in a notable aggregate effect in conjunction with the effects of the Project. Similarly, the Oak Ridge Enhanced Technology and Training Center is not expected to have a significant number of staff and thus no noticeable cumulative impact.

The planned projects at the East Tennessee Technology Park represent a larger scale for both construction and staffing. These projects include the Kairos Reactor Demonstration, Ultra Safe Nuclear Corporations Pilot Fuel Manufacturing Facility, Coquí Pharmas Medical Isotope Production Facility, and the Oak Ridge General Aviation Airport. As shown in Table 2.3-1, these September 2022 4-18 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts projects will be constructed approximately 2.3 miles (3.6 km) southwest of the HCS. These projects are likely to have a minimal impact on regional transportation as the construction and operation of the projects comes after a long period of clean-up activities at the site, which have slowed since completing core cleanup in 2020. The impacts of the cumulative daily vehicle trips on local traffic flow, based on the context and intensity of the impact, are anticipated to be SMALL. On a regional basis, the cumulative transportation impacts from the TRISO-X FFF are also expected to be SMALL.

The operation of the TRISO-X FFF also includes transportation of radioactive material to and from the facility. This transportation results in a collective dose equivalent from all transportation routes to the general public of 8.23E-02 person-Sv/yr (8.23E+00 person-rem/yr), to the transportation workers of 2.81E-02 person-Sv/yr (2.81E+00 person-rem/yr), and to the material handling workers of 1.50E-02 person-Sv/yr (1.50E+00 person-rem/yr). The NRC requires its licensees to limit the maximum radiation exposure to individual members of the public to 1 mSv/yr (100 mrem/yr). 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). The impacts of the transportation of radioactive material are anticipated to be SMALL.

September 2022 4-19 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.2.2-1 Estimated Impacts from Project-Related Traffic During Construction Number of construction workers per day:

134 Number of daily material deliveries and waste removals: 12 Number of daily truckloads of excavated material: 655 Total daily round trips for workers and deliveries: 801 Location of traffic count TDOT 5-Year Average Percentage of Construction- Construction-Identifier Daily Traffic count TotalTraffic Related Average Related Impact (2016 - 2020) Daily Traffic on Local Traffic Count (Percent)

Oak Ridge Turnpike (SR 95) 73000059 11,606 26 209 1.8 WIPP Road (SR 95) 73000058 5,925 13 107 1.8 Oak Ridge Turnpike (SR 95) 73000060 12,696 29 229 1.8 Gallagher Road East of Kingston (SR 58) 73000061 11,602 26 209 1.8 Blair Road North of SR 95 73000174 2,622 6 47 1.8 September 2022 4-20 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.2.2-2 Estimated Impacts from Project-Related Traffic During Operation Number of employees and visitors per day: 816+4 Number of daily material deliveries and waste removals: 1 Total daily round trips for employees, visitors and material delivery/waste removal: 821 Location of traffic count TDOT 5-Year Average Percentage of Operation- Project-Related Identifier Daily Traffic count Total Traffic Related Daily Impact on Local (2016 - 2020) Round Trip Traffic (Percent)

Increase Oak Ridge Turnpike (SR 95) 73000059 11,606 26 214 1.9 WIPP Road (SR 95) 73000058 5,925 13 110 1.9 Oak Ridge Turnpike (SR 95) 73000060 12,696 29 235 1.9 Gallagher Road East of Kingston (SR 73000061 11,602 26 214 1.9 58)

Blair Road North of SR 95 73000174 2,622 6 48 1.9 September 2022 4-21 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.2.3-1 Incident-Free Transportation Annual Dose Equivalent to the Public and Worker Exposed HALEU Fuel Columbia, Radwaste Total (person-Population Piketon, OH WA (person- Clive, UT rem)

(person-rem) rem) (person-rem)

Transportation 6.12E-02 1.87E+00 8.81E-01 2.81E+00 Workers Handling 2.52E-01 7.55E-01 4.91E-01 1.50E+00 Workers General Public 2.30E-01 5.41E+00 2.58E+00 8.23E+00 September 2022 4-22 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS IMPACTS This section summarizes known and potential geological impacts, mitigation measures and cumulative effects. Impacts to geology and soils were determined by assessing potential changes that could result from facility construction and operations under each of the alternatives.

4.3.1 SITE SOILS 4.3.1.1 No-Action Alternative Under the No-Action Alternative, no activities resulting in topsoil removal, general grading, compaction, excavation or foundation installation is required. Therefore, no impacts, such as soil removal, compaction, erosion, or disruption of natural drainage patterns, would occur for this alternative.

4.3.1.2 Proposed Action The TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) consists of an administration building, process building, and related supporting facilities. Features of the Proposed Action include the following:

• Process building including administration building

• Graphite matrix powder (GMP) building

• Security/Emergency Operation Center building

• Electrical and mechanical equipment yards

• Roadways

• Drainage ditches

• Detention basin

• Permanent parking areas

• Temporary construction laydown/parking

• Temporary sediment basin

• Temporary ditches

• Shipping and receiving docks

• Gravel surfacing

• Grass seeding area The depth of excavation for foundations of most buildings is less than 2.5 ft. (0.8 m). Depths of features such as the exhaust stacks and the meteorological tower are determined based on final design.

September 2022 4-23 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Other details of the Proposed Action are described in described in Section 2.1.2 (Proposed Action).

4.3.1.2.1 Construction Up to approximately 110 ac. (44.5 ha) is disturbed under the Proposed Action. Construction activities would entail excavation and grading within the project footprint. Based on the preliminary grading analysis of the site, approximately 560,234 yd3 (428,330 m3) of soil is excavated to support construction activities. This material is assumed to be unsuitable for backfill and is disposed at an approved existing off-site landfill location. Based on the assumption that existing site soils are not suitable for backfill, construction of the project would require the transport of approximately 362,661 cu. yd. (277,274 m3) of suitable material from an existing permitted off-site borrow site.

Materials are stockpiled on level or only gently sloped lands to minimize erosion. Where slopes are steeper, appropriate erosion control measures including berms are used to minimize erosion. Other Best Management Practices (BMPs) implemented as erosion prevention and sediment controls include silt fences, straw bales, ditch check dams, and concrete washout containment to minimize erosion.

Soil disturbance is limited to the HCS and BMPs are implemented to minimize soil erosion on the site. Therefore, impacts to soils are SMALL.

4.3.1.2.2 Operation Impacts to shallow soils after construction is complete and during operation of the TRISO-X FFF does not occur. Therefore, no impacts to soils or erosion occurs during facility operation.

4.3.1.2.3 Decommissioning As described in Section 2.1.2.1.4 (Decommissioning Activities), decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF is conducted in accordance with NRC license termination requirements. Soil testing would also be conducted to identify the presence of areas potentially contaminated by site activities. Any soils having elevated levels of constituents of concern are addressed by excavation and removal or other mitigative measures as appropriate in accordance with NRC and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) guidelines. Decontamination and decommissioning are also conducted to minimize soil erosion, compaction and alteration of on-site drainage patterns, to the extent practicable. Soils excavated and removed from the HCS are transported to an appropriate licensed disposal facility. Therefore, impacts to shallow soils upon completion of the decontamination and decommissioning process are SMALL.

4.3.1.3 Mitigation Measures As previously stated, impacts to the site soils are SMALL. The practices and measures used to further control these impacts to the soils during construction and to minimize residual impacts include the following:

• Placement of soil materials within stockpiles utilizes generally level or only gently sloped lands to minimize erosion. Where slopes are steeper, appropriate erosion control measures including berms are used to minimize erosion. Other BMPs that are used include silt fences, straw bales, ditch check dams, geotextiles, riprap, sedimentation basin and storm drain September 2022 4-24 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts inlet/outlet protection. BMPs are further described in Chapter 5 of this ER (Mitigation Measures).

• Following completion of the facility, the temporary construction laydown/parking area is graded as needed to reverse the effects of compaction and replanted with non-invasive herbaceous plant species.

• Any soils having elevated levels of constituents of concern are addressed by excavation and removal or other mitigative measures as appropriate in accordance with NRC and USEPA guidelines.

• Soils excavated from the HCS are transported to an appropriate licensed disposal facility.

• Establishment and implementation of an approved Decommissioning Plan for ultimate NRC release of the site for unrestricted use and license termination.

4.3.1.4 Cumulative Impacts The geographic area of interest for soil impacts is the HCS as impacts are limited to the HCS. The construction of the 69 kV transmission line would occur along the edge of the HCS and would result in localized and temporary soil disturbance within the transmission corridor. As such, aggregate effects in conjunction with the effects of the Project are localized and temporary. All other planned projects discussed in Section 2.3 would be constructed outside the limits of the HCS and similarly, would result in localized effects to each project site. Because the identified past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities would result in localized effects only, the cumulative effect of the Project, added to effects associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, is SMALL. Because the Project would not result in noticeable impacts to soils beyond the HCS, the impact of the incremental contribution of either the preconstruction activities or the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on soils is not a significant contributor to the SMALL cumulative impact. The cumulative impacts of the TRISO-X FFF on soils during the construction and operation phases is SMALL and are controlled by engineering designs..

4.3.2 GEOLOGICAL IMPACTS 4.3.2.1 No-Action Alternative The No-Action Alternative would not involve any construction, grading, excavations, or placement of foundations in the unconsolidated materials. Therefore, no impacts related to geological factors such as subsidence, liquefaction, or landslides, would occur under this alternative.

4.3.2.2 Proposed Action 4.3.2.2.1 Construction Construction activities for the Proposed Action would potentially involve the placement of foundations into the largely residual soils formed from the in-place weathering of the underlying bedrock as described in Section 3.3.3. Local hazards are those associated with site-specific properties of the soil and bedrock. Subsurface materials encountered during construction are expected to consist predominantly of unconsolidated materials including fill, residual soils, and dolomite bedrock.

September 2022 4-25 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts As described in Section 3.3.2 karst features, including sinkholes of various sizes, have been previously reported on lands adjacent to the HCS. As noted in Section 3.3.3.2, geotechnical investigations including subsurface investigations and a surficial geophysical survey were conducted to identify potential karst conditions and to evaluate the potential for zones of subsidence within the site. As noted in Section 3.3.2, voids within the limestone bedrock were encountered during the geotechnical drilling program. To further characterize subsurface conditions at the HCS, an additional six borings were advanced in areas where the TRISO-X FFF buildings (including the process building) will be located. Voids were encountered in four of the six borings; however these voids were limited to the upper 40 ft. (12.2 m) below ground surface and no large voids were encountered.

4.3.2.2.2 Operation Potential impacts during the operational phase include those associated with large-scale hazards that may include earthquakes, volcanic activity, landslides and sinkhole formation.

4.3.2.2.2.1 Impacts of Large-Scale Hazards Geological conditions and other natural hazards may also exert an effect on the Proposed Action. Factors considered in the vicinity of the HCS relative to the operational phase of the Proposed Action, include the following:

Volcanic Activity. There is no current volcanic activity in the region or vicinity of the HCS, and none is expected (USGS, 2021c; NOAA 2021). Therefore, impacts associated with volcanic activity as a potential hazard or impact to the Proposed Action are SMALL.

Tsunami Threats. There is no current tsunami activity in the region or vicinity of the HCS, and none is expected given its inland and elevated location (NOAA, 2021). Therefore, impacts associated with tsunami activity were not evaluated as a potential hazard or impact to the Proposed Action.

Landslide Potential. There is no landslide activity reported in the immediate vicinity of the HCS.

The area containing the HCS is considered to be an area having a landslide rating of Moderate susceptibility, low incidence (USGS, 2021a). Recent landslide activity reported within the region include that associated with mud and rockslides near Knoxville in 2010 and 2013 and the failure of the man-made dike used to contain the coal ash at the Tennessee Valley Authority, (TVA)

Kingston Fossil Plant in 2008 (USGS, 2021b, USEPA, 2022). Failure of the dike is related to an operational condition rather than a naturally occurring phenomenon (USEPA, 2022). Because there is no reported occurrence of landslide in the immediate vicinity of the HCS and because the area is considered to be one of moderate susceptibility and low incidence, the impacts of landslide on the HCS are SMALL.

Sinkhole Formation. As summarized in Section 3.3.2, no karst features were reported to occur directly on the HCS. Several karst features were noted to occur in parcels adjacent to HCS.

Voids (open and/or clay-filled) within the dolomite and limestone bedrock were encountered during the geotechnical drilling program conducted on the site. The potential for sinkhole formation and karst features is being evaluated in conjunction with a geophysical investigation that would result in the incorporation of karst mitigation measures and designs, as appropriate.

Therefore, because there is no reported incidence of sinkholes on the site, and because mitigative measures are employed in conjunction with the results of a geophysical investigation as needed, potential hazards associated with sinkhole formation are SMALL.

September 2022 4-26 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Earthquakes. As noted in Section 3.3.3, there is no evidence that any of the thrust faults in the Valley and Ridge 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. Seismicity occurs in the basement, below the thin-skinned Paleozoic thrusts, at depths ranging between 7 to 25 km (4.3 to 15.5 mi.), which is why the thrusts on the surface do not appear to be reactivated (Hatcher et al., 2012).

Paleoseismological evidence indicates that large magnitude earthquakes may also be possible, albeit at a very low frequency. The effects of such very improbable seismic events would be notable. However, as indicated in Section 3.3.5, the East Tennessee Seismic Zone (ETSZ) is characterized by frequent small and moderate magnitude earthquakes that have historically produced limited damage. Structures and facilities of the TRISO-X FFF comply with IBC 2018 and ASCE 7-16 codes for seismic design of structures and equipment. As such, the facility is built in accordance with geotechnical and structural specifications, engineering design criteria, applicable building codes, and relevant NRC Regulatory Guidance. Therefore, the impact of hazards associated with small or moderate magnitude earthquakes that may occur within the ETSZ is SMALL.

The subsurface profile consists of clay soils underlain by highly weathered dolomite. Materials such as these clays typically have negligible potential of liquefaction. There is no special design or mitigative measures planned for this site for seismic events. The structures and facilities comply with IBC 2018 and ASCE 7-16 codes for seismic design of structures and equipment.

Therefore, impacts from geological resources on the operation of the TRISO-X FFF are not expected to be significant. The impact of hazards associated with small or moderate magnitude earthquakes are SMALL.

No impacts to the facility are expected to occur in conjunction with either volcanic activity or tsunamis as these activities do not occur within the region. While landslides and sinkhole formation can occur within the region, the incidence for landslides within the vicinity of the HCS is low. The potential for sinkhole formation and karst features has been evaluated in conjunction with geotechnical and geophysical investigations, which found there were no significant voids in the subsurface beneath the TRISO-FFF buildings, including the process building. Therefore, the overall risks associated with these hazards during operation of the HCS is SMALL.

4.3.2.2.3 Decommissioning As described in Section 2.1.2.1.4 (Decommissioning Activities), decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF is conducted in accordance with applicable NRC license termination requirements. Subsurface soil testing may also be part the process, as appropriate, to demonstrate that any residual subsurface soil impacts meet NRC and USEPA guidelines.

Impacts to subsurface soils are SMALL upon completion of the decontamination and decommissioning process.

4.3.2.3 Mitigation Measures As previously indicated, potential geological impacts to and from the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL and are limited within the HCS. The facility is constructed and operated in accordance with appropriate geotechnical and structural specifications, engineering design criteria, applicable building codes, and relevant NRC Regulatory Guidance. These possible mitigation methods are also described in Chapter 5 of this ER (Mitigation Measures).

September 2022 4-27 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.3.2.4 Cumulative Impacts from Site Geology The geographic area of interest for geological impacts is the HCS as impacts are limited to the HCS. The construction of the 69 kV transmission line would occur along the edge of the HCS but would not result in an aggregate effect on geology in conjunction with the effects of the Project. All other planned projects discussed in Section 2.3 would be constructed outside the limits of the HCS and similarly, depending on the scope and need for subsurface excavation, may result in localized effects to each project site. Because the identified past, present and reasonably foreseeable future activities would result in localized effects only, the cumulative effect of the Project, added to effects associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, is SMALL. Because the Project would not result in noticeable impacts to geology beyond the HCS, the impact of the incremental contribution of either the preconstruction activities or the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on geology is not a significant contributor to the SMALL cumulative impact. The cumulative geological impacts to the TRISO-X FFF during the construction and operation phases is SMALL and are controlled by engineering designs.

September 2022 4-28 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.4 WATER RESOURCES IMPACTS 4.4.1 GROUNDWATER 4.4.1.1 No-Action Alternative The No-Action Alternative would not involve any construction, grading, excavations, or placement of foundations in the unconsolidated deposits that are associated with groundwater flow. Therefore, no impacts related to groundwater quantity or quality would occur for this alternative.

4.4.1.2 Proposed Action 4.4.1.2.1 Construction As noted in Section 4.3.1.2, the depth of excavation for foundations of most buildings is less than 2.5 ft. (0.8 m). Depths of features such as the exhaust stacks and the meteorological tower would be determined based on final design. Because of the shallowness of construction activities, foundation development does not impact groundwater levels, availability, or flow patterns.

The use of construction materials and equipment can result in the release of liquids and potentially cause impacts to groundwater quality. Such spills can include accidental releases of gasoline, diesel fuel, hydraulic lubricants, and other similar products used for construction equipment and materials. Proper engineering and design controls including development and following of BMPs such as concrete washout containment, construction entrance, and tire cleaning arrangement, and use of a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan reduces the potential impacts to groundwater during construction. In accordance with the SPCC plan, releases would also be avoided or minimized by regular maintenance and inspection of equipment and rapid response to clean-up spills that would contain and prevent contaminants from reaching soil, sediment, or water. Federal and State regulations and permit requirements also address management and control of all potential pollutants at the facility through the use of structural and non-structural BMPs such that release of such materials to off-site waters is minimized. As such, the potential for a surface release of contaminants to migrate downward to the groundwater aquifer resources is limited.

Implementation of engineering designs and controls including BMPs and a SPCC plan for construction would prevent water quality standards or limits from being exceeded; therefore, impacts to groundwater quality from construction of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL.

4.4.1.2.2 Operation Phase The TRISO-X FFF obtains all potable and industrial water from the City of Oak Ridge.

Therefore, there are no impacts to groundwater levels, availability, or flow patterns associated with groundwater use.

Potential impacts to groundwater quality during the operational phase are associated with large-scale releases of contaminants that are stored outdoors that could enter the subsurface. As noted in Section 4.12.2.1 (Public and Occupational Health Impacts), for those chemicals stored within the process building, internal containment measures limit the potential for release to soils and groundwater.

September 2022 4-29 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts The potential for groundwater impacts to potential users are dependent upon proximity of a given receptor with respect to the location of the TRISO-X FFF. As described in Section 3.4.1, there are no downgradient private or public water supply wells in proximity to the HCS. The potential for a surface release of contaminants to migrate downward to groundwater aquifer resources is also expected to be limited. Table 4.12.2-1 lists the non-radiological materials used in production that are stored outdoors at the TRISO-X FFF. Classes of these chemicals include cryogenic liquid, liquids, and compressed gases. Proper design, maintenance, inspection, and use of BMPs reduces the potential for the storage of these materials on public to impact health and safety. Tables 2.1-1a and 2.1-1b summarize the design features for the aboveground and underground outdoor storage tanks. These features include double walls and interstitial monitoring for the underground tanks. Additionally, routine inspection, maintenance, and response provisions of the SPCC plan reduces the potential impacts to the ground surface and, therefore, to groundwater. Outdoor storage tanks are inspected, tested, and maintained as recommended by applicable industry codes and standards to reduce the risk of a release.

An effluent monitoring program is established to manage effluent concentrations and ensure that nonradiological materials in plant effluents are maintained as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA). An Emergency Plan required by the NRC has been submitted to the NRC for review, and a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit includes a SPCC plan.

Sampling of groundwater wells is implemented upon identification of a release that could pose a threat to groundwater. Sampling results are compared to background data collected and reported under Section 3.4.1. If groundwater is identified as being impacted based on comparison to background groundwater quality, appropriate mitigation measures are implemented in accordance with NRC and USEPA guidelines.

The impervious areas and constructed drainage system results in concentration of runoff for infiltration along the drainage ditches and at the detention system forebay. This re-distribution of infiltration causes some amount of localized transient water table rise, or mounding, along the drainage ditches and under the forebay. This groundwater mounding could potentially at times limit the rate of infiltration at the forebay. The mounding dynamics depends on volume and frequency of runoff flowing into the forebay as well as the hydraulic characteristics of the water table and unsaturated zone in the vicinity of the forebay and capacity to rapidly transmit the infiltrated water away from the area. This is a common concern related to infiltration areas constructed as best management practices to mitigate the impacts of site development (Carleton, 2010). This consideration is addressed in final design and stormwater permitting for the facility, as appropriate. The Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) (2014) and University of Tennessee (Stormwater Management Assistance Research and Training) SMART Center and TDEC (2015) have provided detailed descriptions of the infiltration processes, regulatory guidance, and the Tennessee Runoff Reduction Assessment Tool (TNRRAT) available to evaluate runoff impacts of development.

As described in Section 3.3, karst features have been identified on and adjacent to the HCS.

Groundwater levels in upgradient portions of the HCS were noted to fluctuate between seasons (see Section 3.4.1). In conjunction with operation of the TRISO-X FFF, stormwater is released from the site detention basin at the outlet structure near the western side of the HCS identified in Figure 2.1-1, to the ground surface at the southwestern portion of the HCS. Drainage from this location is noted to be conveyed by an existing drainage swale to an observed sinkhole feature in the adjacent parcel. Post-developed flows from the watershed and site runoff to the outlet area at the western edge of the HCS are calculated to be less than the existing condition September 2022 4-30 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts (see Section 4.4.2). However, under the existing condition runoff from the local subwatershed is conveyed in a more diffuse manner within a karst swale to adjacent off-site areas. However, in conjunction with naturally occurring seasonally elevated groundwater levels in the vicinity of this area, site runoff may contribute to increases in groundwater levels. This effect, however, is expected to be limited to a localized area in the vicinity of the outfall and is only expected to occur seasonally. Stormwater management associated with the TRISO-X FFF includes collection systems and a stormwater management basin that would detain stormwater prior to release to the ground surface. The City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance 1-2016 (City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance) (Section 14-505 (7)(a)) includes provisions that require all new development and redevelopment to retain the runoff of the first one-inch of rainfall, which is primarily a water quality control BMP but also benefits flow rates and durations for control of stream erosion, and includes with stipulations for no increase in the 2-year peak flow which serves to mitigate stream erosion potential (City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2016). Additionally, designs for stormwater management have incorporated relevant and appropriate provisions included in TDECs stormwater management guidance for planning, design, and construction (TDEC, 2012; TDEC, 2014) and the City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance and development permit requirements, including relevant guidance for conditions for karst areas. Any additional management or mitigative measures is addressed in conjunction with final design and permitting by both TDEC and the City of Oak Ridge, as appropriate.

Concentrated runoff from the impervious surfaces and releases from the detention basin has the potential to result in locally increased levels of soil saturation and increased groundwater levels within proximity of the detention basin and immediate downgradient areas. However, with appropriate adherence to requirements of the City of Oak Ridge and the effective incorporation of TDEC stormwater management guidelines in conjunction with permitting and final design impacts to groundwater are SMALL.

Engineering design and controls in combination with the effective management, monitoring and maintenance procedures ensure that potential impacts to groundwater from operation of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL.

4.4.1.2.3 Decommissioning As described in Section 2.1.2.1.4 (Decommissioning Activities), decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF is conducted in accordance with applicable NRC license termination requirements. Groundwater sampling is conducted to evaluate whether groundwater is potentially contaminated by site activities. Any groundwater characteristics having elevated levels of constituents of concern are addressed as appropriate in accordance with NRC and USEPA guidelines. As discussed in Section 4.3.1, soils excavated and removed from the HCS are transported to an appropriate licensed disposal facility. Therefore, any contaminated shallow soils that represent a potential source of contamination to groundwater are removed upon completion of the decontamination and decommissioning process. Additionally, BMPs similar to those required during the construction phase are used to mitigate potential impacts during the decommissioning phase. Therefore, the overall impact to groundwater quality from the decommissioning phase is SMALL.

September 2022 4-31 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.4.1.3 Mitigation Measures Groundwater resource impacts resulting from the TRISO-X FFF are mitigated by measures that are planned to be incorporated into the facility design. These mitigation measures include the following:

• Engineering and design controls.

• BMPs.

• SPCC Plan.

Implementation of an appropriate groundwater monitoring plan as described in Section 6.2.2.

4.4.1.4 Cumulative Impacts Most of the identified projects in Table 2.3.1 are at locations more than 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the HCS or are currently under construction. As described in Section 3.4.1.1.3, groundwater quality in the vicinity has been impacted by historical operations at the ORR. Additionally, as described in Section 3.4.2.3.2, elevated fecal coliform levels within surface water and groundwater at the HCS are attributable to sanitary sewage overflows into East Fork Poplar Creek from the City of Oak Ridge. A project that would occur within 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) of the HCS is the Oak Ridge Electric Department (ORED) 69-kV transmission line extension from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the intersection of Imperium Drive and TN 95. However, construction of the transmission line extension does not require deep excavations and the use of applicable BMPs and adherence to a SPCC plan would reduce the potential impacts to groundwater during construction. Because the identified past activities have noticeably altered the groundwater quality, the cumulative effect of the Proposed Action, added to effects associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, are MODERATE.

As described above, groundwater impacts associated with construction, operation and decommissioning of the are SMALL and are limited to the HCS. Because the HCS groundwater is hydrogeologically isolated from most of the ORR groundwater contamination, and because the Proposed Action would not result in a noticeable change in groundwater quality, the impact of the incremental contribution of the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on groundwater quality are not a significant contributor to the MODERATE cumulative impact.

4.4.2 SURFACE WATER 4.4.2.1 No-Action Alternative Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X FFF would not be constructed, and the HCS would remain in its current state. Therefore, no impacts related to surface water quantity or quality would occur for this alternative.

September 2022 4-32 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.4.2.2 Proposed Action 4.4.2.2.1 Water Hydrology 4.4.2.2.1.1 Construction The construction of the TRISO-X FFF requires vegetation removal, excavation, placement of fill soil, grading and other land disturbing activities for the development footprint, including buildings, site roadways, parking areas and the stormwater management system that includes drainage ditches and stormwater detention system. However, construction activities do not result in impacts to any identified regulatory surface water resource (stream, pond, wetland) as such resources are not present on the HCS. Therefore, potential effects of the Proposed Action relate to changes in stormwater runoff and potential hydrologic alterations of receiving streams as a result of site drainage and detention.

Construction activities result in land disturbance and the alteration of drainage areas present on the HCS and as such have the potential to alter associated stormwater runoff conditions.

All identified existing surface water discharge locations (Figure 3.4.2-2) are affected by construction activities. However, flow alterations associated with surface discharge (SD) location #2, SD#3, SD#4 and SD#6 are negligible. Stormwater drainage to SD#5 (identified as an outlet structure in the Temporary Sediment Pond (TSP) Outlet in Figure 2.1-1) which discharges runoff to East Fork Poplar Creek (EFPC), are impacted in conjunction with the construction of a 14.1 ac. (5.7 ha) temporary parking and staging area and sediment basin with restoration of the disturbed area to near existing conditions at the conclusion of construction.

During construction, nearly all drainage from disturbed areas draining to SD#5 is discharged through the temporary sediment basin constructed and operated in compliance with TDEC (2012) and stormwater discharge permits, including TDEC NPDES general permit TNR100000.

Construction of the permanent main entrance roadway and the majority of a permanent asphalt surfaced parking lot would also occur within the existing drainage areas to SD#5. The western portion of the asphalt surfaced parking lot and a permanent secondary entrance road along the western boundary of the HCS are constructed within the SD#7 drainage area.

Stormwater drainage to SD#1 (identified as the outlet structure identified at the detention basin in Figure 2.1-1) is impacted by construction activities concluding with construction of the majority of the permanent facilities. Construction activities include placement of fill over the SD#1 drainage swale, raising the surface elevation of that area to a final grade as defined by the site development plan. The drainage function of the existing swale is replaced by construction of two drainage ditches with combined total length of approximately 4610 ft. (1405 m) that collect drainage and convey it through the detention basin to the SD#1 location.

Construction phase erosion and sediment controls address stormwater inflows to the HCS as well as stormwater from on-site areas. The total SD#1 existing condition drainage area is approximately 138 ac. (55.8 ha) whereas the TRISO-X FFF drainage area is 149.5 ac. (60.5 ha). Stormwater discharge controls are implemented within the SD#1 drainage area in compliance with TDEC regulatory standards (2012) and the TDEC general permit TNR100000 current at the time of construction.

Erosion and sediment controls, and other construction-phase stormwater BMPS are implemented to mitigate construction impacts on stormwater discharges from the construction area. Stormwater discharge permits for construction are obtained from TDEC and the City of September 2022 4-33 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Oak Ridge. Stormwater controls are in compliance with regulatory standards, including TDEC (2012) and the City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance (City of Oak Ridge, 2016). Stormwater controls are comprehensively described in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that is modified and updated throughout the changing conditions of construction.

As described in Section 3.3, karst features have been identified on and adjacent to the HCS.

While no surface sinkholes have been observed within the HCS, the SD#1 drainage swale may be interpreted by these regulatory agencies to be a karst swale due to its hydrologic characteristics resembling the characteristics described by TDEC (2014) as described in Section 3.4.2 (Surface Water) and because it discharges to a drainage swale that ends off-site west of HCS at a closed topographic depression that has been described as a sinkhole (DOE, 2003). The existence of karst conditions potentially creates additional complexity and uncertainty in stormwater runoff and surface water hydrologic conditions. The City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance identifies special requirements and limitations for land disturbance at areas classified as karst areas.

With adherence to relevant guidelines and regulatory criteria from the site and construction planning phases through finished construction, the Proposed Action would not cause significant alterations in surface water hydrology. Any additional management or mitigative measures are addressed in conjunction with final design and permitting by both TDEC and the City of Oak Ridge, as appropriate.

Following these regulatory minimum criteria and best practices, and applicable management measures developed in conjunction with final design and permitting, impacts to surface water hydrology are expected to be SMALL.

4.4.2.2.1.2 Operation The TRISO-X FFF stormwater management system is designed and operated in compliance with stormwater permits from the City of Oak Ridge and from TDEC, including stormwater management system regulatory standards established by the City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance and TDEC guidelines (2014) that are incorporated in the Ordinance by reference.

The TRISO-X FFF is required to have an NPDES permit for discharge of stormwater from an industrial activity. The facility is permitted under TDEC NPDES Stormwater Multi-Sector General Permit for Industrial Activity TNR050000 (TDEC, 2020), and subsequent renewals. The NPDES stormwater discharge permit is essentially a water quality permit, but stormwater quality and quantity are interdependent and best management practices are dependent upon stormwater quantity. The City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance more explicitly establishes minimum requirements for stormwater quantity as well as overall stormwater management function. Additionally, the facility requires compliance with the City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance which includes provisions for operation of regulated facilities to control both the quality and quantity of stormwater discharges. The City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance includes special requirements for stormwater management system design and operation in karst areas.

Stormwater drainage at the developed portion of the site (Figure 2.1-1) is substantially altered from the existing condition. The existing drainage swale, a broad swale that lacks a defined channel but that drains the majority of the HCS, and essentially all of the developed portion of September 2022 4-34 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts the site, as well as the drainage area north of the HCS, are replaced with two perimeter drainage ditches that collect runoff and convey it to the detention system located immediately upstream of SD#1. Some diversion of drainage area would occur as a result of site development, with an additional 11.9 ac. (4.82 ha) of area being diverted to SD#1. The diverted area includes one of the two asphalt parking areas, as well as an area of approximately 5.6 ac.

(2.27 ha) at the northeastern end of the developed site that drains to SD#3 or SD#4 under the existing condition. Each of the asphalt parking areas would have a subsurface storm drainage system that conveys collected runoff to the southern leg of the site drainage ditches.

Surface inflow exceeding the available retention volume in the forebay is passed into the main detention storage basin. The detention basin is divided into two separate sections, the forebay section is sized to collect the runoff from the entire permanent site areas and provide storage for the Water Quality Volume (WQV) and a portion of the sediment deposited due to the settlement of TSS present in the site runoff. The forebay is not lined and is allowed to infiltrate the WQV.

The main section of the detention basin is lined by a composite liner to prevent any infiltration and to minimize impacts on any karst formations under the facility. The detention basin effluent is released at a controlled rate, via the West Outlet. The forebay provides retention of WQV of 6.51 ac-ft (26,342 m3) of runoff with no surface discharge. This retention volume meets the City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance requirement for retention of the runoff from the first one inch of rainfall from the site for each rainfall event, referred to as the WQV. The WQV is discharged only by infiltration over the forebay area and percolation to groundwater.

Estimated maximum, or peak, discharge rates and detention system storage volumes for a 1-inch storm and for the 10-, 25-, 50-, and 100-year, 24-hour duration storm events are summarized in Table 4.4.2-1.

The detention system discharges to the SD#1 location and to the off-site topographic depression and karst swale west of the HCS. Within the 57ac. (23.1 ha) permanently developed portion of the HCS, there is approximately 24.5 ac. (9.9 ha) of impervious land cover in the form of building roofs, paved roadways, and two asphalt parking lots. The impervious area, therefore, accounts for approximately 43 percent of the developed portion of the site and approximately 16 percent of the total drainage area to the detention system.

Post-developed flows from the watershed and site runoff to the outlet area at the western edge of the HCS are calculated to be less than the existing condition (Table 4.4.2-1). However, under the existing condition runoff from the local subwatershed is conveyed in a more diffuse manner within a karst swale to adjacent off-site areas. The impervious areas and constructed drainage system results in concentration of runoff for infiltration along the drainage ditches and at the detention system forebay. This re-distribution of infiltration causes some amount of localized transient water table rise, or mounding, along the drainage ditches and under the forebay. This groundwater mounding could potentially at times limit the rate of infiltration at the forebay. The mounding dynamics depends on volume and frequency of runoff flowing into the forebay as well as the hydraulic characteristics of the water table and unsaturated zone in the vicinity of the forebay and capacity to rapidly transmit the infiltrated water away from the area. This is a common concern related to infiltration areas constructed as best management practices to mitigate the impacts of site development (Carleton, 2010). This consideration is addressed in final design and stormwater permitting for the facility, as appropriate. TDEC (2014) and University of Tennessee SMART Center and TDEC (2015) have provided detailed descriptions of the infiltration processes, regulatory guidance, and the TNRRAT available to evaluate runoff impacts of development.

September 2022 4-35 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts The Proposed Action results in a small decrease in drainage area to the off-site intermittent stream located to the east of the HCS via SD#3 and SD#4. The drainage area to that intermittent stream is reduced by approximately 5.6 ac. (2.27 ha.), or approximately 6 percent.

Estimated pre- and post-development peak discharges on that intermittent stream are summarized in Table 4.4.2-2 and, based on the minor reductions in contributing flow, would result in negligible impact to the hydrology of the intermittent stream.

Site development includes excavation that results in steeper drainage courses conveying runoff from off-site areas north of the HCS into the constructed northern leg of the site drainage ditch system. These steeper constructed slopes that convey runoff into the drainage ditch likely require installation of a non-erodible lining to prevent head cutting. The erosion protection would also mitigate sediment deposition in the ditch system and in the detention basin.

The City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance (Section 14-505 (7)(a)) includes provisions for new development and redevelopment to retain the runoff from the first one-inch of rainfall. Although primarily a water quality control BMP. it also benefits flow rates and durations for control of stream erosion, with stipulations for no increase in the two-year peak flow which serves to mitigate stream erosion potential (City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2016). Any additional management or mitigative measures are addressed in conjunction with final design and permitting by both TDEC and the City of Oak Ridge, as appropriate. With adherence to design standards, regulatory criteria and TDEC stormwater management guidelines for final design and permitting, the Proposed Action would not be expected to cause notable impacts to existing streams. The existence of karst conditions increases uncertainty in the understanding of existing conditions, developed site surface drainage conditions, and potential impacts to surface drainage and are considered as required by TDEC guidance. Based on the above discussion, and the absence of regulated surface water resources on the HCS, impacts to surface water hydrology are SMALL.

4.4.2.2.1.3 Decommissioning Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF would include cleaning and removal of radioactive and hazardous waste contamination that may be present on materials, equipment, and structures.

The activities are detailed in a Decommissioning Plan prepared and submitted to the NRC.

Some of the facilities, including buildings, drainage features, access roads, and parking areas built for the TRISO-X FFF, could remain in place after closure. Erosion-control BMPs similar to those required during the construction phase are used to mitigate potential impacts during the decommissioning phase. The stormwater management system would remain, functioning as it would during the operation phase. Therefore, no additional impacts would occur. As such, impacts from the decommissioning phase are SMALL.

4.4.2.2.1.4 Cumulative Impacts Reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. Most of the identified projects are at locations more than 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the HCS or are currently under construction (i.e., Oak Ridge Enhanced Technology and Training Center). One foreseeable project adjacent to the HCS is the ORED 69-kV transmission line extension from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the intersection of Imperium Drive and TN

95. This project is an overhead transmission line, no hydrologic alterations of surface water resources is expected. The scope of other proposed actions in Table 2.3-1 may include the alteration of water bodies during construction and operational phases within their respective project areas. While specific details regarding the scope of many of these actions are lacking, September 2022 4-36 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts each project would entail land disturbing activities with the potential to alter surface water resources during construction and operational phases. None of the actions identified in Table 2.3-1, however, geographically intersect with the same resources affected by the proposed project. Because the identified past activities within the geographic reference area have not noticeably altered the surface water hydrology, the cumulative effect of the Proposed Action, added to effects associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, are SMALL.

Furthermore, as described above surface water impacts resulting from construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are limited to stormwater alteration and overall hydrologic impacts are SMALL and are limited to the HCS. Because the Proposed Action would not result in a noticeable change in surface hydrology, the impact of the incremental contribution of the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on surface water hydrology would not be a significant contributor to the SMALL cumulative impact.

4.4.2.2.2 Water Use The TRISO-X FFF obtains water, for both potable and industrial use, from the City of Oak Ridge public water distribution system. All wastewater is discharged to the City of Oak Ridge municipal sanitary sewer collection system. As such there are no impacts to surface water use or water availability as a result of water use by the TRISO-X FFF.

4.4.2.2.3 Water Quality 4.4.2.2.3.1 Construction As identified in Section 3.4.2 (Surface Water), there are no regulatory surface water features on the HCS, therefore, there are no direct impacts to or alteration of existing surface water resources.

Construction of a TSP (Figure 2.1-1) would decrease off-site sedimentation and pollutant loading related to construction activities. As described in Section 2.1.2, runoff from the temporary construction laydown and parking areas are collected in the temporary drainage ditches and discharged to the TSP. The outlet structure in the TSP discharges the effluent at a controlled rate to the existing ditch along the Renovare Blvd. The TSP is designed to ensure settlement of sediments from the collected runoff and discharge water meeting water quality requirements of TDEC and the City of Oak Ridge.

Potential indirect impacts to surface water quality include increased sediment loading to receiving streams as a result of vegetation clearing and land disturbing activities. These impacts are anticipated to be similar to those of construction of any typical industrial or commercial facility in the area. Localized temporary stockpiling of soils prior to transport to an off-site facility and site disturbance on unpaved areas may result in associated short-term erosion. Stockpiles of soils and materials are placed on generally level or only gently sloped lands to minimize erosion. Where slopes are steeper, appropriate erosion control measures are used to minimize erosion and sedimentation into receiving surface water features.

Erosion and sediment controls, and other construction-phase stormwater best management practices are implemented to mitigate construction impacts on water quality of receiving water from the construction area. Stormwater discharge permits for construction are obtained from September 2022 4-37 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts TDEC and the City of Oak Ridge. Stormwater controls are in compliance with regulatory standards, including TDEC (2012) and the City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Management Ordinance (City of Oak Ridge, 2016). Stormwater controls are comprehensively described in SWPPP that are modified and updated throughout the changing conditions of construction to maintain water quality.

BMPs such as slit fencing, straw wattles, concrete washout containment, construction entrance, and tire cleaning arrangement are utilized throughout the construction phase. These measures minimize the potential for runoff of fuels, lubricants, oily wastes, chemical wastes, sanitary wastes, herbicides and pesticides.

Releases are avoided or minimized by regular maintenance and inspection of equipment and rapid response to clean-up spills that would contain and prevent contaminants from reaching soil, sediment, or water. Additionally, Federal and State regulations and permit requirements address management and control of all potential pollutants at the facility through the use of structural and non-structural BMPs such that release of such materials to off-site waters is minimized. Proper engineering and design controls including development and following of BMPs such as concrete washout containment, construction entrance, and use of a SPCC plan reduces the potential impacts to surface water during construction.

Impacts are minimized with the implementation of required sediment and erosion control measures that meet or exceed the regulatory requirements, including those in the NPDES stormwater permit and TDEC Stormwater Construction Permit (TNR100000). Therefore, no adverse impacts on surface-oriented designated water uses in receiving waters downstream of the TRISO-X FFF are anticipated.

With implementation of BMPs, construction of the Proposed Action would not cause water quality standards or limits to be exceeded; therefore, indirect impacts to water quality are SMALL.

4.4.2.2.3.2 Operation Sanitary wastewater from the TRISO-X FFF is discharged through the existing sanitary sewer system to be treated by the City of Oak Ridge. Liquid process waste is either treated on-site and discharged through the existing sanitary sewer system or removed and treated off-site.

During operation of the TRISO-X FFF, stormwater collected from the buildings and the parking areas are drained to the stormwater detention basin that is located on the southwest side of the facility. Stormwater from the site is collected in peripheral ditches and the interior stormwater system and then be discharged into the stormwater detention basin. The stormwater detention basin is designed to store the WQV generated by the first 1-inch of rainfall. All residual water runs off to surface streams.

Stormwater collected during normal operations would contain pollutants typically associated with runoff collected from public streets and parking areas. Small amounts of oil and grease, metals, and other constituents associated with vehicular activity are expected to be carried in runoff from the roads and parking areas within the site. All constituents within stormwater runoff are expected to be at or below the allowable limits set by TDEC. Any stormwater runoff from electrical transformers, mechanical yards and above ground tank containments is collected separately and disposed of after adequate treatment.

September 2022 4-38 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Application for a NPDES stormwater permit for industrial activity would likely be required for the Proposed Action. Development of a SWPPP, use of BMPs, and adherence to requirements under the NPDES permit, limits run-off during normal operations. Furthermore, an SPCC plan is prepared for the operational phase to reduce the potential impacts to surface water associated with accidental releases or spills that may contain contaminants.

Therefore, no degradation of water quality is expected in the downstream receiving waters or surface-oriented water users. In summary, impacts to the quality of receiving surface waters from operation of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL.

4.4.2.2.3.3 Decommissioning In conjunction with decommissioning, erosion-control BMPs similar to those required during the construction phase are used to mitigate potential impacts during the decommissioning phase.

Transportation related activities associated with the TRISO-X FFF would also gradually decrease, further reducing any minimal downstream impact to receiving waters. Stormwater would continue to be routed from the TRISO-X FFF to the stormwater detention basin during and after the decommissioning phase; therefore, no additional impacts would occur.

Furthermore, an SPCC plan is prepared for the decommissioning phase to reduce the potential impacts to surface water associated with accidental releases or spills that may contain and contaminants. The overall impact to surface water quality from the decommissioning phase is SMALL.

4.4.2.2.3.4 Mitigation Measures As previously indicated, potential water quality impacts to and from the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL and are limited to areas within the HCS. The facility is constructed utilizing appropriate erosion control measures and other designs and BMPs in accordance with State and Federal permits. During operations, the TRISO-X FFF would continue to use the on-site retention ponds to collect stormwater runoff and discharge from the site would continue to be monitored under the NPDES stormwater permit. BMPs are further described in Chapter 5 of this ER (Mitigation Measures).

4.4.2.2.3.5 Cumulative Impacts Most of the identified projects in Table 2.3.1 are at locations more than 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the HCS or are currently under construction. As described in Section 3.4.2.3, elevated levels of PCBs mercury and E. coli have been documented in the East Fork Poplar Creek as a result of municipal and industrial point source discharges. As described in Section 2.3.2, a 69-kV transmission line is expected to be installed from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the Horizon Center Park. This project requires land disturbance activities that would result in associated temporary soil erosion and sedimentation in receiving streams. This project is expected to comply with all appropriate TDEC permitting requirements for land disturbance activities including the implementation of appropriate BMPs to minimize erosion and sedimentation. The EFPC is expected to be the receiving stream from any related site runoff from this transmission project. In contrast, land disturbance and runoff from the construction activities associated with the TRISO-X FFF are controlled using BMPs and the TSP prior to release to associated off-site areas. Flow from the TSP would ultimately be discharged to the EFPC, but at a location several miles upstream of the work area related to the 69-kV transmission line. Because the identified past activities have noticeably altered the surface September 2022 4-39 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts water quality, the cumulative effect of the Proposed Action, added to effects associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, are MODERATE.

As described above, impacts to surface water quality associated with construction, operation and decommissioning of the are SMALL and are limited to the HCS. Because the Proposed Action would not result in a noticeable change in surface water quality, the impact of the incremental contribution of the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on surface water quality would not be a significant contributor to the MODERATE cumulative impact.

4.4.3 FLOODPLAINS 4.4.3.1 No-Action Alternative Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X FFF would not be constructed, and the HCS would remain in its current state. Consequently, there are no impact to floodplains.

4.4.3.2 Proposed Action As noted in Section 3.4.3 (Floodplains), the HCS is not located within a mapped 100-year floodplain and there are no National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) mapped floodplains near the site. Also as noted in Section 3.4.3, a floodplain investigation of EFPC was completed by the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) (1991) with the TVA results used by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to map the EFPC 100-year and 500-year inundation areas (USACE 1992).

The EFPC 100-year flood elevation near the eastern corner of the site is approximately 765 ft.

(233 m) (no standard elevation datum is referenced). The backwater from that flood extends upstream along the unnamed tributary and along the eastern boundary of HCS. The lowest existing ground elevation along the eastern corner of the HCS is approximately 778 ft. (237 m).

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/USACE 100-year flood elevation is approximately 759.4 ft. mean sea level (mile 1.92 of the hydraulic model) (Section 3.4.3). Additionally, the ground surface elevation of the TRISO-X FFF is at an elevation of 811.0 ft. (247.2 m). As such, facility is well above the 100-year flood elevation and is not vulnerable to flooding impacts.

As described in Section 3.4.2, (Surface Water), U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) topographic mapping identified one intermittent stream passing through the HCS and one located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the HCS. The feature passing through the HCS was investigated in the field and found to lack the required characteristics of a stream or a wet weather conveyance as defined by Clean Water Act (CWA) and TDEC regulation and thus is best referred to as a karst swale. Flows through the USGS mapped swale that runs through the HCS is addressed by the stormwater management system for the site, which is designed to handle a 100-year return period flood flow onto and through the HCS.

The City of Oak Ridge participates in the NFIP (FEMA, 2022). The NFIP requires that participating jurisdictions adopt and enforce an ordinance regulating development in all flood prone areas, whether mapped by the NFIP or not mapped. The City of Oak Ridge has incorporated the floodplain development ordinance in Zoning Code, Article IX (Section 9.07)

(City of Oak Ridge, 2020).

September 2022 4-40 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts There are no impacts to mapped floodplains during the construction phase, the operation phase, or the decommissioning phase. Therefore, construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are consistent with Executive Order (EO) 11988, Floodplain Management, and the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance, which addresses development in all flood prone areas, including areas that may not have been mapped by the NFIP.

4.4.3.2.1 Cumulative Impacts Reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. Most of the identified projects are at locations more than 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the HCS or are currently under construction (i.e., Oak Ridge Enhanced Technology and Training Center). However, as described in Section 2.3.2, a 69-kV transmission line is expected to be installed from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the Horizon Center Park. This proposed project would result in land disturbance activities and clearing activities in uplands but would not entail impacts to floodplains. Furthermore, as described above, there is no impact to mapped floodplains during the construction, the operation phase, or the decommissioning phase. As such there is no cumulative impact to floodplains as a result of construction, operation or decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF.

4.4.4 WETLANDS 4.4.4.1 No-Action Alternative Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X FFF is not be constructed, and the HCS would remain in its current state. Consequently, there is no impact to wetland resources.

4.4.4.2 Proposed Action 4.4.4.2.1 Construction Wetlands were not identified on the HCS; therefore, there is no direct impact to delineated wetlands. Further, construction activities would avoid direct disturbance to streams and a wet weather conveyance (WWC) identified northeast of the HCS.

Potential indirect impacts include increased sedimentation in off-site receiving wetlands due to vegetation removal and ground disturbance. Wetlands have been mapped in areas adjacent to the HCS by National Wetland Inventory along EFPC and associated tributary streams as described in Section 3.4.4 (Wetlands). These impacts are similar to those of construction of any typical industrial or commercial facility in the area. Impacts are minimized with the implementation of required sediment and erosion control measures and other BMPs such as silt fence, stone check dams, erosion control blankets, construction entrance/exit, geotextile, riprap, sediment basin, and stormwater drain inlet/outlet protection.

Indirect impacts to off-site wetland resources due to site construction phase runoff and sedimentation are minimized by appropriate use of BMPs. As such impacts to off-site wetlands are SMALL.

4.4.4.2.2 Operation Due to the lack of on-site wetlands, no direct impacts to wetlands are anticipated during the operation of the TRISO-X FFF. Additionally, HCS operation would not result in the release or September 2022 4-41 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts discharge of effluents to adjacent off-site wetland areas. As such, indirect impacts to off-site wetlands are SMALL.

4.4.4.2.3 Decommissioning Impacts from decommissioning are similar to those discussed for construction (Section 4.4.4.2.1) and are SMALL.

4.4.4.3 Mitigation Measures The facility design would avoid all direct impacts to wetlands. Indirect impacts to off-site wetland resources due to site construction phase runoff and sedimentation are minimized by appropriate use of BMPs. BMPs are further described in Chapter 5 (Mitigation Measures).

4.4.4.4 Cumulative Impacts As noted in Section 2.3 (Cumulative Effects), reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. Most of the identified projects are at locations more than 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the HCS or are currently under construction (i.e.,

Oak Ridge Enhanced Technology and Training Center).

The scope of other proposed actions in Table 2.3-1 may entail the alteration of wetland resources during construction and operational phases within their respective project areas.

While specific details regarding the scope of many of these actions are lacking, each project would entail land disturbing activities with the potential to alter land cover and impact, either directly or indirectly, wetland resources during construction and operational phases. It is expected that many of these projects are developed in proximity to existing facilities and would therefore be developed on previously disturbed lands and landscaped areas, thus minimizing wetland impacts. Other foreseeable actions such as the TVA Advanced Nuclear Technology Park at the Clinch River Nuclear Site may result in greater effects to wetland resources; but effects associated with the development of the Clinch River Nuclear Site would not geographically intersect with the same resources affected by the project. As described in Section 2.3.2, a 69-kV transmission line is expected to be installed from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the Horizon Center Park. This project would result in land disturbance activities and clearing activities but would not entail impacts to wetlands. Because the identified past activities within the geographic reference area have not noticeably altered wetlands, the cumulative effect of the Proposed Action, added to effects associated with past, present, or reasonably foreseeable future projects, is SMALL.

Furthermore, as described above, wetland impacts resulting from construction, operation and decommissioning of the HCS are SMALL and limited to potential indirect effects to off-site wetland resources associated with construction phase runoff and sedimentation that is minimized by appropriate use of BMPs to adjacent off-site wetlands. As such, because the Proposed Action does not alter wetlands, the impact of the incremental contribution of the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on wetlands is minimal and is not a significant contributor to the SMALL cumulative impact.

September 2022 4-42 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.4.2-1 Pre- and Post-Development Peak Stormwater Flows SD#1 Pre-Development Post-Development Return Period Peak Discharge Peak Discharge Peak Storage (years) Rate (cfs) Rate (cfs) Volume (ac-ft) 1-Inch Rainfall - - 6.51 (WQV) 10 104 23 14.34 25 158 82 15.49 50 199 123 16.07 100 256 182 15.55 Abbreviation:

WQV = water quality volume September 2022 4-43 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.4.2-2 Pre- and Post-Development Peak Stormwater Flows Off-site Intermittent Stream Peak Discharge Rate Return Period (years) Pre-Development (cfs) Post-Development cfs) 10 127 119 25 173 162 50 214 200 100 240 256 September 2022 4-44 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.5 ECOLOGY IMPACTS 4.5.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) is not constructed, and the Horizon Center site (HCS) remains in its current state. Consequently, there is no impact to ecology under this alternative.

4.5.2 PROPOSED ACTION 4.5.2.1 Biotic Communities Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated at the HCS. Details regarding site preparation and construction of the TRISO-X FFF are provided in Figure 2.1-1 of this ER.

4.5.2.1.1 Construction As noted in Section 3.5.1 (Biotic Communities), construction of the TRISO-X FFF primarily occurs in an area currently characterized as previously disturbed and periodically maintained herbaceous upland. The project does not involve clearing along stream banks, filling of waters of the United States, dredging, disposal of dredged material, or the development of waste disposal areas.

While the construction activities may not affect the entire HCS, it is conservatively assumed that all areas are affected by construction activities in order to account for future activities or alterations to construction plans. Figure 3.5-1 depicts the HCS and associated ecological features on the site. Approximately 105 ac. (42.5 ha) of herbaceous upland are affected within the HCS. Another 4.8 ac. (1.9 ha) of mixed forest occurs along the northern and northeastern boundaries of the site. A small area (0.2 ac. [0.08 ha]) of evergreen forest is also located along the northern boundary of the site. Each of the forested areas may be affected by construction of the HCS. Total impacts to on-site forested areas include approximately 5 ac. (2 ha) and are not significant when compared to the vast amount of forested land remaining in the vicinity (see Table 3.5.2-1).

As described in Section 3.5, several invasive plant species were observed on the HCS. Once construction is completed, temporary impact areas are replanted with non-invasive herbaceous plant species to limit erosion and limit the establishment of non-native, weedy species.

In conclusion, effects to natural communities under the Proposed Action are minor. Most of the limits of construction for the TRISO-X FFF are within previously disturbed and periodically maintained/mowed herbaceous habitat. In addition, site restoration measures are used to control invasive species. As such, impacts to biotic communities are SMALL, and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.

4.5.2.1.2 Operations As discussed in Section 3.5.1, much of the HCS is currently open, periodically maintained herbaceous land and does not contain any intact, high-quality native plant communities. During operation, herbicide application is occasionally used around buildings and driveways as part of lawn maintenance activities to control weedy species. Herbicide application is only used for the September 2022 4-45 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts control of targeted weedy plant species following herbicide label application rates and safety precautions. Operations and maintenance activities avoid direct disturbance to any remaining on-site ecological communities. Therefore, because operations occur in areas previously disturbed and herbicide application precautions and safety measures are followed, operational impacts to biotic communities are SMALL.

4.5.2.1.3 Decommissioning Decommissioning activities occur within the limits of the TRISO-X FFF established during operations. BMPs are implemented to minimize erosion and sediment runoff. Disturbed areas are replanted in accordance with the regulations at the time of decommissioning. Overall impacts to biotic communities from decommissioning activities are similar to the impacts from construction and are SMALL.

4.5.2.2 Terrestrial Resources 4.5.2.2.1 Construction As discussed in Section 4.5.2.1.1 and shown on Table 3.5.2-1, approximately 105 ac. (42.5 ha) of herbaceous habitat and 5 ac. (2.0 ha) of forest habitat are affected by construction within the HCS. Habitat that could support common wildlife is permanently converted to developed land or used temporarily for construction laydown. Trees are removed during the period between November 1 and March 31 to avoid disturbance to roosting and nesting wildlife species.

Following construction, any temporary use areas are replanted with non-invasive herbaceous plant species.

All construction activities are limited to the HCS, therefore there are no direct impact to the species located in the adjacent DOE greenways. Construction and sediment control BMPs through a project-specific SWPPP are used to minimize indirect effects to off-site areas. White-tailed deer, gray squirrel, eastern cottontail, wild turkey, and mourning dove are identified in Section 3.5.2.2 (Wildlife) as recreationally valuable game species expected to occur on-site.

These species are abundant in the vicinity and impacts to habitat for these species are minimal.

Avian collisions with man-made structures are the result of numerous factors related to species characteristics such as flight behavior, age, habitat use, seasonal and diurnal habitats; and environmental characteristics such as weather, topography, land use, and orientation of the structures (Drewitt and Langston, 2008). Although cranes and other construction equipment are used to erect building structures, they are not likely to pose a substantial risk for avian collisions because the buildings are relatively low, and the site is in a valley. As discussed in Section 4.9 (Visual/Scenic Resources Impacts), the tallest portion of the TRISO-X FFF buildings are only approximately 54 ft. (16.5 m) high, and the height of the adjacent tree canopy is estimated to be approximately 60 ft. (18.3 m) (LANDFIRE, 2019). Two HVAC vent stacks and one meteorological tower, which extend approximately 100 ft. (30.5 m) and less than 200 ft. (61 m) in height, respectively, are taller than the adjacent tree canopy.

As discussed in Section 3.5.2.3.1 of this ER, Blackoak Ridge, which is located immediately north of the HCS, along with other nearby ridges, may act as a migratory corridor. However, the ridges are at higher elevations than the site, which is in a valley. Construction cranes are lower, smaller, and more easily avoidable than the primary migratory corridors. Therefore, occurrences of avian collisions with construction equipment are temporary, and the number of collisions are small, relative to avian populations within the vicinity.

September 2022 4-46 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Wildlife species have the potential to be affected by the use of artificial lighting during nighttime construction activities. For example, frogs have been found to inhibit their mating calls when exposed to excessive light at night, and the feeding behavior of some bat species may be altered by artificial lighting (Chepesiuk, 2009). Although most construction work occurs during daylight hours, there is a chance that some work may occur during non-daylight hours when artificial lighting may be required. Therefore, there is potential for minor, temporary impacts to wildlife due to use of artificial lighting during construction.

Under the Proposed Action, the common wildlife found in the affected area are expected to continue to use other available habitats within and adjacent to the HCS. During active construction, most wildlife present avoid the construction sites and disperse to adjacent and/or similar habitats. Direct impacts to less mobile fauna could occur. However, given the fragmented and previously disturbed, periodically maintained nature of the HCS, such faunal communities are considered to be common and adaptable to disturbance.

Portions of the HCS could provide suitable habitat for some species of migratory birds of conservation concern that were identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)

Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC) website, such as red-headed woodpecker and prairie warbler (see Section 3.5.2.2). Potential effects of the Proposed Action on these species include long-term alteration of herbaceous habitats covering the majority of the site and a small amount of forest habitat along the northern and northeastern edges of the site. In addition, the Proposed Action may cause short-term avoidance of habitats during the construction phase. As described in Section 3.5 (Ecology), no protected bird species were observed during the 2021 and 2022 on-site field surveys.

Construction for the TRISO-X FFF occurs primarily during the day within open herbaceous areas that are periodically maintained. The natural habitat that is affected during construction within the HCS is minimal. There is a vast amount of forested habitat, and scattered herbaceous habitat, that remains available in areas immediately adjacent to and in the vicinity of the HCS (see Table 3.5.2-1). Therefore, impacts to terrestrial resources from construction activities are SMALL.

4.5.2.2.2 Operations Operational noise from the TRISO-X FFF and the vehicular noise from operations traffic are anticipated to have minimal adverse impacts to wildlife species. As noted in ER Section 4.7.2.4, noise impacts to wildlife are similar to human impacts and that the exposure levels identified to protect humans also protect animals and because wildlife present on and in areas adjacent to the HCS are generally already habituated to existing noise levels from surrounding land uses.

As mentioned above, some wildlife can be impacted by use of artificial lights. Lighting is required in the parking lot areas, building entrances, loading docks, and for security perimeter monitoring. The extent of security lighting has yet to be determined, but it would likely be localized near the perimeter of the process building. The lighting is similar to lighting that currently exists for other developments in the vicinity and impacts to wildlife populations are expected to be minor. Lighting is installed in association with local lighting ordinances as applicable.

As discussed in Section 3.5.2.3.2 of this ER, some travel corridors may occur within the existing herbaceous areas on the HCS that are utilized by common species, such as white-tailed deer, coyotes, and other species to travel to and from forested habitats on adjacent properties.

September 2022 4-47 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Operation of the TRISO-X FFF does not substantially affect these species because of an abundance of alternative habitats in the immediate vicinity of the HCS that would provide suitable travel corridors for wildlife species (see Table 3.5.2-1 and Section 3.5.2.3.1).

Maintenance activities for the TRISO-X FFF include vegetation management, including some herbicide application surrounding the buildings, driveways, and parking areas. Herbicide application is only used for the control of targeted weedy plant species and follows appropriate herbicide label precautions and safety measures. Potential impacts to wildlife include the localized displacement of mobile fauna during vegetation management activities. Vegetation maintenance activities are occasional and resulting disturbance to wildlife is similar to the existing periodic mowing that occurs within the majority of the HCS.

In summary, during operations, noise and artificial lighting at the TRISO-X FFF are similar to other developments and highways in the vicinity. In addition, wildlife travel corridors are still available near the edges and immediately outside the HCS, and maintenance/mowing activities of remaining vegetation on the site is periodic and not substantially different from existing periodic vegetation management practices. Therefore, impacts to terrestrial resources from operation and maintenance activities are SMALL.

4.5.2.2.3 Decommissioning Impacts from decommissioning are similar to those discussed for biotic communities (Section 4.5.2.1.3) and are SMALL.

4.5.2.3 Aquatic Resources 4.5.2.3.1 Construction As there are no streams or ponds within the HCS, construction activities do not affect any surface water features or associated aquatic species within the site.

Construction of a stormwater detention basin and associated drainage ditches minimizes runoff and sedimentation in on-site and near-site streams. Sediment and erosion control practices are included in the site stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) prepared for construction of the TRISO-X FFF. Furthermore, as noted in Section 3.4.4 (Wetlands), there are no on-site aquatic habitats), therefore, no forested riparian habitat is proposed for removal.

Based on avoidance of aquatic habitats and implementation of BMPs in accordance with a project-specific SWPPP, direct and indirect impacts to aquatic resources in conjunction with construction are SMALL.

4.5.2.3.2 Operations The TRISO-X FFF does not withdraw from any surface water body during operations as it obtains all potable and industrial water from the City of Oak Ridge. Therefore, there are no impacts associated with impingement or entrainment of aquatic biota. Furthermore, sanitary wastewater is discharged through the existing sanitary sewer system for treatment by the City of Oak Ridge. In addition, liquid process waste is either treated on-site and discharged through the existing sanitary sewer system or removed and treated off-site. As there are no direct discharges into surface water features, operations of the TRISO-X FFF avoid any pollutant or September 2022 4-48 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts thermal effects to aquatic resources. Therefore, the impacts to aquatic resources from operations are SMALL.

4.5.2.3.3 Decommissioning Impacts from decommissioning are similar to those discussed for biotic communities (Section 4.5.2.1.3) and are SMALL.

4.5.2.4 Important Ecological Systems 4.5.2.4.1 Construction 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, feeding, resting, and wintering areas, or other areas of seasonally high concentrations of individuals of important species. Although limited to approximately 5 ac. (2 ha) along the northern and northeastern boundaries of the site, forested areas on the HCS may be used occasionally for nesting, resting, or foraging by migratory birds and contain potentially suitable summer bat roost habitat (see Figure 3.5-1). However, natural habitats on-site are not considered high value or important ecological systems. In addition, no Federal or State-listed species or seasonally high concentrations of other important species have been observed on-site. Important ecological systems in the vicinity of the site are shown on Figure 3.5.4-1. Most of these areas are distant from the HCS, and construction and sediment control BMPs through a project-specific SWPPP are used to minimize indirect effects to off-site areas.

In conclusion, there are no important ecological systems on the HCS, construction of the TRISO-X FFF primarily occurs within previously disturbed areas, and construction and sediment control BMPs are used to minimize indirect effects to off-site areas. Therefore, impacts to important ecological systems from construction are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.

4.5.2.4.2 Operations As discussed in Section 3.5.4.1, there are several important ecological systems in the vicinity of the HCS, most of which are associated with the Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR). No important ecological systems are present on the HCS. As discussed in Section 4.5.2.3.2, increased stormwater discharges are minimal, and permitting requirements regulated by NPDES stormwater permit for discharges from the on-site detention pond minimize indirect effects to off-site areas.

As discussed in Section 4.5.2.1.2, vegetation maintenance activities for the TRISO-X FFF include some herbicide application. Indirect impacts to off-site important ecological areas are not anticipated because herbicide application is minimal, herbicide application only occurs on the HCS, and label requirements for herbicide application rates and precautions are followed.

In conclusion, there are no important ecological systems on the HCS, and due to the implementation of BMPs that control and limit off-site impacts, indirect effects to off-site ecological areas are minimized. Therefore, impacts to important ecological systems from operations are SMALL, and specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.

September 2022 4-49 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.5.2.4.3 Decommissioning Impacts from decommissioning are similar to those discussed for biotic communities (Section 4.5.2.1.3) and are SMALL.

4.5.2.5 Rare, Threatened, and Endangered Species 4.5.2.5.1 Construction Several terrestrial and aquatic animal species of conservation concern have the potential to be in the vicinity of the HCS based on listings obtained from the USFWS IPaC and the TDEC rare species online database (Table 3.5.5-1). Based on a review of habitat requirements for each of the species, potentially suitable habitat is present within or adjacent to the HCS for the monarch butterfly, eastern slender glass lizard, Indiana bat, northern long-eared bat, bachmans sparrow, bald eagle, American ginseng, fen orchid, Schrebers aster, tall larkspur, and white fringeless orchid. No bald eagle nests were observed during the 2021 summer and fall surveys and no large trees typically used for bald eagle nesting (cottonwood or sycamore) were observed on-site. In addition, no rare, threatened, and endangered species (wildlife or plants) were observed on-site as part of the field surveys .

There are approximately 105 ac. (42.3 ha) of herbaceous habitat and 5 ac. (2 ha) of forest habitats on the HCS site (Table 3.5.2-1). Construction activities are not expected to directly affect any protected species because no individuals of those species were observed during field surveys conducted in 2021 and 2022. In addition, no other known records of protected species occur within the HCS As identified in Section 3.5.4.2, Ecological Systems on the HCS, rare plant communities documented on the nearby ORR are not present within the HCS.

A total of seven potentially suitable bat roost trees fall within the HCS (See Table 3.5.5-2 and Figure 3.5-1). Where feasible, trees are removed during the period between November 1 and March 31 to avoid disturbance to roosting and nesting wildlife species. In addition, there are several potentially suitable bat roost trees in proximity to the site (see Figure 3.5-1) that remain, and there is an abundance of suitable bat habitat in the vicinity of the site (see Table 3.5.2-1).

As such, construction-related impacts to protected species on the HCS or in near off-site areas are SMALL. Specific mitigation measures and management controls are not needed.

4.5.2.5.2 Operations As discussed in ER Section 3.5.5 (Ecology) and in Section 4.5.2.5.1 above, there is limited potentially suitable habitat present within the HCS and off-site survey area that could provide habitat for rare, threatened, and endangered species. However, no protected species were observed on the site during 2021 and 2022 field surveys, and no known records occur.

Operations and maintenance activities do not affect adjacent habitats remaining outside of the HCS, where additional potential suitable habitats for several protected species are also present.

Therefore, impacts to rare, threatened, and endangered species during operations are SMALL.

4.5.2.5.3 Decommissioning Impacts from decommissioning are similar to those discussed for biotic communities (Section 4.5.2.1.3) and are SMALL.

September 2022 4-50 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.5.3

SUMMARY

OF ECOLOGY IMPACTS Particularly important terrestrial habitats such as wetlands, riparian habitats, staging or resting areas for large numbers of waterfowl, rookeries, restricted wintering areas for wildlife (e.g.,

winter deer yards), communal roost sites or breeding grounds, and areas containing rare plant communities are not present within the HCS. Important species and important habitats are not directly affected under the Proposed Action, and construction and sediment control BMPs through a project-specific SWPPP are used to minimize indirect effects. Therefore, overall impacts to ecological resources are SMALL.

4.5.4 MITIGATION MEASURES The design, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the Proposed Action sequentially avoid and minimize adverse impacts to ecological resources to the maximum extent practicable.

Disturbance activities comply with Federal, State, and local regulations. The HCS is primarily located within a previously disturbed, periodically maintained open herbaceous area where no high-quality habitats or vegetation communities occur. Therefore, overall ecological impacts from the Proposed Action have already been partially minimized through site selection. Further minimization is achieved through use of BMPs to protect aquatic resources in the vicinity of the HCS. Terrestrial impacts are controlled by re-grading disturbed areas as appropriate and planting with a non-invasive seed mix to prevent erosion and limit the establishment of non-native, weedy species.

4.5.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. Most of the identified projects are at locations more than 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the HCS or are currently under construction (i.e., Oak Ridge Enhanced Technology and Training Center). A project that would occur within 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) of the HCS is the ORED 69-kV transmission line extension from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the intersection of Imperium Drive and TN 95. A portion of this independent project would extend along the HCS, would require some additional tree clearing, and would cross the East Fork Poplar Creek and associated tributary streams.

The scope of other proposed actions in Table 2.3-1 may entail the alteration of ecological resources during construction and operational phases within their respective project areas.

While specific details regarding the scope of many of these actions are lacking, each project would entail land disturbing activities with the potential to alter land cover and affect vegetative communities and wildlife resources during construction and operational phases. It is expected that many of these projects are developed in proximity to existing facilities and would therefore be developed on previously disturbed lands and landscaped areas. Other foreseeable actions such as the TVA Advanced Nuclear Technology Park at the CRN Site may result in greater effects to ecological resources; however, none of the actions identified in Table 2.3-1 geographically intersect with the same ecological resources affected by the project.

Development activities within the vicinity have impacted vegetive communities and wildlife resources. However, as described in Section 3.5, the ORR provides expansive lands that are preserved as 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. These natural areas would tend to protect biological resources for the foreseeable future. Therefore, impacts of these past and ongoing actions in conjunction September 2022 4-51 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts with the effects of the Proposed Action and other reasonably foreseeable future actions on ecological resources is SMALL.

Future development at the Horizon Center Industrial Park has the potential to impact ecological resources in proximity to the HCS. Development of the TRISO-X FFF would occur within an area designated for industrial use and would avoid greenways designated adjacent to the HCS.

Furthermore, as described above ecological impacts resulting from construction, operation and decommissioning of the HCS are SMALL and limited to effects predominantly on previously disturbed lands of low ecological value. Because the Proposed Action would not result in a noticeable change in ecological resources, the impact of the incremental contribution of the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on ecological resources would not be a significant contributor to the SMALL cumulative impact.

September 2022 4-52 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.6 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS This section describes air quality characteristics of the HCS and potential impacts on air quality and visibility resulting from construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF.

4.6.1 REGIONAL AIR QUALITY The air quality in the region of the HCS is described in Section 3.6.2 (Air Quality. The Clean Air Act requires the USEPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment. 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. Anderson Knox, Loudon, and Roane counties are currently in attainment for all criteria pollutants, as explained in ER Section 3.6.2 (Air Quality).

As discussed in Section 3.6.2 (Air Quality), 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 nonattainment for the 1-hr SO2 NAAQS. Sullivan County is located approximately 100 mi. (161 km) northeast of the HCS in far northeastern Tennessee along the Virginia border.

4.6.2 ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION CHARACTERISTICS Atmospheric dispersion consists of two components: atmospheric transport due to organized or mean wind flow in the atmosphere, and atmospheric diffusion due to disorganized or random air motion. The magnitude of atmospheric dispersion is a function of wind speed, wind direction and atmospheric stability class (NRC RG 1.145). Historical wind speed, wind direction and atmospheric stability class data recorded near the HCS are described in Section 3.6.1.5, (Local Meteorological Data Analysis).

4.6.3 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X FFF would not be constructed and the air quality of the HCS would remain in its current state. Consequently, there are no impacts on air quality.

4.6.4 PROPOSED ACTION Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated at the HCS. New on-site air emission sources would operate at the facility during the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the facility. The source types, constituents, and levels of emissions to the atmosphere would vary over the life of the project. Air emissions control systems and implementation of planned mitigation measures reduce air emissions.

4.6.4.1 Construction Additional traffic and equipment movement around the HCS may generate fugitive dust during construction. These emissions are transient, limited to the construction phase and localized near the HCS. To mitigate fugitive dust production, best management practices are used to prevent particulate matter from becoming airborne. These practices include the following:

• The use of water spray or soil binders on soil surfaces, when necessary, in clearing and grading operations, and construction activities.

September 2022 4-53 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts

• The use of adequate containment methods during excavation and similar operations.

• Covering the beds of open-bodied trucks transporting materials likely to give rise to airborne dust when in motion.

• The prompt removal of earthen materials on paved roads accidentally placed there by trucks or earth moving equipment, or by wind erosion.

• The prompt stabilization or covering of bare soil once any earthmoving activities are completed.

Construction equipment may generate transient visible emissions. Proper maintenance of gas-and diesel-powered equipment mitigates those emissions.

4.6.4.2 Operation As described in Section 2.1.2.1.3, (Operation Activities), TRISO-X FFF manufacturing operations consist of receiving (High-assay low enriched uranium) HALEU in the form of triuranium octoxide (U3O8) powder enriched to less than 20 weight percent 235U; converting the U3O8 into a uranyl nitrate solution, into gel spheres, and then into fuel kernels; and processing the fuel kernels through coating, overcoating, fuel form pressing, and heat treatment and carbonization. These operations are supported by shipping and receiving, laboratory, quality control, research and development, uranium recovery, and waste disposal processes.

The TRISO-X FFF is designed for two production lines. The target production capacity of each line is eight metric tons uranium (MTU) per year, for a total annual capacity of 16 MTU. The facility is expected to operate 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />s/day, seven days/week, using two 12-hour shifts per day.

Ventilation and control systems are designed and operated to assure adequate control of radioactive dust, vapor, and particulate. Ventilation pickups for process equipment have local high efficiency filters. In addition to the local filters, the ventilation system has two main banks of high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters in series prior to atmospheric discharge.

The ventilation system for each production line discharges to a 100-ft. (30.5 m) tall stack adjacent to the production building. The stack for one of the two production lines (Line 1) has a larger diameter than the stack for production Line 2 to accommodate discharges from the production line; an area for research and development and common areas. Physical characteristics of the two stacks are listed in Table 4.6-1. The locations of the stacks for the ventilation system are shown in Figure 4.6-1.

Additional operations-related traffic result in vehicular air emissions. Nominal localized increases in emissions occur due to the increased numbers of cars, trucks, and delivery vehicles traveling to and from the TRISO-X FFF. Most of the increased traffic is associated with employees driving to and from work. Once the workers are at the site, the volume of traffic and its associated emissions are expected to decrease.

4.6.4.2.1 Emergency Operations Equipment Besides air emissions from the TRISO-X FFF process, other air emissions sources include two emergency diesel generators that supply backup power in case of an outage. The generators operate intermittently and for brief durations. Physical characteristics of the generators are listed September 2022 4-54 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts in Table 4.6-1. The locations of the emergency generators are shown in Figure 4.6-1. Emission rates from generators are listed in Table 4.6-2.

4.6.4.2.2 Mechanical-Draft Cooling Towers The TRISO-X FFF has two sets of mechanical-draft cooling towers (MDCTs). One set of towers rejects heat from the production process equipment (Process Heat Removal System - PHRS) and the other set rejects heat from the heating, ventilation, and air-conditioning (HVAC) system (see Section 2.1.2, Proposed Action).

The PHRS uses six cooling tower cells. Four of the cells operate normally and two are in standby. The cooling tower for the HVAC system has three cells. The MDCTs use six concentration cycles. The total dissolved solids content of the cooling water is 156 parts per million.

In MDCTs, excess heat in the cooling water is transferred to the atmosphere by evaporative and conductive cooling. In addition to evaporative heat losses, a small percentage of water is lost in the form of droplets (drift). The droplets evaporate, leaving dissolved solids as deposits. No noticeable impacts are expected from MDCTs due to fogging, icing, and drift. Physical characteristics of the MDCTs are listed in Table 4.6-1. The locations of the MDCTs are shown in Figure 4.6-1.

4.6.4.2.3 Air Pollutant Emissions Air emissions from the TRISO-X FFF include nitrogen oxides (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO),

sulfur oxides (SOx), hydrocarbons in the form of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), particulate matter (PM) having an aerodynamic diameter less than 2.5 microns (PM2.5), and particulate matter having an aerodynamic diameter less than 10 microns (PM10).

Potential annual emissions from the TRISO-X FFF are provided in Table 4.6-3. The emissions are based on an annual production rate of 16.5 MTU which includes a target annual production capacity of 16 MTU and an additional 0.5 MTU for research and development. The potential annual emissions of each criteria pollutant is below the applicable 250 tons per year (TPY) major source threshold for Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) under New Source Review regulations. The potential annual emissions of each criteria pollutant is below the applicable 100 TPY major source threshold under Title V regulations. Regarding the potential emissions of HAPs, emissions from the facility are below the Title V major source threshold of 25 TPY of any combination of HAPs or less than 10 TPY of any single HAP. Therefore, the TRISO-X FFF is a minor air pollutant source.

4.6.4.2.4 Ambient Air Quality Impacts Air emission sources associated with the TRISO-X FFF are managed in accordance with Federal, State, and local air-quality control laws and regulations. The facility complies with all applicable regulatory requirements of the Clean Air Act and TDEC requirements to minimize impacts on State and regional air quality. Since TRISO-X FFF is a minor source, impacts on ambient air quality are expected to be SMALL.

September 2022 4-55 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.6.4.3 Decommissioning The decommissioning phase of the project is expected to last two years. The plans for decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are described in Section 2.1.2.1.4 [Decontamination and Decommissioning (Description of the Proposed Action)]. Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF would involve removal and decontamination of the used process equipment and materials. The number of truck shipments depends upon the quantities of equipment and waste materials resulting from decommissioning.

Traffic and equipment movement around the HCS may generate transient fugitive dust during decommissioning. As in the construction phase, these emissions may impact air quality near the HCS for short periods of time. To control fugitive dust production, best management practices are used to prevent particulate matter from becoming airborne. These practices are described in Section 4.6.4.1 (Construction). Due to the transient nature of the emissions around the HCS during decommissioning, impacts on visibility are expected to be SMALL.

4.6.4.4 Visibility Impacts 4.6.4.4.1 Construction Additional traffic and equipment movement around the HCS may generate transient fugitive dust during construction. These emissions may impact visibility near the HCS for short periods of time. To control fugitive dust production, best management practices are used to prevent particulate matter from becoming airborne. These practices are described in Section 4.6.4.1.

Due to the transient nature of the emissions around the HCS during construction, impacts on visibility are expected to be SMALL.

4.6.4.4.2 Operation The principal air emission sources associated with the TRISO-X FFF are process furnaces, mechanical-draft cooling towers and engine-driven emergency equipment. The emergency equipment operates intermittently and for brief durations.

Air emission sources associated with the TRISO-X FFF are managed in accordance with Federal, State, and local air-quality control laws and regulations to minimize emissions. Due to the relatively small magnitude of emissions from the TRISO-X FFF, impacts on visibility are expected to be SMALL.

4.6.4.4.3 Decommissioning Additional traffic and equipment movement around the HCS may generate transient fugitive dust during decommissioning. As in the construction phase, these emissions may impact visibility near the HCS for short periods of time.

Equipment used for decommissioning may generate fugitive dust. To control fugitive dust production, best management practices are used to prevent particulate matter from becoming airborne. These practices are described in Section 4.6.4.1. Due to the transient nature of the emissions around the HCS during decommissioning, impacts on visibility are expected to be SMALL.

September 2022 4-56 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.6.4.4.4 Class I Areas Class I areas are national parks and wilderness areas that are potentially sensitive to visibility impairment. As discussed in Section 3.6.2.3 (Class I Areas), the nearest Mandatory (Federal) or American Indian Class I area to the HCS is the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee/North Carolina which is located approximately 34 mi. (54 km) southeast of the HCS.

Due to influence of the terrain in the Tennessee River Valley, prevailing winds around the HCS are from the southwesterly and northeasterly wind directions (see Section 3.6.1.1, General Climate; and Section 3.6.1.5, Local Meteorological Data Analysis), crosswind transport from the HCS to this Class I area is unlikely. Given the minor air emissions from the TRISO-X FFF, there is little likelihood that activities at the HCS could adversely affect air quality and air-quality-related values (e.g., visibility or deposition) in this Class I area.

4.6.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS Reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. Most of the identified projects are located more than 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the HCS or are currently under construction (i.e., Oak Ridge Enhanced Technology and Training Center

[ORETTC]). Projects under construction are expected to result in transient air emissions from construction activity.

A project that would occur within 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) of the HCS is the ORED 69-kV transmission line extension from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the intersection of Imperium Drive and TN 95. Air emissions associated with construction of this transmission line may overlap with emissions from construction of the TRISO-X facility at the HCS. However, construction air emissions are expected to be temporary, localized, and intermittent.

The scope of proposed actions in Table 2.3-1 may involve air emissions during their construction and operational phases within their respective project areas. While specific details regarding the scope of many of these actions are lacking, it is expected that these projects are developed in coordination with TDEC to ensure that air emissions permits are obtained and that air emissions are minimized as required. Furthermore, as described above air quality impacts resulting from construction, operation and decommissioning of the HCS are SMALL. As such, the cumulative effects of the Proposed Action on air quality resources are SMALL.

September 2022 4-57 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.6-1 Physical Characteristics of Atmospheric Emissions Sources at the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Location Grade Release Exit Exit Exit Source Label (UTM, zone 16) Elevation Height Diameter Velocity Temperature (Figure 4.6-1) (ft., AMSL) (ft., AGL) (in.) (fps) (F)

Eastings (m) Northings (m)

HVAC exhaust HVAC-1 737,309.324 3,983,031.032 810.5 100 80 50 75 (Production line #1)

HVAC exhaust HVAC-2 737,348.025 3,982,983.903 810.5 100 68 50 75 (Production line #2)

GMP building vent (a) GMP 737,445.110 3,983,036.430 810.5 -- -- -- --

Diesel generator #1 EGEN-1 737,184.440 3,983,023.362 810.5 15 12 160.9 884.2 (b,c,d,e)

Diesel generator #2 EGEN-2 737,217.191 3,983,050.259 810.5 15 12 160.9 884.2 MDCT - West (f,g) MDCT-W 737,066.995 3,982,953.422 810.5 18.2 120 23 96 MDCT - Middle MDCT-M 737,078.424 3,982,962.806 810.5 18.2 120 23 96 MDCT - East MDCT-E 737,089.854 3,982,972.190 810.5 18.2 120 23 96 a) Emissions parameters to be determined in detailed engineering b) Nominal stack heights and diameters for each generator are subject to change based on results from air dispersion modeling.

c) Exit velocity for each generator is based on a flow rate of 7582.8 cfm and a nominal 12 in.-diameter stack.

d) Operation for each generator is up to 100 hr. per year for maintenance, testing and non-emergency use, including no more than 50 hr. per year for non-emergency situations.

e) Enclosure housing dimensions for each generator: length: 384, width: 101, height: 148.

f) Cooling tower cell dimensions: height: 18-2 1/2; length: 14-1 3/4; width: 11-10. Fan diameter: 10 ft.

g) The water flow rate for the cooling towers in the PHRS is 1,600 gpm per cell. The water flow rate for the cooling tower in the HVAC is 2,100 gpm per cell.

September 2022 4-58 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.6-2 Emission Rates from Emergency Operations Equipment at the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Emission Limits (g/kW-hr)(a)

Source CO NOx + NMHC PM Diesel generator #1 and #2 6.4 3.5 0.20 a) Tier 2 emission limits from 40 CFR Part 1039, Appendix I.

September 2022 4-59 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.6-3 Potential Annual Emissions from the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Pollutant Mass Processed Pollutant Type Potential Air Based on 16.5 MTU Emissions Annual Production (TPY)

(Tons)

CO 13.548 Criteria 13.55 NO2 3.162 Criteria 3.16 Particulate matter 0.998 Criteria 1.00 HAPs and VOCs Hydrogen chloride (a) 32.182 HAP 0.00 Benzene 1.896 HAP/VOC 1.90 Methanol 0.108 HAP/VOC 0.11 Butanols 0.316 VOC 0.32 Cyclopentadienes 1.633 VOC 1.63 Dimethylbenzine 0.263 VOC 0.26 Ethanol (b) 474.690 VOC 47.47 Ethylene 1.264 HAP/VOC 1.26 HMDSO (c) 0.00 VOC exempt 0.00 Propanols 3.265 VOC 3.27 Propylene 2.672 HAP/VOC 2.67 Toluene 1.369 HAP/VOC 1.37 Total VOCs: 60.26 Total HAPs: 7.31 Maximum Individual HAP: 2.67 a) Based on 99.99% process control efficiency b) Based on 90.00% process control efficiency c) HMDSO is not a VOC. HMDSO is a linear, volatile, completely methylated siloxane. On October 5, 1994, cyclic, branched, or linear completely methylated siloxanes were listed as VOC exempt (i.e., excluded from the VOC definition for regulatory purposes due to low photochemical reactivity). https://www.epa.gov/ground-level-ozone-pollution/complete-list-voc-exemption-rules, Item 27, 59 FR 50693 page 25.

September 2022 4-60 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.7 NOISE IMPACTS Acoustical characteristics and ambient noise levels for the HCS are described in ER Section 3.7 (Noise). This section discusses noise impacts associated with construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on the surrounding environment.

4.7.1 NO-ACTION ALTERATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X FFF is not constructed, and the HCS would remain in its current undeveloped state. As a result, the existing ambient noise levels at the HCS would remain unchanged and there is no additional impact to the surrounding land uses.

4.7.2 PROPOSED ACTION Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated at the HCS. To assess the noise impacts associated with the Proposed Action, predicted noise levels are compared to ambient noise levels, described in ER Section 3.7 (Noise), and applicable local and federal sound level standards. Four representative noise monitoring (NM) locations were used to characterize baseline acoustical conditions at the HCS and at the property boundaries adjacent to the nearest noise receptors (Figure 4.7.2-1). NM-1 and NM-3 are considered representative of the baseline ambient noise levels along the adjacent segment of the North Boundary Greenway trail while NM-4 is considered representative of the ambient noise levels at adjacent businesses including the Philotechnics industrial facility and Community Reuse Organization of East Tennessee (CROET) offices. NM-2 is not representative of any specific noise receptors but served to characterize baseline acoustical conditions at the eastern portion of the HCS.

The noise impacts of construction, operation, and decommissioning activities associated with the TRISO-X FFF are described below.

4.7.2.1 Construction The current design plans for the TRISO-X FFF include the development of a main process building, as well as an administration building, graphite matrix powder (GMP) building, and security/emergency operation center (EOC) building (Figure 4.7.2-1). On-site development plans include external ground-based equipment, drainage features, parking and construction laydown areas, and entrance roads. Although initial construction activities, including site clearing and grading, may not affect the entire HCS, it is conservatively assumed that all areas are impacted by construction activities in order to account for future activities or changes to construction plans. Construction activities would last for approximately two years.

4.7.2.1.1 Sources of Noise and Predicted Noise Levels Construction activities would require the use of heavy equipment for clearing, excavating, grading, and construction of the buildings. A representative list of construction equipment that may be used on-site and estimated attenuated noise levels for each piece of equipment at various distances are provided in Table 4.7.2-1. Increased traffic noise to and from the HCS is also anticipated during the construction phase, due to construction workforce vehicle traffic, truck deliveries, and off-site shipments of construction debris.

September 2022 4-61 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.7.2.1.2 Community Impacts As described in ER Section 3.7.1.1 (Site Acoustical Characteristics), primary noise receptors in the vicinity of the TRISO-X FFF are users of the North Boundary Greenway recreational trail bordering the HCS to the west, and the industrial and commercial businesses (the Philotechnics facility and CROET offices) associated with the Horizon Center Industrial Park to the south.

Except for the North Boundary Greenway, there are no other recreational facilities, schools, churches, or other sensitive noise receptors adjacent to the HCS that are vulnerable to noise impacts from the TRISO-X FFF. Additionally, the nearest residences are approximately 0.6 mi.

(1.0 km) to the northwest and separated from the HCS by a heavily forested ridge which provides a natural noise barrier.

During construction of the TRISO-X FFF, the majority of construction activity would occur near the process building footprint (Figure 4.7.2-1), toward the center of the HCS at distances of approximately 400 to 555 ft. (122 to 169 m) from the closest property boundary. Thus, noise levels from construction equipment operated in this area would attenuate to levels below those listed for distances of 394 ft. (120 m) in Table 4.7.2-1 (72 A-weighted decibels [dBA] or less) at adjacent properties and would not exceed the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance maximum noise level of 80 dBA (City of Oak Ridge, 2020).

Certain areas, such as the construction laydown and parking areas, roadways, drainage features, and the perimeter security path, are located closer to the property boundaries than the primary construction area. For example, work on the perimeter security path would occur along the HCS boundary, adjacent to the North Boundary Greenway trail and the Philotechnics property (Figure 4.7.2-1). When construction equipment is operated in these areas, maximum construction noise levels at nearby receptors could temporarily exceed 80 dBA (Table 4.7.2-1).

However, construction activities occurring along any specific portion of the HCS boundary are relatively short-term, and once features such as roadways, laydown, and parking areas are established, they would primarily be used to transport and store construction equipment and materials. Noise associated with these areas during construction are attributed to movement of equipment to and from the primary construction area, which would result in noise levels lower than the maximum levels associated with steady state operation of construction equipment provided in Table 4.7.2-1. Additionally, construction noise attenuation is based on maximum estimated noise emissions to provide the most conservative basis for analysis; actual sound levels could be lower than predicted where vegetation provides additional sound absorption.

Increased traffic noise from construction workforce vehicle traffic, truck deliveries, and off-site shipments of construction debris would also contribute to increased noise during the construction period. Increased traffic noise to and from the HCS is also anticipated during construction of the TRISO-X FFF, due to the increase in vehicle traffic associated with the construction workforce and trucking associated onsite shipment of construction materials and offsite shipment of waste. As vehicles would access the HCS from Tennessee Highway 95 (TN

95) via roadways that serve only the Horizon Center Industrial Park (Renovare Boulevard, Imperium Drive, and Novus Drive) (see Section 4.2, Transportation Impacts), noise sensitive receptors along local/collector roadways and residential streets are avoided. Thus, noise impacts from construction traffic are SMALL.

Use of construction equipment may occasionally and temporarily result in noise levels at adjacent property boundaries that exceed the maximum limits established in the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance, and that are notably higher than the daytime ambient equivalent noise level (Leq) observed during the noise monitoring survey (Table 3.7.1-1). However, construction September 2022 4-62 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts noise would generally be intermittent over the approximately two-year construction period and would only be perceptible to receptors in the immediate vicinity of the Horizon Center Industrial Park where moderate noise levels are compatible with the industrial zoning designation (City of Oak Ridge, 2020). Recreators on the North Boundary Greenway may experience elevated noise levels along the segment of trail immediately adjacent to the HCS, but construction noise would dissipate at distances further from the site and noise impacts would not significantly detract from the overall use of the trail. Overall, noise impacts associated with construction on the land uses surrounding the TRISO-X FFF are temporary and SMALL.

4.7.2.1.3 Potential Mitigation Measures Temporary noise impacts during construction may briefly exceed the City of Oak Ridges maximum noise limit of 80 dBA at the adjacent property boundaries and would represent an increase over ambient noise levels. In order to reduce noise impacts from construction, there are various mitigation options that may be considered for application by the contractor.

Examples of this mitigation (New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 2018) are listed below:

• Equipping construction equipment with the manufacturers noise-control devices and maintaining these devices in effective operating condition.

• Utilizing quiet equipment or methods to minimize noise emissions during an activity, when possible.

• Operating equipment with internal combustion engines at the lowest operating speed to minimize noise emissions, when possible and practical.

• Closing engine housing doors during operation of the equipment to reduce noise emissions from the engine.

• Avoiding equipment engine idling.

• Utilizing quieter, less-tonal back-up alarms on construction equipment. These alarms should comply with all applicable safety restrictions, such as Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards.

4.7.2.2 Operation 4.7.2.2.1 Sources of Noise and Predicted Noise Levels Much of the equipment used during operation of the TRISO-X FFF are housed within the interior of the process building. Noise generated in the interior of the building would not produce noise levels that are detectable at off-site receptors. There are four main sources of external equipment that may generate notable noise during normal operation: transformers, cooling towers, pumps associated with the process heat removal system and chilled water system, and rooftop heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units located on the administration building, GMP building, and security/EOC building. Table 4.7.2-2 lists the external equipment utilized during normal operation, the estimated number of units needed for each type of equipment, and the noise level of each piece of equipment at 50 ft. (15 m). The locations of these external noise sources are also shown on Figure 4.7.2-1.

In addition to normal operating equipment, there are several sources of noise associated with loss of power operation. This loss of power operation equipment is also listed in Table 4.7.2-2 September 2022 4-63 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts and includes diesel generators and emergency cooling system pumps and chillers (Figure 4.7.2-1). While specific information regarding the noise levels of the emergency cooling system pumps and chillers are not currently available, the noise level associated with each piece of equipment is conservatively estimated to be equal to that of a diesel generator for the purposes of calculating predicted noise levels. The loss of power equipment would operate infrequently (approximately 200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br /> per year during typical operation), only during a loss of off-site power event or during periodic testing. This equipment would not operate concurrently with the external noise generators associated with normal operation.

Increased traffic noise to and from the HCS is also anticipated during operation of the TRISO-X FFF, due to the increase in vehicle traffic associated with the operational workforce and intermittent trucking associated with transport of raw materials, product, and waste.

4.7.2.2.2 Community Impacts The noise emissions for all noise generating external equipment were combined, along with recorded ambient noise levels, to calculate the predicted sound levels at the closest noise receptors (represented by the Philotechnics property boundary, the CROET property boundary, and a point on the North Boundary Greenway trail closest to the noise generating equipment

[See Figure 4.7.2-1]) associated with normal TRISO-X FFF operation. Table 4.7.2-3 provides the predicted day-night average sound levels (Ldn) which range from 56.5 dBA at the CROET property boundary to 63.4 dBA at the North Boundary Greenway trail during normal operation.

These levels are higher than the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USEPA) recommended Ldn of 55 dBA for outdoor and residential areas. However, the USEPA recommendation 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). Receptors in close proximity to the HCS consist of industrial park employees and visitors, as well as recreational trail users that would pass the TRISO-X FFF for brief durations, and thus would generally be less sensitive to noise than those in residential areas or public gathering spaces. Additionally, predicted sound levels are based on a conservative analysis using the bounding or maximum potential noise emission levels for each piece of equipment and assuming that all equipment is being operated simultaneously. Therefore, actual operational noise levels may be lower than what is estimated. No mitigation measures are required due to the potential exceedance of the USEPA recommended Ldn because it is not intended as a regulatory limit.

In addition to Ldn day-night average sound levels, the hourly Leq projections for normal operation were reviewed to determine compliance with noise limits established for adjacent business uses in the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance (City of Oak Ridge, 2020). The Ordinance dictates that the sound level at a business property boundary should not exceed 70 dBA for more than 50 percent of a one-hour period or 75 dBA for more than 10 percent of a one-hour period. The predicted hourly Leq ranges from 50.7 to 59.3 dBA at the adjacent receptors during normal operation (Table 4.7.2-3). As these levels are below 70 dBA, noise from normal operation would comply with the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance noise standards.

As shown in Table 4.7.2-4, Leq was also projected for loss of power operation; noise levels range from 26.4 to 54.3 dBA at the adjacent receptors, assuming concurrent operation of the diesel generators and the emergency cooling system pumps and chillers. Periodic testing for loss of power operation is limited to daylight hours, so the loss of power equipment would only be operated at night in an infrequent emergency scenario. Thus, the calculation of Ldn would not be applicable, nor would a comparison to the USEPAs recommended Ldn level. The analysis for loss of power operation considers only the predicted hourly Leq, which can be compared to the September 2022 4-64 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts noise level limits established in the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance (the sound level at an adjacent business should not exceed 70 dBA for more than 50 percent of a one-hour period or 75 dBA for more than 10 percent of a one-hour period). Based on the predicted Leq values, noise from loss of power operation would also comply with the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance noise standards (Table 4.7.2-4). Thus, impacts to adjacent land uses from both normal and loss of power operation of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL.

Traffic noise resulting from passenger vehicles for the operational workforce and intermittent trucking associated with transport of raw materials, product, and waste, is intermittent, and would utilize site access from TN 95 via roadways that serve the Horizon Center Industrial Park; local/collector roadways and residential streets would not receive notable traffic (see Section 4.2, Transportation Impacts). Therefore, traffic noise associated with TRISO-X FFF operation have a SMALL impact on the community.

4.7.2.2.3 Potential Mitigation Measures Although the maximum predicted Ldn at the adjacent land uses would exceed the USEPA recommended outdoor Ldn of 55 dBA during normal operation (Table 4.7.2-3), receptors subject to these noise levels do not include the most sensitive populations that the USEPA recommendations are designed to protect (e.g., residences, public gathering spaces, areas people inhabit during evening and nighttime hours). Receptors are limited to industrial park employees and visitors, and recreational trail users that would pass by for brief durations.

Therefore, since both the normal operation and loss of power operation would result in noise levels at adjacent properties that comply with the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance noise standards, no mitigation measures are warranted.

4.7.2.3 Facility Decommissioning Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF would occur over approximately two years and would involve removal and decontamination of the used process equipment and materials, as well as hauling the materials off-site. Thus, the majority of the noise impacting the surrounding land uses would likely be associated with hauling activities. These hauling activities would avoid local roads and thus have low noise impacts. The anticipated noise emissions associated with decommissioning are temporary and similar to or lower than those associated with the construction phase and therefore represent a SMALL noise impact. Mitigation and noise control measures similar to those listed in Section 4.7.2.1.3, for the construction phase, are implemented as needed.

4.7.2.4 Impacts to Wildlife Wildlife species observed or potentially occurring on or in the vicinity of the HCS are detailed in Section 3.5.2.2 (Wildlife). Although there has been significant research and findings related to noise impacts on wildlife (ASTM, 2016), there are no commonly accepted criteria for defining these noise impacts on wildlife. Typical noise related responses may include localized, short-term avoidance of an area during periods of excessive noise emissions (Blickley and Patricelli, 2010). One reference (National Research Council, 1977) states that wildlife impacts are similar to human impacts and that the exposure levels identified to protect humans also protect animals. For this reason, and because wildlife present on and in areas adjacent to the HCS are generally already habituated to preexisting noise levels, impacts to wildlife are similar to those described above for the various phases of the project and are SMALL.

September 2022 4-65 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.7.3 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS As noted in Section 2.3 (Cumulative Effects), a number of foreseeable future actions were identified in the vicinity of the HCS. As described above the nearest sensitive noise receptor are residences located approximately 0.6 mi. (1.0 km) to the northwest of the HCS. Therefore, the geographic area of interest for this resource is considered to be 0.6 mi. (1.0 km).

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.

A project that would occur within 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) of the HCS is the ORED 69-kV transmission line extension from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the intersection of Imperium Drive and TN 95. Noise associated with construction of this transmission line may overlap with noise associated with construction of the TRISO-X facility at the HCS. However, construction noise is temporary, localized, and intermittent. Future development at the Horizon Center Industrial Park, in combination with the Proposed Action, has the potential to increase ambient noise levels in the immediate vicinity. While the specific details regarding the scope of future development is generally unknown at this time, the increase in ambient noise is compatible with the current industrial zoning designations and the planned use of the industrial park. The scope of these other proposed actions may entail the alteration of ambient noise levels within their respective project areas. The majority of the other identified reasonably foreseeable future actions do not overlap geographically with the HCS and thus noise emissions from each of these actions would attenuate to minimal levels over distance such that there would not be an aggregately greater effect associated with the construction, operation or decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF. Because the identified past activities within the geographic reference area have not noticeably altered noise levels, cumulative impacts of the Proposed Action in conjunction with other reasonably foreseeable future actions on noise are SMALL.

Furthermore, as described above noise impacts resulting from construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are localized and are SMALL. Because the Proposed Action is localized but not result in a noticeable change in noise to sensitive receptors, the impact of the incremental contribution of the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on noise would not be a significant contributor to the SMALL cumulative impact September 2022 4-66 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.7.2-1 Attenuated Noise Levels Expected for Operation of Representative Construction Equipment Attenuated Noise Levels (dBA) 15 m 30 m 60 m 120 m Source (50 ft.) (98 ft.) (197 ft.) (394 ft.)

Air Compressor 80 74 68 62 Backhoe 80 74 68 62 Compactor 80 74 68 62 Concrete Pump 82 76 70 64 Concrete Saw 90 84 78 72 Crane 85 79 73 67 Dozer 85 79 73 67 Dump Truck 84 78 72 66 Excavator 85 79 73 67 Flat Bed Truck 84 78 72 66 Front End Loader 80 74 68 62 Generator 82 76 70 64 Lift 85 79 73 67 Paver 85 79 73 67 Pickup Truck 55 49 43 37 Welding Equipment 73 67 61 55 All Other Equipment >5 85 79 73 67 Horsepower

Reference:

FHWA, 2016 Note: Distances shown are the distances from the noise source September 2022 4-67 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.7.2-2 Noise Generating External Equipment for TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Estimated Noise Level Number of (dBA) for Units Normally Each Unit at External Equipment Operating 15 m (50 ft.)

Normal Operation 69kV/4.16 kV, 60 MVA Transformer 2 66 4.16kV/480VAC, up to 2 MVA Transformer 30 58 Cooling Tower Cell 7 62 Process Heat Removal System and Chilled 5 72 Water System Pump Rooftop HVAC Unit (Administration Building) 2 72 Rooftop HVAC Unit (GMP Building) 1 72 Rooftop HVAC Unit (Security/EOC Building) 1 72 (a)

Loss of Power Operation Diesel Generator 2 68 Emergency Cooling System Pump 2 68(b)

Emergency Chiller 2 68(b)

Notes:

a) This equipment would operate only during a loss of off-site power event or during periodic testing and would not be used concurrently with the normal operation equipment.

b) Specific information regarding the noise level of the emergency cooling system pumps and chillers is not available. However, the noise level is conservatively assumed to be equal to that of a diesel generator for the purposes of calculating predicted noise levels.

September 2022 4-68 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.7.2-3 Estimated Operational Sound Levels at Closest Receptors during Normal Operation Predicted Noise Levels at Closest Noise Receptors (dBA)

North Philotechnics CROET Boundary Property Property Greenway Boundary Boundary Trail Day-Night Average Sound Levels (Ldn) (a)

USEPA Recommendation for Outdoor Spaces 55.0 55.0 55.0 Existing Ambient Sound Level (b) 52.1 52.1 51.8 Predicted Sound Level with Normal TRISO-X FFF Operation (c) 60.7(d) 56.5(d) 63.4(d)

Hourly Sound Levels City of Oak Ridge Noise Level Limits (L50) (e) 70.0 70.0 N/A(f)

Predicted Sound Level with Normal TRISO-X FFF Operation (hourly) (Leq) (g) 56.3 50.7 59.3

Reference:

USEPA, 1974; City of Oak Ridge, 2020 Notes:

a) Ldn - Day-night average sound level.

b) As measured in the ambient noise study conducted in January 2022. NM-4 is considered representative of the ambient sound level at the Philotechnics and CROET property boundaries and NM-1 and NM-3 are considered representative of the ambient sound level along the adjacent segment of the North Boundary Greenway trail.

c) Maximum Ldn value, assuming every piece of equipment listed under Normal Operation in Table 4.7.2-2 is in use concurrently.

d) Predicted noise levels that exceed USEPA recommended Ldn of 55 dBA for outdoor and residential areas. However, the USEPA recommendation is not a regulatory standard. No mitigation measures are required.

e) L50 refers to the sound level, expressed in dBA, which is exceeded fifty percent of the time over a one-hour period. The L50 limit is the lowest (most stringent) of the citys noise limits for adjacent business land uses.

f) The City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance does not specify noise level limits for adjacent recreational land uses.

g) Leq - Equivalent noise level.

September 2022 4-69 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.7.2-4 Estimated Operational Sound Levels at Closest Receptors during Loss of Power Operation Predicted Noise Levels at Closest Noise Receptors (dBA)

North Philotechnics CROET Boundary Property Property Greenway Boundary Boundary Trail Hourly Sound Levels(a)

City of Oak Ridge Noise Level Limits (L50) (b) 70.0 70.0 N/A(c)

Predicted Sound Level with Loss of Power TRISO-X FFF Operation (hourly) (Leq) (d) 29.7 26.4 54.3

Reference:

City of Oak Ridge, 2020 Notes:

a) Day-Night Average Sound Levels (Ldn) were not calculated for loss of power operation, as scheduled testing of loss of power equipment is limited to daytime hours. Loss of power equipment would not be operated at night except under an emergency condition.

b) L50 refers to the sound level, expressed in dBA, which is exceeded fifty percent of the time over a one-hour period. The L50 limit is the lowest (most stringent) of the citys noise limits for adjacent business land uses.

c) The City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance does not specify noise level limits for adjacent recreational land uses.

d) Leq - Equivalent noise level September 2022 4-70 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES IMPACTS As described in ER Section 3.8 (Historic and Cultural Resources), a cultural resource survey was conducted to identify the potential occurrence of archaeological and historic resources potentially eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on and near the Horizon Center site (HCS). A total of five archaeological sites and one historic cemetery were documented during the archaeological survey: 40RE637, 40RE638, 40RE639, 40RE640, 40RE641, and the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery. Sites 40RE637, 40RE638, and a portion of the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery are located within the area of potential effect (APE). The remaining sites (40RE639, 40RE640, and 40RE641) are located in the survey area, however they are outside of the APE and no construction or ground disturbance is planned at these sites.

The architectural survey identified one resource over 50 years in age within a 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) viewshed (which is the indirect APE) of the HCS. This resource was recommended not eligible for listing on the NRHP. Two NRHP listed properties are within the 2 mi. (3.2 km) background research buffer, but outside the 0.5 mi. historic architectural viewshed (indirect APE).

The Tennessee State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has also reviewed the findings of the cultural resource survey and has indicated that no further consultation is required. Consultation letters with the SHPO are provided in Chapter 1, Appendix 1A (Regulatory Correspondence).

4.8.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE The No-Action Alternative leaves existing conditions unchanged, and thus results in no impacts.

4.8.2 PROPOSED ACTION Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) is constructed and operated at the HCS.

4.8.2.1 Construction Sites 40RE637 and 40RE638 and a portion of the 100-ft. (30.5-m) buffer surrounding the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery are located within the APE. construction activities could impact these sites. However, 40RE637 and 40RE638 were recommended as not eligible for listing on the NRHP.

Ground disturbance activities associated with the development of the perimeter security path and associated fencing would occur within the 100 ft. (30.5 m) buffer surrounding the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery (Figure 4.8.2-1). As noted in Section 3.8 of this ER (Historic and Cultural Resources), implementation of additional archaeological work that includes the use of near-surface geophysics to identify any unmarked graves within or surrounding the cemetery and archaeological monitoring of all work within the cemetery or associated buffer was recommended to minimize impacts to this resource.

No resources over 50 years of age were identified in the architectural survey of the 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) viewshed (indirect APE) surrounding the HCS. However, two NRHP listed properties are within the 2 mi. (3.2 km) background research buffer, but outside the 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) historic architectural viewshed. The rugged topography of the region, distance of the historic districts from the HCS, and extensive vegetation predominantly obscures the visibility of the HCS from September 2022 4-71 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts the viewshed of these sites. Therefore, the impact to historic resources during construction is SMALL.

4.8.2.2 Operation During operation, impacts are SMALL as additional ground disturbing activities are not anticipated, and the rugged terrain and existing vegetation would continue to obscure visibility of the operating HCS from architectural resources.

4.8.2.3 Decommissioning Ground disturbing activities associated with decommissioning are limited to the same areas of disturbance as construction and as such impacts to cultural resources are avoided. There are no visual effect to known NRHP listed historic properties as a result of decommissioning activities Therefore, impacts to cultural and historical resources associated with decommissioning activities are SMALL.

4.8.2.4 Mitigation Measures Given the presence of the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery 100 ft. (30.5 m) buffer within the APE, there is a potential that ground disturbing work in the buffer may result in inadvertent discovery of human remains. Human remains are the physical remains of a human body or bodies including but not limited to, bones, teeth, hair, and soft tissues (mummified or otherwise preserved). As described above, the use of mitigative measures (use of near-surface geophysics to identify any unmarked graves within or surrounding the cemetery enclosure and archaeological monitoring of all work) recommended at the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery would mitigate any impact to human remains associated with the cemetery. In conjunction with the Section 106 process that are conducted between NRC and the TN SHPO, additional monitoring of potential disturbance in proximity to the cemetery or other identified cultural resources may be considered as part of the development of a cultural resource management plan, as applicable.

4.8.2.5 Cumulative Impacts The geographic area of interest for historic and cultural resources is the direct and indirect APE.

Reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. The scope of these other actions may entail adverse effects to historic and cultural resources within their respective project footprints or viewsheds. However, none of the identified reasonably foreseeable actions identified in Table 2.3-1 is overlapping geographically with the HCS. In addition, eligible archaeological sites would not be impacted and implementation of mitigative measures would minimize impacts to the McKamey and Carmichael Family Cemetery. As such there are no cumulative impacts to historic and cultural resources as a result of construction, operation or decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF.

September 2022 4-72 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES IMPACTS The visual and scenic characteristics of the Horizon Center site (HCS) and its vicinity are described in Section 3.9 (Visual/Scenic Resources), and photographs showing views of the site from different viewpoints are presented on Figures 3.9.3-1 and 3.9.3-2. This section describes potential impacts on visual/scenic resources resulting from the No-Action Alternative (Section 4.9.1) and the Proposed Action (Section 4.9.2). Measures to mitigate the impacts on visual/scenic resources for the Proposed Action are discussed in Section 4.9.3. A description of the anticipated cumulative visual/scenic resources impacts of the Proposed Action is presented in Section 4.9.4.

4.9.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-FFF) is not constructed, and the HCS remains in its current state. Consequently, there is no impact to visual resources.

4.9.2 PROPOSED ACTION Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated at the HCS. Figure 4.9.2-1 presents an aerial photograph of the HCS overlayed with a schematic plan view of the TRISO-X FFF, including the main process building, the attached administration building, the graphite matrix powder (GMP) building, the security/emergency operation center (EOC) building, and the meteorological tower. This figure also shows the location of external ground-based equipment as well as drainage features, parking and construction laydown areas, and the main and secondary entrance roads.

4.9.2.1 Construction Although initial construction activities, including site clearing and grading, may not affect the entire HCS, it is conservatively assumed that all areas are impacted by construction activities in order to account for future activities or changes to construction plans. As noted in Table 3.9.10-1, the majority of vegetation within the HCS consists of periodically maintained herbaceous cover. Construction of the TRISO-X FFF requires only minimal clearing of small islands of scrub-shrub vegetation and mature trees from areas in the interior of the site. Some tree removal in the forested areas along the perimeter of the HCS is also required in support of the development of a perimeter security path and fencing. However, heavily forested areas surrounding the site would continue to provide a visual buffer between the HCS and the majority of sensitive visual receptors in the site vicinity.

In addition, temporary visual intrusions to the landscape may result from the use of tall cranes and other large construction equipment at the HCS. Because the impacts of construction activities on visual resources are temporary and localized, and a visual buffer between the HCS and sensitive visual receptors in the vicinity is maintained, visual/scenic resource impacts resulting from construction of the TRISO-X FFF is SMALL.

September 2022 4-73 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.9.2.2 Operation 4.9.2.2.1 Visual Impact Features The layout of the TRISO-X FFF is shown on Figure 4.9.2-1. Exterior renderings of the facility are shown on Figure 4.9.2-2 (Sheets 1 through 5). As shown on these figures, the largest and most dominant structure associated with the TRISO-X FFF is the process building, to which the administration building is also attached. The tallest point on these buildings is the top of the process buildings heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) penthouse, which is approximately 54.5 ft. (16.6 m) above the exterior grade. The GMP building and security/EOC building have much smaller footprints and extend to approximately 26.0 ft. (7.9 m) and 20.5 ft.

(6.2 m) above exterior grade, respectively. Ground-level support facilities, such as external mechanical and electrical equipment, is located to the northwest and northeast of the process building. The only external ground-based equipment of notable height are the HVAC vent stacks located at the northeast end of the process building, which measure approximately 100 ft. (30.5 m) above exterior grade, and a meteorological tower southeast of the main facility, near the security/EOC building, which measures less than 200 ft. (61.0 m) above exterior grade (see Figure 4.9.2-1). In addition, based on previous studies related to power supply for the site, it is assumed that power to the facility is supplied from the west of the HCS and enter the facility from north of the process building via overhead power lines.

4.9.2.2.1.1 Structures Creating Visual Intrusions in Landscape Character Although public visibility of the HCS is largely limited by forested buffers (see Section 3.9, Visual/Scenic Resources), some of the taller TRISO-X FFF structures may be visible from portions of some surrounding roadways and adjacent properties, creating a visual intrusion.

Viewshed boundaries for the TRISO-X FFF, depicted on Figure 4.9.2-3, were estimated based on relative elevation differences between the structures and digital elevation model (DEM) grid cells that represent the terrain of the landscape. This estimate uses the highest resolution topographic data available for this location, which are based on 3.3 ft. (1.0 m) light detection and ranging (LiDAR) elevation data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Services (NRCS) Bare Earth DEM (USDA NRCS, 2021). The LiDAR elevation data and geographic information systems software were used to determine which areas of the surrounding landscape would have a line of sight to or from the TRISO-X FFF based on topographic elevations and the heights of both the tallest structure, the meteorological tower (less than 200 ft. [61.0 m]), and the tallest point on the process building (54.5 ft. [16.6 m]).

In addition, forested land, which was delineated using a combination of field surveys, described in Section 3.5.2.1 (Plant Communities), and the National Land Cover Database woodland land cover types) was estimated at a height of 60 ft. (18.3 m), based on typical canopy height in the vicinity, to account for the screening provided by forested buffers. The analysis also assumes that viewers located within forested areas would have no visibility of TRISO-X FFF structures due to screening from the overhead tree canopy.

Based on the estimated viewshed boundaries, the process building is visible from approximately 184 ac. (74.5 ha) within the vicinity (3 mi. [4.8 km] radius of the HCS). This area equates to less than 1 percent of the area comprising the vicinity. Due to their height, taller structures such as the HVAC vent stacks and the meteorological tower are visible from a slightly larger portion of the vicinity. However, due to the narrow width of these types of structures, the visual intrusion is minimal. Assuming a maximum height of less than 200 ft. (61.0 m), the meteorological tower is visible from an additional 270 ac. (109.4 ha) that do not also have a view of the process building. In total, approximately 2 percent of the area within the site vicinity has a line of sight to September 2022 4-74 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts the process building and/or the meteorological tower based on the bounding heights of these structures. Additionally, the presence of existing buildings and structures in the vicinity has the potential to alter the viewshed boundaries shown in Figure 4.9.2-3, decreasing the areas from which the TRISO-X FFF structures are visible.

Lighting associated with the TRISO-X FFF also has the potential to create a visual intrusion for the surrounding landscape, particularly at night. Lighting may be required around the parking lot areas, building entrances, loading docks, and for security perimeter monitoring. Visual intrusions from TRISO-X FFF lighting on adjacent land uses is minimal for two main reasons:

• Properties adjacent to the HCS are either undeveloped or are Horizon Center Industrial Park businesses (see Section 3.9.1, Viewshed Boundaries). Industrial Park workers are less sensitive to light intrusions than people occupying land uses where sleep or leisure activities occur during nighttime hours.

• Exterior lighting meets the landscaping and design standards specified in Article XIII of the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance (City of Oak Ridge, 2020), including the requirement that light sources are sufficiently obscured to prevent glare on public streets or on the surrounding area.

4.9.2.2.1.2 Structures Obstructing Views of Existing Landscape The presence of a forested buffer surrounding the majority of the HCS renders the buildings and structures associated with the TRISO-X FFF minimally visible over the tree line from local roads and nearby public spaces, with the exception of a portion of the adjacent North Boundary Greenway trail (see Figure 4.9.2-1). The TRISO-X FFF would dominate the view of the landscape for recreational trail users looking east, but only along the segment of the trail immediately adjacent to the HCS. Taller ancillary structures, such as HVAC vent stacks and the meteorological tower, are also visible over the tree line from certain areas in the vicinity (see Figure 4.9.2-3) but do not obstruct views of the landscape due to their narrow profile. Therefore, the facilities do not obstruct views of the existing landscape from viewpoints outside of the immediate proximity of the HCS and the Horizon Center Industrial Park. Additionally, no scenic features or vistas on the HCS that could potentially be obscured by the structures are considered to be regionally or locally important or of high scenic quality (see Section 3.9.7, High-Quality View Areas).

4.9.2.2.1.3 Structures Requiring the Removal of Barriers, Screens or Buffers Although development of a perimeter security path and fencing likely requires some tree removal in the forested areas along the perimeter of the HCS, heavily forested areas surrounding the site continues to provide a visual buffer between the HCS and the majority of viewers in the site vicinity. Along the western property boundary, however, perimeter tree clearing, in combination with the planned construction of a 69-kV transmission line by the ORED (discussed further in Section 4.9.4, Cumulative Impacts), results in the removal of the vegetative buffer between the HCS and the adjacent North Boundary Greenway trail. Thus, the TRISO-X FFF is visible to greenway users along this segment of the trail.

4.9.2.2.1.4 Physical Facilities Out of Character with Existing Features The physical facilities associated with operation of the TRISO-X FFF are shown on Figure 4.9.2-1 and described in Section 4.9.2.2.1 (Visual Impact Features). These facilities are minimally September 2022 4-75 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts visible from nearby roadways and residential areas due to screening from forested buffers and differences in elevation of the terrain. For those viewers in the immediate proximity of the site, including recreationists on the adjacent North Boundary Greenway trail and employees and visitors of the Horizon Center Industrial Park, the industrial development associated with the TRISO-X FFF constitutes a notable change in the existing visual elements of the currently undeveloped HCS. However, development of the site is consistent with the planned use of the industrial park and compatible with current zoning designations (see Section 3.9.8, Applicable Regulatory Information).

4.9.2.2.1.5 Altered Historical, Archaeological or Cultural Properties As described in Section 4.8 (Historic and Cultural Resources Impacts), no known historical, archaeological, or cultural resources are adversely affected by visual impacts of the TRISO-X FFF.

4.9.2.2.1.6 Structures that Create Visual, Audible, or Atmospheric Elements Out of Character The TRISO-X FFF structures are not out of character with the planned use of the Horizon Center Industrial Park or the current zoning designation for the HCS. As described in ER Section 3.9.8 (Applicable Regulatory Information), the HCS is expected to be designated under the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance as IND-3 which allows for moderate external effects, such as smoke, noise, soot, dirt, vibration, and/or odor. None of the TRISO-X FFF structures or operations typically produce significant noise emissions that exceed established noise level limits (see ER Section 4.7, Noise Impacts) or create significant atmospheric elements, such as large emission plumes, that are visible from the surrounding area (see Section 4.6, Air Quality Impacts).

4.9.2.2.2 Compatibility and Compliance with Regulations, Ordinances, and Requirements Construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF would comply with the design standards and requirements of the City of Oak Ridge, as specified in the Citys Zoning Ordinance (see ER Section 3.9.8, Applicable Regulatory Information). In addition, development of the site meets Federal and State requirements for nuclear and radioactive material sites regarding design, siting, construction materials, and monitoring.

4.9.2.2.3 U.S. Bureau of Land Management Visual Resource Management System Scenic Quality Rating The U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has developed and implemented its Visual Resource Management (VRM) plan to evaluate the aesthetic and scenic quality of public lands in the United States and to manage these public lands in a manner that protects the quality of the scenic values (BLM, 1984). A scenic quality evaluation using the BLM VRM methodology was performed for the HCS, as described in Section 3.9.10.1 (Scenic Quality). The HCS was assigned a total scenic quality score of 5, which places it within the lowest BLM scenic quality rating of C. The scenic quality evaluation results were combined with the results of a sensitivity level analysis and distance zone assessment, as described in Section 3.9.10.2, Sensitivity Level, and Section 3.9.10.3 (Distance Zones), respectively, to determine the BLM visual resource inventory classes applicable to the HCS, where the TRISO-X FFF is constructed. It was determined that the HCS is designated as Visual Resource Inventory Class IV for all distance zones (see Section 3.9.10.4, Determination of Visual Resource Inventory Class). Of September 2022 4-76 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts the four visual resource inventory classes, Class IV allows for the greatest degree of landscape modification and is considered to be of 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 is made to minimize the effects of the planned disturbance (BLM, 1986). Thus, the Proposed Action is compatible with the BLM Class IV management objectives.

4.9.2.2.4 Operation Impact Summary Impacts on visual/scenic resources from operation of the TRISO-X FFF for viewpoints outside the areas immediately adjacent to the HCS is minimized by the presence of heavily forested buffers surrounding the site. Additionally, given the current zoning designation and the location of the HCS within the Horizon Center Industrial Park, development and operation of the TRISO-X FFF is not out of character with the intended use of the property. The TRISO-X FFF structures neither visually impact any known historical, archaeological, or cultural resources on or in the vicinity of the HCS, nor create visual, audible, or atmospheric elements that are out of character with the planned development of the Horizon Center Industrial Park. The TRISO-X FFF is compatible with the HCSs BLM VRM Management Class IV designation. Therefore, the visual/scenic resource impacts resulting from operation of the TRISO-X FFF is SMALL.

4.9.2.3 Decommissioning Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF includes cleaning and removal of radioactive and hazardous waste contamination that may be present on materials, equipment, and structures.

The activities are detailed in a Decommissioning Plan prepared and submitted to the NRC.

Some of the facilities, including buildings, drainage features, access roads, and parking areas built for the TRISO-X FFF, could remain in place after closure. Similar to the construction phase, visual intrusions to the landscape may result from the use of large construction equipment on the HCS during decommissioning, though these impacts are temporary and localized.

Therefore, the visual/scenic resource impacts resulting from decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF is SMALL.

4.9.3 MITIGATION MEASURES Given the limited public visibility of the HCS, the compatibility of the TRISO-X FFF with the planned use of the Horizon Center Industrial Park, and the incorporation of all design standards and requirements of the City of Oak Ridge into the facility design, no further mitigation measures are warranted.

4.9.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As described in Section 2.3, further development at the Horizon Center Industrial Park is reasonably foreseeable. As described above visual effects are localized to the area in the immediate vicinity of the HCS based on visibility. Therefore, the geographic area of interest for this resource is considered to be 0.6 mi. (1.0 km).

Past activities within the geographic area of interest have included localized development within the Horizon Center Industrial Park and the clearing of land parcels (including the HCS) for potential future development. Notably, as it relates to impacts to visual/scenic resources, the ORED has plans to construct a 69-kV transmission line from the ORED substation on Blair Road to the intersection of Imperium Drive and TN 95. The 69-kV transmission line requires a 50 ft. (15.2 m) right-of-way that would closely follow the North Boundary Greenway trail for a September 2022 4-77 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts length of approximately 1.4 mi. (2.3 km), including the portion of the trail adjacent to the HCS (DOE, 2020). The right-of-way clearing and installation of aboveground transmission lines would affect the existing visual character of the greenway and remove the forested buffer between the trail and the HCS. Removal of this buffer during the development of the TRISO-X FFF would be an impact to visual resources for recreationists using the trail. However, the reduction in aesthetic quality associated with the transmission line and the HCS development affects less than 10 percent of the approximately 16 mi. (25.7 km) North Boundary Greenway trail network.

Development activities within the geographic area of interest has resulted in localized impacts to visual/scenic resources. Impacts of these past and ongoing actions in conjunction with the effects of the Proposed Action and other reasonably foreseeable future actions on visual and scenic resources is SMALL.

Public visibility of the HCS from off-site areas within the vicinity is minimal. Therefore, the impact of the incremental contribution of the NRC-authorized activities related to construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF on visual resources are not significant contributors to the SMALL cumulative impact.

September 2022 4-78 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.10 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS Changes in capital influx or employment in a region impact the existing socioeconomic environment. Socioeconomic factors, such as employment, income, and population, are either directly or indirectly related to one another. Direct impacts are those changes that can be directly attributed to the Proposed Action, including changes in employment and expenditures from the construction and operation of the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF).

Indirect impacts to the Region of Influence (ROI) occur in response to the direct impacts from the Proposed Action. In addition, note that all monetary values in this section are reported in terms of 2022 dollars.

4.10.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE The existing population, economic, and community characteristics of the region surrounding the HCS are described in ER Section 3.10 (Socioeconomics). As stated in Section 3.10, the ROI, which refers to areas surrounding the site that are likely to incur socioeconomic impacts, includes Roane, Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Morgan counties. In conjunction with this alternative, trends in the population, economy, and social structure of communities within the ROI would change over time in response to other regional patterns of economic growth and population change. Population in the five counties comprising the ROI is expected to grow approximately 28.7 percent by 2065, as summarized in Table 3.10.1-2. Similarly, employment and community services available within the ROI are also expected to change over time.

Because implementation of the No-Action Alternative does not affect changes from baseline, its impact on social and economic conditions in the region are SMALL.

4.10.2 PROPOSED ACTION Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated at the HCS.

construction of the TRISO-X FFF begins in 2023 and continues through 2025. Operation of the facility begins in 2025 and continues through 2065, under the assumption that the facility is decommissioned when its 40-year licensed operating term expires (unless its license is renewed).

4.10.2.1 Construction Construction activities would require a labor force of approximately 166 employees; the number of workers present on-site is expected to vary from month to month, depending on the activities being undertaken. Construction employment begins with approximately 60 workers in early 2023, gradually increasing to a peak on-site workforce of approximately 134 in early 2024.

Following this peak, construction employment would gradually decline through 2024, reaching an on-site workforce of approximately 74 as construction activities are completed. Details regarding the construction workforce are shown on Table 4.10.2-1.

4.10.2.1.1 Population Impacts The direct impact to population from construction of the TRISO-X FFF is dependent upon how many of the approximately 166 workers are obtained from within the ROI. For example, if all construction workers are obtained from within this region, then there is no change in the ROI total population; however, if any workers are introduced from outside these five counties, there are potential impacts to regional demography in conjunction with the in-migration of the supporting workforce and their families.

September 2022 4-79 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts In 2021, TRISO-X conducted introductory meetings with representatives of regional economic development groups including the City of Oak Ridge Chamber of Commerce and the State of Tennessee Department of Economic and Community Development. Based on these meetings, no major impediments were noted regarding the capacity for local communities to meet the needs of the construction workforce. In addition, occupational employment statistics from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) (BLS, 2020) were used to estimate the availability of construction workers from within the ROI. Table 4.10.2-1 provides the existing labor force present in the ROI, based on BLS data, for each occupational category needed to construct the TRISO-X FFF. Assuming that 10 percent of the ROI labor force is available (e.g., unemployed or willing to change jobs) to support construction, the estimated available labor force within the ROI was then compared to the number of employees needed for the construction phase, for each occupational category, to determine if the ROI available labor force is sufficient to meet project needs. Based on these estimates, 12 workers would need to be obtained from outside the ROI during construction.

As shown on Table 4.10.2-1, workers that may need to be obtained from outside the ROI include ironworkers, millwrights, and cement masons/finishers. These occupations are required on-site for durations ranging from 80 to 83 weeks. Given this time frame, these workers would likely relocate to the ROI on a temporary basis and would not bring their families. Such workers would likely utilize existing hotels, rental units or other accommodations as needed for the duration of the construction period. As the majority of the construction workforce is available from within the ROI and that the number of new individuals moving into the region during construction is minimal and short term construction of the TRISO-X FFF has a SMALL impact on the residential population within the ROI.

4.10.2.1.2 Economic Impacts The U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA), Economics and Statistics Division, calculates multipliers for industry jobs and earnings within a specific region using an economic model called the Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II). The BEA RIMS II multipliers were obtained for the ROI (consisting of Anderson, Knox, Loudon, Morgan, and Roane Counties) and used to evaluate impacts on ROI output, employment, and earnings based upon a total construction expenditure of approximately $337 million over a two-year period (see Table 4.10.2-2). This expenditure results in an estimated total output of approximately $624 million across all local industries, including goods and services produced in the ROI that are used during construction, as well induced impacts relating to the spending of workers whose earnings are affected. In addition, construction of the facility leads to the creation of approximately 1748 jobs per year. This includes both direct employment and indirect employment created by the additional demand on goods and services resulting from construction employment. It is assumed that most indirect jobs are service-related, and that those jobs are filled by the existing workforce within the ROI. The change in demand created by the TRISO-X FFF construction creates annual earnings of approximately $100 million dollars (Table 4.10.2-2) over the two-year construction period. While the State of Tennessee has no personal income tax on salaries and wages (See Section 3.10.2.3, Tax Structure), the State and counties receive revenue from the sales tax on earnings spent within the ROI.

Overall, construction-related annual employment (direct construction jobs plus indirect jobs) is estimated to represent approximately 0.5 percent of the total labor force within the ROI, based on 2019 data. Sales tax revenues on construction of the TRISO-X FFF and earnings spent results in a relatively minor increase in revenue when compared to overall taxes collected by the September 2022 4-80 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts five counties within the ROI. Therefore, construction of the TRISO-X FFF results in a SMALL beneficial impact to the regional economy and employment.

4.10.2.1.3 Impacts to Community Services The impacts associated with construction of the TRISO-X FFF on community resources and services depend on the number of workers that may relocate to the ROI. Similar to population impacts, if all construction workers are obtained from within the region, then community services such as law enforcement and education experience no increase in demand, and therefore, are not impacted. On the other hand, a large influx of new residents could potentially affect the communitys ability to provide the same level of services that it provides in the baseline condition.

As described in 4.10.2.1.1 and shown on Table 4.10.2-1, approximately 12 of the 166 full-time employees needed during the construction period originate from outside the ROI, as there is a deficiency of available ironworkers, millwrights, and cement masons/finishers. As the estimated duration of activities involving these occupations ranges from 80 to 83 weeks, it is likely that these workers relocate to the ROI on a temporary basis, occupying rental units or temporary housing such as extended stay hotels, and do not bring their families. Due to the very small number of construction workers anticipated to be needed from outside the ROI, the short-term increase in population is negligible and does not result in a notable increased demand for housing, educational services, health care services, public safety resources, transportation, or water and wastewater systems. Overall, impacts to community services resulting from construction of the TRISO-X FFF is SMALL.

4.10.2.2 Operation Operation of the TRISO-X FFF is anticipated to begin in 2025, requiring a workforce of approximately 816 full-time employees when fully staffed. Characteristics of the operational workforce are shown in Table 4.10.2-3.

4.10.2.2.1 Population Impacts During TRISO-Xs introductory meetings with representatives of regional economic development groups, it was noted that in addition to the existing labor force capacity, the Tennessee Community College system and the Tennessee College of Applied Technology system, both of which have multiple campuses in the region, may serve as potential options for identifying and developing future technician level staff. However, in order to assess the extent to which the operation of the TRISO-X FFF would result in the in migration of new individuals and their families to the ROI, this analysis relies solely on BLS occupational employment statistics (BLS, 2020) to estimate the number of employees that would need to be obtained from outside the ROI. Table 4.10.2-3 provides the estimated labor force present in the ROI, based on BLS data, for each occupational category needed during operation of the TRISO-X FFF. The estimated available labor force within the ROI was then compared to the number of employees needed for each occupational category, to determine if the ROI available labor force is sufficient to meet project needs. Based on these comparisons, an estimated 507 employees are needed from outside the ROI to support the operational workforce (Table 4.10.2-3).

Commuting patterns for Roane County show that approximately 13.5 percent of the existing labor force in Roane County commutes into the county from outside the ROI (TN Department of Labor and Workforce Development, 2019). Consistent with these commuting patterns, it is September 2022 4-81 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts assumed that 13.5 percent, or 68 of the 507 workers reside in counties outside of the ROI and commute to work. Accordingly, it is estimated that the remaining 439 employees, and their families, relocate within the ROI. Based on the average household size in the State of Tennessee of 2.52 persons per household (USCB, 2019), 439 workers relocating to the ROI increases the population by approximately 1,105 people. The distribution of this new population within the ROI was estimated based on the commuting patterns of Roane County workers and is shown in Table 4.10.2-4. Based on this analysis, the estimated population increases have the greatest impact in Roane County, where the new residents increase the countys population by approximately 1.8 percent (based on 2025 projections). The other four counties in the ROI, and the ROI as a whole would experience population increases of less than 0.2 percent.

Operation of the TRISO-X FFF results in a small increase in the population of the ROI as a whole (less than 0.2 percent) and as such does not notably affect the population characteristics of the ROI. As a result, impacts of operation of the TRISO-X FFF on regional population are SMALL.

4.10.2.2.2 Economic Impacts Applying the BEA RIMS II direct-effect multipliers for the ROI, and an operational workforce of approximately 816 when fully staffed, it is estimated that operation of the TRISO-X FFF creates approximately 1831 indirect jobs within the ROI (Table 4.10.2-5). It is assumed that most indirect jobs are service-related, and that those jobs are filled by the existing workforce within the ROI. The combined total employment (direct TRISO-X FFF operation jobs plus indirect jobs) of approximately 2647 represents approximately 0.8 percent of the total labor force within the ROI in 2019. Additionally, assuming an annual payroll of approximately $72.3 million, an additional $83.2 million is added to the economy of the ROI annually as indirect earnings, resulting in total annual earnings of approximately $155.5 million (Table 4.10.2-5). As noted previously, the State of Tennessee has no personal income tax on salaries and wages.

However, the State and counties receive revenue from the sales tax on earnings spent within the ROI.

As described in ER Section 3.10.2.3 (Tax Structure), the City of Oak Ridge and Roane County also generate tax revenue through property taxes which are based on the appraised value of a property. The construction of the TRISO-X FFF increases the appraised value of the HCS, thus increasing property tax revenue. The estimated appraised value of TRISO-X FFF improvements is assumed to be bounded by the total capital construction cost of approximately $337 million.

Based on the assessment percentage in Table 3.10.2-6 and the property tax rates for 2020 provided in Table 3.10.2-7, property taxes for the HCS are estimated to increase by up to approximately $6.4 million annually ($3.1 million for the City of Oak Ridge and $3.3 million for Roane County). This constitutes an increase in property tax revenue of approximately 14.3 percent for the City of Oak Ridge, compared to fiscal year 2020 (City of Oak Ridge, 2020), and an increase of approximately 17.4 percent for Roane County, compared to fiscal year 2021 (Table 3.10.2-5). Tax revenues are also generated through corporate income taxes and taxes on tangible personal property, such as process equipment and machinery. Operation of the TRISO-X FFF results in a minor (approximately 0.8 percent) increase in regional employment.

Based on the estimated increase of 6.4 million annually in property tax revenue and other tax revenue payments throughout the operational life of the TRISO-X FFF, economic impacts to the City of Oak Ridge and Roane County are SMALL to MODERATE and beneficial. Within the rest of the ROI (Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Morgan Counties) economic impacts are SMALL to MODERATE and beneficial based upon the total annual earnings of the TRISO-X FFF.

September 2022 4-82 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.10.2.2.3 Impacts to Community Services The impacts associated with operation of the TRISO-X FFF on community resources and services are dependent on the number of operational workers and family members that relocate to the ROI. This influx of population could potentially affect housing, educational services, health care services, and public safety resources. Impacts to transportation resources are discussed in Section 4.2 (Transportation Impacts).

4.10.2.2.3.1 Housing Housing characteristics of the ROI are discussed in Section 3.10.3.1 and summarized on Table 3.10-13. The introduction of TRISO-X FFF employees from outside the ROI places new demands on available housing. As described previously, a workforce of approximately 816 full-time employees are required to operate the facility, of which it is estimated that approximately 439 relocate to the ROI from other areas. Assuming each new worker represents a single household, this results in a demand for approximately 4.9 percent of the 8897 housing units for sale or rent within the ROI in 2019. As shown in Table 4.10.2-6, impacts to available housing within each county depend on both the number of available units and the number of workers who reside in each county, which was estimated based on the existing commuting patterns of Roane County workers. Based on these calculations, Roane County experiences the greatest demand for housing and Knox County experiences the lowest demand.

Given that demand for housing to accommodate the TRISO-X FFF operational workforce represents a small fraction of the available housing stock in the ROI as a whole, the operation of the facility does not adversely impact the availability of housing in the ROI, therefore, the impacts are SMALL.

4.10.2.2.3.2 Education Schools and student populations within the ROI are discussed in Section 3.10.3.2. The introduction of TRISO-X FFF employees and their families to the ROI places new demands on the regions educational services. As described previously, the influx of the operational workforce increases the population of the ROI by approximately 1105 people. Approximately 19 percent of the population of the State of Tennessee is between 5 and 19 years old (i.e., school-aged). Therefore, it is estimated that of the 1105 people relocating to the ROI, approximately 19 percent, or 209 people, are school-aged children.

The distribution of the operational workforce is shown in Table 4.10.2-4. To estimate the number of school-aged children that relocate to the ROI, these population distribution percentages were used to estimate the number of operations-related school-aged children that relocate to each of the five counties in the ROI. As shown in Table 4.10.2-6, the increase in number of students associated with the operations workforce do not affect student to teacher ratios, except for Roane County where the student to teacher ratio would increase from 9.7 to 10.0. In addition, the increase in school-aged children results in an approximately 0.2 percent increase in total enrollment within the ROI.

As the estimated number of school-aged children relocating to the ROI is small relative to total enrollment for the 2018-2019 school year, and student to teacher ratios is minimally impacted, the increased number of school-aged children associated with the operation of the TRISO-X FFF does not adversely impact educational services. Therefore, impacts to educational services are SMALL.

September 2022 4-83 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.10.2.2.3.3 Health Care Services The health care services available in the ROI, including hospitals and other licensed health care facilities, as well as senior services, are described in Section 3.10.3.3. Table 3.10.3-7 presents the number of residents per type of licensed health care professional for each county in the ROI.

An influx of new residents into the ROI creates a higher demand for these health care services and has the potential to impact the ability of health care facilities and personnel to provide the same level of services provided in the baseline condition. As previously described, in Section 4.10.2.2.1, the increase in the population within the ROI resulting from the operation of the TRISO-X FFF is very small in relation to the total projected 2025 ROI population (less than 0.2 percent increase). This population increase results in less than two additional residents per medical doctor, registered nurse, and dentist for Anderson, Knox, and Loudon Counties. Roane and Morgan Counties experience the higher increase in demand with Roane County experiencing the greatest increase in resident per medical professional. Similarly, impacts on hospital capacity and provision of senior services are anticipated to mirror increases from population on medical professionals. However, residents from all five counties of the ROI may seek medical treatment and care in other counties within the ROI due to the higher number of medical professionals. Therefore, operation of the TRISO-X FFF does not adversely impact health care services within the ROI and impacts to health care services are SMALL.

4.10.2.2.3.4 Public Safety and Emergency Services Public safety resources available within the ROI, such as law enforcement, fire protection, and rescue services, are described in Section 3.10.3.4. The influx of workers and their families could potentially impact the ability of these departments to deliver services. As previously described, influx of population resulting from the operation of the TRISO-X FFF results in an increase of less than 0.2 percent of the projected 2025 population in the ROI. Therefore, operation of the TRISO-X FFF does not adversely impact the provision of public safety services in the ROI.

Therefore, impacts to public safety and emergency services are SMALL.

4.10.2.2.3.5 Water and Wastewater Water and wastewater service is provided by the City of Oak Ridge Public Works Department, and the City of Oak Ridge has an excess of 2.2 million gallons per day (Mgd) of water and capability to treat 30.6 Mgd of wastewater between the two treatment facilities, as discussed in Section 3.10.3.6 (Water and Wastewater). Operation of the TRISO-X FFF is anticipated to require 0.38 Mgd of water, which is approximately 17.2 percent of the existing excess capacity.

It is anticipated that the TRISO-X FFF discharges approximately 0.10 Mgd of wastewater, which is approximately 0.3 percent of the wastewater treatment capacity within the City of Oak Ridges treatment plants. Therefore, operation of the TRISO-X FFF has a SMALL impact on the City of Oak Ridge water and wastewater systems.

4.10.2.2.3.6 Community Service Impacts Summary In summary, the number of workers and family members that relocate to the ROI in support of TRISO-X FFF operation is small in relation to the total projected 2025 population, representing an increase of less than 0.2 percent. Therefore, due to the minor increase in demand, impacts to community services associated with operation of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL.

September 2022 4-84 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.10.2.3 Decommissioning Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF begins in 2065 (unless its license is renewed) and lasts approximately two years. It is estimated that decommissioning activities are carried out by a workforce of up to 150 full-time employees.

4.10.2.3.1 Population Impacts No reliable information could be obtained regarding labor market conditions over 40 years in the future. However, it is likely some of that operational workforce is retained to fill decommissioning jobs due to their familiarity with the facility and equipment. Other workers previously employed for facility operations may also choose to leave the ROI after operations end, potentially offsetting population increases associated with the decommissioning workforce.

Regardless of these uncertainties, the impact of decommissioning on the regional population level is minimal. Due to the time frame for decommissioning activities, it is not likely that decommissioning-phase workers needed from outside the ROI would permanently relocate to the ROI or bring their families. A conservative assessment of population effects, assuming that the entire decommissioning workforce relocates to the ROI, results in a population increase of approximately 150 individuals, or a less than 0.02 percent increase over the projected ROI population of 882,387 in 2065. As a result, impacts of decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL.

4.10.2.3.2 Economic Impacts Ceasing operation of the facility for decommissioning decreases the economic output and employment within the ROI, some of which is offset by expenditures of approximately 230 million for decommissioning work and associated site closure activities over approximately two years. This expenditure results in an estimated total output of approximately $427 million across all local industries, including goods and services produced in the ROI that are used during construction, as well induced impacts relating to the spending of workers whose earnings are affected. In addition, decommissioning leads to the creation of approximately 1195 jobs per year. This includes both direct employment and indirect employment created by the additional demand on goods and services. It is assumed that most indirect jobs are service-related, and that those jobs are filled by the existing workforce within the ROI. The change in demand created by decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF creates annual earnings of approximately

$68.2 million annually, or $136.5 million over the two-year decommissioning period (Table 4.10.2-7).

As noted above, the State of Tennessee has no personal income tax on salaries and wages, however, the State and counties receive revenue from the sales tax on earnings spent within the ROI.. As the decommissioning strategy is to leave the infrastructure, including the buildings, parking areas, and access roads in place, there is little impact to assessed property value and associated tax revenue. Additionally, the decommissioned facility provides the community an opportunity to potentially benefit from other industrial or business uses. Overall, in the context of the overall economy of the ROI, regional impacts of decommissioning are SMALL.

4.10.2.3.3 Impacts to Community Services As with construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF, decommissioning could impact the provision of community services by introducing new individuals to the region to support September 2022 4-85 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts deconstruction activities. However, as discussed in Section 4.10.2.3.1 (Population Impacts),

there are uncertainties in how decommissioning impacts the net population of the ROI, as the labor force availability from within the ROI could not be reliably determined, and population increases could be offset by the departure of the former operational workforce.

However, the analysis of the community impacts of facility operation concluded that regional housing, education, medical, and emergency services would not be adversely impacted by the increase in population associated with facility operation, which is notably larger than the maximum potential population increase associated with decommissioning. For this reason, decommissioning has a SMALL impact on the provision of community services in the ROI.

4.10.3 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As described in Section 3.10, the socioeconomic impacts primarily affect the five counties (Roane, Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Morgan counties) that make up the economic ROI where cumulative impacts are expected. This economic region is the geographic area of interest for cumulative socioeconomic impacts.

As detailed in ER Section 2.3 (Cumulative Effects), a number of reasonably foreseeable future actions were identified in proximity to the HCS. The scope of these other proposed actions is expected to result in both construction phase and operational phase workforce requirements that could contribute to regional population increases and associated impacts on the local economy and availability of community facilities and services.

Specific foreseeable future actions that may affect workforce availability, housing, and the adequacy of services in communities also impacted by the TRISO-X FFF include the potential development of the Kairos Hermes Reactor Project, the construction of small modular reactor (SMR) units at the CRN site, the development of the new airport by the City of Oak Ridge, the construction of new production facilities at the Y-12 complex, and potential additional development at the Horizon Center Industrial Park. Each of these actions is located within the same socioeconomic ROI as that of the TRISO-X FFF.

While employment and community impacts are not additive across the approximately 44 years of construction, operation, and decommissioning, economic impacts such as local household earnings (from both direct and indirect employment) can be added over time to estimate cumulative impacts of the TRISO-X FFF. As shown in Table 4.10.3-1, the cumulative earnings over the duration of all project activities total approximately $6.6 billion. These earnings and associated tax revenue benefit the ROI throughout the life of the project. However, in the context of the overall economy of the ROI and the extended licensing period, impacts are positive but relatively SMALL, as direct and indirect employment associated with the project accounts for only 0.8 percent of the total labor force within the ROI and associated increases in tax revenue are likely be minor when compared to total revenue generated by the five counties within the ROI.

The overlap between construction, operation, and decommissioning of the foreseeable future actions and the TRISO-X FFF results in a MODERATE and beneficial impact to local economies within the ROI due to increased employment opportunities, compounded localized spending, and anticipated increases in property tax revenue. Specific details regarding employment generated by these other actions and their respective timing (construction duration, start of operations) are generally lacking. However, the Kairos Hermes project is estimated to have a construction phase workforce of 425 (212 off-peak) workers with a maximum on-site operational September 2022 4-86 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts phase workforce of 68 workers (Kairos 2021), and the development of the Advanced Nuclear Technology Park at the CRN Site is estimated to have a peak construction workforce of up to 3300 workers with an operational workforce of up to 500, with up to 1000 additional temporary workers during periodic refueling and major maintenance activities (TVA, 2022). Depending on the timing of implementation of this and other reasonably foreseeable projects, localized effects associated with workforce availability, housing availability, and the adequacy of services potentially may occur in combination with the development of the TRISO-X FFF. Although the construction workforces are typically larger than that of operational workforces, many of these workers are expected to be drawn from the existing ROI and as such impacts of housing and many community services are expected to be minor. Locally, increased demands on water and wastewater treatment are also expected with each of these actions. Depending on the timing of these projects and the plans to improve treatment capacity may be expected to result in SMALL impacts to water and wastewater services as well as other community facilities and services.

In summary, economic development within the ROI has impacted social and economic resources. Impacts of these past and ongoing actions in conjunction with the effects of the Proposed Action and other reasonably foreseeable future actions on the socioeconomic characteristics within the ROI is MODERATE and primarily beneficial. Demographic impacts are SMALL and impacts on community services would also be SMALL. As impacts associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL and primarily beneficial, and the incremental contribution of the project to the overall cumulative impacts on socioeconomic characteristics within the ROI are SMALL.

September 2022 4-87 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.2-1 Construction Workforce Requirements and Estimated ROI Labor Force Availability Full-Time Duration Estimated Estimated Employees Needed for Labor Force Estimated ROI Needed for TRISO-X by Available Construction TRISO-X Construction Occupation Labor Force Labor Force Occupation Construction (weeks) in ROI(a) in ROI(b) Deficiency(c)

Carpenters 12 102 846 85 0 Electricians 20 102 2151 215 0 Ironworkers 14 80 70 7 7 Laborers 10 104 2136 214 0 Equipment Operators/Engineers 12 104 513 51 0 Plumbers/Pipefitters/Sprinkler Fitters 34 104 1072 107 0 Sheet Metal Workers 12 80 202 20 0 Construction Supervisors 4 104 1064 106 0 Millwrights 10 81 78 8 2 Surveyors 6 40 179 18 0 Cement Masons/Finishers 20 83 171 17 3 Painters 12 56 458 46 0 Total 166 12

Reference:

BLS, 2020 Note:

a) BLS labor force data by occupation was only available for the Knoxville, TN Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which is made up of nine counties, including the five ROI counties. The ROI labor force for each occupation was estimated by scaling the MSA labor force by a factor of 0.777, the fraction of the total MSA labor force that comes from the ROI.

b) Assumes that 10 percent of the labor force within the ROI are available to work on the project.

c) Number of employees needed for project construction that exceed the estimated available labor force in the ROI, by occupation.

September 2022 4-88 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.2-2 Estimated Economic Impacts of TRISO-X FFF Construction Data Description Value Total Construction Cost ($) $336,981,459 Multipliers(a):

Output 1.8524 Earnings 0.5923 Employment (jobs per $1 million in total construction cost) 10.3739 Impacts:

Total Output ($) $624,224,455 Average Annual Earnings ($)(b) $99,797,059 Average Annual Employment (jobs)(b) 1748 Note:

a) Multipliers derived from BEA, 2019 b) Annual averages based on a two-year construction period September 2022 4-89 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.2-3 (Sheet 1 of 2)

Peak Operational Workforce Requirements and Estimated ROI Labor Force Availability Full-Time Estimated Estimated Employees Labor Available Estimated Needed for Force by Labor ROI Labor TRISO-X Occupation Force in Force Occupation Operation in ROI(a) ROI(b) Deficiency(c)

Chief Executives 7 N/A(d) N/A(d) 7 General and Operations Managers 1 5273 527 0 Industrial Production Managers 2 373 37 0 Architectural and Engineering Managers 1 544 54 0 Buyers and Purchasing Agents 2 846 85 0 Compliance Officers 13 722 72 0 Human Resources Specialists 3 1033 103 0 Training and Development Specialists 4 528 53 0 Project Management Specialists and Business Operations Specialists 6 3223 322 0 Network and Computer Systems Administrators 6 613 61 0 Database Administrators and Architects 2 233 23 0 Statisticians 2 31 3 0 Chemical Engineers 10 217 22 0 Electrical Engineers 2 412 41 0 Electronics Engineers 2 132 13 0 Health and Safety Engineers 1 124 12 0 Mechanical Engineers 2 466 47 0 Nuclear Engineers 4 303 30 0 Engineers 2 745 75 0 Drafters 2 39 4 0 Industrial Engineering Technologists and Technicians 1 225 23 0 Mechanical Engineering Technologists and Technicians 3 62 6 0 Calibration Technologists and Technicians and Engineering Technologists and Technicians 9 194 19 0 Biological Scientists 3 54 5 0 Physicists 5 217 22 0 September 2022 4-90 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.2-3 (Sheet 2 of 2)

Operational Workforce Requirements and Estimated ROI Labor Force Availability Full-Time Estimated Estimated Employees Labor Available Estimated Needed for Force by Labor ROI Labor TRISO-X Occupation Force in Force Occupation Operation in ROI(a) ROI(b) Deficiency(c)

Environmental Scientists and Specialists 3 427 43 0 Chemical Technicians 43 179 18 25 Nuclear Technicians 2 179 18 0 Occupational Health and Safety Specialists 3 326 33 0 Occupational Health and Safety Technicians 13 85 9 4 Technical Writers 1 93 9 0 Security Guards 33 1755 176 0 Janitors and Cleaners 9 4815 481 0 Bookkeeping, Accounting, and Auditing Clerks 3 3432 343 0 Payroll and Timekeeping Clerks 2 248 25 0 Information and Record Clerks 2 318 32 0 Production, Planning, and Expediting Clerks 5 916 92 0 Shipping, Receiving, and Inventory Clerks 6 1802 180 0 Executive Secretaries and Executive Administrative Assistants 1 544 54 0 Secretaries and Administrative Assistants 7 3867 387 0 First-Line Supervisors of Mechanics, Installers, and Repairers 2 1079 108 0 Electrical and Electronics Repairers, Commercial and Industrial Equipment 18 225 23 0 Industrial Machinery Mechanics 16 668 67 0 First-Line Supervisors of Production and Operating Workers 32 1553 155 0 Chemical Equipment Operators and Tenders 520 489 49 471 Total 816 507

Reference:

BLS, 2020 Note:

a) BLS labor force data by occupation was only available for the Knoxville MSA, which is made up of nine counties, including the five ROI counties. The ROI labor force for each occupation was estimated by scaling the MSA labor force by a factor of 0.777, the fraction of the total MSA labor force that comes from the ROI.

b) Assumes that 10 percent of the labor force within the ROI are available to work on the project.

c) Number of employees needed for project operation that exceed the estimated available labor force in the ROI, by occupation.

d) BLS estimates not released for occupational category.

September 2022 4-91 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.2-4 Population Increases Associated with Operational Workforce Percentage of Distribution Existing Roane of Workers Total Baseline County Labor Needed Number of Population Percent Force by Place from New (2025 Increase in of Residence Outside ROI Residents Projections) Population ROI 86.5% 439(a) 1,105(a) 706,095 0.16%

Roane County 73.2% 371 935 53,386 1.75%

Anderson County 3.3% 17 43 78,500 0.05%

Knox County 5.5% 28 71 494,503 0.01%

Loudon County 1.7% 9 22 57,606 0.04%

Morgan County 2.8% 14 35 22,100 0.16%

Outside ROI 13.5% 68(b) N/A N/A N/A Total 100.0% 507 - - -

References:

Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development, 2019; USCB, 2019; Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research, 2019 Note:

a) Expected to relocate to the ROI; estimates are rounded to the nearest whole number, accounting for potential discrepancies between the ROI total and the sum of the five ROI counties.

b) Expected to commute from counties outside the ROI; workers and families would continue to reside outside of the ROI and would not impact the ROI population.

September 2022 4-92 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.2-5 Estimated Economic Impacts of TRISO-X FFF Operation Data Description Value TRISO-X FFF Full-Time Operational Employees 816 TRISO-X FFF Annual Payroll ($) $72,268,085 Multipliers(a):

Direct-effect Employment 3.2442 Direct-effect Earnings 2.1515 Impacts:

Indirect Employment (number of jobs) 1831 Total Employment (number of jobs)(b) 2647 Indirect Annual Earnings ($) $83,216,700 Total Annual Earnings ($)(c) $155,484,785 Note:

a) Multipliers derived from BEA, 2019 b) Direct TRISO-X FFF operations jobs and indirect jobs combined c) TRISO-X FFF annual payroll and indirect annual earnings combined September 2022 4-93 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.2-6 Impacts to Housing and Educational Services Associated with Operational Workforce Housing Education Percent of Baseline Available Student Available Housing Enrollment Baseline Additional New Workers Housing Units Units (2018-2019 & Student to School Student to Relocating (for Rent or Needed for 2020-2021 Teacher Aged Teacher to ROI(a) Sale, 2019) Workforce(b) School Year) Ratio Children(a)(c) Ratio Anderson County 17 987 1.7% 11,858 12.5 8 12.5 Knox County 28 6194 0.5% 67,462 14.5 13 14.5 Loudon County 9 559 1.6% 4814 11.8 4 11.8 Morgan 14 173 8.1% 2814 14.2 7 14.2 Roane County 371 984 37.7% 7004 9.7 177 10.0 ROI 439 8897 4.9% 93,952 13.6 209 13.6

References:

USCB, 2019; National Center for Education Statistics, 2022 Note:

a) Estimates are rounded to the nearest whole number, accounting for discrepancies between the ROI total and the sum of the five ROI counties.

b) Assumes each worker represents a single household.

c) Estimated at approximately 19 percent of the total number of new residents, based on the percentage of the total population of the State of Tennessee that are of school age (5-19 years).

September 2022 4-94 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.2-7 Estimated Economic Impacts of TRISO-X FFF Decommissioning Data Description Value Total Decommissioning Cost ($) $230,366,926 Multipliers(a):

Output 1.8524 Earnings 0.5923 Employment (jobs per $1 million in total decommissioning cost) 10.3739 Impacts:

Total Output ($) $426,731,694 Average Annual Earnings ($)(b) $68,233,165 Average Annual Employment (jobs)(b) 1195 Note:

a) Multipliers derived from BEA, 2019 b) Annual averages based on a two-year construction period September 2022 4-95 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.10.3-1 Estimated Cumulative Impact of Earnings through Construction, Operation, and Decommissioning of TRISO-X FFF Approximate Annual Total Earnings Duration Earnings for Phase Phase (years) ($ millions) ($ millions)

Construction(a) 2 99.8 199.6 Operations(a) 40 155.5 6,219.4 Decommissioning(a) 2 68.2 136.4 Regional Direct and Indirect Cumulative Earnings Impact 6,555.4

($ millions)

Note:

a) Earnings account for both direct and indirect employment, based on BEA RIMS II multipliers September 2022 4-96 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Environmental justice refers to a federal policy (EO 12898) under which each agency identifies and addresses disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental effects of agency policies and activities, including licensing actions, on minority or low-income populations. This section evaluates whether the construction, operation, or decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF could have a disproportionately high and adverse impact on the minority and low-income communities living within the area surrounding the HCS.

4.11.1 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE EVALUATION METHODS The guidelines and procedures set forth in Appendix C of NUREG-1748, which describes Environmental Justice Procedures as part of Environmental Reviews for Licensing Actions Affecting Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards (NMSS) Programs, and in the NRC Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions (NRC, 2004), were used to evaluate whether environmental justice concerns exist for the minority and low-income populations surrounding the TRISO-X FFF. Based on the NRC established procedures, the applicant should collect demographic data for communities within a 0.6- mi. (1.0- km) radius from the center of the site (corresponding to approximately 1 sq. mi.

[2.6 km2] surrounding the site) if the facility is located in an urban area or within city limits, or within a 4.0- mi. (6.4 km) radius from the center of the site (corresponding to approximately 50 sq. mi. [129.5 km2] surrounding the site) if the facility is located outside city limits or in a rural area, and then use that data and the suggested criteria to identify potentially affected low-income and minority communities. Although the HCS is located within the Oak Ridge city limits, the predominantly rural setting of the site supports the use of the larger 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius in this analysis in order to adequately characterize racial and income characteristics of the surrounding population. Communities located within this 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius span portions of Roane, Anderson, and Morgan counties.

Demographic data on minority and low-income households were obtained from the 2020 U.S.

Census Bureau (USCB) Decennial Census (USCB, 2020) and 2015-2019 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates (USCB, 2019), respectively, for each of the census block groups (CBG) partially or entirely within a 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius from the center of the HCS. These data included the total population, total population of each minority group (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]), and total number of households living below the U.S. Census Bureau-specified poverty level (defined in NUREG-1748 as low-income households). These data are summarized in Section 3.10.1.2 (Demographic Characteristics), and in Tables 3.10.1-3 and 3.10.1-4. Figures 3.10.1-2 and 3.10.1-3 provide a graphical representation of the minority and low-income populations by CBG, respectively.

Based on these data, the combined minority percentage of the population and the percentage of the population with incomes below the poverty level were computed for each CBG; these percentages were then compared with similar data for the counties in which these CBGs are located (Roane, Anderson, and Morgan), and the State of Tennessee (Tables 3.10.1-3 and 3.10.1-4) in order to determine whether the minority and low-income populations in each CBG significantly exceeded the minority and low-income population percentages of their respective county or State. Appendix C of NUREG-1748 and the NRC Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Regulatory and Licensing Actions state that the percentage of minority and low-income individuals in each CBG is considered significantly September 2022 4-97 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts higher than their respective county or State if the CBG (i) contains a minority population group, aggregate minority population, or low-income household percentage that exceeds its county or State percentages by more than 20 percentage points; or (ii) has a population that is more than 50 percent minority (either by individual group or in aggregate) or low-income individuals.

As shown in Figures 3.10.1-2 and 3.10.1-3, the HCS is located in Roane County, within Census Tract 9801, CBG 1, which has no resident population. The closest residential community is located north of the HCS in Census Tract 301, CBG 2, where minority residents comprise 16.1 percent of the total population (Table 3.10.1-3) and low-income residents account for 1.5 percent of the total population (Table 3.10.1-4). Black or African American residents make up the largest minority group in the CBG, though the percentage is not significantly greater than those of Roane County or the State of Tennessee (Table 3.10.1-3). Additionally, the percentage of low-income residents is well below both county and State percentages (Table 3.10.1-4).

Thus, the population of Census Tract 301, CBG 2, is not considered a minority or low-income population subject to environmental justice considerations based on the NRCs thresholds listed above.

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 in which it is located (Anderson) 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 described in Section 3.10.1.2.1 (Minority Population), and 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 of the CBG 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. No churches, institutions, or businesses were identified within this CBG that predominantly serve minority communities.

However, because the screening assessment identified this CBG as having a significant population of minority residents, the following analysis of environmental justice impacts assesses whether the construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF results in disproportionately high and adverse environmental impacts to this community.

As shown in Table 3.10.1-4, none of the CBGs within 4 mi. (6.4 km) of the HCS have a low-income population percentage that exceeds their respective county or State by 20 percentage points or more, nor do they have low-income populations that exceed 50 percent of the total CBG population. Therefore, no low-income populations were identified that require consideration of environmental justice in greater detail.

Environmental justice analysis also considers any unique economic, social, or human health circumstances and lifestyle practices of minority and low-income populations that could result in disproportionately high and adverse impacts to these populations. Such circumstances and practices may include, for example, subsistence consumption of fish or wildlife or pre-existing health conditions within a community that might make it more susceptible to potential environmental impacts. None of these unique circumstances or practices were identified within the communities residing within a 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius the of the HCS. In particular, given the lack of data pertaining to subsistence fishing in the Melton Hill Reservoir or the Tennessee River system, this practice is assumed to be rare within the vicinity of the HCS. There is no evidence that the populations studied in this analysis rely on or practice subsistence fishing.

September 2022 4-98 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.11.2 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IMPACTS 4.11.2.1 No-Action Alternative Under the No-Action Alternative, it is estimated that the population of the ROI grows as projected by the University of Tennessees Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research (see Table 3.10.1-2). In the absence of additional information regarding racial and income level projections, the analysis assumes that the demographic characteristics and the proportional representation of minority and low-income populations within the regional population remain relatively stable. Thus, Census Tract 201, CBG 2, is expected to continue to have a significant percentage of minority residents, while minority and low-income populations in other CBGs within a radius of 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) of the HCS continues to be represented at levels below the NRC environmental justice thresholds referenced above. Through 2065, the estimated period that the TRISO-X FFF is in operation, the population of the ROI is projected to increase (Table 3.10.1-2). As a result, some changes in air and water quality associated with population growth and new development could be experienced in the CBGs as a function of baseline conditions.

However, as future development is expected to be in compliance with all relevant local and federal regulations, regional air and water quality (including that of minority and low-income populations) would be maintained similar to existing conditions. Therefore, impacts from the No-Action Alternative on environmental justice populations are SMALL.

4.11.2.2 Proposed Action Under the Proposed Action, the TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated at the HCS. If the Proposed Action is undertaken, construction of the TRISO-X FFF begins in 2023 and continues through 2025. Operation of the facility begins in 2025 and continues until the anticipated license renewal or decommissioning in 2065. As described above, a minority population subject to environmental justice consideration was identified near the edge of the 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius, east-northeast of the HCS.

4.11.2.2.1 Construction Construction of the TRISO-X FFF requires a labor force of approximately 166 employees; the number of workers present on-site at any given time ranges from approximately 52 to 134, depending on the construction activities underway. Preparation of the HCS and construction of the TRISO-X FFF is projected to take approximately two years, beginning in 2023 and ending in 2025. During the construction phase of the project, environmental impacts may include the following:

• Increased truck and vehicle traffic associated with construction materials and labor (see Section 4.2, Transportation Impacts).

• Air quality impacts from construction traffic and operation of construction equipment (see Section 4.6, Air Quality Impacts).

• Water resource impacts caused by land disturbance and alteration of stormwater runoff from the TRISO-X FFF (as described in Section 4.4, Water Resource Impacts).

• Increased noise associated with the operation of construction machinery (see Section 4.7, Noise Impacts).

September 2022 4-99 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts

• Visual intrusions to the landscape resulting from the use of cranes and other construction equipment (see Section 4.9, Visual/Scenic Resources Impacts).

In consideration of the analyses identified above, and because the identified minority population (Census Tract 201, CBG 2) is located at a significant distance from the HCS and is predominantly located beyond the 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius from the center of the HCS, potential effects to this community are negligible and SMALL. Any potential off-site environmental impacts that are not fully mitigated (e.g., noise impacts) are mainly limited to nearby recreators and visitors to the Horizon Center Industrial Park, as the closest residents to the TRISO-X FFF are more than 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) from the HCS boundary (within Census Tract 301, CBG 2).

Because the greatest impact is expected to occur in the immediate vicinity of the TRISO-X FFF in an area lacking a resident population, construction of the facility would not result in disproportionately high or adverse impacts on low-income or minority residents. Thus, impacts of construction of the facility on environmental justice populations are SMALL.

4.11.2.2.2 Operation Operation of the TRISO-X FFF is expected to begin in 2025, with full staffing for steady-state operations to include approximately 816 full time employees. During the operation phase of the project, potential environmental impacts may include the following:

• Increased truck and vehicle traffic associated with transportation of materials and product, as well as employees, to and from the TRISO-X FFF (see Section 4.2, Transportation Impacts).

• Air quality impacts from both vehicle exhaust and operation of the facility (see Section 4.6, Air Quality Impacts).

• Water resource impacts to surface water and groundwater from HCS operations (as described in Section 4.4, Water Resources Impacts).

• Increased noise associated with the operation of the facility (see Section 4.7, Noise Impacts).

• Increased visibility associated with the facility buildings and ancillary structures (as described in Section 4.9, Visual/Scenic Resources Impacts).

• Trace radiological releases (see Section 4.12, Public and Occupational Health Impacts).

• Production of radioactive and non-radioactive waste (see Section 4.13, Waste Management Impacts).

As was the case for construction, the environmental impacts associated with the operation of the facility mainly affect areas in the immediate proximity of the TRISO-X FFF, which has no resident population. Additionally, the closest residents are located in CBGs which are not considered to have a significant minority or low-income population based on the NRC thresholds listed above. Therefore, the operation of the TRISO-X FFF is not expected to result in disproportionately high or adverse impacts on low-income or minority residents and is thus, not expected to give rise to environmental justice concerns.

It should be noted that even where environmental impacts are generally SMALL, the behaviors of some subpopulations may lead to disproportionate exposure through inhalation or ingestion September 2022 4-100 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts (e.g., subsistence fishing, wild-caught or gathered foods). However, the analysis did not identify specific exposure pathways or unique economic, social, or lifestyle practices that indicate the likelihood of any such disproportionate exposures near the TRISO-X FFF. As noted above, no populations were identified in the vicinity of the HCS that practice subsistence fishing.

Therefore, operations of the TRISO-X FFF are not expected to result in disproportionately high or adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations and, impacts of operation of the facility on environmental justice populations are SMALL.

4.11.2.2.3 Decommissioning Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF is projected to begin in 2065, unless the license is renewed, and is projected to take approximately two years. Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF includes cleaning and removal of radioactive and hazardous waste contamination that may be present on materials, equipment, and structures, and employs up to 150 full time employees.

Decommissioning results in a reduction in environmental impacts relative to construction and operation of the facility, but slightly higher than baseline. Again, impacts are expected to be SMALL and concentrated in the areas in the immediate proximity of the TRISO-X FFF where there is no resident population. Thus, decommissioning of the facility does not result in disproportionately high or adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations. Therefore, impacts from decommissioning on environmental justice populations are SMALL.

4.11.2.2.4 Project Benefits In addition to the potential environmental impacts associated with construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF, there are projected to be positive economic impacts for the area, including increased employment and income (as described in Section 4.10, Socioeconomic Impacts). It is projected that approximately 166 employees are needed during construction; approximately 816 employees are needed during the facility operation phase; and up to 150 employees are required during the decommissioning phase. A significant portion of the workforce are expected to be hired from within the ROI. A wide range of skills and education levels are needed; thus, there are potential employment opportunities available to the residents in the vicinity of the facility, including areas with relatively high percentages of minority and low-income residents. These employment-related benefits are realized across the ROI and do not have a disproportionate impact on minority or low-income populations.

4.11.3 POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES As no environmental justice concerns were identified, mitigation measures to reduce or minimize adverse impacts on minority or low-income populations are not required. Any potential mitigation measures listed in the previously discussed environmental impact sections (Section 4.2, Transportation Impacts; Section 4.6, Air Quality Impacts; Section 4.4, Water Resource Impacts; Section 4.7, Noise Impacts; Section 4.12, Public and Occupational Health Impacts; Section 4.13 Waste Management Impacts) are used to minimize potentially adverse impacts affecting the general population, which are SMALL.

4.11.4 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS As described in Section 4.11.1, the location of the HCS within a predominantly rural setting supports the use of a 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius to adequately characterize racial and income characteristics of the surrounding population. Communities located within this 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius span portions of Roane, Anderson, and Morgan counties were considered to be the September 2022 4-101 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts appropriate geographic area of interest for cumulative effects analysis to environmental justice populations.

As described above, a single CBG with minority and low-income populations that meet the thresholds to require environmental justice considerations is located within the 4 mi. (6.4 km) radius of the HCS established to assess environmental justice impacts. However, the majority of the population resides in the easternmost portion of that CBG, closer to Oak Ridges city center, which is outside of the study area radius. No disproportionately high or adverse human health, environmental, physical, or socioeconomic impacts to this community are realized as a result of construction, operation, or decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF.

As noted in Section 2.3 (Cumulative Effects), a number of ongoing, current and reasonably foreseeable future actions were identified in the vicinity of to the HCS. Actions that overlap geographically with the TRISO-X FFF, such as further development at the Horizon Center Industrial Park, has minimal impacts on environmental justice communities as the closest residents are located in CBGs which are not considered to have a significant minority or low-income population based on the NRCs thresholds. The scope of other proposed actions identified in Table 2.3-1 have the potential to result in disproportionately adverse impacts to minority or low-income populations if these populations are present in the areas surrounding the respective project locations. However, the specific details regarding the scope of these actions are unknown at this time. Because construction, operation and decommissioning of the project would not result in disproportionately high or adverse impacts, there are no cumulative impacts as a result of implementation of this project.

September 2022 4-102 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.12 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH IMPACTS This section describes public and occupational health impacts from non-radiological and radiological sources.

4.12.1 NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) is not constructed, and the Horizon Center site (HCS) remains in its current state. Consequently, there is no impact to public and occupational health.

4.12.2 PROPOSED ACTION 4.12.2.1 Non-Radiological Impacts 4.12.2.1.1 Proximity to Potential Receptors The potential for public health impacts is related to both the proximity of a given receptor with respect to the location of the TRISO-X FFF and the characteristics of non-radiological constituents, hazards and preventative measures associated with the facility. Figure 4.12.2-1 shows the location and distance to the nearest sensitive receptor populations relative to the HCS. These receptor populations include:

• The nearest full-time residence is located 0.72 mi. (1.16 km) to the north-northwest.

• The nearest elder-care facility, Canterfield of Oak Ridge, is located 8.40 mi. (13.52 km) to the northeast.

• The nearest school, Dyllis Elementary School, is located 2.81 mi. (4.52 km) to the west.

• The nearest residential well is located 1.12 mi. (1.80 km) to the north-northwest.

• The nearest hospital, Methodist Medical Center, is located 8.28 mi. (16.60 km) to the northeast.

• The nearest drinking water intake is the Cumberland Utility District intake located 5.52 mi.

(8.88 km) to the west-northwest.

4.12.2.1.2 Impacts of Construction 4.12.2.1.2.1 Public Health Impacts Construction of the TRISO-X FFF results in fugitive dust emissions (from construction activities and vehicular traffic along unpaved portions of the site) and vehicle emissions. Fugitive dust emissions from excavation and grading during construction is controlled using Best Management Practices (BMPs) and dust-suppression methods (e.g., water sprays and speed limits on unpaved roadways). Emissions from heavy construction equipment and vehicles generally do not affect ambient air quality but could result in a temporary local increase in emissions. Therefore, impacts to public health due to construction related air emissions are SMALL.

Precautions are taken during construction to avoid soil erosion. Engineering controls and best management and construction practices are implemented to minimize the extent of excavations September 2022 4-103 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts and grading. Standard soil-erosion and sedimentation-control methods (e.g., silt fencing) are used to minimize or prevent runoff from disturbed areas into any nearby waterbodies. All disturbed areas are permanently surfaced with either asphalt, grass, or concrete. Runoff collected from these areas is expected to have very minor sediment and other pollutants such as automobile oil, bacteria, nutrients, and pesticides. All of these pollutants are expected to be at concentrations equal to or lower than the allowable limits set by the Tennessee Department of Environmental Quality. Impacts to public health resulting from soil erosion are SMALL during construction because preventative measures are taken to prevent the removal and erosion of soils.

Additionally, accidental discharges of fuel, waste, and sewage are also controlled by the use of safety procedures, adherence to a spill prevention, control, and countermeasure (SPCC) plan, and use of spill-response equipment in accordance with federal and State laws, which minimize the likelihood and magnitude of impacts from accidental discharges, should they occur. Should an accidental spill occur, trained qualified professionals promptly deploy appropriate spill clean-up methods. Use of these BMPs implemented during construction of the TRISO-X FFF, therefore, reduce exposure and potential effects to workers and the surrounding public. As such, potential effects of waste and accidental discharges on human health are SMALL.

No water features are present on-site that could be used for drinking water purposes. As was stated in Section 4.12.2.1.1, above, the nearest drinking water intake is the Cumberland Utility District intake located 5.52 mi. (8.88 km) from the HCS. Construction wastes (e.g., discarded building materials, concrete truck washout, chemicals, litter, sanitary waste) are strictly controlled to prevent impacts to water quality. As described in Section 4.4.2 (Surface Water),

erosion and sediment controls, and other construction-phase stormwater BMPs are implemented, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit for construction is obtained from the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) and the City of Oak Ridge and stormwater controls are comprehensively described in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that are modified and updated throughout the changing conditions of construction. As such, impacts to surface water quality in conjunction with operation of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL. Therefore, adverse health impacts to nearby residents or workers in conjunction with surface water quality are SMALL.

Subsurface characteristics of the HCS reflect the presence of groundwater at depths ranging from 16.2 to 64.7 ft. (4.9 to 19.7 m) from top of casing for groundwater monitoring wells installed on the HCS (Section 3.4.1, Groundwater). As described in Section 4.4.1 (Groundwater), in conjunction with the use of best management and construction practices, impacts to groundwater quality expected to occur in conjunction with the construction, operation or decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL. No off-site residential groundwater wells in the immediate vicinity of the HCS are used for drinking water supply (see Section 3.4.1).

Therefore, adverse health impacts to nearby residents or workers in conjunction with groundwater quality are SMALL.

4.12.2.1.2.2 Occupational Health Impacts Construction activities for the TRISO-X FFF include as many as 166 construction-related personnel (Section 4.10, Socioeconomic Impacts). Construction activities are subject to Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) construction regulations (29 CFR 1926, Safety and Health Regulations for Construction) and any local ordinances, as appropriate.

September 2022 4-104 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts As indicated in Table 3.11.3-1, the 2020 recordable injury and illness rates for the construction industry were 2.5 per 100 full-time workers (national average) (BLS, 2022a) and 2.8 per 100 full-time workers (Tennessee average) (BLS, 2022b). Based upon these average recordable injury and illness rates, and an anticipated construction workforce of 166 personnel, recordable injuries and illnesses reported during the construction of the TRISO-X FFF could potentially range from 4.2 to 4.6 incidents annually. Similarly, the 2020 fatal occupational injury rate for the construction industry was 10.2 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (national average)

(BLS, 2022c) and 18.3 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (Tennessee average) (BLS, 2022d). Based upon these average fatality rates, and an anticipated construction workforce of 166 personnel, the potential for construction-related fatalities is extremely low, on the order of 0.02 fatalities annually.

Proper adherence to the construction health and safety plan, including the use of personnel protective equipment, reduces the likelihood of construction-related recordable injuries and illness during the construction phase. Use of BMPs implemented during construction of the TRISO-X FFF, as described in Section 4.12.2.1.2.1, also reduces exposure and potential effects to construction workers. As such, potential impacts associated with construction are SMALL.

4.12.2.1.3 Impacts of Operation 4.12.2.1.3.1 Public Health Impacts Potential releases from non-radiological materials vessels stored outdoors have a greater potential to migrate from the TRISO-X FFF to surrounding public receptors as compared to materials stored within the building. In conjunction with catastrophic release situations there is a greater potential for direct emission to the atmosphere. Additionally, non-radiological materials released to the ground surface have the potential to migrate to groundwater and surface water.

Table 4.12.2-1 summarizes the potential health hazards associated with exposure to non-radiological materials used in production and planned to be stored outdoors at the TRISO-X FFF. Classes of these chemicals include cryogenic liquid, liquids, and compressed gases.

Depending upon the attributes of the stored material, risks to human health include asphyxiation, respiratory and neural system toxicity, inhalation, dermal and/or digestive system irritants/corrosives, flammability and explosivity.

Proper design, maintenance, inspection and use of BMPs reduces the potential for impact from the storage of these materials on public health and safety. Outdoor major chemical and gas storage tanks are inspected, tested, and maintained as recommended by applicable industry codes and standards. The TRISO-X FFF is required to have an NPDES permit for discharge of stormwater from an industrial activity. Effective implementation of these BMPs and adherence to permit conditions would minimize the potential for emissions and, thus, impacts to public health are SMALL.

4.12.2.1.3.2 Occupational Health Impacts Non-radiological materials storage and use at the TRISO-X FFF includes the materials stored outside the TRISO-X FFF (Table 4.12.2-1) and the materials stored inside the facility (Table 4.12.2-2). Appropriate engineering controls and personal protective equipment are used to prevent exposure to the materials listed in Tables 4.12.2-1 and 4.12.2-2.

September 2022 4-105 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Operational activities at the TRISO-X FFF are subject to OSHAs Occupational Safety and Health Standards (29 CFR 1910) and in-facility gaseous emissions do not exceed OSHAs occupational safety and health standards for toxic and hazardous substances, in accordance with 29 CFR 1910 Subpart Z.

It is anticipated that up to 816 on-site personnel make up the on-site workforce at the TRISO-X FFF (Section 4.10, Socioeconomic Impacts). The potential for occupational health impacts associated with operations is SMALL, due to operational activities being subject to 29 CFR 1910.

As indicated in Table 3.11.3-1, the 2020 recordable injury and illness rate for all private industry was 2.7 per 100 full-time workers (national average) (BLS, 2022a) and 2.7 per 100 full-time workers (Tennessee average) (BLS, 2022b). Based upon these average recordable injury and illness rates, and an anticipated on-site workforce of 816 personnel, recordable injuries and illnesses reported during the operation of the TRISO-X FFF could be on the order of 22 incidents annually. Similarly, the 2020 fatal occupational injury rates for all private industry were 3.7 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (national average) (BLS, 2022c) and 5.1 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (Tennessee average) (BLS, 2022d). Based upon these average fatality rates, and an anticipated on-site workforce of 816 personnel, the potential for operations-related fatalities is extremely low, on the order of 0.03 to 0.042 fatalities annually.

Therefore, the potential of occupational health impacts associated with operations is SMALL.

Consideration of Other Facility Licensing Requirements Impacts of facility operation on nonradioactive public and occupational health and safety also considers the establishment and effectiveness of programs that are inherent in the licensing requirements for the TRISO-X FFF. These programs and protective measures are specified in other parts of the license application in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 70.22 and NUREG 1520 and include the following:

• Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA). The ISA evaluates potential accidental releases of the constituents and chemicals used at the TRISO-X FFF. Items relied on for safety (IROFS) are also identified as part of the ISA to enhance operational safety and minimize potential risks to workers and the public. The accidents evaluated in the ISA and the environmental effects of accidents are discussed in Section 4.12.2.3.

• Chemical Process Safety. The Chemical Process Safety program considers the health and safety of workers and the public in conjunction with chemical risks associated with normal operations and credible accident conditions.

• Fire Safety. The Fire Safety program provides information that demonstrates adequate protection against fires and explosions that could affect the safety of licensed materials and thus present an increased radiological or chemical risk. This chapter also establishes that the applicant has considered the radiological and chemical consequences of the fires and institutes suitable safety controls to protect workers, the public, and the environment.

In summary, proper design, maintenance, inspection and use of BMPs reduces the potential for impact of the storage of potentially hazardous materials on public health and safety. The effective integration of IROFs would minimize the potential for emissions, releases to workers and releases to the public. Additionally, the results of the ISA, Chemical Process Safety, and Fire Safety measures are incorporated into facility operations to enhance chemical and fire safety to ensure proper work conditions and to enhance worker safety and minimize effects to September 2022 4-106 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts the public. As such, overall impacts from facility operation on public and occupational safety are SMALL.

4.12.2.1.4 Impacts of Decommissioning Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF results in fugitive dust emissions (from construction activities and vehicular traffic along unpaved portions of the site) and vehicle emissions. Fugitive dust emissions from excavation and grading during decommissioning are controlled using BMPs and dust-suppression methods (e.g., water sprays and speed limits on unpaved roadways).

Emissions from heavy construction equipment and vehicles generally are localized and do not affect ambient air quality.

Precautions are taken during decommissioning to avoid accidental discharges of fuel, waste, and sewage. These precautions, including the use of safety procedures, spill controls, spill-response plans, countermeasures plans, and spill-response equipment in accordance with federal and State laws, minimize the likelihood and magnitude of impacts from accidental discharges, should they occur. If a spill occurs, trained qualified professionals promptly deploy spill clean-up methods. Standard soil-erosion and sedimentation-control methods (e.g., silt fencing) are used to minimize or prevent runoff from disturbed areas into any nearby waterbodies.

Use of these BMPs implemented during decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF therefore, reduce exposure and potential effects to workers and the surrounding public. As such, potential effects of air and waste on human health are SMALL.

It is anticipated that up to 150 construction-related personnel could be present on-site during decommissioning activities (Section 4.10, Socioeconomic Impacts). Decommissioning activities are subject to OSHA construction regulations (29 CFR 1926, Safety and Health Regulations for Construction) and any local ordinances, as appropriate, and serve to minimize health impacts to construction workers involved with decommissioning activities, therefore the likelihood of decommissioning-related construction impacts is SMALL.

As was shown in Table 3.11.3-1, the 2020 recordable injury and illness rates for the construction industry were 2.5 per 100 full-time workers (national average) (BLS, 2022a) and 2.8 per 100 full-time workers (Tennessee average) (BLS, 2022b). Based upon these average recordable injury and illness rates, and an anticipated decommissioning construction workforce of up to 150 personnel, recordable injuries and illnesses reported during decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF could potentially range from 3.8 to 4.2 incidents annually. Similarly, the 2020 fatal occupational injury rates for the construction industry were 10.2 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (national average) (BLS, 2022c) and 18.3 per 100,000 full-time equivalent workers (Tennessee average) (BLS, 2022d). Based upon these average fatality rates, and an anticipated decommissioning construction workforce of 150 personnel, the potential for construction-related fatalities is extremely low, on the order of 0.015 to 0.027 fatalities annually.

Proper adherence to the decommissioning health and safety plan, including the use of personnel protective equipment, reduces the likelihood of recordable injuries and illness during the decommissioning phase. Use of BMPs during decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF, as described above, also reduces exposure and potential effects to decommissioning construction workers. As such, potential impacts associated with decommissioning are SMALL.

September 2022 4-107 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.12.2.1.5 Mitigation Measures The following management measures and regulatory controls serve to reduce or eliminate the potential for public and occupational health impacts:

• Outdoor major chemical and gas storage tanks are inspected, tested, and maintained as recommended by applicable industry codes and standards.

• An effluent monitoring program is established to maintain concentrations of non-radiological materials in plant effluents at as low as is reasonably achievable levels.

• Operational activities at the TRISO-X FFF are subject to OSHAs Occupational Safety and Health Standards (29 CFR 1910) and in-facility gaseous emissions do not exceed OSHAs occupational safety and health standards for toxic and hazardous substances, in accordance with 29 CFR 1910 Subpart Z.

• An NRC-required Emergency Plan, and a NPDES permit which requires a SPCC Plan.

• Development of a SWPPP plan for the NPDES stormwater construction permit.

• Development of a SPCC plan to prevent and control accidental releases.

• Implementation of the environmental monitoring program described in Chapter 6 ensures concentrations of hazardous materials in the environment remain below acceptable levels to protect public and occupational health.

4.12.2.1.6 Cumulative Impacts 4.12.2.1.6.1 Public Health The potential for cumulative public health impacts associated with the non-radiological materials storage of cryogenic liquid, liquids, and compressed gases outdoors is SMALL since any released gases would readily disperse into the atmosphere near the emission source. Also, outdoor major chemical and gas storage tanks are inspected, tested, and maintained as recommended by applicable industry codes and standards. This BMP minimizes the potential for releases to environmental media. Additionally, the TRISO-X FFF is located at a site that lacks adjacent or nearby residences and population centers.

As noted in Section 2.3 (Cumulative Effects), reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. Each of the identified projects are at sufficient distances from the TRISO-X FFF that there is not an increased risk of exposure to the public from either routine operations or accidental release. Therefore, cumulative impacts to public health are SMALL.

Past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions have the potential to affect public heath. However, given the expected adherence to local, State and federal regulations, the impact is SMALL. Accordingly, as impacts of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF is SMALL, the incremental contribution of this project to the cumulative impact is SMALL September 2022 4-108 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.12.2.1.6.2 Occupational Health Operational activities at the TRISO-X FFF are subject to OSHAs Occupational Safety and Health Standards (29 CFR 1910) and in-facility gaseous emissions do not exceed OSHAs occupational safety and health standards for toxic and hazardous substances, in accordance with 29 CFR 1910 Subpart Z. Therefore, there are no cumulative impacts to occupational health.

4.12.2.2 Radiological Impacts This section describes the public and occupational health impacts from radioactive material due to construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF.

4.12.2.2.1 Pathway Assessment Health impacts to the public are possible if radioactive material is released to the environment.

Radioactive material can be transported from the TRISO-X FFF via airborne effluent (There is no normal liquid effluent pathway from the TRISO-X FFF). Workers are potentially exposed to direct radiation from facility structures, systems, and components.

The TRISO-X FFF is approximately 236 ft. (72 m) from the site boundary in its nearest cardinal sectors (South sector). The distances between the site boundary and the TRISO-X Facility are based on a circle that envelopes the TRISO-X Facility. This assumption is conservative because it results in the minimum distance between the facility and the site boundary for each of the 16 sectors (The actual closest distance is approximately 408 ft.). For the purpose of estimating population dose, the population surrounding the facility out to 5 miles is conservatively assumed to be 720,000. It is conservatively assumed that the entirety of food and milk consumed by the assumed population is produced within 5 miles of the TRISO-X FFF.

The TRISO-X FFF releases airborne effluent through the facilitys ventilation systems. It is assumed that the facility releases gaseous effluent at a rate such that the requirements of 10 CFR 20 (CFR, 2021a) are met. Compliance is shown by meeting the specific requirements of 10 CFR 20.1302(b)(2) (CFR, 2021a), which includes a requirement that all radioisotopes activity concentrations at the site boundary are less than those presented in Table 2 of Appendix B of 10 CFR 20 and the sum of the fractions of those activity concentrations are less than one. The gaseous effluent activity concentrations correspond to airborne concentrations that result in an annual dose of 100 mrem (10 CFR 20 annual limit for public dose). The airborne activity concentration limits are further reduced to 10 percent of the 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2 values per guidance in Regulatory Guide 4.20 (NRC, 2012). Thus, the TRISO-X FFF assumes a gaseous effluent release rate such that dose at the site boundary is limited to 10 mrem per year.

The gaseous effluent transport to the receptors accounts for site-specific meteorological conditions and distances from the facility to the receptors. Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC, 1977a) methodology is followed to determine the atmospheric dispersion (X/Q) and the deposition (D/Q) factors for the site boundary and cardinal sectors surrounding the TRISO-X FFF out to 5miles. The atmospheric dispersion and the deposition factors are presented in Tables 4.12.2-3 thru 4.12.2-7.

The TRISO-X FFF does not release liquid effluent from the facility. Thus, liquid effluent is not discussed in this section.

September 2022 4-109 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts The radiation sources in the TRISO-X FFF are not sufficient to pose a direct dose hazard to off-site receptors. This is due to the only major radionuclides present at the facility being four isotopes of uranium, which have long half-lives, low gamma energies, and predominantly undergo alpha decay. Thus, off-site dose is solely due to gaseous effluent.

4.12.2.2.2 Public and Occupational Exposure 4.12.2.2.2.1 Impacts of Construction Since licensed radioactive materials are not on-site during construction the impacts to the public from radiation exposure are SMALL 4.12.2.2.2.2 Impacts of Operation As described in Section 3.11.1, there are no abnormal sources of radiation on-site or within the TRISO-X FFF vicinity. Section 3.11.1 estimates background radiation in the vicinity of the TRISO-X FFF to be approximately 310 mrem/yr. Although above the national average for background radiation, this annual dose is not an abnormal radiation hazard.

Only the population dose from airborne effluent is considered for the area surrounding the TRISO-X FFF because liquid effluents are not released to the environment and direct shine to these receptors is negligible. As discussed in Section 4.12.2.2.1, it is assumed that the airborne concentrations of radioactive gaseous effluents are less than 10 percent of the limits presented in Table 2 of Appendix B of 10 CFR 20 (CFR, 2021a) and that the sum of the fractions of those concentrations are less than one. This assumption, combined with the atmospheric dispersion factors calculated for the site boundary, is used to estimate a bounding gaseous activity release rate of 4.52E-5 Ci/yr for the TRISO-X FFF.

Dose to the surrounding population is performed out to five miles from the TRISO-X FFF.

Regulatory Guide 1.109 (NRC, 1977b) methodology is applied to estimate integrated population dose. The methodology uses the radionuclide-specific annual activity release rates, population distribution data, and atmospheric dispersion and deposition factors (Tables 4.12.2-4 thru 4.12.2-7). Table 4.12.2-8 presents the estimated population dose for the area surrounding the TRISO-X FFF. Total body gaseous effluent population dose is 7.44E-02 person-rem/yr, which is significantly less than the estimated population dose due to background radiation of 6.20E+03 person-rem/yr. Note that the national average radiation background is considerably lower than that in the area of the HCS (see Section 3.11.1).

Administrative dose limits are implemented to control occupational radiation exposure to workers at the TRISO-X FFF. Administrative dose limits cannot be exceeded without management approval. Occupational exposure is controlled and monitored by the facilitys radiation protection program and is maintained as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA).

Additionally, engineered controls exist to minimize occupational exposure. Annual average dose to TRISO-X FFF workers is expected to be in line with other fuel fabrication facilities.

The TRISO-X FFF performs radiological monitoring to meet programmatic and regulatory commitments. The ambient air of the process and supporting areas are monitored for particulates (U-234, U-235, U-236, and U-238) in support of the facilitys radiation protection air monitoring program. Ambient air monitoring allows for detection of glovebox leaks, ensures 10 CFR 20 limits arent exceeded, and quantifies changes in background radiation. Heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) ductwork for process area ventilation, hoods, and September 2022 4-110 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts gloveboxes are also monitored to quantify activity concentrations in air. To ensure regulatory requirements of 10 CFR Part 20.1101, 10 CFR Part 20.1302, 10 CFR Part 70.59 (CFR, 2021b),

and 40 CFR Part 190 (CFR, 2021c) are met, gaseous effluent release points (stacks) are monitored.

Mitigation measures are used to keep the hazard from radiological sources ALARA. Both engineered and administrative controls are used. The TRISO-X FFF uses the following engineered controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers:

• Radiation source identification.

• Confinement around radiation sources.

• Ventilation control.

• Access control to radiation areas.

• Contamination control.

• Remote operation.

• Waste minimization.

The TRISO-X FFF uses administrative controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers. These controls consist of written procedures, policies, and employee training in the following subject areas:

• General environmental activities.

• General environmental hazards regarding the facility.

• Waste minimization requirements.

• Waste minimization goals.

• Waste minimization accomplishments.

• Specific environmental issues.

• Responsibilities for environmental stewardship.

• Employee recognition for efforts to improve environmental conditions.

• Requirements for employees to consider environmental issues in day-to-day activities.

The impacts during facility operation from radioactive materials at the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL 4.12.2.2.2.3 Impacts of Decommissioning The decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF consists of removing and disposing of radioactive materials in accordance with NRC regulations and guidance. The impacts to the public from radioactive materials are bounded by the operation of the facility and are SMALL.

September 2022 4-111 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.12.2.2.3 Cumulative Impacts As noted in Section 2.3 (Cumulative Effects), reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. Each of the identified projects are at sufficient distances from the TRISO-X FFF that there is not an increased risk of exposure to the public from either routine operations or accidental release. Therefore, cumulative impacts to public health from radioactive materials are SMALL.

Past, present and reasonably foreseeable future actions have the potential to affect public health. However, given the expected adherence to federal regulations, the impact is SMALL.

Accordingly, as impacts of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF is SMALL, the incremental contribution of this project to the cumulative impact is SMALL 4.12.2.3 Environmental Effects of Accidents In accordance with 10 CFR 70, Subpart H, an Integrated Safety Analysis (ISA) was performed using guidance provided in NUREG-1513, Integrated Safety Analysis Guidance Document, Revision 0, May 2001. An ISA is defined in 10 CFR 70.4 as a systematic analysis to identify facility and external hazards and their potential for initiating accident sequences, the potential accident sequences, their likelihood and consequences, and the items relied on for safety.

Items relied on for safety (IROFS) are structures, systems, equipment, components, and activities of personnel that are relied on to prevent or mitigate potential accidents that could exceed the performance requirements in 10 CFR 70.61.

The ISA describes compliance with the 10 CFR 70.61(b) and (c) performance requirements, which require that IROFS be implemented to make credible high consequence events highly unlikely and to make credible intermediate consequence events unlikely. In addition, the risk of nuclear criticality accidents must be limited by assuring that all nuclear processes are subcritical and in compliance with 10 CFR 70.61(d). As required by 10 CFR 70.65, an ISA Summary was submitted to the NRC as part of the License Application using guidance provided in NUREG-1520, Standard Review Plan for Fuel Cycle Facilities License Applications, Revision 2, June 2015. As required by 10 CFR 70, the ISA methodology is described in License Application Chapter 3, Integrated Safety Analysis. As required by 10 CFR 70.72(d)(3), updates to the ISA Summary are submitted annually to the NRC.

Accidents that could occur at the TRISO-X FFF under the Proposed Action alternative are both radiological and non-radiological in nature. The fabrication of fuel for advanced nuclear reactors involves the chemical processing of uranium enriched to less than 20 weight percent. The fuel fabrication process involves the encapsulation of each uranium fuel particle with multiple carbonous layers. The encapsulated uranium fuel particles are pressed into a fuel pebble which has an additional outer layer of graphite that provides additional encapsulation of the uranium.

This encapsulation results in lower uranium density that is well bounded by the chemical processing of initial feed materials of uranium oxide into a uranyl nitrate and ammonium diuranate solution. Uranium materials are processed indoors in batch limited quantities such that process upsets would pose minimal impacts to the environment.

4.12.2.3.1 Bounding Accident Consequence Determination The hazards posed by the materials used in the fuel fabrication process were evaluated using several methods:

September 2022 4-112 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts

• Consequences of accidents involving radiological materials and/or chemicals comingled with special nuclear material (SNM), accident analyses were determined for potential on-site accidents using the ISA methodologies for the associated systems or process operations.

• Consequences of accidents involving chemicals outside of SNM processing areas were determined using the ALOHA computer program (Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres), developed jointly by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, which is designed for use in responding to chemical releases.

• The dose to the public at the fence line is also determined for a bounding nuclear criticality accident in alignment with industry accepted codes and methods.

The bounding accidents for the TRISO-X FFF are:

• Major fire due to the ignition of an uncontained spill of Hexamethyldisiloxane (HMDSO) inside the fuel fabrication building.

• Nuclear criticality inside the fuel fabrication building.

• Flammable gas explosion inside the fuel fabrication building.

• Nitric acid release inside the fuel fabrication building.

• Methyltrichlorosilane (MTS) release outside the fuel fabrication building.

Table 4.12.2-9 describes the ISA consequence threshold limits used to determine the severity of accidents that could impact the public and/or the environment to comply with the performance requirements in 10 CFR 70.61. Accident consequences for each credible scenario are compared to the consequence threshold limits and a consequence level of Low, Intermediate, or High is assigned.

For radiological consequences, the calculated Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE), uranium intake, and fraction of the 10 CFR 20, Appendix B values, are used.

As required by 10 CFR 70.65(b)(7), proposed quantitative consequence standards used to assess the consequences to an individual from acute chemical exposure to licensed material or chemicals produced from licensed materials which are on-site, or expected to be on-site, include:

• Acute Exposure Guideline Levels (AEGLs) are used if available.

• If no AEGLs are available, Emergency Response Planning Guidelines (ERPGs) are used.

• If no ERPGs are available, Temporary Emergency Exposure Levels (TEELs) are used.

• If there are no AEGLs, ERPGs, or TEELs available, the chemical family is used to identify whether there are any similar chemicals within the same chemical family that are expected to have a bounding acute exposure. If no similar chemicals can be found, the chemical is assumed to have no acute hazards as documented in Chemical Accident Consequence Evaluation.

September 2022 4-113 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts

• The soluble uranium intake limits are based on 10 CFR 70.61, ISG-14, NUREG-1391, and DOE-STD-1136-2017 rather than AEGL/ERPG/TEELs. The calculations for the soluble uranium intake are included in the radiological consequence analysis rather than the chemical consequence analysis due to the similarity of evaluation methods.

4.12.2.3.2 Radiological Accidents The bounding radiological accidents that could impact the environment / public, as identified in the ISA, are:

• Major fire due to the ignition of an uncontained spill of HMDSO inside the fuel fabrication building

• Nuclear criticality inside the fuel fabrication building For a radiological release to the environment, calculations performed for the purpose of the ER determined that an upset of an HMDSO fire would have to involve at least 60 kg of uranium oxide in order to lead to an intermediate consequence that corresponds to 5,000 times the 10 CFR 20, Appendix B limits averaged over a 24-hour period. For radiological exposure to the public, the ISA assumes the major fire results in a high consequence.

The dose from a nuclear criticality accident is calculated to be 1.25 rem at the closest location of public access to the site boundary of 122 meters from the facility. The accident involves a postulated criticality event consisting of a 55-gallon (208 L) drum containing 200 g U/L of ammonium diuranate with 1 x 1018 fissions. This is a low consequence to the public since the calculated dose of 1.25 rem is less than the 5 rem intermediate consequence threshold in Table 4.12.2-9.

4.12.2.3.2.1 Major Fire Mitigation Measures The spill of HMDSO is mitigated with the following measures and IROFS:

• Flammable liquid volume limits

• Level alarms and isolation interlocks

• Clean agent fire suppression

• Fire alarm and smoke detection

• Fire resistant materials of construction

• Combustible Control Program

• Fire barriers

• Electrical Classification

• Site Emergency Plan, implementing procedures, and response actions 4.12.2.3.2.2 Nuclear Criticality Mitigation Measures As required by 10 CFR 70.64(a)(9), the TRISO-X FFF employs the double contingency principle in its design for operations involving SNM. The double contingency principle incorporates sufficient factors of safety to require at least two unlikely, independent, and concurrent changes September 2022 4-114 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts in process conditions before a criticality accident is possible. A criticality accident is also demonstrated to be highly unlikely in the ISA.

4.12.2.3.3 Non-radiological Accidents The bounding accidents that could result in chemical exposure to the public, as identified in the ISA, are:

• Flammable gas explosion inside the fuel fabrication building

• Major fire due to the ignition of an uncontained spill of HMDSO inside the fuel fabrication building that causes a nitric acid release

• Nitric acid release in the chemical storage area inside the fuel fabrication building

• MTS release outside the fuel fabrication building from the bulk storage tank The ISA assumes that release of multiple solution process vessels inside the fuel fabrication building, due to a flammable gas explosion, results in a high consequence to the public.

Calculations for an accident involving the release of 55 gallons of 70 weight percent nitric acid inside the fuel fabrication building due to an unmitigated HMDSO fire results in a chemical exposure to the public of approximately 124 mg/m3. This exceeds the AEGL-2 limit of 77.2 mg/m3 indicating that the release of nitric acid due to a major fire results in a high consequence to the public.

Calculations for an accident involving the release of 660 gallons of 70 weight percent nitric acid spill inside the fuel fabrication building result in a chemical exposure to the public of approximately 0.66 mg/m3. This exceeds the AEGL-1 limit of 0.4 mg/m3 indicating that the release of nitric acid due to unconfined spill of the entire tank contents results in an intermediate consequence to the public.

ALOHA calculations for an accident outside the fuel fabrication building due to a spill of 1,800 gallons of methyltrichlorosilane (MTS) from the bulk storage tank was determined to be the bounding outdoor chemical release. The unmitigated release of MTS as an evaporating spill due to a one-inch hole in the storage tank results in a chemical exposure of approximately 304 ppm. This results in a high consequence to the public since the calculated exposure of 304 ppm exceeds the AEGL-2 limit of 7.3 ppm for the public.

4.12.2.3.3.1 Flammable Gas Explosion / Major Fire Mitigation Measures Flammable gas explosions and a major fire are mitigated with the following measures and IROFS:

• Flammable liquid volume limits

• Level alarms and isolation interlocks

• Clean agent fire suppression

• Combustible gas detection and isolation interlocks

• Fire resistant materials of construction September 2022 4-115 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts

• Fire alarm and smoke detection

• Combustible Control Program

• Fire barriers

• Electrical Classification

• Site Emergency Plan, implementing procedures, and response actions 4.12.2.3.3.2 Indoor Chemical Spill Mitigation Measures Indoor spills of chemicals are mitigated with the following measures and IROFS:

• Metering vessel volume limits

• Level alarms and isolation interlocks

• Containment materials of construction

• Welded piping and columns

• Overflow collection

• Site Emergency Plan, implementing procedures, and response actions 4.12.2.3.3.3 Outdoor Chemical Spill Mitigation Measures Outdoor spills of chemicals are mitigated with designs following industry engineering practices and code requirements that include International Building Code (IBC)/International Fire Code (IFC):

• Containment materials of construction

• Welded piping and tanks

• Secondary containment

• Fencing / bollards

• Site Emergency Plan, implementing procedures, and response actions September 2022 4-116 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-1 Summary of Potential Health Impacts Associated with Releases of Non-Radiological Materials Used in Production and Stored Outdoors at the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chemical Class Non-Radiological Potential for Health Impacts if Released to the Environment Materials Stored Outdoors Cryogenic Liquid Argon Argon is a simple asphyxiant (NLM, 2022a). Simple asphyxiants are harmful to the body only when the asphyxiant becomes so concentrated in air that the effective oxygen level in the breathing zone is lowered from 21 percent to 19.5 percent or lower (CCPS, 2022).

Stored argon is a refrigerated liquid. Upon accidental release from a cryogenic tank, argon would rapidly transition to the gaseous state at normal atmospheric pressure and outdoor temperature, as stated in the National Library of Medicines PubChem database citation for argon (NLM, 2022a). Because of this rapid transition to the gaseous phase, released argon would not be expected to impact environmental media including soil, ground water, sediment or surface water.

Liquids Ethanol Ethanol is a skin and eye irritant. Ethanol vapors are heavier than air. Accidental release of ethanol is also a potential physical hazard in that ethanol is classified as flammable (NLM, 2022b).

Hexamethyldisiloxane Hexamethyldisiloxane is not irritating via dermal contact.

Accidental release of Hexamethyldisiloxane is a potential physical hazard in that Hexamethyldisiloxane is classified as flammable (NLM 2022c).

Methyltrichlorosilane Methyltrichlorosilane is corrosive to skin and the intestinal tract.

Methyltrichlorosilane vapors are heavier than air. Accidental release of methyltrichlorosilane is also a potential physical hazard in that methyltrichlorosilane is classified as flammable (NLM, 2022d).

Silicone Oil Silicone oil is not listed in the National Library of Medicines PubChem database.

Compressed Gases Acetylene Acetylene gas as an inhalation toxicant, affecting primarily the central nervous system and respiratory system. Acetylene gas is also listed as a simple asphyxiant. Accidental release of acetylene gas represents a potential physical hazard in that acetylene is classified as flammable (NLM, 2022e).

Carbon Monoxide Carbon monoxide gas is an inhalation toxicant and asphyxiant.

Accidental release of carbon monoxide gas is also a potential physical hazard in that carbon monoxide is classified as a flammable gas (NLM, 2022f).

Propylene Propylene gas is an inhalation toxicant and simple asphyxiant.

Accidental release of propylene gas is also a potential physical hazard in that propylene is classified as extremely flammable (NLM, 2022g).

September 2022 4-117 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-2 Summary of Potential Health Impacts Associated with Exposure to Non-Radiological Materials Used in Production and Stored Indoors at the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chemical Class Non-Radiological Potential Health Impacts Associated in Exposure Materials Stored Indoors Liquids Acetic Acid Acetic acid is corrosive to metals and tissue. Acetic acid is also a potential physical hazard in that acetic acid is classified as flammable (NLM, 2022h).

Ammonium Ammonium hydroxide is corrosive via inhalation, ingestion and Hydroxide dermal contact routes of exposure (NLM, 2022i).

Formaldehyde Formaldehyde is corrosive via inhalation, ingestion and dermal contact routes of exposure and causes anesthetic effects.

Formaldehyde is also a potential physical hazard in that formaldehyde is classified as flammable (NLM, 2022j).

Hydrogen Peroxide Hydrogen peroxide is caustic to mucous membranes and skin.

Hydrogen peroxide is also an oxidizer (NLM, 2022k).

Nitric Acid Nitric acid is corrosive via inhalation, ingestion and dermal contact routes of exposure. Nitric acid is also an oxidizer (NLM, 2022l).

Sodium Chlorate Sodium chlorate is an eye and skin irritant. Sodium chlorate is also an oxidizer (NLM, 2022m).

Sodium Hydroxide Sodium hydroxide is corrosive via inhalation, ingestion and dermal contact routes of exposure. Sodium hydroxide is also an oxidizer (NLM, 2022n).

Solids Graphite Graphite is a respiratory, dermal and eye irritant (NLM, 2022o).

Methenamine Methenamine is a respiratory, dermal, eye and mucous membrane irritant. Methenamine is also a potential physical hazard in that methenamine is classified as flammable (NLM, 2022p).

Phenolic Resin Phenolic resin is corrosive to skin (NLM, 2022q).

Resorcinol Resorcinol is a skin and eye irritant (NLM, 2022r).

Sodium Carbonate Sodium carbonate is an eye irritant (NLM, 2022s).

Urea Urea is an eye irritant (NLM, 2022t).

September 2022 4-118 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-3 Site Boundary X/Q and D/Q Factors X/Q (s/m3)

Distance 2.26 day 8 day D/Q Sector No Decay (m) Decay Decay (1/m2)

Undepleted Undepleted Depleted N 0.09 4.00E-04 3.90E-04 3.80E-04 2.20E-07 NNE 0.09 9.00E-04 8.90E-04 8.70E-04 6.40E-07 NE 0.09 2.30E-03 2.30E-03 2.30E-03 1.60E-06 ENE 0.17 1.20E-03 1.10E-03 1.10E-03 5.90E-07 E 0.16 1.00E-03 1.00E-03 9.90E-04 4.70E-07 ESE 0.11 1.20E-03 1.20E-03 1.10E-03 3.70E-07 SE 0.11 8.70E-04 8.60E-04 8.40E-04 2.40E-07 SSE 0.05 2.60E-03 2.60E-03 2.60E-03 5.90E-07 S 0.04 3.50E-03 3.50E-03 3.40E-03 7.60E-07 SSW 0.10 1.30E-03 1.30E-03 1.30E-03 4.10E-07 SW 0.15 1.50E-03 1.50E-03 1.50E-03 6.30E-07 WSW 0.18 9.20E-04 9.10E-04 8.80E-04 3.70E-07 W 0.10 7.10E-04 7.00E-04 6.90E-04 3.60E-07 WNW 0.07 4.60E-04 4.60E-04 4.50E-04 2.30E-07 NW 0.07 4.20E-04 4.20E-04 4.10E-04 1.80E-07 NNW 0.07 3.40E-04 3.30E-04 3.30E-04 1.50E-07 September 2022 4-119 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-4 Distance-Segmented X/Q Values - Undecayed/Undepleted Case Cardinal Distance-Segmented X/Q Factor (s/m3)

Sector 0.5-1 mi. 1-2 mi. 2-3 mi. 3-4 mi. 4-5 mi.

S 3.64E-05 7.79E-06 2.33E-06 1.18E-06 7.34E-07 SSW 5.25E-05 1.13E-05 3.38E-06 1.71E-06 1.06E-06 SW 1.08E-04 2.32E-05 6.99E-06 3.54E-06 2.22E-06 WSW 9.25E-05 2.00E-05 6.07E-06 3.09E-06 1.94E-06 W 2.48E-05 5.33E-06 1.60E-06 8.07E-07 5.03E-07 WNW 9.08E-06 1.93E-06 5.67E-07 2.82E-07 1.74E-07 NW 8.17E-06 1.73E-06 5.07E-07 2.52E-07 1.55E-07 NNW 7.00E-06 1.49E-06 4.36E-07 2.17E-07 1.33E-07 N 1.25E-05 2.66E-06 7.83E-07 3.90E-07 2.41E-07 NNE 2.92E-05 6.22E-06 1.85E-06 9.24E-07 5.73E-07 NE 8.05E-05 1.73E-05 5.19E-06 2.62E-06 1.63E-06 ENE 1.08E-04 2.32E-05 7.01E-06 3.55E-06 2.23E-06 E 8.02E-05 1.72E-05 5.18E-06 2.62E-06 1.64E-06 ESE 5.37E-05 1.15E-05 3.47E-06 1.76E-06 1.10E-06 SE 3.69E-05 7.92E-06 2.38E-06 1.21E-06 7.53E-07 SSE 2.99E-05 6.42E-06 1.92E-06 9.70E-07 6.05E-07 September 2022 4-120 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-5 Distance-Segmented X/Q Values - 2.26 Day Decayed/Undepleted Case Cardinal Distance-Segmented X/Q Factor (s/m3)

Sector 0.5-1 mi. 1-2 mi. 2-3 mi. 3-4 mi. 4-5 mi.

S 3.55E-05 7.41E-06 2.14E-06 1.04E-06 6.26E-07 SSW 5.12E-05 1.07E-05 3.09E-06 1.51E-06 9.09E-07 SW 1.05E-04 2.20E-05 6.38E-06 3.12E-06 1.88E-06 WSW 8.98E-05 1.89E-05 5.48E-06 2.68E-06 1.62E-06 W 2.41E-05 5.05E-06 1.45E-06 7.06E-07 4.24E-07 WNW 8.88E-06 1.85E-06 5.25E-07 2.53E-07 1.51E-07 NW 7.98E-06 1.66E-06 4.69E-07 2.25E-07 1.35E-07 NNW 6.85E-06 1.42E-06 4.02E-07 1.93E-07 1.15E-07 N 1.22E-05 2.55E-06 7.24E-07 3.49E-07 2.09E-07 NNE 2.86E-05 5.96E-06 1.71E-06 8.29E-07 4.99E-07 NE 7.87E-05 1.66E-05 4.81E-06 2.35E-06 1.43E-06 ENE 1.05E-04 2.21E-05 6.44E-06 3.16E-06 1.92E-06 E 7.82E-05 1.64E-05 4.75E-06 2.32E-06 1.40E-06 ESE 5.23E-05 1.10E-05 3.16E-06 1.54E-06 9.31E-07 SE 3.59E-05 7.51E-06 2.17E-06 1.06E-06 6.38E-07 SSE 2.92E-05 6.10E-06 1.76E-06 8.55E-07 5.16E-07 September 2022 4-121 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-6 Distance-Segmented X/Q Values - 8 Day Decayed/Depleted Case Cardinal Distance-Segmented X/Q Factor (s/m3)

Sector 0.5-1 mi. 1-2 mi. 2-3 mi. 3-4 mi. 4-5 mi.

S 3.24E-05 6.59E-06 1.85E-06 8.87E-07 5.30E-07 SSW 4.68E-05 9.53E-06 2.68E-06 1.29E-06 7.68E-07 SW 9.59E-05 1.96E-05 5.53E-06 2.66E-06 1.60E-06 WSW 8.23E-05 1.69E-05 4.79E-06 2.31E-06 1.39E-06 W 2.21E-05 4.50E-06 1.26E-06 6.06E-07 3.62E-07 WNW 8.10E-06 1.63E-06 4.51E-07 2.14E-07 1.26E-07 NW 7.28E-06 1.47E-06 4.03E-07 1.91E-07 1.13E-07 NNW 6.25E-06 1.26E-06 3.46E-07 1.64E-07 9.66E-08 N 1.12E-05 2.25E-06 6.22E-07 2.95E-07 1.75E-07 NNE 2.60E-05 5.28E-06 1.47E-06 6.99E-07 4.16E-07 NE 7.18E-05 1.47E-05 4.12E-06 1.98E-06 1.19E-06 ENE 9.60E-05 1.96E-05 5.56E-06 2.68E-06 1.61E-06 E 7.15E-05 1.46E-05 4.10E-06 1.97E-06 1.18E-06 ESE 4.78E-05 9.75E-06 2.75E-06 1.32E-06 7.90E-07 SE 3.28E-05 6.69E-06 1.88E-06 9.06E-07 5.42E-07 SSE 2.67E-05 5.43E-06 1.52E-06 7.31E-07 4.37E-07 September 2022 4-122 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-7 Distance-Segmented D/Q Values Cardinal Distance-Segmented D/Q Factor (1/m2)

Sector 0.5-1 mi. 1-2 mi. 2-3 mi. 3-4 mi. 4-5 mi.

S 1.21E-08 2.48E-09 6.47E-10 2.91E-10 1.64E-10 SSW 1.94E-08 3.97E-09 1.04E-09 4.65E-10 2.63E-10 SW 4.87E-08 9.98E-09 2.61E-09 1.17E-09 6.62E-10 WSW 3.91E-08 8.01E-09 2.09E-09 9.39E-10 5.31E-10 W 1.55E-08 3.18E-09 8.29E-10 3.72E-10 2.11E-10 WNW 6.49E-09 1.33E-09 3.47E-10 1.56E-10 8.82E-11 NW 4.94E-09 1.01E-09 2.64E-10 1.19E-10 6.71E-11 NNW 4.35E-09 8.91E-10 2.33E-10 1.04E-10 5.91E-11 N 9.02E-09 1.85E-09 4.82E-10 2.17E-10 1.23E-10 NNE 2.63E-08 5.38E-09 1.40E-09 6.30E-10 3.57E-10 NE 6.77E-08 1.39E-08 3.62E-09 1.63E-09 9.20E-10 ENE 5.88E-08 1.20E-08 3.14E-09 1.41E-09 7.99E-10 E 3.98E-08 8.16E-09 2.13E-09 9.56E-10 5.41E-10 ESE 1.92E-08 3.94E-09 1.03E-09 4.62E-10 2.61E-10 SE 1.16E-08 2.38E-09 6.21E-10 2.79E-10 1.58E-10 SSE 1.01E-08 2.06E-09 5.39E-10 2.42E-10 1.37E-10 September 2022 4-123 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-8 Gaseous Normal Effluent Population Dose Receptor Collective Dose (person-rem/yr)

Pathway Total GI Tract Bone Liver Kidney Thyroid Lung Skin Body Ground 8.18E-04 8.18E-04 8.18E-04 8.18E-04 8.18E-04 8.18E-04 8.18E-04 3.82E-03 Inhalation 7.35E-02 3.25E-03 1.18E+00 0.00E+00 2.59E-01 0.00E+00 5.71E+00 0.00E+00 Vegetables 6.39E-05 4.67E-05 1.03E-03 0.00E+00 2.11E-04 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Milk 2.68E-06 1.77E-06 4.33E-05 0.00E+00 8.64E-06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Meat 7.97E-07 7.34E-07 1.29E-05 0.00E+00 2.82E-06 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Total 7.44E-02 4.12E-03 1.19E+00 8.18E-04 2.60E-01 8.18E-04 5.72E+00 3.82E-03 Natural Background Population Dose: 6.20E+03 person-rem/yr September 2022 4-124 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Table 4.12.2-9 10 CFR 70.61 Radiological and Chemical Consequence Exposure Levels Consequence Radiological Chemical

• Level Public/Environment Public/Environment High TEDE 25 rem CHEM2 30 mg soluble U Intermediate 25 rem > TEDE 5 rem CHEM1

< CHEM2 5,000 x 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, limits averaged over 24-hour period Low < Intermediate Levels < Intermediate Levels

• CHEM = AEGL, ERPG, or TEEL September 2022 4-125 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts 4.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT IMPACTS 4.13.1 SOURCES AND TYPES OF SOLID RADIOACTIVE AND MIXED WASTE The sources of radioactive liquid, solid, gaseous waste generated by the operation of the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) are discussed in Section 2.1.2.1.1.8 and summarized as follows:

• Liquid and gaseous effluents associated with process streams (e.g., wet chemistry material recovery process, gelation process, TRISO particle washing, High Temperature Carbonization furnace process).

• Solid waste associated with receipt of feedstock material (e.g., empty containers that contained HALEU); dry active waste including personal protective equipment (PPE),

rags, cleaning supplies; waste from consumables used in the production process; and material that gets carried over into the ventilation system (e.g., U3O8 powder, Graphite Matrix Powder (GMP), and abraded material from mechanical handling; HEPA filters).

• Quality Control laboratory wastes.

• Routine waste from maintenance activities (e.g., trash generation from decontamination, filter replacement).

The type and quantity of radioactive wastes is provided in Table 2.1-2.

4.

13.2 DESCRIPTION

OF WASTE MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS The Class A waste is consolidated and compacted as necessary before being stored in 55-gallon drums. Drums are then shipped off-site for disposal.

The primary liquid radioactive waste streams are the wet chemistry material recovery process and the gelation process. Small amounts of liquid radioactive waste are expected to be generated as part of Quality Control Laboratory operations.

HEPA filtration is installed on systems with the potential to discharge radioactive gaseous materials. Filters are disposed of as solid waste.

Nonhazardous and hazardous waste is properly packaged and consolidated as necessary then shipped off-site to an approved treatment, storage, or disposal facility.

Waste systems designed to collect, store, and process the waste from the TRISO-X FFF are discussed in Sections 2.1.2.1.1.8 and 2.1.2.1.1.9.

4.13.3 WASTE DISPOSAL PLANS Radiological wastes are stored on-site for a period of time before they are shipped off-site.

Enough storage capacity is provided on-site to accommodate the amount of waste between shipments to the off-site licensed disposal facility. The types of radiological waste and frequency of shipment is provided in Table 2.1-2. How solid and liquid radwaste is handled is discussed in Sections 2.1.2.1.1.8.1 and 2.1.2.1.1.8.2. Radioactive waste gases are discussed in Section 2.1.2.1.1.8.3. The radioactive wastes are transported to the destinations discussed in Section 4.2.3.2. There is no radioactive waste disposal at the TRISO-X FFF.

September 2022 4-126 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Hazardous waste is handled as described in Section 2.1.2.1.1.9. There is no hazardous waste disposal at the TRISO-X FFF.

4.13.4 WASTE MINIMIZATION PLAN Pollution prevention and waste minimization planning provides the framework for promoting environmental stewardship and educating employees in the environmental aspects of activities occurring in the workplace, the community, and homes. The TRISO-X FFF has a program for pollution prevention and waste minimization that includes the following:

• Waste minimization and recycling for the various phases of the TRISO-X FFF construction and operation.

• Employee training and education on general environmental activities and hazards regarding the facility, operations and the pollution prevention program, as well as waste minimization requirements, goals, and accomplishments.

• Employee training and education on specific environmental requirements and issues.

• Responsibilities for pollution prevention and waste minimization.

• Recognition of employees for efforts to improve environmental conditions.

• Requirements for employees to consider pollution prevention and waste minimization in day-to-day activities and engineering.

4.13.5 CUMULATIVE IMPACTS TRISO-X FFF wastes are managed as described in the previous sections and are managed in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations. As a result, the direct impacts to the environment due to the on-site storage and disposal of waste are SMALL. Additionally, the indirect impacts to the environment from transportation and delivery of waste to off-site waste repositories are SMALL. Reasonably foreseeable future actions at other facilities in proximity to the HCS are summarized in Table 2.3-1. The following reasonably foreseeable future facilities would involve radioactive wastes:

• Hermes Low-Power Demonstration Reactor / East Tennessee Technology Park (ETTP).

• ETTP remediation activities.

• Medical Isotope Production Facility.

• ORNL remediation activities and ongoing nuclear operations.

• TRU Waste Processing Center (TWPC).

• Clinch River Nuclear (CRN) site.

• Y-12 remediation activities and ongoing nuclear operations.

For radioactive waste generated during operation and decommission, such disposals are only available at a few existing facilities that are located well outside the local region. Given the volumes of LLRW received at these facilities from industries such as the nuclear power industry (93 operating commercial reactors in 2021), medical industry, research and development, the operation and future decommissioning of a single non-power reactor does not contribute September 2022 4-127 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts significantly to LLRW management and disposal resources. Likewise, each of the other projects and existing non-DOE facilities that generate LLRW within 5 miles of the site have only a small effect on the nation-wide LLRW management and disposal infrastructure. Most hazardous and radioactive waste generated at ORR is managed at ORR treatment and disposal facilities and does not contribute to the cumulative waste impacts. Therefore, the cumulative impact of the project on all waste management resources are SMALL.

Nonhazardous industrial waste is disposed off-site at an appropriate treatment, storage, or disposal facility (TSDF). Hazardous waste are stored temporally on-site, consolidated as necessary, and properly packaged then shipped off-site to an approved hazardous waste TSDF.

As described above, no hazardous waste is disposed at the TRISO-X FFF. All other waste streams generated at the TRISO-X FFF are transported off-site and disposed of in accordance with applicable Federal, State, and local regulations.

All regional construction, operation, and decommissioning projects listed above have an impact on cumulative waste management. Due to its relatively small size and operating staff, the contribution of the TRISO-X FFF on the local nonradioactive and nonhazardous waste and general sanitary waste management resources and disposal capacity is SMALL. The percentage of waste contributed, when considering other current and projects, is also SMALL.

With respect to hazardous waste, construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF have a negligible effect on the cumulative impact on regional hazardous waste management and disposal resources from regional projects.

September 2022 4-128 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Figure 4.6-1 Emission Points for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility 6HSWHPEHU2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.7.2-1 Location of Noise Sources Associated with the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility September 2022 Rev.0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.8.2-1 McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery and Buffer September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.9.2-1 TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Layout September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.9.2-2 (Sheet 1 of 5)

TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Renderings Aerial View from the West 6HSWHPEHU2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.9.2-2 (Sheet 2 of 5)

TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Renderings Aerial View from the South September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.9.2-2 (Sheet 3 of 5)

TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Renderings Elevation View from the Southwest toward Administration Building Entry September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.9.2-2 (Sheet 4 of 5)

TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Renderings Elevation View from the East at Main Entrance to the Facility September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.9.2-2 (Sheet 5 of 5)

TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Renderings Aerial View from the Northeast toward the GMP Building September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4 - Environmental Impacts Figure 4.9.2-3 Estimated Viewshed Boundaries for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 4- Environmental Impacts Figure 4.12.2-1 Vicinity Sensitive Receptor Map September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Table of Contents CHAPTER 5 MITIGATION MEASURES TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page

5.0 INTRODUCTION

............................................................................................................ 5-5 5.1 LAND USE .....................................................................................................................5-5 5.2 TRANSPORTATION ...................................................................................................... 5-6 5.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ................................................................................................. 5-7 5.4 WATER RESOURCES .................................................................................................. 5-8 5.4.1 GROUNDWATER .................................................................................................... 5-8 5.4.2 SURFACE WATERS ................................................................................................ 5-9 5.4.3 WATER USE ............................................................................................................ 5-9 5.4.4 FLOODPLAINS ...................................................................................................... 5-10 5.4.5 WETLANDS ........................................................................................................... 5-10 5.5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES ...................................................................................... 5-11 5.6 AIR QUALITY ............................................................................................................... 5-12 5.7 NOISE .......................................................................................................................... 5-13 5.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ................................................................ 5-14 5.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES .................................................................................. 5-15 5.10 SOCIOECONOMICS ................................................................................................... 5-16 5.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ...................................................................................... 5-17 5.12 PUBLIC HEALTH ......................................................................................................... 5-18 5.12.1 NON-RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS ......................................................................... 5-18 5.12.2 RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS .................................................................................. 5-18 5.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT .............................................................................................. 5-19 September 2022 5-1 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Number Title None September 2022 5-2 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Number Title None September 2022 5-3 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ALARA As Low as Reasonably Achievable BMP Best Management Practice dBA Decibel HCS Horizon Center site Ldn Day-night average sound levels NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan TDEC Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation TRISO-X FFF TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service September 2022 5-4 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures CHAPTER 5 Mitigation Measures

5.0 INTRODUCTION

Mitigation measures are those actions or processes that are implemented to avoid or minimize the magnitude of the impact of the Proposed Action on the affected environment, rectify (i.e.,

repair, rehabilitate, or restore) the affected environment, or compensate for the impact by providing substitute resources or environments as defined in 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1508.20, Mitigation. This chapter summarizes the mitigation measures to reduce potential, adverse impacts (see Chapter 4 of this Report, Environmental Impacts) resulting from the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF). This summary does not preclude additional mitigation measures that may be implemented by TRISO-X, LLC based on consultations with regulatory agencies.

5.1 LAND USE The use of the HCS for the TRISO-X FFF is consistent with the City of Oak Ridge land use plans and zoning requirements. Decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF will maintain the suitability of the HCS for future uses consistent with those same plans and requirements. As such, there are no impacts to onsite or offsite land use. No further mitigative measures are needed.

September 2022 5-5 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.2 TRANSPORTATION Transportation impacts are minor, consisting of incremental increases in local traffic from the workforce during construction, operation and, decommissioning, offsite transportation of earthwork during construction, and transportation of radioactive and non-radioactive raw materials and products during operation. It is expected that all transportation activities to and from the HCS will be conducted in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal requirements for vehicular transportation, including requirements related to noise, tailpipe emissions, transportation of hazardous and radioactive materials, and public safety.

Transportation activities will be operated by appropriately licensed individuals. TRISO-X will discontinue the use of any transportation providers that cannot meet the applicable requirements.

Transportation activities related to construction generally occur during weekdays and daylight hours in compliance with all applicable restrictions of the City of Oak Ridge. Occasional work is required during weekends to meet construction deadlines. Offsite transportation of earthwork during construction will be conducted in compliance with the requirements of the City of Oak Ridge, as implemented through the land use and related permits issued by the City. Earthwork trucks will be cleaned onsite prior to travelling on public roadways in compliance with the TDEC NPDES permit for construction activities.

The City of Oak Ridge requires a traffic impact study to be prepared by TRISO-X to support site planning for facility operations in conjunction with their issuance of the Land Use, Building and other related permits for the TRISO-X FFF. TRISO-X will implement the recommendations of any the studies as required by the City of Oak Ridge.

Transportation activities related to decommissioning generally occur during weekdays and daylight hours in compliance with all applicable restrictions of the City of Oak Ridge. Occasional work is required during weekends to meet decommissioning commitments. Offsite transportation of demolition debris during decommissioning will be conducted in compliance with the requirements of the City of Oak Ridge, as implemented through the required land disturbance and building permits issued by the City.

September 2022 5-6 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Construction of the TRISO-X FFF would require excavation, grading, and other land disturbing activities across the 110 ac. (45.5 ha) site. Soils excavated from the Horizon Center site (HCS) are disposed of at an existing approved off-site landfill, as the excavated material is assumed to be not suitable for backfill. To minimize erosion, excavated materials are stockpiled on level or gently sloped lands. Where slopes are steeper, appropriate erosion control measures including berms, silt fences, straw bales, ditch check dams, geotextiles, riprap, sedimentation basin and storm drain inlet/outlet protection are used to control erosion.

Decontamination and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF would be conducted in accordance with applicable Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) license termination requirements. Soil testing will also be conducted to determine the presence of areas potentially contaminated by site activities. Any soils with elevated levels of constituents of concern are addressed by excavation and removal or addressed with other mitigative measures as appropriate in accordance with NRC and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) guidelines.

Decontamination and decommissioning is also to be conducted to minimize soil erosion, compaction and alteration of on-site drainage patterns, to the extent practicable. Soils excavated and removed from the HCS are transported to an appropriate licensed disposal facility.

Other Best Management Practices (BMPs) that are used to minimize impacts include the following:

• Following completion of facility construction, the temporary construction laydown/parking area are graded as needed to reverse the effects of compaction and are replanted with non-invasive herbaceous plant species.

• Establishment and implementation of an approved Decommissioning Plan for ultimate NRC release of the site for unrestricted use and license termination.

As described in Section 3.3.2, karst features including sinkholes of various sizes, have been previously reported on lands adjacent to the HCS and voids within the limestone bedrock were encountered during the geotechnical drilling program conducted on the HCS. To further characterize subsurface conditions at the HCS, an additional six borings were advanced in areas where the TRISO-X FFF buildings (including the Process building) will be located. Voids were encountered in four of the six borings, however these voids were limited to the upper 40 ft.

(12.2 m) below ground surface and no large voids were encountered.

The TRISO-X FFF is constructed and operated in accordance with appropriate geotechnical and structural specifications, engineering design criteria, applicable building codes, and relevant NRC Regulatory Guidance. Therefore, additional mitigative measures are not warranted.

September 2022 5-7 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.4 WATER RESOURCES 5.4.1 GROUNDWATER Karst features have been identified on and adjacent to the HCS and groundwater levels in upgradient portions of the HCS fluctuate noticeably between seasons. Impervious areas and the constructed drainage system result in concentration of runoff for infiltration at the detention basin forebay. The re-distribution of infiltration causes some amount of localized water table rise or mounding under the forebay which could at times limit the rate of infiltration at the forebay.

Stormwater management designs incorporated relevant and appropriate provisions included in TDECs stormwater management guidance for planning, design, and construction and the City of Oak Ridge Stormwater Ordinance and development permit requirements. Additional mitigative measures are incorporated into the final design as appropriate in conjunction with permitting by the City of Oak Ridge and TDEC.

The use of construction materials and equipment can result in the release of liquids and potentially cause impacts to groundwater quality. Such spills can include accidental releases of oil and grease from equipment, including vehicles and hydraulic line failures, cement mixing, fuel leaks, and others. These impacts are minimized through the following measures:

• Establishment of proper engineering and design controls.

• Development of a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for both the construction and operational phases.

- The SPCC Plan minimizes or avoids releases to stormwater by regular maintenance and inspection of equipment and rapid response to spills to contain and prevent contaminants from reaching soil, sediment, or water.

• Containment of concrete washout.

• Construction entrance and tire cleaning equipment washing in accordance with the SPCC Plan.

• Implementation of a groundwater monitoring program as identified in Section 6.2.2.2.

Potential releases from non-radiological materials vessels stored outdoors have an increased potential to migrate from the TRISO-X FFF to surrounding public receptors as compared to materials stored within the building. Non-radiological materials released to the ground surface have the potential to migrate to groundwater and surface water. The groundwater monitoring program serves as a mitigative measure to allow for the detection of potential impacts to groundwater quality during both the construction phase and operational phase of the TRISO-X FFF.

Table 4.12.2-1 lists the non-radiological materials used in production and that are stored outdoors at the TRISO-X FFF. Classes of these chemicals include cryogenic liquid, liquids, and compressed gases. Proper design, maintenance, inspection and use of BMPs reduces the potential for the storage of these materials to impact public health and safety. Outdoor major chemical and gas storage tanks are inspected, tested, and maintained as recommended by applicable industry codes and standards. Tables 2.1-1a and 2.1-1b summarize the design features for the above ground and underground outdoor storage tanks. These features include double walls and interstitial monitoring for the underground tanks. Effective implementation of these BMPs minimizes the potential for emissions and, thus, impacts to public health.

September 2022 5-8 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures The potential for unknown surface releases of contaminants to migrate downward to groundwater aquifer resources is expected to be limited due to the aforementioned mitigation measures. However, if an inadvertent release to groundwater is known to have occurred, sampling of groundwater wells is implemented and sampling results are compared to background data collected and reported under Section 3.4.1 (Water Resources). If groundwater is identified as being impacted based on comparison to background groundwater quality, appropriate mitigation measures would be implemented in accordance with NRC and USEPA guidelines.

Following decommissioning, groundwater sampling will be conducted to demonstrate whether groundwater is potentially contaminated by site activities. Appropriate mitigation measures are implemented in accordance with NRC and USEPA guidelines for any groundwater characteristics found to have elevated levels of constituents of concern based on comparison to background groundwater quality.

5.4.2 SURFACE WATERS The facility design avoids direct impacts to surface water features. Indirect impacts to changes in stormwater runoff and potential hydrologic alternation of receiving steam based on site drainage and detention, could occur during site preparation and construction and operation.

Potential indirect water quality impacts due to releases or runoff could occur during site construction, operation and decommissioning. Impacts to surface water are minimized by the following measures:

• Adherence to stormwater discharge permits for construction obtained from TDEC and the City of Oak Ridge including implementation of any special requirements and limitations for land disturbance in karst areas.

• Implementation of stormwater controls comprehensively described in a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that are modified and updated throughout the changing conditions of construction.

• Development of a SPCC plan to prevent and control accidental releases.

• The TRISO-XFFF stormwater management system is designed and operated in compliance with stormwater permits from the City of Oak Ridge and from TDEC. This includes adherence to the following standard:

- Retention of the first 1 in. (25.4 mm) of rainfall, with stipulations for no increase in the 2-year peak flow.

As identified in Chapter 6, an environmental monitoring program is established as a mitigative measure to allow for the detection of water quality impacts.

5.4.3 WATER USE The TRISO-X FFF obtains water, for both potable and industrial use from the City of Oak Ridge public water distribution system. All domestic, industrial, and non-radiological wastewaters are discharged to the City of Oak Ridge municipal sanitary sewer collection system. As such there are no impacts to water availability as a result of water use by the facility. Therefore, no mitigative measures are required.

September 2022 5-9 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.4.4 FLOODPLAINS The HCS is not located within a mapped 100-year floodplain. As such, there are no impacts to floodplains during the construction phase, the operation phase, or the decommissioning phase.

Therefore, no mitigative measures are required.

5.4.5 WETLANDS There are no identified wetlands on the HCS and therefore there are no impacts to wetlands.

Potential indirect impacts include increased sedimentation in receiving streams and wetlands due to vegetation removal and ground disturbance. Indirect impacts are minimized with the implementation of required sediment and erosion control measures and other BMPs such as silt fences, stone check dams, erosion control blankets, construction entrance/exit, geotextile, riprap, sediment basin, and stormwater drain inlet/outlet protection.

September 2022 5-10 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES Site disturbance activities comply with Federal, State, and local regulations. Impacts from the Proposed Action are minimized by site selection as the HCS is a previously disturbed and periodically maintained area with no high-quality habitat or vegetation communities.

In addition to the previously mentioned BMPs, which protect aquatic resources in the vicinity, and the site SWPPP listed in Section 5.4, potential ecological resources mitigation measures could include:

• Re-grading disturbed areas as appropriate and planting with a noninvasive seed mix to prevent erosion and limit the invasion of non-native, weedy species.

• Removing trees during the period between November 1 and March 31 to avoid disturbance to roosting and nesting wildlife species. This minimizes impacts to a small amount of potentially suitable bat roost habitat on-site.

In addition to the management practices listed above, recommendations from consultations with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and TDEC, are considered, as appropriate.

September 2022 5-11 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.6 AIR QUALITY During construction, additional traffic, and equipment movement around the HCS may generate fugitive dust. These emissions are transient, limited to the construction phase and localized near the HCS. To mitigate fugitive dust production, best management practices (BMPs) are used to prevent particulate matter and/or suspended particulate matter from becoming airborne. As discussed in Section 4.6.4.1, Construction, these practices include the following:

• The use of water spray or soil binders on soil surfaces, when necessary, in clearing and grading operations, and construction activities.

• The use of adequate containment methods during excavation and similar operations.

• Covering the beds of open-bodied trucks transporting materials likely to give rise to airborne dust when in motion.

• The prompt removal of earthen materials on paved roads accidentally placed there by trucks or earth moving equipment, or by wind erosion.

• Prompt stabilization or covering of bare areas once any earthmoving activities are completed.

Construction equipment may generate transient visible emissions. Proper maintenance of gas-and diesel-powered equipment mitigates excessive visible emissions.

During operations, as discussed in Section 4.6, Air Quality Impacts, gaseous and particulate material may be emitted from process furnaces and equipment, mechanical-draft cooling towers, and emergency diesel generators at the TRISO-X FFF. Ventilation systems are designed and operated to assure adequate control of radioactive dust and particulate from process equipment. Emission control devices, including HEPA filters, are provided where necessary to treat effluents before their discharge to the atmosphere, mitigating atmospheric emissions.

Air emission sources at the TRISO-X FFF are managed in accordance with Federal, State, and local air-quality control laws and regulations. The TRISO-X FFF complies with all regulatory requirements of the Clean Air Act and Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) requirements to minimize impacts on State and regional air quality.

Operations-related traffic result in vehicular air emissions. Nominal localized increases in emissions occur due to the increased numbers of cars, trucks, and delivery vehicles traveling to and from the TRISO-X FFF. Most of the increased traffic is associated with employees commuting to and from work.

During decommissioning, vehicle traffic and equipment movement around the HCS may generate transient fugitive dust. As during the construction phase, these emissions may impact air quality near the HCS for short periods of time. To control or mitigate fugitive dust production, BMPs are used to prevent particulate matter from becoming airborne. These precautions are described above.

September 2022 5-12 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.7 NOISE To reduce noise impacts associated with construction, mitigation options that may be considered are listed below:

• Equipping construction equipment with the manufacturers noise-control devices and maintaining these devices in effective operating condition.

• Utilizing quiet equipment or methods to minimize noise emissions during an activity, when possible.

• Operating equipment with internal combustion engines at the lowest operating speed to minimize noise emissions, when possible and practical.

• Closing engine housing doors during operation of the equipment to reduce noise emissions from the engine.

• Avoiding equipment engine idling.

• Utilizing quieter, less-tonal back-up alarms on construction equipment. These alarms should comply with all applicable safety restrictions, such as Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards.

As described in Section 4.7.2.2 (Facility Operation) noise associated with normal operations and loss of power operation complies with the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance noise standards.

No mitigation measures are required.

September 2022 5-13 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Ground disturbing activities associated with the development of the perimeter security path and associated fencing occurs within the buffer surrounding the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery. The following mitigative measures are employed to minimize impacts to human remains during construction activities within the buffer of the cemetery:

• Use of near-surface geophysics to identify any unmarked graves.

• Archaeological monitoring of all work within the buffer surrounding the McKamey and Carmichael cemetery.

In conjunction with the Section 106 process that is to be conducted between NRC and the Tennessee State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), additional monitoring of potential disturbance in proximity to the cemetery or other identified cultural resources may be considered as part of the development of a cultural resource management plan, as applicable.

September 2022 5-14 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES Given the limited public visibility of the HCS, the compatibility of the TRISO-X FFF with the planned use of the Horizon Center Industrial Park, and the incorporation of all design standards and requirements of the City of Oak Ridge into the facility design, no further mitigation measures are warranted.

September 2022 5-15 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.10 SOCIOECONOMICS Population, and community services impacts from the construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are minor and economic impacts are beneficial.

Therefore, no mitigation measures are needed.

September 2022 5-16 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE Construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF does not result in disproportionately high or adverse impacts on low-income or minority residents. Therefore, no mitigation measures are needed.

September 2022 5-17 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.12 PUBLIC HEALTH 5.12.1 NON-RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS Management measures and regulatory controls are implemented to minimize public and occupational health impacts. These measures include:

• Establishment of an effluent monitoring program to maintain concentrations of non-radiological materials in plant effluents at As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) levels.

• Development of an NRC-required Emergency Plan.

• Inspection, testing, and maintenance of outdoor major chemical and gas storage tanks as recommended by applicable industry codes and standards.

• Adherence to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Occupational Safety and Health Standards (29 CFR 1910) to ensure that in-facility gaseous emissions do not exceed OSHAs occupational safety and health standards for toxic and hazardous substances, in accordance with 29 CFR 1910 Subpart Z.

• Implementation of the environmental monitoring program described in Chapter 6 ensures concentrations of hazardous materials in the environment remain below acceptable levels to protect public and occupational health.

5.12.2 RADIOLOGICAL HAZARDS Mitigation measures are used to keep the hazard from radiological sources ALARA. Both engineered and administrative controls are used. The TRISO-X FFF uses the following controls to minimize radiation exposure to the public and workers:

• Radiation source identification.

• Confinement around radiation sources.

• Ventilation and effluent control.

• Access control to radiation areas.

• Contamination control.

• Waste minimization.

• Hazard identification and management control September 2022 5-18 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 5 - Mitigation Measures 5.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT To mitigate gaseous waste, HEPA and other high efficiency filtration is installed on systems with the potential to discharge radioactive materials. Filters are disposed of as solid waste. Each radiological stack is planned to be continuously sampled to ensure air effluent discharge concentrations to the environment are less than action levels established and limits in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Column 1 are not exceeded.

The TRISO-X FFF has a program for pollution prevention and waste minimization (discussed in Section 2.1.2.1.1.11) that includes:

• Waste minimization and recycling for the various phases of the TRISO-X FFF construction and operation.

• Employee training and education on general environmental activities and hazards regarding the facility, operations, and the pollution prevention program, as well as waste minimization requirements, goals, and accomplishments.

• Employee training and education on specific environmental requirements and issues.

• Responsibilities for pollution prevention and waste minimization.

• Recognition of employees for efforts to improve environmental conditions.

• Requirements for employees to consider pollution prevention and waste minimization in day-to-day activities and engineering.

September 2022 5-19 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - Table of Contents CHAPTER 6 ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 6.1 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING ................................................................................. 6-6 6.1.1 EFFLUENT MONITORING PROGRAM .................................................................... 6-6 6.1.2 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ............................ 6-8 6.2 PHYSIOCHEMICAL MONITORING ............................................................................ 6-9 6.2.1 AIR MONITORING .................................................................................................... 6-9 6.2.2 WATER RESOURCES ............................................................................................ 6-10 6.3 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING................................................................................... 6-16 6.3.1 MONITORING LOCATIONS ................................................................................... 6-16 6.3.2 TIMING AND FREQUENCY .................................................................................... 6-16 6.4 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES MONITORING .................................... 6-17 6.4.1 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS ........................................................................... 6-17 6.4.2 MONITORING LOCATIONS ................................................................................... 6-17 6.4.3 MONITORING METHODS ...................................................................................... 6-17 6.4.4 MONITORING FREQUENCY.................................................................................. 6-17 September 2022 6-1 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Number Title 6.1.2-1 Summary of Radioactive Environmental Monitoring Program 6.2.2-1 Summary of Observation Well Details and Groundwater Monitoring Program 6.2.2-2 Technical Rationale for Surface Water Monitoring Program September 2022 6-2 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Number Title 6.1.2-1 Location of Site Boundary TLDs September 2022 6-3 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition AGL above ground level ALARA As Low As is Reasonably Achievable APE area of potential affect ASOS Automated Surface (weather) Observing Station BMPs Best Management Practices DO dissolved oxygen DOE U.S. Department of Energy EO Executive Order GERM gaseous effluent radiation monitor HCS Horizon Center site KTYS McGhee Tyson airport in Knoxville, Tennessee station identifier MAP Mitigation Action Plan MEI Maximally Exposed Individual NAVD88 North America Vertical Datum 1988 NAD83 North America Datum 1983 NELAC National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRHP National Register of Historic Places ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory ORP oxidation reduction potential ORR Oak Ridge Reservation QA Quality Assurance QAPD Quality Assurance Project Document September 2022 6-4 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition REMP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program RMS Radiation Monitoring System RPP radiation protection program SHPO State Historic Preservation Office SOP Standard Operating Procedures SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures TDEC Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation TEDE total effective dose equivalent TLD thermoluminescent dosimeters TN Tennessee TRISO-X FFF TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility U-234 Uranium-234 U-235 Uranium-235 U-238 Uranium-238 September 2022 6-5 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs CHAPTER 6 Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs 6.1 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING In accordance with 10 CFR 20.1101, Radiation Protection Programs (i.e., Subpart B of Part 20), each licensee must implement a radiation protection program (RPP). As stated in 10 CFR 20.1101(b), the licensee shall use, to the extent practical, procedures and engineering controls based on sound radiation protection principles to achieve doses to members of the public that are As Low As is Reasonably Achievable (ALARA). In addition, 10 CFR 20.1101(d) places an ALARA constraint of 0.1 mSv/yr (10 mrem/yr total effective dose equivalent (TEDE)) on public exposure from emissions of airborne radioactive material, excluding radon-222 and its daughters (i.e., decay products) notwithstanding the requirements of 10 CFR 20.1301.

Furthermore, 10 CFR 20.1301(e) (i.e., Subpart D of Part 20) requires a licensee subject to the provisions of 40 CFR 190, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations, to comply with those provisions. The regulations of 40 CFR 190.10, Standards for Normal Operations, place limits of 0.25 mSv (25 mrem) to the whole body, 0.75 mSv (75 mrem) to the thyroid, and 0.25 mSv (25 mrem) to any other organ of any member of the public as the result of exposures to planned discharges of radioactive materials, excluding radon and its daughters, to the general environment from uranium fuel cycle operations and of exposures to radiation from these operations. Finally, 10 CFR 20.1501 (i.e., Subpart F of Part 20) requires a licensee to perform radiation/radioactive material surveys to show compliance with the applicable regulations of Part 20 (e.g., 10 CFR 20.1101(d) and 10 CFR 20.1301(e)).

In addition, 10 CFR 70.59, Effluent Monitoring Reporting Requirements, outlines the reporting requirements for radiological effluent monitoring for a 10 CFR 70 licensee. These semi-annual reports specify the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides released to unrestricted areas in liquid and gaseous effluents, and other information the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) may require estimating maximum potential annual radiation doses to the public resulting from effluent releases. Regulatory Guide 4.16 provides guidance for monitoring and reporting radioactive materials in effluents from fuel cycle facilities. Furthermore, 10 CFR 20.1302, Compliance with Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public, requires surveys of radioactive materials in effluents released to unrestricted and controlled areas to demonstrate compliance with the dose limits for individual members of the public. As discussed in NUREG-1520, Section 9.4.1, Regulatory Requirements, the requirements in Subpart B, Radiation Protection Programs; Subpart D, Radiation Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public; and Subpart F, Surveys and Monitoring, of 10 CFR 20 also specify the effluent control and treatment measures necessary to meet the dose limits and dose constraints for members of the public.

Section 4.4.7, Radiation Surveys and Monitoring Programs, of NUREG-1520 explains that radiation surveys are conducted for two purposes: (1) to ascertain radiation levels, concentrations of radioactive material, and potential radiological hazards that could be present in the facility, and (2) to detect releases of radioactive material from plant equipment and operations. The TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) Radiation Monitoring System (RMS) supports both of these purposes in the case of effluent monitoring instrumentation.

6.1.1 EFFLUENT MONITORING PROGRAM The radiological effluent monitoring program is established to identify and quantify principal radionuclides in effluents. This is used to verify that the TRISO-X FFF is performing as expected and within its design parameters so that doses to individual members of the public remain within September 2022 6-6 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs the limits established in 10 CFR 20.1301 and doses due to airborne emissions meet the ALARA requirement of 10 CFR 20.1101(d) as required by Regulatory Guide 4.20. In addition, the NRC requires pursuant to 10 CFR 70, that licensees submit semiannual reports, specifying the quantities of the principal radionuclides released to unrestricted areas and other information needed to estimate the annual radiation dose to the public from effluent discharges. The NRC has also issued Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Inception through Normal Operations to License Termination) - Effluent Streams and the Environment, and Regulatory Guide 4.16, Monitoring and Reporting Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities, that reiterate that concentrations of hazardous materials in effluent must be controlled and that licensees must adhere to the ALARA principal such that there is no undue risk to the public health and safety at or beyond the site boundary. All effluent pathways that could be a significant release pathway for radioactive material from the TRISO-X FFF include radiological effluent monitoring. The principal release pathway for the TRISO-X FFF is gaseous (as discussed in ER Section 4.6). No radioactive liquid effluent is expected (as discussed in ER Section 4.4).

The effluent monitoring program falls under the oversight of the TRISO-X FFF Regulatory Affairs (RA) program. Written procedures are used to ensure the collection of representative samples, use of appropriate sampling methods and equipment, proper locations for sampling points, and proper handling, storage, transport, and analyses of effluent samples. In addition, the plants written procedures also ensure that sampling and measuring equipment, including ancillary equipment such as airflow meters, are properly maintained and calibrated at regular intervals. Moreover, the effluent monitoring program procedures include functional testing and routine checks to demonstrate that monitoring and measuring instruments are in working condition. Employees involved in implementation of this program are trained in the program procedures.

6.1.1.1 Gaseous Effluent Monitoring Airborne release is a principal radiological exposure pathway. Exhaust from ventilation of facility process areas may include entrained radioactive particulates. The gaseous effluents from the TRISO-X FFF are monitored for airborne particulate radioactivity, specifically airborne uranium particulate (U-234, U-235, and U-238). The radiological pathway assessment is presented in Section 4.12.2. The ventilation system for each production line discharges to a 100-ft. (30.5 m) tall stack adjacent to the production building. The stack for one of the two production lines (Line

1) has a larger diameter than the stack for production Line 2 to accommodate discharges from the production line, an area for research and development, and common areas. Physical characteristics of the two stacks are listed in Table 4.6-1. The locations of the stacks for the ventilation system are shown in Figure 4.6-1. Each facility release point is provided with a gaseous effluent radiation monitor (GERM) as part of the TRISO-X FFF fixed RMS instrumentation. The GERMs provide the TRISO-X FFF with the regulatory required sampling and monitoring of facility effluents for compliance with 10 CFR 20.1101, 10 CFR 20.1302, 10 CFR 20.1501, 10 CFR 70.59, and 40 CFR 190.

Pathway analysis discussed in ER Section 4.12.2 shows that the TRISO-X FFF, during normal operation, can release up to 1.67E+06 Bq/yr (4.52E-05 Ci/yr) and meet the established Maximally Exposed Individual (MEI) airborne concentration limits of 10 percent of the 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2 limits. This annual release rate is the total bounding value for the facility. The TRISO-X FFF uses the GERMs to monitor for exhaust activity concentrations significantly lower than this bounding value for ALARA purposes.

September 2022 6-7 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs The GERMs include sample nozzles in the effluent release point (i.e., stack) such that representative samples are extracted and delivered to the monitored filtration media. Using a parallel sampling system, the sampling system facilitates both uninterrupted continuous monitoring and sample removal for periodic laboratory analysis of quantity and identity of radionuclides collected. These removable samples and associated analysis form the basis of data reported in the regulatory required 10 CFR 70.59 effluent monitoring reports and are referred to as the for record samples. The GERMs have a measurement range of (5E-13 to 1E-04 µCi/cc).

6.1.1.2 Liquid Effluent Monitoring There are no radioactive liquid releases during normal operations from the TRISO-X FFF.

Therefore, there is no need for liquid effluent monitoring at the facility.

6.1.2 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) at the TRISO-X Facility aids in ensuring compliance with normal effluent requirements. It provides a supplementary check of containment and effluent controls, establishes a process for collecting data for assessing radiological impacts on the environs and estimating the potential impacts on the public, and supports the demonstration of compliance with applicable radiation protection standards and guidelines.

The requirement to have a REMP is documented in 10 CFR 20.1302. The REMP is used to verify the effectiveness of plant measures which are used to control the release of radioactive material and to verify that measurable concentrations of radioactive materials and levels of radiation are not higher than expected based on effluent measurements and modeling of the environmental exposure pathways.

Regulatory Guide 4.20, Constraint on Releases of Airborne Radioactive Materials to the Environment for Licensees Other Than Power Reactors, provides guidance on methods that can be used to meet 10 CFR 20.1101(d) and implement the ALARA requirements in 10 CFR 20.1101(b). In 1996, the NRC added the constraints to provide an ample margin of safety to members of the public from airborne emissions of radioactive material to the environment and to remove dual regulation by the NRC and the USEPA. Regulatory Guide 8.37, ALARA Levels for Effluents from Materials Facilities, provides guidance for development of a program to establish and maintain ALARA levels for gaseous and liquid effluents at materials facilities, including those facilities where special nuclear material is licensed under 10 CFR 70. As mentioned in Section 6.1, 10 CFR 70.59 requires semiannual reporting of the principal radionuclides released to unrestricted areas in liquid and gaseous effluents.

Continuous airborne particulate sampling is performed at a location downwind from the prevailing wind direction for the facility location. Sample media from this continuous airborne particulate sampler is retrieved quarterly for isotopic analysis focused on U-234, U-235, and U-238. Vegetation at 4 locations surrounding the facility is collected yearly for isotopic analysis.

Groundwater at 5 locations surrounding the facility is collected yearly for isotopic analysis (see Section 6.2.2.2). Soil samples at 4 locations surrounding the facility are collected yearly for isotopic analysis. All isotopic analysis conforms with the guidance in Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Inception through Normal Operations to License Termination) - Effluent Streams and the Environment, which includes the use of established standards provided by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC).

September 2022 6-8 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) provide indication of direct radiation from contained radiation sources within the TRISO-X Facility building, from radioactivity in the airborne effluent, and from deposition of airborne radioactivity onto the ground. TLDs are placed on the facility boundary fence in sufficient quantity such that detectors cover all possible directions for radiological release. This scheme is meant to give 360-degree coverage of the site boundary and provide sufficient resolution of data for analysis and reporting per 10 CFR 70. TLDs are collected quarterly for processing in conformance with guidance in RG 4.13, Performance, Testing, and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications. The 16 TLD locations are shown in Figure 6.1.2.2-1. See Table 6.1.2-1 for summary of radiation monitoring stations.

The REMP falls under the oversight of the facilitys Regulatory Affairs (RA) program. Written procedures to ensure representative sampling, proper use of appropriate sampling methods and equipment, proper locations for sampling points, and proper handling, storage, transport, and analyses of effluent samples are a key part of the program. In addition, written procedures ensure that sampling and measuring equipment, including ancillary equipment such as airflow meters, are properly maintained and calibrated at regular intervals. Moreover, the REMP implementing procedures include functional testing and routine checks to demonstrate that monitoring and measuring instruments are in working condition.

6.2 PHYSIOCHEMICAL MONITORING Physiochemical monitoring samples air, surface water, and groundwater are as described in the following sections.

6.2.1 AIR MONITORING 6.2.1.1 Meteorological Monitoring An on-site meteorological station records wind speed, wind direction, air temperature and relative humidity. Wind speed/direction are recorded at the industry standard (33 ft. [10 m]) level and at near stack level (100 ft. [30.5 m]) above ground level (AGL). Parameters recorded by the on-site meteorological station are input into plume modeling software that supports emergency response in case of an accidental release.

The meteorological station is located near the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facilitys emergency operations center, as described in Section 1.3.1.3, Site Layout and shown in Figure 1.3-3.

6.2.1.1.1 Maintenance, Calibration and Quality Assurance The meteorological monitoring equipment is routinely maintained and calibrated.

6.2.1.1.2 Additional Meteorological Data Sources Meteorological data are also available from public (internet) sources in case data are unavailable from the on-site meteorological station. Data are publicly available from the Oak Ridge Automated Surface Observing Station (ASOS) (station identifier KOQT) which is located approximately 8.7 mi. (14.0 km) northeast of the HCS as described in Section 3.6.1.1, General Climate.

Another source of public meteorological data is a 60-m multi-level tower (also known as Tower D or MT2) located approximately 3.5 mi. (5.6 km) southeast of the HCS at Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) as described in Section 3.6.1.3 Meteorological and Air Quality-September 2022 6-9 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs Related Data Sources. Other more distant public sources described in Section 3.6.1.3 and Section 3.6.1.1 of the ER include meteorological towers in the monitoring program supporting Y-12; and the McGhee Tyson airport in Knoxville, Tennessee (station identifier KTYS). This station is located approximately 23.9 mi. (38.5 km) southeast of the HCS.

6.2.1.2 Air Effluent Monitoring The gaseous effluents from the TRISO-X FFF are monitored for airborne particulate radioactivity as discussed in Section 6.1.1.1.

6.2.2 WATER RESOURCES Sanitary wastewater from the TRISO-X FFF is discharged through the existing sanitary sewer system to be treated by the City of Oak Ridge. Liquid process waste from non-radiological areas may be discharged through the existing sanitary sewer system in accordance with the requirements of the City of Oak Ridge. Liquid process waste from radiological areas is removed and treated off-site (Section 4.4.2.2.2.3.2). Therefore, operations of the TRISO-X FFF do not entail either release of process water or wastewater to receiving streams.

6.2.2.1 Groundwater Monitoring of groundwater during both the construction phase and operational phase of the TRISO-X FFF is to provide for long-term comparison of groundwater to baseline conditions.

6.2.2.2 Monitoring Locations As described in Section 3.4, five on-site wells are included in the HCS groundwater monitoring program. Monitoring well GW-1 was used for water level measurements but was found to have insufficient water for water quality sampling. A replacement well (GW-1R) is therefore included as part of the future groundwater monitoring network. Under the long-term groundwater monitoring program, water level monitoring is conducted at all five on-site wells, whereas water quality sampling is conducted at four on-site observation wells (including GW-1R) (Table 6.2.2-1).

6.2.2.2.1 Monitoring Methods Groundwater quality sampling includes the measurement of water levels and the collection of water samples for laboratory analysis. Sampling is collected using low flow (low purge) sampling methodology with a submersible bladder pump. Per low flow sampling methodology, water levels and water quality field parameters including pH, dissolved oxygen (DO), oxidation reduction potential (ORP), temperature, specific conductance, and turbidity is measured during purging to determine stabilization prior to sampling. Field parameters are obtained using appropriately calibrated water quality field meters and recorded. Water levels are measured prior to well purging and water quality samples are taken after well purging. Water quality samples are collected after parameter stabilization, as indicated by the field meters, and submitted for analyses to approved analytical laboratories. All field sampling procedures are conducted according to written procedures and performed by employees trained in the program procedures.

6.2.2.2.2 Monitoring Parameters and Frequency As described in Section 3.4, NUREG-1748 does not provide any specific guidance regarding groundwater quality parameters; therefore, the parameter list contained in NUREG-1555 was used to support the baseline characterization of groundwater quality at the HCS. The monitoring September 2022 6-10 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs program follows the parameters established as part of the pre-development monitoring program to allow for comparison with baseline data.

Monitoring is conducted during a single sampling event on an annual basis at a prescribed interval. Annual monitoring is conducted during each of the two years during HCS construction, during the first two years following first operation, then once every five years thereafter. After the first five-year monitoring interval, the list of parameters may be reviewed and revised to reflect a smaller list of indicator parameters for the long-term monitoring program.

Groundwater levels are also measured annually during construction and for the first two years following first operation, then once every five years thereafter. Groundwater levels are measured from the top of the well casing to the nearest hundredth of a foot and recorded prior to well purging and sampling during each sampling event.

Because operation of the TRISO-X FFF does not use groundwater or entail either release of process water or wastewater to groundwater, the collection of operational phase monitoring data is precautionary in the long term and does not require routine quarterly sampling. Rather, ground water quality monitoring in accordance with the above plan is to be conducted on an annual basis as described above. However, should monitoring results indicate elevated parameters that may be of concern and potentially attributable to the operation of the TRISO-X FFF, the frequency of the sampling plan is reassessed as appropriate.

6.2.2.3 Surface Water Monitoring of surface water in conjunction with the implementation of the TRISO-X FFF provides for construction phase monitoring and long-term comparison of surface water to baseline conditions 6.2.2.3.1 Monitoring Locations Monitoring is conducted at five of the surface water sampling sites (SW-3 through SW-7) established under the base program and shown on Table 6.2.2-2 and on Figure 3.4.2-3. In conjunction with the baseline monitoring program site SW-6 was identified as being intermittently dry and is therefore included as an opportunistic sampling location.

Additional surface water monitoring is expected to be required on a recurring basis in conjunction with Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation (TDEC) permit conditions for National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitted outfalls.

6.2.2.3.2 Monitoring Methods The samples are collected as composite grab samples. After collection, samples are submitted for analysis to approved analytical laboratories. Analytical and field parameters are the same as those established as part of the base environmental monitoring program. All field sampling procedures are conducted according to written procedures and performed by employees trained in the program procedures.

Surface water monitoring during construction and operation are in accordance with the requirements of TDECs Stormwater Construction Permit (TNR100000) and also include continued monitoring established by the baseline environmental characterization program.

Proper engineering and design controls including development and following of Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as concrete washout containment, construction entrance, September 2022 6-11 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs and tire cleaning arrangement, and use of a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan reduces the potential impacts to stormwater and groundwater during construction.

6.2.2.3.3 Monitoring Parameters and Frequency As described in Section 3.4.2.2, NUREG-1748 does not provide any specific guidance regarding water quality parameters; therefore, the parameter list contained in NUREG-1555 were used to support the characterization of water quality at the HCS and is also used for monitoring. The monitoring program follows the parameters established as part of the pre-development monitoring program to allow for comparison with data compiled during the baseline monitoring program.

Monitoring is conducted annually during the two-year construction period, annually for the first and second years following first operation, then once every five years thereafter. After the first five-year monitoring interval, the list of parameters may be reviewed and revised to reflect a smaller list of indicator parameters for the long-term monitoring program.

Because operations of the TRISO-X FFF do not directly use surface water or entail either release of process water or wastewater to receiving streams, the collection of operational phase monitoring data is precautionary in the long term and does not require routine quarterly sampling. Rather, surface water quality monitoring in accordance with the above plan is to be conducted on an annual basis. However, should monitoring results indicate elevated parameters that may be of concern and potentially attributable to the operation of the TRISO-X FFF, the frequency of the sampling plan is reassessed as appropriate.

Additional surface water monitoring is expected to be required on a recurring basis to adhere to TDEC permit conditions for NPDES permitted outfalls. Parameters and frequency of monitoring at permitted outfalls to be determined in conjunction with the TDEC NPDES permitting process.

September 2022 6-12 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs Table 6.1.2-1 Summary of Radioactive Environmental Monitoring Program Station Sample Location Monitor Type Target ID Frequency CAS-1 WSW fence line Continuous Air Sampler Quarterly Gaseous Effluent Particulate TLD-1 N fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-2 NNE fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-3 NE fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-4 ENE fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-5 E fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-6 ESE fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-7 SE fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-8 SSE fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-9 S fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-10 SSW fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-11 SW fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-12 WSW fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-13 W fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-14 WNW fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-15 NW fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD-16 NNW fence line TLD Quarterly Dose from gaseous effluents/ direct radiation TLD - Thermoluminescent dosimeters September 2022 6-13 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs Table 6.2.2-1 Summary of Observation On-Site Well Details and Groundwater Monitoring Program TOC Water-Level Northing Easting Total Screen Chemical Elevation On-Site Depth Length Target Isotopic Well ID US feet, US feet, Aquifer US feet, Testing Testing Monitoring NAD83 NAD83 ft bgs feet NAD83 GW-1 597,860.10 2,451,011.18 841.55 75.2 10 Upper x x x Bedrock GW-1R 597,641.48 2,450,984.06 826.70 80.0 15 Upper x x x Bedrock GW-2 596,811.83 2,452,480.08 787.11 42.4 10 Upper x x x Bedrock GW-3 596,131.16 2,449,329.48 802.75 49.0 10 Upper x x x Bedrock GW-4 595,321.09 2,450,833.61 769.72 39.0 10 Upper x x x Bedrock ID - Identification TOC - top of casing ft bgs - feet below ground surface Survey horizontal datum: North America Datum 1983 (NAD83) State Plane Tennessee FIPS 4100 (US feet)

Survey vertical datum: North America Vertical Datum 1988 (NAVD88)

September 2022 6-14 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs Table 6.2.2-2 Technical Rationale for Surface Water Monitoring Program Construction Operational Sampling Type Period Period Rationale Location ID Frequency Frequency Surface Water SW-3 Year 1 Year 1, 2, and Construction phase: monitor Characterization 5-year interval construction phase effects, extend SW-4 thereafter pre-operation baseline monitoring.

SW-5 Operational phase: monitoring of SW-6(a) operational phase effects.

SW-7 West Outlet and NA TBA Monitoring frequency and NPDES requirements based on TDEC Outfall(s)(b) NPDES permit conditions a) Opportunistic sampling location based on water availability b) Monitoring frequency based on TDEC permit conditions, as appropriate September 2022 6-15 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs 6.3 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING Following construction at the HCS, ecological monitoring is focused on invasive species management to minimize impacts and enhance preservation of adjacent DOE natural areas.

6.3.1 MONITORING LOCATIONS Restored areas discussed in Chapter 5 are monitored for invasive species to minimize their potential spread to surrounding and adjacent DOE natural areas.

6.3.2 TIMING AND FREQUENCY Monitoring the potential occurrence of invasive, weedy plant species occurs concurrent with on-going vegetation maintenance activities at the HCS within open and lawn spaces after construction. Monitoring occurs immediately following construction and for two years following construction. Non-native, invasive plant species encountered during monitoring are controlled through a combination of mechanical and chemical (herbicide) applications. Any herbicide application follows all appropriate label rates and safety precautions.

September 2022 6-16 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility and Monitoring Programs 6.4 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES MONITORING 6.4.1 MONITORING REQUIREMENTS As described in Section 3.8.4.1, a portion of the 100-ft. (30.5-m) buffer surrounding the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery is located within the area of potential affect (APE) of the HCS. Monitoring will be conducted in advance and during construction within the 100-ft. (30.5-m) buffer established around the cemetery.

6.4.2 MONITORING LOCATIONS Ground disturbance activities associated with the development of the perimeter security path and associated fencing occur within the 100-ft. (30.5-m) buffer surrounding the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery. As noted in Section 3.8 of this report (Historic and Cultural Resources),

monitoring of all ground disturbance activities within the cemetery buffer is conducted to mitigate any impact to human remains associated with the cemetery.

6.4.3 MONITORING METHODS Monitoring methods include the use of near-surface geophysics to identify any unmarked graves within or surrounding the cemetery and archaeological monitoring of all work within the cemetery buffer.

6.4.4 MONITORING FREQUENCY Monitoring is conducted during construction when ground disturbing activities occur. Once construction is complete, no additional monitoring is required. However, in conjunction with the Section 106 process that are conducted between NRC and the TN SHPO, additional monitoring of potential disturbance in proximity to the cemetery or other identified cultural resources may be considered as part of the development of a cultural resources management plan, as applicable.

September 2022 6-17 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 6 - Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs Figure 6.1.2-1 Location of Site Boundary TLDs September 2022 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Table of Contents CHAPTER 7 COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page

7.0 INTRODUCTION

......................................................................................................... 7-5 7.1 COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION........................................... 7-5 7.1.1 COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................. 7-6 7.1.2 BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................................................. 7-10 7.1.3

SUMMARY

OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ............................................................ 7-11 7.2 COMPARATIVE COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ACTION RELATIVE TO NON-ACTION ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................ 7-13 7.2.1 THE NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE........................................................................... 7-13 7.2.2 METHODOLOGY .................................................................................................... 7-13 7.2.3 COMPLIANCE WITH POLICY AND TECHNICAL OPERATIVES .......................... 7-14 7.2.4

SUMMARY

REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION VERSUS THE NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE .......................................................................................................... 7-15 7.3 OVERALL COST-BENEFIT CONCLUSIONS ........................................................... 7-15 September 2022 7-1 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Number Title 7.1-1 Socioeconomic Benefits Associated with the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility September 2022 7-2 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Number Title None September 2022 7-3 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition ATF Accident tolerant fuels AR Advanced Reactor BEA U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of Economic Analysis BMP Best management practices CO Carbon monoxide DOE U.S. Department of Energy ER Environmental Report HALEU High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium HAP Hazardous air pollutants HCS Horizon Center Site LWR Light water reactors NMSS Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards NO2 Nitrogen dioxide NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration RIMS Regional Input-Output Modeling ROI Region of Influence SO2 Sulfur dioxide SPCC Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures TRISO-X TRISO-X, LLC TRISO-X FFF TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency VOC Volatile organic compounds September 2022 7-4 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis CHAPTER 7 Cost Benefit Analysis

7.0 INTRODUCTION

The costs and benefits of the Proposed Action and No-Action Alternative are considered in this chapter to assist in evaluating environmental consequences. Costs and benefits are presented, where possible, in monetary terms. Important costs and benefits that cannot be quantified in monetary terms, such as environmental impacts, are presented qualitatively.

Cost-benefit analysis can assist in deciding whether a project is likely to have a net positive impact by aggregating the costs and benefits resulting from the project. Cost-benefit analysis involves valuing the benefits and costs associated with a project in monetary terms, to the extent possible. Depending on the data available, cost-benefit analyses may partially rely on qualitative data to evaluate the various costs and benefits. The methodology utilized for a cost-benefit analysis is typically dependent on the specific issues involved in a project. Costs and benefits are often separated into two categories - private and societal. Private costs and benefits are those that impact the owner of a project or facility while societal costs and benefits are those that impact society as a whole.

The analysis focuses on the various private and societal costs and benefits associated with the Proposed Action and the No-Action Alternative using available data. These data include the economic and fiscal benefits of facility construction, operation, and decommissioning, both for the region in which the facility is located and for Tennessees State economy. As described in Section 3.10, the region of influence (ROI) for the analysis of socioeconomic impacts is comprised of Anderson, Knox, Morgan, Loudon, and Roane Counties as these are the counties surrounding the HCS that are most likely to be impacted as a result of Proposed Action. While many of the costs and impacts of the various phases of the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) development occur within the ROI, significant economic, fiscal, and energy security benefits also happen at the national level. Therefore, the cost-benefit analysis addresses a larger area than the ROI that was considered in the analysis of socioeconomic impacts. Also discussed are the benefits of the TRISO-X FFF at the national level in fulfilling the need for TRISO fuel to fulfill domestic energy requirements, for domestic supplies of TRISO fuel for national energy security, and for nuclear fuel fabrication technology in the United States.

Societal costs considered include those related to impacts on land use, historical and cultural resources, visual resources, air quality, geology and soils, water resources, ecological resources, environmental justice, noise, transportation, public and occupational health, and waste management.

This chapter analyzes the costs and benefits both quantitatively, in monetary terms where possible, and qualitatively. Section 7.1 weighs the costs and benefits associated with the Proposed Action. Section 7.2 compares the costs and benefits for the Proposed Action to those of the No-Action Alternative. Section 7.3 combines these sections into overall conclusions.

7.1 COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION Under the Proposed Action, TRISO-X constructs, operates, and eventually, decommissions the TRISO-X FFF in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. In order for TRISO-X to carry out the Proposed Action, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) grants a license to TRISO-X to possess and use source material, byproduct, and special nuclear material in accordance with the requirements of Title 10, Energy, Parts 30, 40, and 70 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), respectively, if all regulatory requirements are met. The TRISO-X FFF is to be September 2022 7-5 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis constructed from 2023 to 2025. The start-up activities and full commercial operation begin in 2025. Facility production continues into 2065, followed by either license renewal or decommissioning in 2065.

This section describes the costs and benefits of all life-cycle stages of the Proposed Action.

Quantitative estimates (in terms of dollars) are provided where possible. Other costs and benefits are described in qualitative terms.

7.1.1 COSTS OF CONSTRUCTION AND THE PROPOSED ACTION The direct costs associated with the Proposed Action may be categorized by the following life-cycle stages:

• Construction

• Start-up activities

• Facility operation

• Decommissioning In addition to monetary costs, the Proposed Action results in adverse impacts on various resource areas, which can also be considered costs for the purpose of this analysis. The resource areas and corresponding impacts are summarized below and described in more detail in Chapter 4 of this ER. The adverse impact of the Proposed Action is SMALL for all resource areas.

7.1.1.1 Land Use As described in Section 4.1, the Horizon Center site (HCS) is zoned for industrial use.

Construction of the TRISO-X FFF is consistent with current zoning and land use. Construction, operations, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF does not alter current zoning of the HCS or land use of the surrounding properties. Impacts are SMALL during all phases.

7.1.1.2 Transportation As described in Section 4.2, the number of truck shipments varies over the course of construction. Truck traffic associated with construction activities have a SMALL impact on local traffic. Prior to start-up, it is anticipated that the construction workforce will also cause increases to traffic , with the heaviest traffic occurring in the immediate vicinity of the site entrance.

Impacts on roads in the vicinity of the HCS are SMALL and regional impacts are SMALL.

Operations require an increased workforce (with respect to construction) and the shipment of various materials to and from the facility; impacts on the public and transportation crews from traffic increase, radiation exposure, chemical exposure, and vehicle emissions are SMALL. No fatalities are expected from accidents (direct physical trauma) on an annual basis. Thus, the overall annual transportation impacts from the Proposed Action are expected to be SMALL.

Decommissioning activities decreases the total number of workers, and the number of truck shipments is anticipated to be approximately the same as during construction. In this regard, operations and initial decommissioning are anticipated to have a similar impact (i.e.,

MODERATE local and SMALL regional). Once operations cease and the workforce drops to, or below the labor force required for construction, local and regional transportation impacts are SMALL. Impacts from radioactive waste shipments are SMALL due to the low levels of external September 2022 7-6 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis radiation and the low number of shipments. Thus, transportation impacts from decommissioning are SMALL.

7.1.1.3 Geology and Soils As described in Section 4.3, approximately 110 acres (44.5 ha) of land on the HCS is disturbed to support construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF. The facility would be constructed by excavation and grading of soils on the HCS, and best management practices (BMPs) are implemented to minimize impacts. No impacts to soils or erosion occur during facility operation. The facility is constructed and operated in accordance with appropriate geotechnical and structural specifications, engineering design criteria, applicable building codes, and relevant NRC Regulatory Guidance. Impacts to geology and soils during construction, operation and decommissioning are SMALL.

7.1.1.4 Groundwater Resources As described in Section 4.4.1, implementation BMPs and use of a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasures (SPCC) plan during constructional life stages will be employed. Engineering design and controls together with the established management, monitoring and maintenance procedures, minimize the potential impacts for leaks of fuel, oil, and grease to impact groundwater from all life cycle stages of the TRISO-X FFF. The TRISO-X FFF obtains all potable and industrial water from the City of Oak Ridge and does not use groundwater.

Therefore, impacts to groundwater during construction, operation and decommissioning are SMALL.

7.1.1.5 Surface Water Resources As described in Section 4.4.2, no regulated surface waters were identified on the HCS.

Alterations in surface water hydrology as a result of construction and operation are minimized through adherence to design standards, and relevant regulatory criteria and guidelines. Erosion and sediment control BMPs and other construction-phase stormwater BMPs are implemented to mitigate impacts from stormwater discharges. The TRISO-X FFF obtains water, for both potable and industrial use, from the City of Oak Ridge public water distribution system. Sanitary wastewater from the TRISO-X FFF is discharged through the existing sanitary sewer system to be treated by the City of Oak Ridge. Given the absence of regulated surface waters onsite, adherence to regulatory minimum criteria and best practices, and applicable management measures developed in conjunction with final design and permitting, impacts to surface water are SMALL.

7.1.1.6 Ecological Resources As described in Section 4.5, terrestrial habitats on the HCS predominantly consist of previously disturbed herbaceous communities. Important terrestrial habitats such as wetlands, riparian habitats, staging or resting areas for large numbers of waterfowl, rookeries, restricted wintering areas for wildlife (e.g., winter deer yards), communal roost sites or breeding grounds, and areas containing rare plant communities are not present within the HCS. Important species and Federally-listed threatened, endangered, or special status species are not present or not directly affected under the Proposed Action. Construction and sediment control BMPs through a project-specific SWPPP and seasonal restrictions to tree clearing, and monitoring and control of invasive species are used to minimize indirect effects. Additionally, no wetland or aquatic habitats are present on the HCS, and indirect effects associated with site erosion and sedimentation within offsite wetlands and aquatic environments is minimized through use of September 2022 7-7 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis BMPs. Therefore, overall impacts to ecological resources from construction, operation and decommissioning are SMALL.

7.1.1.7 Air Quality As described in Section 4.6, due to the relatively small magnitude of air pollutant emissions from the TRISO-X FFF, impacts on ambient air quality are SMALL. Criteria pollutants, greenhouse gases, hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), fugitive dust emissions, and engine exhaust emissions are released during construction. Emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), and carbon monoxide (CO) have a SMALL impact on ambient air quality (well below applicable standards). Construction activities are projected to cause a temporary increase in the concentrations of particulate matter in the ambient air, which exceed the air quality standard.

The TRISO-X FFF does not employ any continuous combustion activities during operation; criteria pollutant and hazardous air pollutants (HAPs) emission rates are SMALL. Air emission sources associated with the TRISO-X FFF are process furnaces, mechanical-draft cooling towers, and engine-driven emergency operations equipment. All operational impacts on air quality are SMALL. Decontamination activities during decommissioning mostly occur inside buildings, where emission controls minimize atmospheric releases. Decommissioning activities at the TRISO-X FFF are comparable to or less than those during construction; therefore, impacts on ambient air quality are SMALL.

7.1.1.8 Noise As described in Section 4.7, use of construction equipment may occasionally and temporarily result in noise levels at HCS property boundaries that exceed the maximum limits established in the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance, and that are notably higher than the daytime ambient equivalent noise levels. Noise levels along roadways serving the HCS also increase during construction due to transport of materials and workforce. Recreators on the North Boundary Greenway may experience elevated noise levels along the segment of trail immediately adjacent to the HCS. However, these noise levels dissipate with distance and impacts are temporary. Normal operations and loss of power operations result in noise levels at adjacent properties that comply with the City of Oak Ridge Zoning Ordinance. Therefore, noise impacts resulting from construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are localized and are SMALL.

7.1.1.9 Historic and Cultural Resources As described in Section 4.8, no historic resources over 50 years of age were identified in the architectural survey of the 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) viewshed surrounding the HCS. Potentially eligible archaeological sites are not impacted and implementation of mitigative measures minimizes impacts to the 100-ft. (30.5 m) buffer around the McKamey and Carmichael Cemetery. As such, impacts to historic and cultural resources are SMALL during all phases.

7.1.1.10 Visual and Scenic Resources As described in Section 4.9, temporary visual impacts resulting from construction and decommissioning are temporary and localized. A heavily forested visual buffer between the HCS and sensitive visual receptors in the vicinity is maintained. The facility design complies with requirements of the City of Oak Ridge, and the operation is consistent with the planned use of the Horizon Center Industrial Park. Impacts to visual resources resulting from construction, operation and decommissioning are SMALL.

September 2022 7-8 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis 7.1.1.11 Socioeconomics As described in Section 4.10, workers and their families could relocate into the ROI in support of TRISO-X FFF operations (over the 40-year license period), which results in long-term socioeconomic impacts, including increased demand for housing resources and community services. Impacts from construction and decommissioning are short-term and limited. Based on the analysis, the estimated population increases have the greatest impact in Roane County, where the new residents increase the countys population by approximately 1.8 percent (based on 2025 projections). The other four counties in the ROI, and the ROI as a whole would experience population increases of less than 0.2 percent. Construction, operation and decommissioning will generate revenue which provides an overall benefit within the ROI.

Overall, socioeconomic impacts associated with the construction, operation and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL.

7.1.1.12 Environmental Justice As described in Section 4.11, a minority population subject to environmental justice consideration was identified near the edge of the 4.0 mi. (6.4 km) radius, east-northeast of the HCS within the City of Oak Ridge. No disproportionately high or adverse human health, environmental, physical, or socioeconomic impacts to this community are realized as a result of construction, operation, or decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF. Therefore, impacts to environmental justice populations are SMALL.

7.1.1.13 Non-Radiological Public and Occupational Health As described in Section 4.12.2.1, the potential for public health impacts is related to both the proximity of a given receptor with respect to the location of the TRISO-X FFF and the characteristics of non-radiological constituents. Implementation of measures to reduce exposure and potential effects to workers and the surrounding public including BMPs, safety procedures, spill controls, spill-response plans, countermeasure plans, and spill-response equipment in accordance with Federal and State laws minimize impacts to the public. Implementation of the proper engineering controls designed to prevent exposure to non-radiological materials stored on site, adherence to established occupational health and safety plans, including the use of personnel protective equipment, reduces the likelihood of construction-related recordable injuries and illness minimizes impacts to the worker health and safety. Thus, impacts to public and occupational health during construction, operation and decommissioning are SMALL.

The impacts on members of the public from non-radiological accidents are discussed in Section 4.12.2.3.3.

7.1.1.14 Radiological Public and Occupational Health As described in Section 4.12.2.2 members of the public around the HCS and the workers who are involved in the construction of the TRISO-X FFF are likely to experience a total body dose of 7.44E-02 person-rem/yr. As a result, the public and occupational health impacts from normal operations are SMALL. The public and occupational health impacts from decommissioning are SMALL.

The impacts on members of the public from radiological accidents are discussed in Section 4.12.2.3.2.

September 2022 7-9 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis 7.1.1.15 Waste Management As described in Section 4.13, solid nonhazardous wastes generated during construction are similar to wastes from other industrial construction sites and transported off-site to an approved local landfill. The county landfill in Roane County has been closed. However, there are landfills in Knox County. Chestnut Ridge Landfill in Knox County received 307,000 tons of waste in 2020. Construction activities generate approximately 672 tons of construction debris per year that is 0.2 percent of the Class I waste that the Chestnut Ridge Landfill receives annually from all other sources. Hazardous wastes from construction are packaged and shipped off-site to licensed facilities. The quantity of all waste materials generated during construction could be managed effectively and result in SMALL impacts. Sanitary wastewater is discharged to the existing City of Oak Ridge sanitary sewer system infrastructure for treatment. Liquid process waste is either treated on-site and discharged as sanitary wastewater or removed and treated off-site. Should discharges to surface waters be necessary, the existing National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System discharge permit is adequate to cover additional effluent volume.

Impacts from sanitary wastewater, cooling tower blowdown, and process wastewater are SMALL. Impacts of nonhazardous/nonradioactive waste, hazardous waste, and low-level radioactive waste generation are SMALL due to treatment processes and the availability of disposal pathways. Waste management facilities used during operations are used during decommissioning. With the decrease in workers during decommissioning, sanitary wastewater treatment declines. Materials and equipment eligible for recycling or nonhazardous disposal are sampled or surveyed to ensure that contaminant levels are below release limits. Buildings and other structures are decontaminated, and the debris shipped off-site for disposal. Radioactive material from decontamination and contaminated equipment are packaged and shipped off-site to a licensed facility. Waste management impacts from decommissioning are SMALL.

7.1.2 BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The Proposed Action results in positive economic impacts in the ROI, as described in Section 4.10. Table 7.1-1 presents the beneficial impacts of the Proposed Action (benefits) related to earnings (from both direct and indirect employment) associated with the Proposed Action.

Construction activities require a labor force of approximately 166 employees, operations phase requires a labor force of 816 workers and the decommissioning phase requires a labor force of 150 workers. Direct and indirect employment generated by the construction, operation and decommissioning earnings over the duration of all project activities total approximately $6.6 billion. These earnings and associated tax revenue benefit the ROI throughout the life of the project.

As noted previously, the State of Tennessee has no personal income tax on salaries and wages. However, the State and counties receive revenue from the sales tax on earnings spent within the ROI although the exact amount that are received by each county cannot be determined.

In addition to corporate income taxes, the TRISO-X FFF is also subject to property taxes levied by Roane County and by the City of Oak Ridge (see Table 3.10.2-7). Assuming that assessed valuation equals total capital investment cost of the TRISO-X FFF, then TRISO-X payments of total property taxes are approximately $6.4 million annually during the period 2025 to 2065.

Economic impacts to the City of Oak Ridge and Roane County are SMALL to MODERATE and beneficial. Within the rest of the ROI (Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Morgan Counties) economic impacts are SMALL to MODERATE and beneficial based upon the total annual earnings of the TRISO-X FFF.

September 2022 7-10 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis 7.1.3

SUMMARY

OF THE PROPOSED ACTION This analysis shows that although there are economic and fiscal benefits associated with the Proposed Action, these benefits are SMALL to MODERATE. The costs resulting from impacts associated with the Proposed Action on various resource areas that cannot be expressed in dollar terms the impacts are estimated to be SMALL in magnitude for all resources. Chapter 8 provides further details on the summary of environmental consequences of the Proposed Action.

September 2022 7-11 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis Table 7.1-1 Socioeconomic Benefits Associated with the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Project Phase Average Direct and Total Earnings for Indirect Phase Jobs Created ($ millions) (c)

(Full-Time Jobs)(a)

Construction(a)(b) 1748 199.6 Facility operation(a) 2647 6219.4 Decommissioning(a)(b) 1195 136.4 Note:

a) Direct and indirect jobs combined b) Annual average based on two-year period c) Earnings account for both direct and indirect employment, based on BEA RIMS II multipliers September 2022 7-12 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis 7.2 COMPARATIVE COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ACTION RELATIVE TO NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE This section compares the costs and benefits of the Proposed Action to those of the No-Action Alternative. This comparison focuses on the tradeoffs between the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) construction compared to not building the facility.

7.2.1 THE NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE Under the No-Action Alternative, the NRC does not issue a license to possess and use Special Nuclear Material and the TRISO-X FFF does not operate. As such, all potential local environmental impacts related to water use, land use, groundwater contamination, ecology, transportation, air emissions, human health and occupational safety, waste storage and disposal, disposition of depleted uranium, and decommissioning projected to occur during the construction, operations, and decommissioning phases are avoided. Similarly, all socioeconomic impacts related to employment, economic activity, population, housing, and community resources during the construction, operations, and decommissioning phases do not occur.

Under the No-Action Alternative, the facility is not available for the production of TRISO fuel and the fuel is not available from this facility for the nuclear industry. Therefore, the No-Action Alternative negatively impacts the domestic and international availability of TRISO fuel pebbles and other TRISO-based advanced reactor (AR) fuel forms. Other fuel fabrication continues to be performed by existing domestic and foreign UO2-based AR suppliers.

7.2.2 METHODOLOGY The Proposed Action and the No-Action Alternative are assessed in Section 7.2.3 for compliance with various policy and technical objectives. The Proposed Action and the No-Action Alternative are then analyzed in Section 7.2.4 for impacts and values across the following impact areas or attributes:

• Construction costs

• Operating costs

• Decommissioning costs The other non-monetary cost areas described in Section 7.1.1 are not included in this comparison because the effect of these impacts is assumed to be either: (1) approximately equal for the Proposed Action and the No-Action Alternative as defined above or (2) too small of a differential impact to materially affect the comparative cost-benefit analysis. The assessed impacts and values for these criteria using either: (1) estimated dollars or (2) ordinal ratings based on expert judgment where quantification is regarded as inappropriate or unnecessary.

This approach is consistent with NRC guidance and is well suited to the current analysis.

This analysis does not attempt to estimate the economic effects of a cheaper source of enriched uranium for nuclear power plants, or to estimate the impact of lower enriched uranium prices on the ratio of nuclear and non-nuclear power in the domestic economy, on overall power demand and price, and on the potential economic benefits to consumers and suppliers.

September 2022 7-13 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis 7.2.3 COMPLIANCE WITH POLICY AND TECHNICAL OPERATIVES The following policy and technical objectives are relevant to the choice of a nuclear fuel fabrication technology:

• The demand for High-Assay Low-Enriched Uranium (HALEU) nuclear fuel fabrication technology to fulfill domestic energy requirements currently being met by foreign sources.

• The need for domestic supplies of nuclear fuel fabrication technology for national energy security.

• The need for upgraded nuclear technology in the United States.

The No-Action Alternative does not contribute to fulfilling these objectives. The following sections address how the Proposed Action meet each of these objectives.

7.2.3.1 Meeting Future Demand As indicated in Section 1.2, the demand for HALEU nuclear fuel fabrication in the United States is currently being met from foreign sources. The issuance of a license that enables construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF is for a first-of-a kind manufacturing operation in the U.S.

TRISO fuel has been in development since the 1960s and improvements beginning in 2002 have enhanced performance and manufacturing methods. Production of TRISO fuel supports ARs, creates clean energy, encourages a resilient supply chain, and promotes a strong nuclear workforce.

Under the Proposed Action, construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF contributes to reliable domestic supply of nuclear fuel to meet the increased demand for nuclear fuel from the nuclear power industry. This benefit is MODERATE.

7.2.3.2 National Energy Security As discussed in Section 1.2, without the Proposed Action, the U.S. loses its competitiveness in the nuclear industry, there is limited improvement in fuel types for the existing fleet, and AR deployment is delayed. The global market for nuclear power could triple by 2050 due to increasing pressures to transition to a carbon-free world. The U.S. industry must be able to compete quickly, in order to ensure our national security and regain leadership from Russia and China.

Therefore, the projected 16 metric tons uranium production capacity per year resulting from the Proposed Action is important for increasing the nations energy security. This benefit is MODERATE.

7.2.3.3 Technology Upgrade The Proposed Action represents the implementation of a new nuclear fuel fabrication technology. As discussed in Section 1.2, currently many U.S. reactors face economic challenges or are nearing the end of their planned operating lives. New construction of traditional reactors is costly and time consuming. AR designs have the potential to offer lower costs, faster construction, variable size and more flexible operation, while providing safe, clean energy. This could potentially result in SMALL to MODERATE beneficial impacts. The Proposed Action therefore contributes to fulfilling the objective of upgraded domestic nuclear fuel fabrication technology, while the No-Action Alternative does not.

September 2022 7-14 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 7 - Cost Benefit Analysis 7.2.4

SUMMARY

REGARDING THE PROPOSED ACTION VERSUS THE NO-ACTION ALTERNATIVE In the preceding sections, the benefits and costs expected to result from construction and operation of TRISO-X FFF have been summarized. To integrate these many factors and balance the benefits versus costs, a range of measures on different bases need to be considered. The primary benefits resulting from fabrication of uranium fuel accrue to the nuclear power generating industry and through those power plants to the power consuming public. An important consideration in this regard is the decreased use of foreign oil and the decrease in emissions of greenhouse gases. The secondary benefits of employment, income generation and taxes are of importance, not only to the nation, but also to the local and regional communities. Throughout this ER (e.g., Sections 2.0, 4.0 and 8.0) it has been demonstrated that the potential environmental impacts of both the No-Action alternative and the Proposed Action are small from an overall viewpoint. In areas where there is potential for environmental impacts (e.g., groundwater contamination), the plans for mitigation (see Section 5.0) and the environmental monitoring program (see Section 6.0) would adequately address these areas to ensure potential impacts are minimized.

Based on consideration of local and national socioeconomic benefits, the costs of construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF, as well as on a range of environmental resources, and public and occupational health, the Proposed Action is preferable to the No-Action Alternative in the following respects:

• The Proposed Action contributes to meeting future demand from domestic sources and increase national energy security. It also introduces a newer technology with potential to have smaller resource requirements and environmental impacts in the United States to fulfill these needs.

• The Proposed Action has positive impacts in the ROI on employment, income, and tax revenues during the construction, operations, and decommissioning phases (as discussed in Section 4.10), and on State and Federal income tax revenues.

7.3 OVERALL COST-BENEFIT CONCLUSIONS While there are national energy security and fiscal benefits associated with the Proposed Action, and local socioeconomic benefits in the ROI, there are also direct costs associated with the construction and operation phases of the Proposed Action, as well as impacts associated with the Proposed Action on various resource areas. However, these impacts are SMALL in magnitude and small in comparison to the local and national benefits of the Proposed Action.

Although the Proposed Action and the No-Action Alternative include the continuation of light water reactors (LWRs) using up to 8 percent enriched non-TRISO-based fuel, the development of new facilities based on current nuclear fuel fabrication technology, and imported fuel fabrication supplies, the Proposed Action better satisfies the objectives to meet future demand for nuclear fuel and improve national energy security because it provides a new and reliable domestic source of fuel for ARs. It is therefore apparent that in comparison to the No-Action Alternative, the Proposed Action is associated with net positive benefits.

September 2022 7-15 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 8 - Table of Contents CHAPTER 8

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 8.1 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS........................................ 8-5 8.2 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES .......... 8-5 8.2.1 IRREVERSIBLE RESOURCE COMMITMENTS ...................................................... 8-5 8.2.2 IRRETRIEVABLE RESOURCE COMMITMENTS .................................................... 8-6 8.3 SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM IMPACTS ............................................................ 8-7 8.4 SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY ................................................ 8-7 September 2022 8-1 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 8 - List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Number Title None September 2022 8-2 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 8 - List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Number Title None September 2022 8-3 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 8 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition BMP Best Management Practice HCS Horizon Center site HTGR High Temperature Gas Reactor km kilometer mi. mile NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System TRISO Tri-Structural Isotropic TRISO-X FFF TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility September 2022 8-4 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 8 - Summary of Environmental TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Consequences Chapter 8 Summary of Environmental Consequences

8.0 INTRODUCTION

This chapter summarizes the Proposed Actions environmental consequences that cannot be avoided and for which no practical means of mitigation are available to fully eliminate the impacts. Identification and description of the Proposed Actions environmental impacts that would result from the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility (TRISO-X FFF) are presented in Chapter 4 of this Report (Environmental Impacts). The mitigation measures that are integrated into the Proposed Action to control and minimize potential adverse impacts are summarized in the Control of Impacts section for each resource category in Chapter 4 and discussed further in Chapter 5 (Mitigation Measures).

8.1 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Implementing the Proposed Action would bring about certain unavoidable adverse impacts on the surrounding environment. The types and magnitudes of these impacts vary during the construction, operation, and decommissioning phases for the TRISO-X FFF. Environmental impacts from an action that are not detectable or are so minor that they neither destabilize nor noticeably alter any important attribute of an applicable environmental resource are assigned the significance level of SMALL. When the environmental impacts from an action are sufficient to alter noticeably, but not to destabilize, important attributes of a resource, a significance level of MODERATE is assigned. Environmental impacts that are clearly noticeable and are sufficient to destabilize important attributes of a resource are assigned the significance level of LARGE.

The environmental impacts by resource category for the Proposed Action are summarized in Section 2.1.2 for each stage of the projects life. The summaries presented in the Table 2.1-5 are based on comprehensive impact discussions and include the impact controls for each resource category presented in the corresponding section in Chapter 4 (Environmental Impacts). Unavoidable adverse impacts of the Proposed Action after implementation of mitigation measures to control and minimize potential adverse impacts are SMALL for all resources.

8.2 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES An irreversible commitment and an irretrievable commitment are defined in Section 5.8 of NUREG-1748 (NRC, 2003) as follows:

• Irreversible refers to the commitment of environmental resources that cannot be restored.

• Irretrievable refers to the commitment of material resources that once used cannot be recycled or restored for other uses by any practical means.

8.2.1 IRREVERSIBLE RESOURCE COMMITMENTS No commitments of environmental resources at, or in proximity to, the Horizon Center site (HCS) were identified for the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF that ultimately could not be restored after the closure and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF site for unrestricted use (excluding the material resources discussed in Section 8.2.2). As stated in Section 4.4.2.2.2, all water required for the TRISO-X FFF operations are obtained from the City of Oak Ridges public water distribution system. The resulting wastewaters from the September 2022 8-5 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 8 - Summary of Environmental TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Consequences facilitys water usage are discharged to the City of Oak Ridge municipal sanitary sewer collection system (Section 4.4.2.2.2). As noted in Section 4.4.2.2.1.2, there are no direct impacts to surface water hydrology or water availability as a result of water use by the facility, therefore there are no irreversible impacts. No solid wastes generated by the TRISO-X FFF operations are land-disposed at the HCS. As stated in Section 4.4.2.2.1.3, at the end of the TRISO-X FFFs operational life, TRISO-X would decontaminate and decommission the facility.

Some of the facilities, including buildings, drainage features, access roads, and parking areas built for the TRISO-X FFF, could remain in place after closure. Due to its location at the Horizon Center Industrial Park, future use of the HCS remains industrial and as such does not result in a change to existing land use or visual resources. The transportation, air quality, noise, and public and occupational health impacts associated with the TRISO-X FFF operations would discontinue with the permanent shutdown and decommissioning of the facility.

The TRISO-X FFF would require the irreversible commitment of land use resources at those off-site land disposal facilities that are used for the permanent disposal of the wastes generated by the construction, operation, and decommissioning of the facility. These wastes include nonhazardous wastes and hazardous wastes (see Section 4.13 of this Report, Proposed Action

[Waste Management Impacts]).

8.2.2 IRRETRIEVABLE RESOURCE COMMITMENTS The construction of the TRISO-X FFF requires substantial quantities of concrete, steel, nonferrous metals, plastics, soil borrow and other material resources necessary for the manufacturing of the equipment and the building of the structures essential for the operation of the TRISO-X FFF. The specific types and quantities of these materials ultimately depends on the facilitys final design. These materials are considered irretrievable unless they are recycled at decommissioning. In general, use of construction materials in the quantity expected for this facility have a small impact with respect to availability of these resources on a larger scale.

Construction also involves the disposal of excavated soil materials.

The operation of the TRISO-X FFF requires the mining and refining of uranium ores to produce and supply fuel pebbles essential for the next generation of nuclear reactors. The tri-structural isotropic (TRISO) fuel produced by the TRISO-X FFF is used to power high temperature gas reactors (HTGRs) and other users of TRISO-based fuel. At the end of their use, the material is disposed as spent fuel. Final disposal of spent fuel is an irretrievable resource commitment.

Also, the depleted uranium ore from the enrichment process to produce the U3O8 feedstock for TRISO-X FFF operations is an irretrievable commitment of material resources.

The fuel fabrication process and the equipment that is used for the TRISO-X FFF are powered by a single 69kV line. The electrical power required for the TRISO-X FFF operations is supplied by the Oak Ridge Electric Department, which provides electricity from the Tennessee Valley Authority to power its grid. At times of electric utility power outages, stand-by power is provided by the TRISO-X FFFs on-site diesel electric generators. In addition, diesel fuel and gasoline are used to operate the motor vehicles used for the TRISO-X FFF construction, operation, and decommissioning. The consumption of fossil and nuclear fuels to provide the energy to operate the TRISO-X FFF is an irretrievable commitment of material resources.

The TRISO-X FFF construction, operation, and decommissioning generates a combination of nonhazardous and hazardous waste streams. Those waste materials that cannot be recovered or recycled, and, therefore, need to be disposed of (i.e. by burial in an off-site landfill), represent an irretrievable commitment of material resources. Hazardous and non-hazardous wastes September 2022 8-6 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 8 - Summary of Environmental TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Consequences shipped off-site to a licensed land-disposal facility results in the permanent removal of a portion of land surface area for other land uses.

8.3 SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM IMPACTS A short-term period and a long-term period are defined in Section 5.8 of NUREG-1748 (NRC, 2003) as follows:

• Short-term represents the period from start of construction to the end of the Proposed Action, including prompt decommissioning.

• Long-term represents the period extending beyond the end of the Proposed Action.

The short-term environmental impacts of the TRISO-X FFF are discussed in Section 2.1.2 and summarized in Table 2.1-5. The long-term environmental impacts of the TRISO-X FFF are related to available land use beyond the decommissioning and permanent closure of the TRISO-X FFF (as discussed in Section 2.1.2.1.4). The TRISO-X FFF is decontaminated and decommissioned in accordance with applicable NRC license termination requirements at the end of its useful life. It is the intent of TRISO-X to decommission and close the TRISO-X FFF so as to reduce the level of radioactivity remaining in the facility to residual levels acceptable for release of the facility site for unrestricted use and for NRC license termination pursuant to 10 CFR 20.1401 and 10 CFR 20.1402. Any radioactive equipment and materials are disposed of during decommissioning according to local and Federal laws and regulations. Decommissioning and closure activities include the cleaning and removal of radioactive and hazardous waste contamination that may be present on materials, equipment, and structures. Decontaminated and non-radiologically impacted building structures and roadways are likely to remain in place post-decommissioning for future reuse.

The future land use of the area on which the TRISO-X FFF is located is expected to be legally unrestricted. The actual long-term use of the land likely remains industrial, as the HCS is located at an industrial park. Similarly, wastes generated by the construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF and sent off-site for land disposal removes land associated with the disposal site from future alternative uses.

8.4 SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY The terms short-term uses and long-term productivity are defined in Section 5.8 of NUREG-1748 (NRC, 2003) as follow:

• Short-term uses generally affect the present quality of life for the public (i.e., the planned license period for the TRISO-X FFF).

• Long-term productivity affects the quality of life for future generations based on environmental sustainability (i.e., the period after license termination for the TRISO-X FFF).

The construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF requires short-term uses of environmental resources that have a SMALL impact on the quality of life for the public.

Impacts on the public from the short-term use of these environmental resources for the Proposed Action are controlled and minimized to the extent practicable with the implementation of mitigation measures and good resource management practices. However, none of these impacts represent long-term effects that impact future productivity of the site. Long-term impacts September 2022 8-7 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 8 - Summary of Environmental TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Consequences that effect the future productivity of the site are limited to decommissioning activities. As referenced in Section 4.1.2.9, decontaminated and non-radiologically impacted buildings are likely to remain in place post-decommissioning, allowing the site to remain available for future industrial purposes.

As stated in Section 4.1, the TRISO-X FFF is to be constructed at the Horizon Center Industrial Park. As addressed in Section 4.8, no resources over 50 years of age were identified in the architectural survey of the 0.-5 mi. (0.8- km) viewshed surrounding the HCS. However, two National Register of Historic Places listed properties are within the 2-mi. (3.2-km) background research buffer, but outside the 0.5-mi. (0.8-km) historic architectural viewshed. The rugged topography of the region, distance of the historic districts from the Proposed Action, and extensive vegetation predominantly obscures the visibility of the HCS from the viewshed of these sites. Therefore, impact to historic resources is SMALL. The TRISO-X FFF creates no visual/resource impacts (Section 4.9.2.2.4) that are out of character with the HCS vicinity or alter its existing mixed land use setting. Potential impacts from soil and geological conditions (Section 4.3.2.2.2.1) on the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL and mitigated through engineering controls.

As discussed throughout Section 4.4, water-quality impacts from construction and operation of the Proposed Action are SMALL due to the use of best management practices (BMPs) and standard waste treatment operations. The Proposed Action does not use surface water as a source of water. Any impacts from the Proposed Action on groundwater quality are SMALL (Section 4.4.1.2). Groundwater levels are not anticipated to change as a result of the Proposed Action. No impacts to floodplains occur. As stated in Section 4.5.3, the area of the TRISO-X FFF does not directly impact any wetlands. Indirect impacts to wetland resources are SMALL and controlled using BMPs.

As discussed in Section 4.5, construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF displaces some local wildlife populations to a nearby habitat within and adjacent to the HCS site but is not expected to disrupt wildlife travel corridors. Human encounters with some wildlife may increase due to loss of habitat. No direct impacts to rare or unique habitats or commercially or recreationally valuable species result from the Proposed Action (Section 4.5.2.5). The removal of forested biotic communities noticeably alters the composition of habitat but does not destabilize nor noticeably alter the existence of these communities. Overall, wildlife populations on the HCS are altered, but the existence of these species are be destabilized (Section 4.5.2.2).

Therefore, the direct and indirect impacts to ecological resources from the Proposed Action are SMALL (Section 4.5.3).

As discussed in Section 4.12, Public and Occupational Health Impacts, workers at the TRISO-X FFF use appropriate safety equipment and procedures to limit to acceptable levels any radiation and chemical exposure that occurs during the material-handling and maintenance activities required for production of the TRISO fuel. During all phases of the TRISO-X FFF, air emissions control systems, monitoring programs, and BMPs (Section 4.6.4) remain in place so as to not significantly affect the ambient air concentration levels to which the public is exposed. As stated earlier, wastewaters generated by the TRISO-X FFF operations are discharged to City of Oak Ridge municipal sanitary sewer collection system. Per Section 4.13, all non-radioactive solid waste is managed on-site in accordance with good waste storage and handling practices and then shipped off-site for recycling, re-use, or final treatment or disposal at licensed facilities appropriate for the specific type of waste.

September 2022 8-8 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the Chapter 8 - Summary of Environmental TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Consequences As stated throughout Section 4.10.2, adverse population and community services impacts are SMALL. Economic impacts are SMALL to MODERATE and beneficial. The numbers of workers required for construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF are expected not to significantly affect housing, educational, medical, law enforcement, and fire services in the region (Section 4.10.2.1.1). The Proposed Action is not expected to result in disproportionately adverse impacts on low-income or minority residents (Section 4.11.2.1). The beneficial impacts from the in-migration of the construction workforce and indirect economic output and employment resulting from construction and operation cease once the facility is decommissioned. However, this does not affect long-term productivity in the region.

The HCS is currently a greenfield site dedicated to industrial activities. As stated in Section 4.2.2, motor vehicle traffic generated by the construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF results in an incremental increase in the daily vehicle trips on TN 95, TN 58 and other local connecting roadways in the vicinity of the facility. The impacts of the cumulative daily vehicle trips on local traffic flow are SMALL (Section 4.2.2). On a regional basis, the cumulative transportation impacts from the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL. As stated in Section 4.7.2, impacts to adjacent land uses from both normal and loss of power operation as well as associated traffic noise of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL. Because most noise-generating sources associated with operation of the TRISO-X FFF are located inside structures, noise impacts (Section 4.7.2) for the remainder of the operating life of the TRISO-X FFF are SMALL.

The construction, operation, and decommissioning of the TRISO-X FFF permanently consume materials and energy resources that are no longer be available for use by future generations. As discussed previously, upon the permanent closure of the TRISO-X FFF, TRISO-X decontaminates and decommissions the buildings and equipment and restore the land for unrestricted use. This makes the TRISO-X FFF site available for a future alternative land use.

The construction and operation of the TRISO-X FFF requires the short-term commitment of resources and permanently commits certain resources (e.g., land, uranium ore, energy, construction materials) to the facilitys construction and operation. The short-term use of such resources result in the long-term socioeconomic benefits to the local area and the region through continued (and incremental) employment and expenditures as described in Section 4.10.2 (Socioeconomic Impacts). Long-term productivity is facilitated by investment in dependent businesses in the local area and region and provides further socioeconomic benefits to the local area and the region.

September 2022 8-9 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - Table of Contents CHAPTER 9 LIST OF REFERENCES TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 9.1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT ..................... 9-3 9.2 CHAPTER 2 ALTERNATIVES .................................................................................... 9-4 9.2.1 SECTION 2.1 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES ........................ 9-4 9.2.2 SECTION 2.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED .......................... 9-5 9.2.3 SECTION 2.3 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS.................................................................... 9-5 9.2.4 SECTION 2.4 COMPARISON OF THE PREDICTED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ....

................................................................................................................................... 9-6 9.3 CHAPTER 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT ......................... 9-7 9.3.1 SECTION 3.1 LAND USE .......................................................................................... 9-7 9.3.2 SECTION 3.2 TRANSPORTATION ........................................................................... 9-8 9.3.3 SECTION 3.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ...................................................................... 9-8 9.3.4 SECTION 3.4 WATER RESOURCES ..................................................................... 9-11 9.3.5 SECTION 3.5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................... 9-14 9.3.6 SECTION 3.6 METEOROLOGY, CLIMATOLOGY, AND AIR QUALITY .................. 9-18 9.3.7 SECTION 3.7 NOISE ............................................................................................... 9-22 9.3.8 SECTION 3.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ..................................... 9-23 9.3.9 SECTION 3.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES ....................................................... 9-23 9.3.10 SECTION 3.10 SOCIOECONOMIC ........................................................................ 9-24 9.3.11 SECTION 3.11 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH ....................................... 9-26 9.3.12 SECTION 3.12 WASTE MANAGEMENT ................................................................ 9-29 9.4 CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ............................................................. 9-31 9.4.1 SECTION 4.1 LAND USE IMPACTS ....................................................................... 9-31 9.4.2 SECTION 4.2 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS ......................................................... 9-31 9.4.3 SECTION 4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOIL IMPACTS ...................................................... 9-31 9.4.4 SECTION 4.4 WATER RESOURCES IMPACTS ..................................................... 9-32 9.4.5 SECTION 4.5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES IMPACTS .......................................... 9-33 9.4.6 SECTION 4.6 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS ................................................................... 9-33 9.4.7 SECTION 4.7 NOISE IMPACTS .............................................................................. 9-33 9.4.8 SECTION 4.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES IMPACTS .................... 9-34 9.4.9 SECTION 4.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES IMPACTS ...................................... 9-34 9.4.10 SECTION 4.10 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS ........................................................ 9-35 9.4.11 SECTION 4.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.......................................................... 9-35 9.4.12 SECTION 4.12 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH IMPACTS ...................... 9-36 9.4.13 SECTION 4.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT IMPACTS ................................................ 9-38 9.5 CHAPTER 5 MITIGATION MEASURES ................................................................... 9-39 September 2022 9-1 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - Table of Contents 9.5.1 SECTION 5.1 LAND USE ........................................................................................ 9-39 9.5.2 SECTION 5.2 TRANSPORTATION ......................................................................... 9-39 9.5.3 SECTION 5.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS .................................................................... 9-39 9.5.4 SECTION 5.4 WATER RESOURCES ..................................................................... 9-39 9.5.5 SECTION 5.5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES ........................................................... 9-39 9.5.6 SECTION 5.6 AIR QUALITY .................................................................................... 9-39 9.5.7 SECTION 5.7 NOISE ............................................................................................... 9-39 9.5.8 SECTION 5.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES ..................................... 9-39 9.5.9 SECTION 5.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES ....................................................... 9-39 9.5.10 SECTION 5.10 SOCIOECONOMICS ...................................................................... 9-39 9.5.11 SECTION 5.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE.......................................................... 9-39 9.5.12 SECTION 5.12 PUBLIC HEALTH ............................................................................ 9-39 9.5.13 SECTION 5.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT ................................................................ 9-40 9.6 CHAPTER 6 ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAM .

.................................................................................................................................. 9-41 9.6.1 SECTION 6.1 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING ....................................................... 9-41 9.6.2 SECTION 6.2 PHYSIOCHEMICAL MONITORING ................................................. 9-41 9.6.3 SECTION 6.3 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING .......................................................... 9-41 9.6.4 SECTION 6.4 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING .......................................................... 9-41 9.7 CHAPTER 7 COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS ................................................................ 9-42 9.7.1 SECTION 7.1 COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION................. 9-42 9.7.2 SECTION 7.2 COMPARATIVE COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ACTION RELATIVE TO NON-ACTION ALTERNATIVE ......................................................... 9-42 9.7.3 SECTION 7.3 OVERALL COST-BENEFIT CONCLUSIONS ................................... 9-42 9.8 CHAPTER 8

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES ..................... 9-43 9.8.1 SECTION 8.1 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS .............. 9-43 9.8.2 SECTION 8.2 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES .......................................................................................................... 9-43 9.8.3 SECTION 8.3 SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM IMPACTS .................................. 9-43 9.8.4 SECTION 8.4 SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY .................................... 9-43 September 2022 9-2 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References CHAPTER 9 List of References 9.1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT DOE, 2021. Office of Nuclear Energy: Strategic Vision, U.S. Department of Energy Office of Nuclear Energy, Website: https://www.energy.gov/sites/default/files/2021/01/f82/DOE-NE%20Strategic%20Vision%20-Web%20-%2001.08.2021.pdf,Date accessed: July 21, 2021.

September 2022 9-3 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.2 CHAPTER 2 ALTERNATIVES 9.2.1 SECTION 2.1 DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE ALTERNATIVES DOE ONE, 2019. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Nuclear Energy (ONE). TRISO Particles: The Most Robust Nuclear Fuel on Earth, July 9, 2019, Website:

https://www.energy.gov/ne/articles/triso-particles-most-robust-nuclear-fuel-earth, Accessed:

April 6, 2021.

Electric Power Research Institute, 2019. Uranium Oxycarbide (UCO) Tristructural Isotropic (TRISO) Coated Particle Fuel Performance, Topical Report EPRI-AR-1 (NP), Electric Power Research Institute, May 2019.

Exec. Order No. 14057, 2021. Catalyzing Clean Energy Industries and Jobs Through Federal Sustainability; Federal Register Volume 86, Number 236; December 13, 2021.

Idaho National Laboratory, 2017. A Summary of the Results from the DOE Advanced Gas Reactor (AGR) Fuel Development and Qualification Program, INL/EXT-16-40784, Revision 0, Idaho National Laboratory, April 2017.

NEI, 2020a. Nuclear Energy in a Low-Carbon Energy Future; Nuclear Energy Institute, December 2020.

NEI, 2020b. Nuclear Energy: Essential Carbon-Free Energy for a Low Carbon Economy; Nuclear Energy Institute; 2020.

USEPA, 2021a. How is mixed waste regulated. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Website: https://www.epa.gov/radiation/how-mixed-waste-regulated, Accessed: June 16, 2022 USEPA, 2021b. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Regulations. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: https://www.epa.gov/rcra/resource-conservation-and-recovery-act-rcra-regulations. Date accessed: June 16, 2021.

USEPA, 2021c. Basic Information about How to Use SW-846. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: https://www.epa.gov/hw-sw846/basic-information-about-how-use-sw-846, Accessed: June 16, 2022 USEPA, 2022. Hazardous Waste, Defining Hazardous Waste: Listed, Characteristic and Mixed Radiological Wastes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website:

https://www.epa.gov/hw/defining-hazardous-waste-listed-characteristic-and-mixed-radiological-wastes#mixed, Accessed: June 16, 2022 VCN, 2022. Role of Electricity Produced by Advanced Nuclear Technologies in Decarbonizing the U.S. Energy System; Vibrant Clean Energy, LLC; June 17, 2022.

WNN, 2021. World Energy Needs and Nuclear Power; World Nuclear Association; November 2021.

September 2022 9-4 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.2.2 SECTION 2.2 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED BUT ELIMINATED Electric Power Research Institute, 2002. Siting Guide: Site Selection and Evaluation Criteria for an Early Site Permit Application. EPRI, Palo Alto, California. Report number 1006878.

9.2.3 SECTION 2.3 CUMULATIVE EFFECTS City of Oak Ridge, 2017. Oak Ridge City Council special meeting. February 21, 2017.

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/, Date accessed: August 10, 2021.

City of Oak Ridge, 2021. Oak Ridge Airport Frequently Asked Questions. Website:

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/content.aspx?article=5203, Date accessed: May 27, 2021.

Coquí Radio Pharmaceuticals Corporation, 2019. Coquí Pharma on Track to Build Medical Isotope Production Facility in Tennessee. Website: http://coquipharma.com/coqui-pharma-on-track-to-build-medical-isotope-production-facility-in-tennessee/, Date accessed: January 24, 2022.

Department of Energy, 2014. Environmental Study Report, Proposed 69-kV Delivery Point, Horizon Center, Oak Ridge Tennessee. January 15, 2014.

Department of Energy, 2020. Addendum to Environmental Study Report Proposed 69-kV Delivery Point Horizon Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. February 2020.

Department of Energy, 2021. Record of Decision for Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act Oak Ridge Reservation Waste Disposal at the Environmental Management Disposal Facility, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. June 22, 2021.

DOE/OR/01-2794&D1.

Kairos Power, 2021. Kairos Power and TVA to Collaborate on Low-Power Demonstration Reactor. Website: https://kairospower.com/media, Date accessed: May 27, 2021.

National Nuclear Security Administration, 2020. Topping out Ceremony Marks Major Milestone for the Uranium Processing Facility Project. Website:

https://www.energy.gov/nnsa/articles/topping-out-ceremony-marks-major-milestone-uranium-processing-facility-project, Date accessed: May 27, 2021.

Northwind Solutions LLC, 2021. Transuranic Waste Processing Center.

https://truproject.com/, Date accessed: August 10, 2021.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2019. Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit. Early Site Permit No. ESP-006, December 19, 2019. Website:

https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1935/ML19352D868.pdf, Date accessed: May 30, 2021.

Oak Ridge Chamber of Commerce, 2020. Proposed Downtown Oak Ridge.

https://chambermaster.blob.core.windows.net/userfiles/UserFiles/chambers/2441/CMS/Downto wn_Oak_Ridge/OR-Downtown-Brochure----update--12-30-20.pdf, Date accessed: June 9, 2021.

Oak Ridge Office of Environmental Management, 2019. Program Plan FY 2014 to 2024 Biannual Update - Fall 2019. Website: https://www.energy.gov/orem/downloads/orem-program-plan, Date accessed: May 28, 2021.

September 2022 9-5 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References Roane Alliance, 2020. Expression of Interest for an Emergency Response Training Facility.

Website: https://www.roanealliance.org/news/58/expression-of-interest-requested-for-the-emergency-response-training-facility-ertf-project/, Date accessed: June 9, 2021.

TVA 2022. Clinch River Nuclear Site Advanced Nuclear Reactor Technology Park Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Roane County, Tennessee. July 2022 9.2.4 SECTION 2.4 COMPARISON OF THE PREDICTED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS None September 2022 9-6 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.3 CHAPTER 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 9.3.1 SECTION 3.1 LAND USE COR, 2019. Zoning Ordinance, City of Oak Ridge (COR), Tennessee, December 23, 2010.

COR, 2019. City Blueprint, City of Oak Ridge (COR), Tennessee, May 2019.

Dewitz, J., and USGS, 2019. National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2019, Version 2.0, U.S.

Geological Survey (USGS), Website: https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KZCM54, June 2021.

DOE, 1996. Environmental Assessment for the Lease of Parcel ED-1 of the Oak Ridge Reservation by the East Tennessee Economic Council, DOE/EA-1113, US. Department of Energy, April 1996.

DOE-ORR, 2021. Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) Annual Site Environmental Report 2019, DOE/CSC-2513, U.S. Department of Energy, September 2020.

EIA, 2020. Tennessee State Energy Profile, U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA),

Website: https://www.eia.gov/state/print.php?sid=TN, Date accessed: March 29, 2021.

HDC, 2001. Horizon Center Development Plan, Horizon Development Corporation (HDC),

August 2001.

NRCS, 2021. Gridded Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) Database for Tennessee, U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS),

Website: https://gdg.sc.egov.usda.gov/, January 2021.

Oak Ridge, 2021. Welcome to the City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Utility Contacts, City of Oak Ridge (Oak Ridge), Website: www.oakridgetn.gov/department/UBO/Utility-Contacts, Date accessed: April 1, 2021.

ORIDB, 2013. Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions of the Horizon Center, Oak Ridge Industrial Development Board, July 1, 2013.

OSMRE, 2019. Overview of Tennessee Coal Mining Industry, Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement (OSRME), U.S. Department of the Interior, Website:

https://www.arcc.osmre.gov/about/states/tn.shtm/; Date accessed: March 29, 2021.

TGS, 2020. Tennessee's Mineral Industry, Tennessee Geological Survey (TGS), Website:

https://www.tn.gov/environment/program-areas/tennessee-geological-survey/geology-redirect/tennessee-s-mineral-industry.html/, Date accessed: March 29, 2021.

USACE, 2021. Tennessee River Charts, Nashville District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Website: https://www.lrn.usace.army.mil/Missions/Navigation/Downloadable-TN-River-Charts/, Date accessed: January 26, 2022.

USDA, 2017. 2017 Census of Agriculture County Profile, Roane County, Tennessee, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 2017.

USDA/NASS, 2020. 2020 State Agricultural Overview, Tennessee, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), 2020.

September 2022 9-7 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References USFS, 2009. Tennessees Timber Industry-An Assessment of Timber Product Output and Use, 2007, Resource Bulletin SRS-152, United States Department of Agriculture, U.S. Forest Service (USFS), June 2009.

USGS, 2019. 2014 Minerals Yearbook, Tennessee [Advance Release], U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), September 2019.

9.3.2 SECTION 3.2 TRANSPORTATION CSXT, 2015. CSX System Map. Website: https://www.csx.com/index.cfm/customers/maps/csx-system-map, Date accessed: March 18, 2021.

TDOT, 2021. Transportation Data Management System. Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT). Website: https://www.tn.gov/tdot/long-range-planning-home/longrange-road-inventory/longrange-road-inventory-traffic.html, Date accessed: January 11, 2022.

TDOT, 2022. Maps, Bridges, and Restrictions. Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT). Website: https://www.tn.gov/tdot/central-services/oversize---overweight-permits.html, Date accessed: February 11, 2022.

9.3.3 SECTION 3.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS Cameron, C., E. Brandmayr, and G. Vlahovic, 2017. Insights from Seismicity, Hydrology, and Displacement Relationships in the Eastern Tennessee Seismic Zone, Proceedings of the European Geophysical Union (EGU) Conference, Vienna, Austria, April 23-28, 2017, p.5675.

Cox, R.T., Hatcher, R.D., Forman, S.L., Counts, R., Vaughn, J., Gamble, E., Glasbrenner, J., Warrell, K., Adhikari, N., and Pinardi, S., 2022. Synthesis of Recent Paleoseismic Research on Quaternary Faulting in the Eastern Tennessee Seismic Zone, Eastern North America: Implications for Seismic Hazard and Intraplate Seismicity. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America 2022.

DOE, 2013. Implementation of Mitigation Action Plan for Parcel ED-1 on the Oak Ridge Reservatio, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. May 21, 2013.

EPRI/DOE/NRC, 2012. Technical Report: Central and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities. NUREG-2115, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, January 2012.

Hatcher, R.D., Jr., P.J. Lemiszki, R.B. Dreier, R.H. Ketelle, R.R. Lee, D.A. Leitzke, W.M.

McMaster, J.L. Foreman, and S.Y. Lee, 1992. Status Report on the Geology of the Oak Ridge Reservation, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL/TM-12074), Environmental Sciences Division Publication 3860: pp. 29-39, October 1992.

Hatcher, R.D., Jr., J.D. Vaughn, and S.F. Obermeier, 2012. Large Earthquake Paleoseismology in the East Tennessee Seismic Zone: Results of an 18-month Pilot Study in Cox, R.T., M.P. Tuttle, O.S. Boyd, and J. Locat, eds., Recent Advances in North American Paleoseismology and Neotectonics East of the Rockies: Geological Society of America Special Paper 493, p. 111-142, doi:10.1130/2012.2493(06).

September 2022 9-8 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References Lemiszki, P.J. 2000. Geologic Map of the Bethel Valley Quadrangle. State of Tennessee, Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Geology. Draft Open File Map.

Lemiszki, P. J. 2015. Geologic Map of the Elverton Quadrangle. State of Tennessee, Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Geology. Draft Open File Map.

NPS, 2021a. Interior Low Plateaus Province, Website:

https://www.nps.gov/articles/interiorlowplateausprovince.htm, Date accessed: February 21, 2021.

NPS, 2021b. Appalachian Plateaus Province, Website:

https://www.nps.gov/articles/appalachiannplateausprovince.htm#:~:text=The%20Appalachian%

20Plateaus%20form%20the,deposited%20during%20the%20late%20Paleozoic, Date accessed February 21, 2021.

NPS, 2021c. Blue Ridge Province, Website:

https://www.nps.gov/articles/blueridgeprovince.htm, Date accessed February 21, 2021.

NPS, 2021d. Piedmont Province. Website: https://www.nps.gov/articles/piedmontprovince.htm, Date accessed February 21, 2021.

NPS, 2021e. Valley and Ridge Province, Website:

https://www.nps.gov/articles/valleyandridgeprovince.htm, Date accessed February 21, 2021.

Powell, C.A., 2014. The Eastern Tennessee Seismic Zone: Reactivation of an Ancient Continent-Continent Suture Zone. American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting, abstract S31B-4397, December 2014.

Stearns, C., P. Arroucau, and G. Vlahovic, 2013. Slope-area and Stream Length Index Analysis in the Eastern Tennessee Seismic Zone: Evidence for Differential Uplift? American Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2013, abstract EP33B-0898, December 2013.

Stover, C.W. and J.L. Coffman, 1993. Seismicity of the United States, 1568-1989 (Revised).

U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1527.

Swann, M.E, W. Roberts, E.H Hubbard and H.C Porter, 1942. Roane County Tennessee Soil Survey, 1942. USDA Bureau of Plant Industry, Tennessee Agricultural Experimental Station and the Tennessee Valley Authority.

Taylor, C.J. and E.A. Green, 2008. Hydrologic Characterization Methods Used in the Investigation of Karst Hydrology. Chapter 3 of Field Techniques for Estimating Water Fluxes Between Surface Water and Ground Water, Edited by Donald O. Rosenberry and James W.

LaBaugh. Techniques and Methods 4-D2, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey.

TVA, 2009. Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Final Safety Analysis Report, Amendment 93, Geology, Seismology, and Geotechnical Engineering Summary of Foundation Conditions, April 2009.

TVA, 2019. Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application Part 2, Site Safety Analysis Report, 247 pp., January 2019.

September 2022 9-9 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References USDA NRCS, 2009. Soil Survey of Roane County TN, 2009. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, in cooperation with Tennessee Department of Agriculture, Tennessee Agricultural Experiment Station, Roane County Board of Commissioners, and Roane County Soil Conservation District 2009.

USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Soil Survey Geographic (SSURGO)

Database. Available online at https://sdmdataaccess.sc.egov.usda.gov. Accessed [02/03/2022].

USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022a. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Description View by Name.

For the Fullerton soil. Available online at: https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/osdname.aspx.

Accessed 02/08/2022.

USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022b. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Description View by Name.

For the Colbert soil. Available online at:https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/osdname.aspx.

Accessed 02/08/2022.

USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022c. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Description View by Name.

For the Talbott soil. Available online at: https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/osdname.aspx.

Accessed 02/08/2022.

USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022d. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Description View by Name.

For the Greendale soil. Available online at: https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/osdname.aspx.

Accessed 02/08/2022.

USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022e. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Description View by Name.

For the Melvin soil. Available online at: https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/osdname.aspx.

Accessed 02/08/2022.

USDA NRCS Soil Survey Staff, 2022f. Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Description View by Name.

For the Clarksville soil. Available online at: https://soilseries.sc.egov.usda.gov/osdname.aspx.

Accessed 02/08/2022.

USGS, 2008. Preliminary Map of Potentially Karstic Carbonate Rocks in the Central and Southern Appalachian States. Website:

https://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2008/1154/index_files/Appalachian_karst.pdf, Date accessed: March 25, 2021.

USGS, 2021a. DYFI Summary Maps, https://earthquake.usgs.gov/data/dyfi/summary-maps.php, accessed March 23, 2021.

USGS, 2021b. Karst Aquifers, by Water Resources. July 20, 2021. Available online at: Karst Aquifers l U.S. Geological Survey (usgs.gov), Date accessed March 30, 2022.

September 2022 9-10 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References Vaughn, J.D., Obermeier, S.F., Hatcher, R.D., Howard, C.W., Mills, H.H., and Whisner, S.C.,

2010. Evidence for One or More Major Late-Quaternary Earthquakes and Surface Faulting in the East Tennessee Seismic Zone [abstract]: Seismological Research Letters, v. 81, no. 2, p.

323.

Warrell, K.F., R. T. Cox, R. D. Hatcher, J. D. Vaughn, and R. Counts, 2017. Paleoseismic Evidence for Multiple M w 6 Earthquakes in the Eastern Tennessee Seismic Zone During the Late Quaternary. Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 107, No. 4, p. 1610-1624, August 2017.

9.3.4 SECTION 3.4 WATER RESOURCES Bieger, Katrin; Rathjens, Hendrik; Allen, Peter M.; and Arnold, Jeffrey G., 2015.

Development and Evaluation of Bankfull Hydraulic Geometry Relationships for the Physiographic Regions of the United States, Publications from USDA-ARS / UNL Faculty,17p.

(https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/usdaarsfacpub/1515?

utm_source=digitalcommons.unl.edu%2Fusdaarsfacpub%2F1515&utm_medium=PDF&utm_ca m

Bouwer, H., 1978. Groundwater Hydrology, McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Brahana, J.V., D. Mulderink, J.A. Macy, and M.W. Bradley, 1986. Preliminary Delineation and Description of the Regional Aquifers of Tennessee - the East Tennessee Aquifer System. U.S.

Geological Survey. Water-Resources Investigations 82-4091.

Dieter, C.A., M.A. Maupin, R.R. Caldwell, M.A. Harris, T.I. Ivahnenko, J.K. Lovelace, N.L.

Barber, and K.S. Linsey, 2018. Estimated Use of Water in the United States in 2015: U.S.

Geological Survey Circular 1441, 65 p., Website: https://doi.org/10.3133/cir1441 [Supersedes USGS Open-File Report 2017-1131], Date accessed: February 21, 2021.

DOE 1996. Environmental Assessment, Lease of Parcel ED-1 of the Oak Ridge Reservation by the East Tennessee Economic Council. DOE/EA-1113. April 1996.

DOE, 2003. Mitigation Action Plan for the Protection of the Natural Area on Parcel ED-1. April 2003.

DOE, 2020. Oak Ridge Reservation Annual Site Environmental Report 2019.No. DOE/CSC-2513. U.S. Department of Energy. September 2020.

Duffield, G.M., 2004. AQTESOLV for Windows, Version 4.5 Users Guide. Developer of AQTESOLV HydroSOLVE, Inc., Reston, VA.

FEMA, 2007. National Flood Insurance Program, Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Roane County, Tennessee and Incorporated Areas. Map Number 47145C0130F, Panel 130 of 335.

Freeze, R.A. and J.A. Cherry, 1979. Groundwater. Prentice-Hall Inc., Englewood Cliffs, Vol.

7632, 604.

Law, G.S., and G.D. Tasker, 2003. Flood-Frequency Prediction Methods for Unregulated Streams of Tennessee, 2000. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 03-4176, 79 p. (http://pubs.usgs.gov.wri/wri034176/)

September 2022 9-11 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References Law, G.S. G.D. Tasker, and D.E. Ladd, 2009. Streamflow-characteristic estimation methods for unregulated streams of Tennessee, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2009-5159. 212 p. (http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2009/5159/).

Leidos, February 2020. Addendum to Environmental Study Report, Proposed 69-kV Delivery Point, Horizon Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Report DOE/OR/01-2639/A1. 110 pages.

Lloyd, O. B. and W. L. Lyke, 1995. Ground Water Atlas of the United States, Segment 10, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Ohio, Tennessee, Hydrologic Investigations Atlas 730-K. U.S.

Geological Survey, Website: https://pubs.usgs.gov/ha/ha730/ch_k/K-text4.html, Date accessed:

February 26, 2021.

NOAA, 2022. NOAA Atlas 14 Point Precipitation Frequency Estimates. Website:

https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/pfds_map_cont.html?bkmrk=az; Accessed January 17, 2022 OREIS, 2022. Oak Ridge Environmental Information System, Department of Energy, UCOR.

Spatial Query Tool. Accessed via personal account request from Website:

http://www.ucor.com/oreis.html#, Date accessed: April 20, 2022.

Parr, Patricia Dreyer, and Joan F. Hughes, 2006. Oak Ridge Reservation Physical Characteristics and Natural Resources. ORNL/TM-2006/110. Prepared by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Contract DE-AC04-00OR22725.

Robinson, J.A., 2018. Public-supply Water Use and Self-supplied Industrial Water Use in Tennessee, 2010: U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigation Report 2018-5009, 30 p.,

Website: https://doi.org/10.3133/sir20185009, Date accessed: February 21, 2021.

Soloman, D.K., Moore, G.K., Toran, L.E., Dreier, R.B., and McMaster, W.M., 1992. Status Report a Hydrologic Framework for the Oak Ridge Reservation. Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

ORNL/TM-12206. May, 1992 TDEC, 2005a. Total Maximum daily Load (TMDL) for Pathogens in the Lower Clinch River Watershed (06010207). Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control. November 29, 2005. Website:

https://tdec.tn.gov/FileNetServices/FileNetServices/downloadfile/%7BD258B8CE-B264-4925-A32F-1BD2E55C7DDC%7D, Accessed February 3, 2022.

TDEC, 2005b. Lower Clinch River Watershed (06010207) of the Tennessee River Basin Watershed Water Quality Management Plan. TDEC, Division of Water Pollution Control, Watershed Management Section, Website:

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/environment/water/watershed-management/wqm-plans/wr-ws_watershed-plan-lower-clinch-2005.pdf, Date accessed: March 4, 2021.

TDEC, 2006. Total Maximum daily Load (TMDL) for Siltation and Habitat Alteration in the Lower Clinch River Watershed (06010207). Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Pollution Control. March 15, 2006. Website:

https://tdec.tn.gov/FileNetServices/FileNetServices/downloadfile/%7B424CB54E-BC14-4380-A044-BBDF560EC55E%7D, Date Accessed: February 3, 2022.

September 2022 9-12 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References TDEC, 2014. Tennessee Permanent Stormwater Management and Design Guidance Manual.

First Edition, December 2014. Available at https://tnpermanentstormwater.org/manual.asp.

Accessed 3/17/2022.

TDEC, 2015. Tennessee Nutrient Reduction Framework. Draft, March 2015. TDEC Division of Water Resources. Website: https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/environment/water/tmdl-program/wr-ws_tennessee-draft-nutrient-reduction-framework_030315.pdf, Date accessed:

January 5, 2021.

TDEC, 2017. Total Maximum daily Load (TMDL) for E. coli in the Lower Clinch River Watershed (06010207). Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Resources. September 21, 2017. Website:

https://tdec.tn.gov/FileNetServices/FileNetServices/downloadfile/%7B41035047-1CDE-4FFD-BFE2-4230DACA9EF0%7D, Date Accessed: February 3, 2022.

TDEC, 2019. Rules of the Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation Chapter 0400-40-03 General Water Quality Criteria. Effective December 19, 2019. Website:

https://publications.tnsosfiles.com/rules/0400/0400-40/0400-40-03.20190911.pdf. Revised September 2019.

TDEC, 2020a. Environmental Monitoring Report for Work Performed: July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. No. 327023. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Remediation. August 2020. Website:

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/environment/remediation/documents/oakridgereservation/em plans/Environmental%20Monitoring%20Plan%20July%202020%20-%20June%202021.pdf, Date Accessed: February 3, 2022.

TDEC, 2020b. Final 2014 303(d) List. Nashville, Tenn.: TDEC, Division of Water Pollution Control, Planning and Standards Section, April 2020. Website:

https://www.tn.gov/environment/program-areas/wr-water-resources/water-quality/water-quality-reports---publications.html, Date accessed: January 31, 2022.

TDEC, 2022a. Total Maximum Daily Load documents from TDEC's Division of Water Resources, Website: https://tdec.tn.gov/document-viewer/#/search/tmdl, Date accessed:

January 28, 2022 TDEC, 2022b. TDEC Water Resources Well Map Viewer. Website:

https://www.tn.gov/environment/about-tdec/tdec-dataviewers.html. Accessed April 20, 2022.

TDEC, 2022c. TDEC Well Survey Report. Ms. Annabelle Dempsey; Tennessee Department of Environment & Conservation, Division of Water Resources. Report received on April 29, 2022.

Tennessee Valley Authority, 2020. River Management Fact Sheet.

https://www.tva.com/about-tva/learn-about-tva/river-management. September 30, 2020.

USACE, December 1992. An Identification of the East Fork Poplar Branch Floodplain, Anderson and Roane Counties, Tennessee. Prepared by Nashville District USACE for Environmental Restoration Division, U.S. Department of Energy.

https://www.osti.gov/biblio/569090-identification-east-fork-poplar-creek-floodplain-anderson-roane-counties-tennessee.

September 2022 9-13 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References USEPA, 2021. Superfund Site, Oak Ridge Reservation (USDOE), Oak Ridge Tennessee, Website: https://cumulis.epa.gov/supercpad/cursites/csitinfo.cfm?id=0404152, Website: Date accessed: March 9, 2021.

USEPA, 2022. Sole Source Aquifers for Drinking Water, Interactive Map of Sole Source Aquifers, Website:

https://epa.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=9ebb047ba3ec41ada1877155fe 31356b, Website: Date accessed: April 26, 2022.

USFWS, 2022. National Wetlands Inventory, Wetlands Mapper, Website:

https://www.fws.gov/gis/data/national/. Accessed: February 11, 2022.

USGS, 2019a. Bethel Valley Quadrangle, Tennessee. 7.5-minutes series.

USGS, 2019b. Elverton Quadrangle, Tennessee. 7.5-minutes series.

USGS, 2022a. National Water Information System: Web Interface. Tennessee.

https://waterdata.usgs.gov/tn/nwis/nwis, Date accessed April 20,2022.

USGS, 2022b. StreamStats web-based Geographic Information System application; Streamflow Statistics. https://streamstats.usgs.gov/ss/ Accessed 2/4/2022.

USGS, 2022c. Water Resources of the United States, Water Basics Glossary.

https://water.usgs.gov/water-basics_glossary.html. Accessed 3/29/2022.

9.3.5 SECTION 3.5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES AFORR, 2022. Description of Areas Proposed for Designation as the Oak Ridge Reservation State Natural Area, Advocates for the Oak Ridge Reservation, Website: https://aforr.info/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/natdesc.html#walkerledges, Date accessed: February 16, 2022.

Baranski, M.J., 2009. Natural Areas Analysis and Evaluation: Oak Ridge Reservation.

ORNL/TM-2009/, Prepared for Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November 2009, Website: https://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/files/Pub21101.pdf.

City of Oak Ridge, 2022. Greenways & Greenbelts, Website:

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/content/RESIDENTS/Greenways-%26-Greenbelts, Date accessed:

February 16, 2022.

Dewitz, J., and U.S. Geological Survey, 2021. National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2019 Products (ver. 2.0, June 2021): U.S. Geological Survey data release, Website:

https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KZCM54, Date accessed: February 3, 2022.

DOE, 2020. Oak Ridge Reservation Annual Site Environmental Report 2019, Report No.

DOE/CSC-2513, U.S. Department of Energy, September 2020, Website:

https://doeic.science.energy.gov/aser/aser2019/index.html, Date Accessed: February 10, 2022.

DOE, 2021. Oak Ridge Reservation Annual Site Environmental Report - 2020, September 2021, U.S. Department of Energy, Website:

https://doeic.science.energy.gov/ASER/aser2020/REPORT%20FULL%202020%20ASER%20FI NAL.pdf, Date accessed: February 3, 2022.

September 2022 9-14 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References eBird, 2022. eBird: An online database of bird distribution and abundance [web application],

eBird, Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, New York, Website: http://www.ebird.org, Date accessed: January 25, 2021.

FISRWG, 1998. Stream Corridor Restoration: Principles, Processes, and Practices. By the Federal Interagency Stream Restoration Working Group (FISRWG). GPO Item No. 0120-A; SuDocs No. A 57.6/2:EN3/PT.653. ISBN-0-934213-59-3, Website:

https://www.nrcs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb1044574.pdf, Date accessed:

March 17, 2022.

Griffith, G., Omernik, J., Azevedo, S., 1998. Ecoregions of Tennessee (text, map, summary tables, and photographs), map scale 1:940,000, U.S. Geological Survey, Website:

https://gaftp.epa.gov/EPADataCommons/ORD/Ecoregions/tn/tn_front.pdf, Date accessed:

March 16, 2022.

Industrial Economics, Inc., 2009. Oak Ridge Reservation Natural Resource Damage Assessment Evaluation of Contaminant-Related Losses in Watts Bar Reservoir and Gains from the Black Oak Ridge Conservation Easement, Website:

https://www.cerc.usgs.gov/orda_docs/DocHandler.ashx?task=get&ID=469, Date accessed:

January 29, 2021.

McCracken et al., 2015. McCracken, M.K., N.R. Giffen, A.M. Haines, and J.W. Evans. Bat Species Distribution on the Oak Ridge Reservation. ORNL/TM-2015/248, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Website:

https://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/files/Pub55871.pdf, Date accessed: January 28, 2021.

National Audubon Society, 2022. Oak Ridge Reservation. Website:

https://netapp.audubon.org/iba/Reports/2862, Date accessed: February 16, 2022.

The Nature Conservancy, 1995. The Oak Ridge Reservation, Biodiversity, and the Common Ground Process Final Report, Prepared for Barge, Waggoner, Sumner and Cannon, Inc., under subcontract to Lockheed Martin Energy Systems for the US Department of Energy, Website:

https://nerp.ornl.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/orr_tnc_1995.pdf, Date accessed: April 14, 2021.

The Nature Conservancy, 2022. Cumberland Plateau, Website: https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/tennessee/stories-in-tennessee/cumberland-plateau/,

Date accessed: February 16, 2022.

NatureServe, 2022. NatureServe Explorer: An Online Encyclopedia of Life [Web Application].

Arlington, VA: NatureServe, Website: http://explorer.natureserve.org/, Date accessed:

February 4, 2022.

ORNL, 1997. Biological Monitoring Program for East Fork Poplar Creek. Quarterly Progress Report, submitted to Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October 24, 1997, Website: https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/3688, Date Accessed: February 3, 2022.

ORNL, 2015. Forest Management Plan for the DOE Oak Ridge Reservation: An Interdisciplinary Approach for Managing a Heritage Resource, September 2015, Website:

September 2022 9-15 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References https://nerp.ornl.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/ForestManagement8-28-2015.pdf, Date accessed: February 4. 2022, Date accessed: February 4, 2022.

ORNL, 2019. Wildlife Management Plan for the Oak Ridge Reservation. October 2019, Website: https://info.ornl.gov/sites/publications/Files/Pub133467.pdf, Date accessed: February 4, 2022.

Parr, P.D., and Hughes, J.F., 2006. Oak Ridge Reservation Physical Characteristics and Natural Resources, Prepared by Oak Ridge National Laboratory, managed by UT-Battelle, LLC, Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy, ORNL/TM-2006/110, September 2006, Website:

https://www.osti.gov/biblio/921773, Date accessed: February 4, 2022.

Soto, K. M., McKee, R. K., and Newman, J. C., 2021. Conservation Action Plan: Green Salamander (Aneides aeneus) Species Complex, Southeast Partners in Amphibian and Reptile Conservation.

Sustainable Tennessee Organization, 2009. Sustaining Tennessee In the Face of Climate Change: Grand Challenges and Great Opportunities, Website:

https://www.eenews.net/assets/2012/09/13/document_cw_01.pdf, Date accessed: January 29, 2021.

TDEC, 2020a. Environmental Monitoring Report for Work Performed: July 1, 2018 through June 30, 2019. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Remediation, August 2020, Website:

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/environment/remediation/documents/oakridgereservation/env ironmental-monitoring-reports/rem_Jul2018-Jun2019EnvironmentalMonitoringReport.pdf, Date Accessed: February 8, 2022.

TDEC, 2020b. Environmental Monitoring Plan, July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2021, Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation, Division of Remediation, August 2020, Website:

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/environment/remediation/documents/oakridgereservation/em plans/Environmental%20Monitoring%20Plan%20July%202020%20-%20June%202021.pdf, Date Accessed: February 5, 2022.

TDEC, 2020c. Posted Streams, Rivers, and Reservoirs in Tennessee, Tennessee Division of Water Resources, Tennessee Department of Environmental Conservation, August 2020, Website: https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/environment/water/planning-and-standards/wr_wq_fish-advisories.pdf. Accessed: February 3, 2022.

TDEC, 2021a. Rare Species by Quadrangle [online database], Website:

http://tdec.tn.gov:8080/pls/enf_reports/f?p=9014:2::::::, Date accessed: September 30, 2021.

TDEC, 2021b. Scenic River Classifications, Website: https://www.tn.gov/environment/program-areas/na-natural-areas/natural-areas-redirect/na-sr-scenic-rivers/na-sr-river-classifications.html, Date accessed: January 27, 2021.

TDEC, 2022. List of Natural Areas, Website: https://www.tn.gov/environment/program-areas/na-natural-areas/list-of-natural-areas.html, Date accessed: February 1, 2022.

Tennessee Fish and Wildlife Commission. 2021. Commercial Take of Fish and Turtles.

Proclamation 21-06. September 13, 2021. Website:

September 2022 9-16 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References https://publications.tnsosfiles.com/pub/proclamations/09-13-21.pdf. Date Accessed: March 17, 2022.

Third Rock Consultants, 2011. Evaluation of Freshwater Mollusk and Habitat, Clinch River, CRM 15.0-19.0, Roane County, Tennessee, Prepared for Tennessee Valley Authority, Lexington, KY, December 2, 2011, Website:

https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1733/ML17334A055.pdf#:~:text=The%20survey%20area%20is%2 0being%20evaluated%20for%20development,near%20the%20site%20%28CRS%29%20in%20 1982%20%28Jenkinson%201982%29, Date Accessed: February 1, 2022.

TVA, 2013. Biological Monitoring to Characterize the Aquatic Community near the Site of the Proposed Clinch River Small Modular Reactor 2011, Tennessee Valley Authority, Biological and Water Resources, Chattanooga, Tennessee, January 2013, Website:

https://adamswebsearch2.nrc.gov/webSearch2/main.jsp?AccessionNumber=ML17334A058, Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

TVA, 2021. Watts Bar Reservoir Land Management Plan Amendment, Volume II, Loudon, Meigs, Rhea, and Roane Counties, Tennessee, Prepared by Tennessee Valley Authority, July 2021, Website: https://www.tva.com/environment/environmental-stewardship/land-management/reservoir-land-management-plans/watts-bar-reservoir-land-management-plan, Date accessed: February 3, 2022.

TWRA, 2016. Tennessee Reservoir Fisheries Statewide Management Report 2016, TWRA Fisheries Report No. 18-03, Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, Fisheries Management Division, Nashville, Tennessee, Website:

https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/twra/documents/fishing/TWRA_Reservoir_Report_2016.pdf, Date Accessed: February 3, 2022.

TWRA, 2021. Oak Ridge Reservation and WMA, Website:

https://www.tn.gov/twra/wildlife/viewing-area/cumberland-plateau/oak-ridge-wma.html, Date accessed: February 1, 2021.

TWRA, 2022. Virtual Learning Center, Website: https://www.tn.gov/content/tn/twra/stay-connected/virtual-learning-center.html, Date accessed: February 16, 2022.

USDA NRCS, 2004. National Biology Handbook. Title 190, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Washington D.C., Website:

https://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/OpenNonWebContent.aspx?content=17728.wba, Date accessed: February 3, 2022.

USDA NRCS, 2006. Amphibians and Reptiles: Fish and Wildlife Habitat Management Leaflet, Number 35. Prepared by Natural Resources Conservation Service and Wildlife Habitat Council, February 2006, Website: nrcs144p2_054079.pdf (usda.gov), Date accessed: March 21, 2022.

USFWS, 2007a. Indiana Bat (Myotis sodalis) Draft Recovery Plan, First Revision, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Great Lakes Big Rivers Region, Region 3 Fort Snelling, Minnesota. 260 pages, Website:

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/inba/inba_drftrecpln16ap07.html, Date accessed: January 29, 2021.

September 2022 9-17 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References USFWS, 2007b. National Bald Eagle Management Guidelines, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Website:

http://www.fws.gov/northeast/ecologicalservices/pdf/NationalBaldEagleManagementGuidelines.

pdf, Date accessed: January 29, 2021.

USFWS, 2015. Northern long-eared bat (Myotis septentrionalis) Factsheet, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Website:

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/nleb/pdf/NLEBFactSheet01April2015.pdf, Date accessed: January 29, 2021.

USFWS, 2020. Range-Wide Indiana Bat Summer Survey Guidelines, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Website:

https://www.fws.gov/midwest/endangered/mammals/inba/surveys/pdf/FINAL%20Range-wide%20IBat%20Survey%20Guidelines%203.23.20.pdf, Date accessed: January 29, 2021.

USFWS, 2021. Information for Planning and Consultation (IPaC), Environmental Conservation Online System, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Website: https://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/, Date accessed: September 30, 2021.

USGS, 2019. USGS Nonindigenous Aquatic Species (NAS Data) for the Lower Clinch - HUC 06010207, U.S. Geological Survey, September 2019, Website:

https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/SpeciesList.aspx?Group=&Status=0&FMB=0&pathway=0&Sortb y=1&Size=50&HUCNumber=06010207, Date Accessed: February 2, 2022.

Visit Knoxville, 2020. Melton Hill Lake. Website: https://www.visitknoxville.com/listings/melton-hill-lake/1032/, Date accessed: December 31,2020.

9.3.6 SECTION 3.6 METEOROLOGY, CLIMATOLOGY, AND AIR QUALITY ASCE, 2016. Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard ASCE/SEI 7-16. American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia, 2016.

ASHRAE, 2017. 2017 ASHRAE Handbook - Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., IP edition. Chapter 14, American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., Atlanta, Georgia, 2017.

Bellinger, T., 2011. Evaluating the Wind Data from the Automated Surface Observing System in Oak Ridge, Tennessee - Is KOQT the Calmest Site in the U.S.? Available from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Website:

http://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/web/KOQTCalm.pdf, Date accessed: November 24, 2020.

Fricke, K. and F. Kornegay, 1993. The February 21, 1993 Tornadoes of East Tennessee.

Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Available from the U.S.

Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information. Website:

https://www.osti.gov/biblio/10191452-february-tornadoes-east-tennessee, Date accessed:

December 21, 2020.

Fujita, T., 1974. Jumbo Tornado Outbreak of 3 April 1974. Department of Geophysical Sciences, univ. of Chicago. Website:

September 2022 9-18 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References https://www.weather.gov/media/ohx/PDF/fujita_april31974.pdf, Date accessed: November 20, 2020.

Holzworth, G. 1972. Mixing Heights, Wind Speeds and Potential for Urban Air Pollution throughout the Contiguous United States. USEPA Office of Air Programs, Research Triangle Park, North Carolina. January, 1972.

Ft Ineson et al., 2011. Solar Forcing of Winter Climate Variability in the Northern Hemisphere.

Nature Geoscience, Vol. 4. Pages 753 - 757.

NCEI, 1952. Local Climatological Data, November 1952. Knoxville, Tennessee (KTYS), National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 1952.

NCEI, 1960a. Local Climatological Data, August 1960. Oak Ridge, Tennessee, National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 1960.

NCEI, 1960b. Storm Data, August 1960 Volume 2 No. 8, National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 1960.

NCEI, 1960c. Local Climatological Data, February 1960. Knoxville, Tennessee, National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 1960.

NCEI, 1985. Local Climatological Data, January 1985. Knoxville, Tennessee (KTYS), National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 1985.

NCEI, 1993. Storm Data, February 1993 Volume 35 No. 2, National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 1993.

NCEI, 1999. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1998, Oak Ridge Tennessee (OAKT), National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 1999.

NCEI, 2011. Federal Climate Complex Data Documentation for Integrated Surface Data, National Centers for Environmental Information Air Force Combat Climatology Center Fleet Numerical Meteorology and Oceanography Detachment, Asheville, North Carolina, September 30, 2011.

NCEI, 2020a. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2019, Oak Ridge Tennessee (KOQT), National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 2020.

NCEI, 2020b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2019, Knoxville, Tennessee (KTYS), National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina, 2020.

NCEI, 2020c. Climate Data Online, National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina. Website: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/cdo-web/datatools/selectlocation, Date accessed: November 12, 2020.

September 2022 9-19 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References NCEI, 2020d. NCEI Storm Events Database, National Centers for Environmental Information, Asheville, North Carolina. Website: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/, Date accessed:

November 11, 2020.

NCEI, 2020e. TD-3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 2005-2020, for Oak Ridge, Tennessee (station identifier KOQT).

Website: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/quick-links#dsi-3505, Date accessed:

December 14, 2021.

NCEI, 2020f. TD-3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in TD 3505 digital format from 1990-2020, for Knoxville, Tennessee (station identifier KTYS).

Website: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/data-access/quick-links#dsi-3505, Date accessed:

December 14, 2021.

NOAA, 1999. Julian X.L. Wang and J.K. Angell, Air Stagnation Climatology for the United States (1948-1998). National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Air Resources Laboratory, Environmental Research Laboratories, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, Silver Spring, MD, April 1999.

NOAA, 2022a. Hydrometeorological Design Studies Center. Precipitation Frequency Data Server. NOAA Atlas 14, Vol. 2, Version 3. Location Name: Oak Ridge, Tennessee. Latitude:

35.9614, Longitude: -84.3703. Website: https://hdsc.nws.noaa.gov/hdsc/pfds/, Date accessed:

January 11, 2022.

NOAA, 2020b. Historical Observing Metadata Repository. Oak Ridge, Tennessee ASOS.

Website: https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/homr/#ncdcstnid=30000752&tab=MISC, Date accessed:

November 24, 2020.

NPS, 2022. Class I Areas on Native American Tribal Lands. National Park Service (NPS).

Updated December 11, 2018. Website: https://www.nps.gov/subjects/air/tribalclass1.htm, Date accessed: January 10, 2022.

NWS, 2020. The Jet Stream. NOAA - National Weather Service (NWS). Website:

https://www.weather.gov/jetstream/jet, Date accessed: December 4, 2020.

ORNL, 2020a. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Climate Data, Normals and Extremes. Website: https://metweb.ornl.gov/page5.htm, Date accessed:

November 12, 2020.

ORNL, 2020b. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Tower Networks, Weather Maps & Models. Website: https://metweb.ornl.gov/page4.htm, Date accessed: November 12, 2020.

ORNL, 2020c. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Current Meteorology. Website: https://metweb.ornl.gov/page1.htm, Date accessed: November 12, 2020.

ORNL, 2020d. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Tornado Record, Anderson County, Tennessee. Website:

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/web/Tornado_Anderson.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

September 2022 9-20 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References ORNL, 2020e. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Tornado Record, Knox County, Tennessee. Website:

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/web/Tornado_Knox.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020f. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Tornado Record, Loudon County, Tennessee. Website:

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/web/Tornado_Loudon.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020g. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Tornado Record, Roane County, Tennessee. Website:

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/web/Tornado_Roane.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020h. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. ORNL Thunderstorm Days. Website: https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/web/ORNLThunderstorm.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020i. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Snowfall Totals - Oak Ridge, Tennessee 1985-2019. Website:

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/web/Snowfall.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020j. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Freezing Rain Days - Oak Ridge, Tennessee 1999-2019. Website:

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/web/FreezingRain.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020k. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Oak Ridge Air Stagnation - 1980-2012. Website:

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/met/Data/UA/OakRidge/AirStagnation.pdf, Date accessed:

November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020l. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Climate Data, Normals and Extremes. Tower "D". https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/met/Data/hour/

/ORNL/TOWD/, Date accessed: December 19, 2021.

ORNL, 2020m. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. ORNL Monthly Mixing Heights 2014-2019.

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/met/Data/UA/OakRidge/MixHt_Monthly_2014T2019.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020n. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. ORNL Hourly Mixing Heights - Annual 2014-2019.

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/met/Data/UA/OakRidge/MixHt_AnnualHr_2014T2019.pdf, Date accessed: November 6, 2020.

ORNL, 2020o. Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Oak Ridge Reservation Meteorology. Y-12 2019 Mixing Heights.

https://metweb.ornl.gov/~krbirdwell/met/Data/UA/OakRidge/MixHt_AnnualHr_2014T2019.pdf, Date accessed: November 28, 2020.

September 2022 9-21 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References ORR, 2020. Oak Ridge Reservation Annual Site Environmental Report 2019. DOE/CSC-2513.

September 2020.

SPC, 2020. The Enhanced Fujita Scale (EF Scale). NOAA - Storm Prediction Center (SPC)

Norman, OK. Website: https://www.spc.noaa.gov/efscale/, Date accessed: November 11, 2020.

Stern et al. 1984. Stern, A.C., R.W. Boubel, D.B. Turner, D.L. Fox, Fundamentals of Air Pollution, Academic Press, Orlando, Florida, 1984.

TDEC, 2020. 2020 Annual Monitoring Network Plan. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Air Pollution Control Division (TDEC). July 1, 2020.

USDA, 1998. Rural Utilities Service Summary of Items of Engineering Interest, U. S.

Department of Agriculture (USDA), August 1998.

USEPA, 1971. Environmental Protection Agency - Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 -

Section 81.57 Eastern Tennessee-Southwestern Virginia Interstate Air Quality Control Region.

November 25, 1971.

USEPA, 1990. Prevention of Significant Deterioration Workshop Manual, Prevention of Significant Deterioration and Nonattainment Area Permitting. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Research Triangle Park, N.C., October 1990.

USEPA, 2017. 2017 National Emissions Inventory (NEI) Data. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Updated October 21, 2020. Website: https://www.epa.gov/air-emissions-inventories/2017-national-emissions-inventory-nei-data, Date accessed: December 4, 2020.

USEPA, 2021a. NAAQS Table and Criteria Air Pollutants. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Updated February 10, 2021. Website: https://www.epa.gov/criteria-air-pollutants/naaqs-table, Date accessed: January 10, 2022.

USEPA, 2021b. Tennessee Nonattainment/Maintenance Status for each County by Year for all Criteria Pollutants as of December 31, 2021. Website: https://www.epa.gov/green-book/green-book-national-area-and-county-level-multi-pollutant-information, Date accessed: January 20, 2022.

USEPA, 2021c. Air Data: Air Quality Data Collected at Outdoor Monitors Across the U.S. Air Quality Monitor Values Reports. Website: https://www.epa.gov/outdoor-air-quality-data/monitor-values-report, Date accessed: January 10, 2022.

USEPA, 2022. Regional Haze Program. Map of Class I Areas. Website:

https://www.epa.gov/visibility/regional-haze-program, Date accessed: January 10, 2022.

Vaisala, 2018. Vaisala 2018 National Lightning Report. U.S. Cloud-to-Ground Flash Density Map 2009-2018.

9.3.7 SECTION 3.7 NOISE City of Oak Ridge, 2020. Zoning Ordinance, As Originally Passed June 17, 1959 with Amendments through November 19, 2020, City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Website:

September 2022 9-22 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References http://www.oakridgetn.gov/images/uploads/Documents/City%20Codes/Zoning%20Ordinance/Of ficial%20Zoning%20Ordinance%20Updated%20Through%2011_19_2020.pdf. Date accessed:

February 16, 2022.

Cook, D. I. and Van Haverbeke, D.F., 1971. Trees and Shrubs for Noise Abatement, Research Bulletin 246, U.S. Department of Agriculture cooperating with University of Nebraska College of Agriculture, July 1971.

Leidos, 2020. Environmental Assessment Addendum, Proposed Revitalization of Parcel ED-1 at the Horizon Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, DOE/EA-1113-A2, Prepared by Leidos for the U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge Office, Issued August 2020.

Outdoor Knoxville, 2022. North Boundary Trail, Park Information, Website:

https://outdoorknoxville.com/places/parks/regional/north-boundary-trail/, Date accessed:

February 10, 2022.

USEPA, 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Arlington, VA, March 1974.

9.3.8 SECTION 3.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES NPS, 2002. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. National Register Bulletin 15, National Park Service, Washington, D.C.

TDOA, 2018. Tennessee SHPO Standards and Guidelines for Archaeological Resource Management Studies. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Archaeology, Nashville, TN.

9.3.9 SECTION 3.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES BLM, 1984. Visual Resource Management, BLM Manual 8400, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, DC, April 5, 1984, Website:

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/program_recreation_visual%20resource%20manageme nt_quick%20link_BLM%20Manual%20Section%208400%20-

%20Visual%20Resource%20Management.pdf.

BLM, 1986. Visual Resource Inventory, BLM Manual Handbook H-8410-1, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, DC, January 17, 1986, Website:

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/program_recreation_visual%20resource%20manageme nt_quick%20link_%20BLM%20Handbook%20H-8410-1,%20Visual%20Resource%20Inventory.pdf.

City of Oak Ridge, 2018. Blueprint Oak Ridge, Horizon Center Subarea Report, Website:

http://www.oakridgeblueprint.info/learn/about/, Date accessed: February 10, 2022.

City of Oak Ridge, 2020. Zoning Ordinance, As Originally Passed June 17, 1959 with Amendments through November 19, 2020, Website:

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/images/uploads/Documents/City%20Codes/Zoning%20Ordinance/Of ficial%20Zoning%20Ordinance%20Updated%20Through%2011_19_2020.pdf.

September 2022 9-23 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References Explore Oak Ridge, 2022. Things to Do, Explore Oak Ridge, Website:

http://exploreoakridge.com/things-to-do/, Date accessed: February 10, 2022.

NPS, 2021. Valley and Ridge Province, Series: Physiographic Provinces, U.S. National Park Service, Website: https://www.nps.gov/articles/valleyandridgeprovince.htm, Date accessed:

January 25, 2021.

Outdoor Knoxville, 2022. North Boundary Trail, Park Information, Website:

https://outdoorknoxville.com/places/parks/regional/north-boundary-trail/, Date accessed:

February 10, 2022.

Roane Tourism, 2022. Roane Alliance, Plan Your Trip, Website:

https://www.roanetourism.com/play/list/, Date accessed: February 10, 2022.

9.3.10 SECTION 3.10 SOCIOECONOMIC Anderson County, 2021. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, Anderson County, Tennessee, For the Year Ended June 30, 2021. Report Prepared by Robby Holbrook, Interim Finance Director, Website:

https://comptroller.tn.gov/content/dam/cot/la/documents/county/2021/FY21AndersonACFR.pdf, Date accessed: February 3, 2022..

Anderson County, 2022. Anderson County Property Assessors Office, Property Search Application, Website:

https://acassessor.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=ceca75ab630048669e3 b90abb301b09a, Date accessed: March 3, 2022.

Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research, 2019. University of Tennessee, State Data Center, Boyd Center Population Projections, 2018-2070 Projections, Released October 22, 2019, Website: https://tnsdc.utk.edu/estimates-and-projections/boyd-center-population-projections/, Date accessed: February 21, 2022.

City of Oak Ridge, 2020. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2020, Prepared by Finance Department, Website:http://www.oakridgetn.gov/images/uploads/Documents/Departments/Finance%20Depa rtment/Reports/2020CAFR.pdf, Date accessed: February 3, 2022.

City of Oak Ridge, 2022a. Public Works Department, Website:

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/department/PublicWorks/Home, Date accessed March 11, 2022.

City of Oak Ridge, 2022b. Public Works Department Operations, Website:

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/department/PublicWorks/Divisions/Services, Date accessed March 11, 2022.

Covenant Health, 2022. Methodist Medical Center of Oak Ridge. Website:

https://www.mmcoakridge.com/aboutus/, Date accessed: February 25, 2022..

East Tennessee Economic Development Agency, 2022. Data Library, Largest Employers, East Tennessee Economic Development Agency, Website: https://www.eteda.org/data-library/major-employers/largest-employers, Date accessed: February 25, 2022.

September 2022 9-24 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References FBI, 2019. Table 80: Tennessee Full-time Law Enforcement Employees by Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Counties, 2019, U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigations, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Website: https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/table-80/table-80-state-cuts/tennessee.xls, Date accessed: February 21, 2022.

Knox County, 2021. Comprehensive Financial Report, For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2020, Knox County, Tennessee. Report Prepared by Knox County Governments Finance Department, Website: https://comptroller.tn.gov/content/dam/cot/la/advanced-search/2020/other/1492-2020-cn-knoxco-rpt-cpa225-2-19-21.pdf, Date accessed: March 15, 2021.

Loudon County, 2021. Annual Financial Report, Loudon County, Tennessee, For the Year Ended June 20, 2021, Website:

https://comptroller.tn.gov/content/dam/cot/la/documents/county/2021/FY21LoudonAFR.pdf, Date accessed February 3, 2022.

Morgan County, 2021. Annual financial Report, Morgan County, Tennessee, For the Year Ended June 20, 2021, Website:

https://comptroller.tn.gov/content/dam/cot/la/documents/county/2021/FY21MorganAFR.pdf, Date accessed February 2, 2022.

NCES, 2021. Common Core of Data: Search for Public Schools, and Private School Universe Survey: Search for Private Schools, 2018-2019 and 2020-2021 school years, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, Website:

https://nces.ed.gov/datatools/, Date accessed: February 11, 2022.

Oak Ridge Today, 2021. Construction of new water plant could start in May, be complete next year, February 7, 2021, Website: https://oakridgetoday.com/2021/02/07/construction-of-new-water-plant-could-start-in-may-be-complete-next-year/, Date accessed March 11, 2022.

Roane County, 2021. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, Roane County, Tennessee, For the Year Ended June 30, 2020, Website:

https://comptroller.tn.gov/content/dam/cot/la/documents/county/2021/FY21RoaneAFR.pdf, Date accessed: February 3, 2022.

Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury, 2022a. Understanding Property Taxes: Assessment vs Taxation, Comptroller of the Treasury, Jason E. Mumpower, Nashville, Website:

https://comptroller.tn.gov/office-functions/pa/property-taxes/assessment-vs-taxation.html, Date accessed: February 21, 2022.

Tennessee Comptroller of the Treasury, 2022b. Assessment Information for Each County.

Property Tax Rates. Years 2010-2021, Comptroller of the Treasury, Jason E. Mumpower, Nashville, Website: https://comptroller.tn.gov/office-functions/pa/tax-resources/assessment-information-for-each-county/property-tax-rates.html, Date accessed: February 16, 2022.

Tennessee Department of Health, 2022a. Licensed Health Care Facilities, Website:

https://apps.health.tn.gov/FacilityListings/ , Date accessed: February 4, 2022.

Tennessee Department of Health, 2022b. Health Professional Licensing Reports, Website:

https://apps.health.tn.gov/Licensurereports, Date accessed: February 4, 2022.

September 2022 9-25 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References TVA, 2019. Clinch River Nuclear Site Early Site Permit Application - Part 3 Environmental Report Revision 2, March 2019.

USCB, 2000. Decennial Census, Year 2000, Detailed Tables, U.S. Census Bureau, Website:

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/, Date accessed: February 15, 2022.

USCB, 2010. Decennial Census, Year 2010, Detailed Tables, U.S. Census Bureau, Website:

https://data.census.gov/cedsci/, Date accessed: February 15, 2022.

USCB, 2019. American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2015-2019, Detailed Tables, U.S.

Census Bureau, Website: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/, Date accessed: February 15, 2022.

USCB, 2020. 2020 Decennial Census Redistricting Data (PL 94-171), Detailed Tables, U.S.

Census Bureau, Website: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/, Date accessed: February 21, 2022.

9.3.11 SECTION 3.11 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Almanac, 2021. 50 State Elevations (Mean Elevation), The World Almanac of the U.S.A.,

https://www.netstate.com/states/tables/state_elevation_mean.htm, Date accessed: February 25, 2021.

ASER, 2019. Appendix E: Radiation, Annual Site Environmental Report, Oak Ridge Reservation, 2019.

BLS. 2022a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Website: TABLE 1. Incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry and case types, 2020 (bls.gov). Date accessed:

January 28, 2022.

BLS. 2022b. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Website: 20summ1_47.xlsx (live.com). Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

BLS. 2022c. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Website: cfoi_rates_2020hb.xlsx (live.com).

Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

BLS. 2022d. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Website: Fatal injury rates by state of incident and industry (bls.gov). Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

CalEPA. 2022a. California Toxicity Criteria Database Citation for Hydrogen Fluoride. Website:

Hydrogen Fluoride - OEHHA (ca.gov). Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

CalEPA. 2022b. California Toxicity Criteria Database Citation for Lead and Compounds.

Website: Lead and Lead Compounds - OEHHA (ca.gov). Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

CalEPA. 2022c. California Toxicity Criteria Database Citation for Nickel and Nickel Compounds. Website: Nickel and Nickel Compounds - OEHHA (ca.gov). Date accessed:

January 28, 2022.

CalEPA. 2022d. California Toxicity Criteria Database Citation for Sulfuric Acid. Website:

Sulfuric Acid - OEHHA. Date accessed: February 23, 2022.

September 2022 9-26 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References DOE, 2020. Assessment of Radioactive Waste Management at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Interim Report, Office of Enterprise Assessments, U.S. Department of Energy, April 2020.

USEPA, 2005. Assessment of Variations in Radiation Exposure in the United States, Contract Number EP-D-05-002, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, July 15, 2005.

USEPA, 2009. Environmental Radiation Data, Report 139, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, July - September 2009.

Google, 2022. Google Maps, Google, https://www.google.com/maps, Date accessed: February 16, 2022.

NIOSH, 1973. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Chemetron Chemical Organics Division, Newport, Tennessee. HHER 71-20-49, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

June 1973.

NIOSH, 1984. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Aluminum Company of America, Alcoa, Tennessee. HETA 80-124, 230-1168, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

Revised April 1994.

NIOSH, 1985. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Raytheon Missile Systems Division, Bristol, Tennessee. HETA 83-186-1628, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

September 1985.

NIOSH, 1988. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Nuclear Fuel Services, Erwin Tennessee.

HETA 86-381-1934, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. October 1988.

NIOSH, 1990. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Schlegel Tennessee, Inc., Maryville, Tennessee. HETA 89-212-2020, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. March 1990.

NIOSH, 1994. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Duracell Battery Company, Cleveland, Tennessee. HETA 91-109-2426, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. May 1994.

NIOSH, 1996. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Lockheed Martin Energy Systems, Inc., U.S.

Department of Energy Oak Ridge K-25 Site, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. HETA 96-0071-2584, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. July 1996.

NIOSH, 2001. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. HETA 99-0177-2828, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.

February 2001.

NIOSH, 2002. Health Hazard Evaluation Report, Mueller Company, Chattanooga, Tennessee.

HETA 98-0237-2872, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. April 2002.

NIOSH, 2022. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Website: CDC - NIOSH Health Hazard Evaluations (HHEs) - Search.

Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

September 2022 9-27 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References NRC, 2021a. Sources of Radiation, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website:

https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources.html, Date accessed: February 24, 2021.

NRC, 2021b. Natural Background Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website:

https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/nat-bg-sources.html, Date accessed:

February 25, 2021.

NRC, 2021c. Man-Made Sources, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website:

https://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/around-us/sources/man-made-sources.html, Date accessed: February 25, 2021.

NRC, 2021d. Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website:

https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactors/wb1.html, Date accessed: February 25, 2021.

NRC, 2021e. Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 2, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Website:

https://www.nrc.gov/info-finder/reactors/wb2.html, Date accessed: February 25, 2021.

ORNL, 2021. Science and Discovery, Neutron Sciences, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Website: https://neutrons.ornl.gov/hfir, Date accessed: February 25, 2021.

OSHA, 2022. U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Permissible Exposure Limits - Annotated Tables. Website: Permissible Exposure Limits -

OSHA Annotated Table Z-1 l Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Date accessed:

January 28, 2022.

Philotechnics, 2022. Website: https://www.philotechnics.com, Date accessed: February 16,2022.

TDEC, 2022. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation. Air Pollution Control Permits Dataviewer. Website: Page 34031 - SITE or FACILITY INFORMATION (tn.gov). Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

USEPA, 1997. Health Effects Assessment Summary Tables. EPA-540-R-97/036, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. July 1997.

USEPA, 2022a. Envirofacts Database Search. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Website Search within a 1-mi Radius of the Planned TRISO-X Facility. Website:

https://enviro.epa.gov/enviro/enviroFACTS.quickstart?ve=11,35.933008,-

84.412069&pSearch=Renovare%20Blvd,%20Oak%20Ridge,%20Tennessee,%2037830&miny=

35.84933283915504&minx=-84.54939839434432&maxy=36.01668251931491&maxx=-

84.2747401912197. Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

USEPA, 2022b. Toxic Release Inventory Explorer. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Website Search for Anderson County and Roane County, 2020 Data. Website:

https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer. Date accessed: January 27, 2022.

USEPA, 2022c. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for Ammonia. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Ammonia CASRN 7664-41-7 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

September 2022 9-28 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References USEPA, 2022d. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for Chromium(VI). U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Chromium(VI) CASRN 18540-29-9 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022e. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for 1,6-Hexamethylene Diisocyanate. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Hexamethylene diisocyanate CASRN 822-06-0 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022f. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for Monomeric and Polymeric Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanate (monomeric MDI) and polymeric MDI (PMDI) CASRN 101-68-8 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022g. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for 2,4-/2,6-Toluene Diisocyanate Mixture. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Toluene diisocyanate mixture (TDI)

CASRN 26471-62-5 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022h. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for Hydrogen Chloride. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Hydrogen chloride CASRN 7647-01-0 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022i. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for Manganese. U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Manganese CASRN 7439-96-5 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022j. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for Mercury. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Mercury, elemental CASRN 7439-97-6 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022k. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for Methanol. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Methanol CASRN 67-56-1 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed:

February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022l. Integrated Risk Information System Citation for Polychlorinated Biphenyls.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) CASRN 1336-36-3 lIRISlUS EPA, ORD. Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

USEPA, 2022m. Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Value for Cobalt. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: Cobalt l Provisional Peer-Reviewed Toxicity Values (PPRTV) l US EPA. Date accessed: January 28, 2022.

USEPA, 2022n. Cleanups in My Community. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website Search for Cleanups within a 10-mile Radius of the Planned TRISO-X FFF. Website: Cleanups in My Community l Cleaning Up Our Land, Water and Air l US EPACleanups in My Community l Cleaning Up Our Land, Water and Air l US EPA. Date accessed: March 17, 2022.

9.3.12 SECTION 3.12 WASTE MANAGEMENT USEPA, 2021. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Regulations. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Website: https://www.epa.gov/rcra/resource-conservation-and-recovery-act-rcra-regulations. Date accessed: May 6, 2021.

September 2022 9-29 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References Strata, 2019. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Development Area #6 Horizon Center Industrial park, Strata Environmental Services, Inc, March 2019.

September 2022 9-30 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.4 CHAPTER 4 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 9.4.1 SECTION 4.1 LAND USE IMPACTS Dewitz, J., and USGS, 2019. National Land Cover Database (NLCD) 2019, Version 2.0, U.S.

Geological Survey (USGS), Website: https://doi.org/10.5066/P9KZCM54, June 2021.

9.4.2 SECTION 4.2 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS ASER, 2019. Appendix E: Radiation, Annual Site Environmental Report, Oak Ridge Reservation, 2019.

CFR, 2021a. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material, Website: https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/part071/index.html, Date accessed: May 11, 2021.

CFR, 2021b. Title 49, Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 100 through 185, Hazardous Materials Regulations, Website: https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-idx?SID=93bab94fad033189c361055ab83f9cfe&mc=true&tpl=/ecfrbrowse/Title49/49chapterI.tpl

, Date accessed: May 11, 2021.

NRC, 2021. Certificate of Compliance for Radioactive Material Packages, Certificate No. 9315, Revision 16, Docket No. 71-9315, Model No. ES-3100, 2021.

NRC, 2020. Certificate of Compliance for Radioactive Material Packages, Certificate No. 9342, Revision 15, Docket No. 71-9342, Model No. Versa-Pac VP-55, 2020.

TDOT, 2021. Transportation Data Management System. Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT). Website: https://www.tn.gov/tdot/long-range-planning-home/longrange-road-inventory/longrange-road-inventory-traffic.html, Date accessed: January 11, 2022.

USCB, 2010. United State Census Bureau 2010 Census Data, 2010.

USCB, 2020. United State Census Bureau 2020 Census Data, 2020.

WASH, 1972. Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear Power Plants, WASH-1238. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Directorate of Regulatory Standards. 1972.

9.4.3 SECTION 4.3 GEOLOGY AND SOIL IMPACTS Hatcher, R.D., Jr., J.D. Vaughn, and S.F. Obermeier, 2012. Large Earthquake Paleoseismology in the East Tennessee Seismic Zone: Results of an 18-month Pilot Study in Cox, R.T., M.P. Tuttle, O.S. Boyd, and J. Locat, eds., Recent Advances in North American Paleoseismology and Neotectonics East of the Rockies: Geological Society of America Special Paper 493, p. 111-142, doi:10.1130/2012.2493(06).

USEPA, 2022. EPA response to Kingston TVA Coal Ash Spill, Website:

https://www.epa.gov/tn/epa-response-kingston-tva-coal-ash-spill. Date accessed: September 6, 2022.

September 2022 9-31 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References USGS, 2021a. ArcGIS Landslide Susceptibility. Available at:

https://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html?panel=gallery&layers=b3fa4e3c494040b49 1485dbb7d038c8a. Accessed on April 7, 2021.

USGS, 2021b. U.S. Landslide Inventory Web Application. Available at:

https://usgs.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=ae120962f459434b8c904b456 c82669d. Accessed on April 8, 2021.

USGS, 2021c. Volcano Hazards. Available at: https://www.usgs.gov/natural-hazards/volcano-hazards/. Accessed on April 8, 2021.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2021. National Hazards Viewer.

Available at: https://maps.ngdc.noaa.gov/viewers/hazards/. Accessed on April 8, 2021.

9.4.4 SECTION 4.4 WATER RESOURCES IMPACTS Carleton, G.B., 2010. Simulation of groundwater mounding beneath hypothetical stormwater infiltration basins, U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report, 2010-5102, 64 p.

City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2016. Ordinance No. 1-2016. Title 14, Zoning and Land Use Control, Chapter 5 Stormwater Management. Website: http://stormwater.oakridgetn.gov/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Stormwater-Management-Ordinance-1-2016.pdf, Date accessed: February 24, 2021.

City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 2020. Zoning Ordinance, Available at:

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/images/uploads/Documents/City%20Codes/Zoning%20Ordinance/Of ficial%20Zoning%20Ordinance%20Updated%20Through%2011_19_2020.pdf, Website: Date accessed: 3/18/2022.

DOE, 2003. Mitigation Action Plan for the Protection of the Natural Area on Parcel ED-1, Oak Ridge Operations, April, 2003.

FEMA, 2022. Community Status Book Report, Website: https://www.fema.gov/flood-insurance/work-with-nfip/community-status-book, Date accessed: 3/18/2022.

TDEC, 2012. Tennessee Erosion & Sediment Control Handbook, 4th Edition.

TDEC, 2014. Tennessee Permanent Stormwater Management and Design Guidance Manual, First Edition. Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, Division of Water Resources, and University of Tennessee Department of Biosystems Engineering and Soil Science, Tennessee Water Resources Research Center, Stormwater Management, Assistance, Research and Training (SMART) Center, December 2014. Website:

https://tnpermanentstormwater.org/manual.asp, Date accessed: May 3, 2021.

TDEC, 2020. Tennessee NPDES Permit, Stormwater Multi-Sector General Permit for Industrial Activities, Permit Number TNR05000, Website:

https://dataviewers.tdec.tn.gov/pls/enf_reports/f?p=9034:34051:::NO:34051:P34051_PERMIT_

NUMBER:TNR050000, Date accessed: April 12, 2022.

TVA, 1991. Flood Analysis for Department of Energy Y-12, ORNL and K-25 Plants, Flood Analysis in Support of Flood Emergency Planning. Report ES/CNPE-95/1. Prepared by Flood September 2022 9-32 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References Protection Section, Water Resources Operations Department, Water Resources Division.

Prepared for the Center for Natural Phenomena Engineering, Oak Ridge Y-12 Plant, December, 1991.

USACE, 1992. An Identification of the East Fork Poplar Branch Floodplain, Anderson and Roane Counties, Tennessee. Prepared by Nashville District USACE for Environmental Restoration Division, U.S. Department of Energy, Website: https://www.osti.gov/biblio/569090-identification-east-fork-poplar-creek-floodplain-anderson-roane-counties-tennessee, Date accessed: 1/25/20222.

University of Tennessee SMART Center and TDEC, 2015. Introduction to the Tennessee Runoff Reduction Assessment Tool, Website:https://tnpermanentstormwater.org/TNRRAT/TNRRAT%20Description%20150526.pdf Date accessed: 3/24/2022.

9.4.5 SECTION 4.5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES IMPACTS Chepesiuk, R., 2009. Missing the Dark, Health Effects of Light Pollution, Environmental Health Perspectives, Volume 117, Number 1, January 2009.

Drewitt, A.L. and R.H.W. Langston. 2008. Collision Effects of Wind-power Generators and Other Obstacles on Birds. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 1134: 233-266. June 2008.

LANDFIRE, 2019. Existing Vegetation Height Layer, Limited Update, LANDFIRE 2.0.0, U.S.

Department of the Interior, Geological Survey, and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Website:

https://landfire.gov/viewer/, Date accessed: April 5, 2022.

9.4.6 SECTION 4.6 AIR QUALITY IMPACTS None 9.4.7 SECTION 4.7 NOISE IMPACTS ASTM, 2016. American Society for Testing and Materials International, Standard Guide for Selection of Environmental Noise Measurements and Criteria, ASTM E1686-16, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA., October 2016.

Blickley, J. L. and Patricelli, G. L., 2010. Impacts of Anthropogenic Noise on Wildlife:

Research Priorities for the Development of Standards and Mitigation, Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy, 13:274-292, 2010.

City of Oak Ridge, 2020. Zoning Ordinance, As Originally Passed June 17, 1959 with Amendments through June 18, 2020, Website:

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/images/uploads/Documents/City%20Codes/Zoning%20Ordinance/Of ficial%20Zoning%20Ordinance%20Updated%20Through%2006_18_2020.pdf, Date accessed:

April 24, 2021.

Federal Highway Administration (FWHA), 2006. Construction Noise Handbook -

Construction Equipment Noise Levels and Ranges, Website:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/construction_noise/handbook/handbook09.cfm#top Date accessed: May 5, 2021.

September 2022 9-33 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References National Research Council, 1977. Guidelines for Preparing Environmental Impact Statements on Noise. Committee on Hearing, Bioacoustics and Biomechanics, Assembly of Behavioral and Social Sciences. National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Committee on Hearing, Bioacoustics, and Biomechanics, Washington, DC.

New York City Department of Environmental Protection, 2018. The Rule of the City -

Chapter 28: Citywide Construction noise Mitigation, Website:

https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/newyorkcity/latest/NYCrules/0-0-0-29014, Date accessed: May 7, 2021.

USEPA, 1974. Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Noise Abatement and Control, Arlington, VA, March 1974.

9.4.8 SECTION 4.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES IMPACTS None.

9.4.9 SECTION 4.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES IMPACTS BLM, 1984. Visual Resource Management, BLM Manual 8400, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, DC, Website:

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/program_recreation_visual%20resource%20manageme nt_quick%20link_BLM%20Manual%20Section%208400%20-

%20Visual%20Resource%20Management.pdf.

BLM, 1986. Visual Resource Inventory, BLM Manual Handbook H-8410-1, Bureau of Land Management, U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, DC, Website:

https://www.blm.gov/sites/blm.gov/files/program_recreation_visual%20resource%20manageme nt_quick%20link_%20BLM%20Handbook%20H-8410-1,%20Visual%20Resource%20Inventory.pdf.

City of Oak Ridge, 2020. Zoning Ordinance, As Originally Passed June 17, 1959 with Amendments through June 18, 2020, Website:

http://www.oakridgetn.gov/images/uploads/Documents/City%20Codes/Zoning%20Ordinance/Of ficial%20Zoning%20Ordinance%20Updated%20Through%2006_18_2020.pdf.

DOE, 2020. Addendum to Environmental Study Report, Proposed 69-kV Delivery Point, Horizon Center, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, DOE/OR/01-2639/A1, Prepared by Leidos for the U.S.

Department of Energy, Reservation Management Branch, Issued February 2020.

USDA NRCS, 2021. LiDAR Elevation Dataset - Bare Earth Digital Elevation Model, GeoTIFF, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, Website:

https://gdg.sc.egov.usda.gov/Catalog/ProductDescription/LIDAR.html, Date accessed: April 19, 2021.

USCB, 2019. American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2015-2019, Detailed Tables, U.S.

Census Bureau, Website: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/, Date accessed: March 8, 2022 September 2022 9-34 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.4.10 SECTION 4.10 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS BEA, 2019. Regional Input-Output Modeling System (RIMS II) Multipliers for X-Energy ROI, Total Multipliers for Output, Earnings, Employment, and Value Added by Detailed Industry, U.S.

Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis, Economics and Statistics Division.

Based on 2012 Benchmark Input-Output Table for the Nation and 2019 regional data.

BLS, 2020. Occupational Employment Statistics, May 2020, Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates - Knoxville, TN MSA, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Website: https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_28940.htm, Date accessed:

February 8, 2022.

Boyd Center for Business and Economic Research, 2019. University of Tennessee, State Data Center, Boyd Center Population Projections, 2018-2070 Projections, Released October 22, 2019, Website: https://tnsdc.utk.edu/estimates-and-projections/boyd-center-population-projections/, Date accessed: February 21, 2022.

City of Oak Ridge, 2020. Comprehensive Annual Financial Report, City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, For the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2020, Prepared by Finance Department.

Kairos, 2021. Hermes Non-Power Reactor Environmental Report, HER-ER-001, Revision 0, Kairos Power, October 2021.

National Center for Educational Statistics, 2022. Common Core of Data: Search for Public Schools, and Private School Universe Survey: Search for Private Schools, 2018-2019 and 2021-2022 school years, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, Website: https://nces.ed.gov/datatools/, Date accessed: February 11, 2021.

Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development, 2019. Commuter Data County, Website: https://www.tn.gov/workforce/tennessee-economic-data-

/commutepatterns/commuter-data-county.html, Date accessed: January 24, 2022.

TVA, 2022. Clinch River Nuclear Site Advanced Reactor Technology Park Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement, Roane County, Tennessee, Tennessee Valley Authority, February 2022.

USCB, 2019. American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2015-2019, Detailed Tables, U.S.

Census Bureau, Website: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/, Date accessed: March 8, 2022 9.4.11 SECTION 4.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE NRC, 2004. Policy Statement on the Treatment of Environmental Justice Matters in NRC Licensing and Regulatory Actions, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register 69(163):52040-52048.

USCB, 2019. American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, 2015-2019, Detailed Tables, U.S.

Census Bureau, Website: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/, Date accessed: February 9 and 16, 2021.

USCB, 2020. 2020 Decennial Census Redistricting Data (PL 94-171), Detailed Tables, U.S.

Census Bureau, Website: https://data.census.gov/cedsci/, Date accessed: February 21, 2022.

September 2022 9-35 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.4.12 SECTION 4.12 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH IMPACTS BLS. 2022a. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Website: TABLE 1. Incidence rates of nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses by industry and case types, 2020 (bls.gov). Date accessed:

February 25, 2022.

BLS. 2022b. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Website: 20summ1_47.xlsx (live.com). Date accessed: February 25, 2022.

BLS. 2022c. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Website: cfoi_rates_2020hb.xlsx (live.com).

Date accessed: February 25, 2022.

BLS. 2022d. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Website: Fatal injury rates by state of incident and industry (bls.gov). Date accessed: February 25, 2022.

CCPS, 2022. Center for Chemical Process Safety. American Institute of Chemical Engineers.

Website: Asphyxiant l AIChE. Date accessed: February 25, 2022.

CFR, 2021a. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation, 2021.

CFR, 2021b. Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material, 2021.

CFR, 2021c. Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 190, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations, 2021.

NLM, 2022a. PubChem Database Citation for Argon. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Argon l Ar - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022b. PubChem Database Citation for Ethanol. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Ethanol l CH3CH2OH - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed:

February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022c. PubChem Database Citation for Hexamethyldisiloxane. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Hexamethyldisiloxane l C6H18OSi2 -

PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022d. PubChem Database Citation for Methyltrichlorosilane. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Methyltrichlorosilane l CH3SiCl3 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022e. PubChem Database Citation for Acetylene. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Acetylene l C2H2 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed:

February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022f. PubChem Database Citation for Carbon Monoxide. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Carbon monoxide l CO - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

September 2022 9-36 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References NLM, 2022g. PubChem Database Citation for Propylene. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Propylene l CH2CHCH3 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022h. PubChem Database Citation for Acetic Acid. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Acetic acid l CH3COOH - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022i. PubChem Database Citation for Ammonium Hydroxide. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Ammonium hydroxide l NH4OH - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022j. PubChem Database Citation for Formaldehyde. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Formaldehyde l H2CO - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022k. PubChem Database Citation for Hydrogen Peroxide. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Hydrogen peroxide l H2O2 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022l. PubChem Database Citation for Nitric Acid. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Nitric acid l HNO3 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed:

February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022m. PubChem Database Citation for Sodium Chlorate. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Sodium chlorate l NaClO3 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022n. PubChem Database Citation for Sodium Hydroxide. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Sodium hydroxide l NaOH - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022o. PubChem Database Citation for Carbon. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Carbon l C - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022p. PubChem Database Citation for Methenamine. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Methenamine l C6H12N4 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022q. PubChem Database Citation for Phenol. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Phenol l C6H5OH - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed:

February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022r. PubChem Database Citation for Resorcinol. National Library of Medicine.

National Institutes of Health. Website: Resorcinol l C6H6O2 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

NLM, 2022s. PubChem Database Citation for Sodium Carbonate. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Sodium carbonate l Na2CO3 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed: February 22, 2022.

September 2022 9-37 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References NLM, 2022t. PubChem Database Citation for Urea. National Library of Medicine. National Institutes of Health. Website: Urea l NH2CONH2 - PubChem (nih.gov). Date accessed:

February 22, 2022.

NRC, 1977a. Regulatory Guide 1.111, Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, 1977.

NRC, 1977b. Regulatory Guide 1.109, Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, 1977.

NRC, 2012. Regulatory Guide 4.20, Constraint on Releases of Airborne Radioactive Materials to the Environment for Licensees Other than Power Reactors, 2012.

University of Tennessee SMART Center and TDEC, 2015. Introduction to the Tennessee Runoff Reduction Assessment Tool, Website:https://tnpermanentstormwater.org/TNRRAT/TNRRAT%20Description%20150526.pdf Date accessed: 3/24/2022.SECTION 4.12 PUBLIC AND OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH IMPACTS.

9.4.13 SECTION 4.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT IMPACTS None September 2022 9-38 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.5 CHAPTER 5 MITIGATION MEASURES 9.5.1 SECTION 5.1 LAND USE None 9.5.2 SECTION 5.2 TRANSPORTATION None 9.5.3 SECTION 5.3 GEOLOGY AND SOILS None 9.5.4 SECTION 5.4 WATER RESOURCES None 9.5.5 SECTION 5.5 ECOLOGICAL RESOURCES None 9.5.6 SECTION 5.6 AIR QUALITY None 9.5.7 SECTION 5.7 NOISE None 9.5.8 SECTION 5.8 HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES None 9.5.9 SECTION 5.9 VISUAL/SCENIC RESOURCES None 9.5.10 SECTION 5.10 SOCIOECONOMICS None 9.5.11 SECTION 5.11 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE None 9.5.12 SECTION 5.12 PUBLIC HEALTH None September 2022 9-39 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.5.13 SECTION 5.13 WASTE MANAGEMENT None September 2022 9-40 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.6 CHAPTER 6 ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAM 9.6.1 SECTION 6.1 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING None 9.6.2 SECTION 6.2 PHYSIOCHEMICAL MONITORING None 9.6.3 SECTION 6.3 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING None 9.6.4 SECTION 6.4 ECOLOGICAL MONITORING None September 2022 9-41 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.7 CHAPTER 7 COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS 9.7.1 SECTION 7.1 COSTS AND BENEFITS OF THE PROPOSED ACTION None 9.7.2 SECTION 7.2 COMPARATIVE COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF PROPOSED ACTION RELATIVE TO NON-ACTION ALTERNATIVE None 9.7.3 SECTION 7.3 OVERALL COST-BENEFIT CONCLUSIONS None September 2022 9-42 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 9 - List of References 9.8 CHAPTER 8

SUMMARY

OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES 9.8.1 SECTION 8.1 UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS None 9.8.2 SECTION 8.2 IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES NRC, 2003. NUREG-1748, Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated with NMSS Programs, Final Report, August 2003.

9.8.3 SECTION 8.3 SHORT-TERM AND LONG-TERM IMPACTS None 9.8.4 SECTION 8.4 SHORT-TERM USES OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND MAINTENANCE AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY NRC, 2003. NUREG-1748, Environmental Review Guidance for Licensing Actions Associated with NMSS Programs, Final Report, August 2003.

September 2022 9-43 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - Table of Contents CHAPTER 10 LIST OF PREPARERS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 10.1 LIST OF PREPARERS ..................................................................................... 10-5 September 2022 10-1 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Tables LIST OF TABLES Number Title 10.1-1 Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility September 2022 10-2 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Figures LIST OF FIGURES Number Title None September 2022 10-3 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronyms and Abbreviations Acronym/Abbreviation Definition B.A. Bachelor of Arts B.S. Bachelor of Science GIS Geographic Information System J.D. Juris Doctor M.B.A Master of Business Administration M.E. Master of Engineering M.S, Master of Science PhD Doctor of Philosophy S&L Sargent & Lundy, LLC TRISO-X TRISO-X, LLC Wood Wood Environmental & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc.

September 2022 10-4 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers CHAPTER 10 List of Preparers 10.1 LIST OF PREPARERS Table 10.1-1 lists the individuals who contributed to the preparation of the Environmental Report and their affiliation. The Environmental Report was primarily prepared for TRISO-X, LLC Staff (TRISO-X) by staff at Sargent & Lundy, LLC (S&L) and Wood Environmental & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. (Wood).

The list of contributors is organized into three sections: S&L staff, Wood staff, TRISO-X staff.

The contributors name, academic credentials, and years of experience are provided in Table 10.1-1. The type of contribution that each person made for the 10 chapters of the Environmental Report is noted by the following:

A Author. Qualified professional staff who contributed as primary or secondary author to the report chapters or subsections.

E Editorial. S&L and/or Wood professional staff who provided editorial, document preparation, or graphical support.

L Lead. S&L and/or Wood professional staff assigned to lead a chapter or subsection of the report to help facilitate involvement of authors and incorporation of reviewers comments.

QA Quality Assurance. S&L and/or Wood professional staff who contributed to the overall quality review of the project.

R Reviewer. S&L and/or Wood professional staff included in one or more of several tiers of technical review of a chapter or subsection (ranging from specific subject matter expertise to senior technical reviewers with a broader perspective).

T Technical. Professional staff who made specific technical contributions to sections of the report or the associated analyses, modeling, or database support.

S&L and/or Wood staff such as Geographic Information System (GIS) analysts who contributed to maps and figures used throughout the report.

September 2022 10-5 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 1 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role Russell Light (Environmental Permitting & Licensing Consultant) R R R R R L M.S., Environmental Engineering, Illinois Institute of T Technology B.A., Biological Sciences, Northwestern University Years of Experience: 31 C. Michael Launi (Nuclear Technology & Regulations Technical R R R R R R R R L Advisor) T M.B.A., University of Chicago M.E., Nuclear Engineering, University of Virginia B.S., Nuclear Engineering, University of Virginia Years of Experience: 42 Maria Albright (Environmental Permitting & Licensing Associate) A A A A A A B.S., Environmental Science, University of South Florida R Years of Experience: 7 Erwin Prater (Environmental Permitting & Licensing Project A A A A A A Consultant) R R M.B.A, D.W. Reynolds School for Business and Economic Development, University of Arkansas Ph.D., Atmospheric Science, University of Wyoming M.S., Atmospheric Science, University of Wyoming B.A., Geography/Mathematics, Kent State University Years of Experience: 28 Michael Duffy (Nuclear Power Group Manager) R R R R R M.S., Environmental Management and Sustainability, Illinois Institute of Technology B.S., Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology Years of Experience: 26 September 2022 10-6 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 2 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role Candice Chou (Nuclear Technology & Regulations Senior R R R R R E R Consultant) E B.S., Nuclear Engineering, Purdue University Years of Experience: 31 Syed Ahmed (Energy & Industrial Project Associate) A A A B.S., Civil Engineering, Osmania University Years of Experience: 25 Daniel Rokusek (Nuclear Technology & Regulations Project A E A A A Associate) R E M.S., Nuclear Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of E Technology B.S., Nuclear Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Years of Experience: 14 Aleksandar Milicevic (Nuclear Technology & Regulations Project R R R Associate) T T T B.S., Nuclear Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison Years of Experience: 16 Harley Hutchins (Nuclear Technology & Regulations Project A A A A Associate) T T T B.S., Nuclear Engineering, University of Wisconsin, Madison Years of Experience: 13 David Gennardo (Nuclear Technology & Regulations Project A A A Associate)

M.S., Nuclear Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign B.S., Nuclear Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Years of Experience: 12 September 2022 10-7 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 3 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role Mark Wozniak (Nuclear Technology & Regulations Project R A A A A A A A Associate) R R R M.S., Environmental Assessment, North Carolina State University B.S., Environmental Geology, Edinboro University of Pennsylvania Years of Experience: 14 Greg Boswell ((Nuclear Technology & Regulations Consultant I) A R E E E B.S., Environmental Science, University of North Carolina at Asheville Years of Experience: 25 Jessica Howe ((Nuclear Technology & Regulations Project A R R R R Associate)

B.S., Atmospheric Science, Purdue University Years of Experience: 10 Nathan Conner (Nuclear Technology & Regulations Associate) A A B.S., Nuclear Engineering, Idaho State University B.S., Mechanical Engineering, Idaho State University Years of Experience: 1 Shannon McEwen-Barbas (Environmental Permitting & Licensing A A Associate)

M.S., Environmental Science and Policy, University of Chicago M.A., Geography, Geographic Techniques (GIS), Western Michigan University B.A., History, Environmental Studies, Aquinas College Years of Experience: 10 September 2022 10-8 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 4 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role Megan Krajewski (GIS Technician) T T T B.S., Earth & Environmental Science, University of Michigan Years of Experience: 6 Ryan Foley (Nuclear Power Technologies Manager) T T T M.S., Structural Engineering, University of Wisconsin Madison B.S., Civil & Environmental Engineering, University of Wisconsin Madison B.S., Physics, University of Wisconsin La Crosse Years of Experience: 16 Nikhil Patel (Energy & Industrial Group Senior Associate) T T T M.S., Civil Engineering (Water Resources), L.D. College of Engineering B.S., Civil Engineering, L.D. College of Engineering Years of Experience: 34 Robert Field (Nuclear Power Group Senior Manager) T T T M.S., Nuclear Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo B.S., Nuclear Engineering, State University of New York at Buffalo Years of Experience: 35 Ravinder Aggarwal (Nuclear Power Group HVAC Engineering T T T Senior Manager)

M.B.A., Marketing Management, Punjab Agricultural University B.S., Mechanical Engineering, Punjab University Years of Experience: 34 Kevin Gawlinski (Corporate Construction Manager) T T T Associate of Applied Science Apprentice Technology Graduate of Pipefitters Local 597 Apprenticeship Program Years of Experience: 31 September 2022 10-9 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 5 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role Kenneth Snell (Environmental Permitting & Licensing Senior T Manager) R J.D., Law, John Marshall Law School B.S., Chemical Engineering, University of Illinois B.A., Environmental Studies, University of Kansas Years of Experience: 36 Daniel Kocunik (Environmental Civil Engineering Manager) T T M.S., Civil Engineering, Clarkson College of Technology B.S., Civil Engineering, Clarkson College of Technology Years of Experience: 48 Wei Wu (Environmental Civil Engineering Consultant) T T M.S., Civil Engineering, University of Colorado at Boulder B.S., Civil Engineering, Tongji University Years of Experience: 21 Adelajda Koci (Cost Information Project Associate) T T T M.S., Construction Engineering and Management, Illinois Institute of Technology B.S., Civil/Structural Engineering, Polytechnic University of Tirana Years of Experience: 18 Jaroslaw Staniszewski (Cost Information Senior Associate) T T T M.S., Management and Marketing, University of Bialystok B.S., Construction Management, Drexel University Years of Experience: 15 James McIntyre (Quality Assurance Senior Manager) QA M.B.A, Lewis University B.S., Mechanical Engineering, University of Iowa Years of Experience: 35 September 2022 10-10 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 6 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role Wood Environmental & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc. Staff Bill Elzinga (Wood Project Manager) L L L L R R L R L M.S., Biology, Southern Illinois University - Edwardsville B.S., Biology, Calvin College Years of Experience: 36 Angie Love (Natural & Cultural Resources Service Line Manager) QA M.S., Biological Sciences, Emporia State University, Kansas B.S., Biology, University of Kansas Years of Experience: 21 Karen Boulware (Wood Deputy Project Manager) R R R R R R R R R M.S., Resource Planning, Missouri State University B.S., Geology, Missouri State University Years of Experience: 27 Steve Stumne, PWS (Senior Associate) T T R T R T M.S., Environmental Sciences, Southern Illinois University -

Edwardsville B.S., Biology, Harding University Years of Experience: 31 Kurt Sichelstiel (Technical Director) A A A B.A., Geology, University of South Florida Years of Experience: 40 Ray Finocchiaro, Ph.D (Senior Biologist) A A A Ph.D., Soil Science and Ecology, University of Missouri M.S., Fisheries and Wildlife, University of Missouri B.S., Biological Science, Webster University Years of Experience: 16 September 2022 10-11 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 7 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role Valentina Montaldo Falero, Ph.D. (Associate Geoscientist) A A A Ph.D., Geology, Universit degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca M.S., Geology, Universit degli Studi di Milano Years of Experience: 21 Konrad W. Quast, Ph.D. (Associate Hydrogeologist) T T T Ph.D., Hydrology and Water Resources with a minor in Analytical Chemistry, University of Arizona B.S., Hydrology and Water Resources, University of Arizona Years of Experience: 25 Wayne Ingram, PE (Water Resources Engineer) A A A A B.S., Civil Engineering, University of Illinois Urbana B.S., Physics, Illinois College Years of Experience: 43 Chelsey Nieman, Ph.D. (Environmental Technical Professional) A A A Ph.D., Fisheries and Wildlife, Ohio State University Years of Experience: 7 Robin Ledford (Senior Scientist/ Project Manager) A A A M.S., Biological Science, Southern Illinois University -

Edwardsville B.S., Biological Science, Southern Illinois University -

Edwardsville Years of Experience: 19 Stephanie Miller, PWS (Senior Scientist) R R R R M.S., Biology, Southern Illinois University - Edwardsville B.S., Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Cruz Years of Experience: 10 Chris Mausert-Mooney (Biology Technical Professional) A A A B.S., Biology, James Madison University (M.S. in progress)

Years of Experience: 10 September 2022 10-12 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 8 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role Rebecca Porath (Senior Environmental Scientist) A A A A M.S., Wildlife and Fisheries Science, Southern Illinois University - Carbondale B.S., Wildlife and Fisheries Science, University of Missouri -

Columbia Years of Experience: 23 Matt Basler (Senior Biologist / Project Manager) R R R M.S., Fisheries Science/Management, Mississippi State University B.S., Wildlife and Fisheries, University of Missouri-Columbia Years of Experience: 16 Natalie Reiss (Environmental Technical Professional) A A A B.A., Biology, Saint Louis University Years of Experience: 7 Erin Alsop (Environmental Technical Professional) A A A A A B.S., Environmental Science, University of Missouri-Columbia Years of Experience: 4 September 2022 10-13 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 9 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role David Zopff, PE, (Sr. Environmental Engineer) T T T B.S. Chemical Engineering, University of Kentucky Years of Experience: 36 John A. Hunter (Senior Archaeologist) A A A M.A., Anthropology, New Mexico State University B.A., Anthropology, University of Kentucky Years of Experience: 22 Randy Shuler, Ph.D. (Human Health Risk Assessor) A A A Ph.D., Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Thomas Jefferson University B.S., Biochemistry, Philadelphia College of Pharmacy &

Science B.S., Biology, Philadelphia College of Pharmacy & Science Years of Experience: 31 Connie Heitz (Senior Environmental Planner) T T R T M.P.A. Environmental and Natural Resource Management, Indiana University B.S. Public Affairs, Indiana University Years of Experience: 28 Joel Budnik (Senior Biologist/Natural Resources Group Lead) T T T T M.S. and B.S., Wildlife and Fisheries Sciences, University of Missouri Years of Experience: 21 Brian Mueller (Senior Analyst (GIS) T T T B.S., Limnology, University of Wisconsin, Stevens Point Years of Experience: 35 September 2022 10-14 Rev. 0

Environmental Report for the TRISO-X Fuel Fabrication Facility Chapter 10 - List of Preparers Table 10.1-1 (Sheet 10 of 10)

Contributors to Environmental Report for TRISO-X Facility Environmental Report by Chapter and Contribution Breakdown A = Author; R = Reviewer; E = Editorial; L = Lead; T = Technical; QA = Quality Assurance Contributors, Credentials, Education General 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 Project Role TRISO-X, LLC Staff LLC Jennifer Wheeler, P.E. (Regulatory Affairs Director) R R R R R R R R R R L M.S., Civil Engineering, University of Tennessee B.S., Civil Engineering, Clemson University Years of Experience: 31 Janice Greene, DrPH, PMP (Environmental Consultant) R R R R R R R R R R T Dr.P.H., Community and Behavioral Health, East Tennessee State University M.S., Environmental Health, East Tennessee State University B.S., Geology, Morehead State University Years of Experience: 36 September 2022 10-15 Rev. 0